(3) can be had by adding (preupdate) joboper.opqtycomplete to the sum of values entered in the qty, scrap & noncnfrmg controls and verifying they don't exceed prod qty. (Going by memory so check me on table.field names.) If BPM, I think you can get the tt field values for qty, scrap & noncnfrmg before you process. If VB .Net, read the uncommitted value entered into each control.
In some environments, it might be more efficient to allow over-entry & add code to force entry of a reason code (so org learns as someone reviews short/over entries marked complete). There may be valid things happenning here & you don't want to over lock entry down to hide it. (You and the system will lose cred.)
Explain (2) further please? (I have no idea what you are trying to say /:o ).
Re (1) - What are you methods DOING (physically)? In the machining world, not every ideally sequenced (by an ME on a computer) OP (out of perhaps dozens of OPs winding back & forth through a half dozen plus machines (more true for CNC Milling than often single OP CNC bar fed turning w/ live tooling - that can spit complex pc's off in what to your ERP part rev method may be a single OP - but is likely multiple, chained CNC programs).
GROUPS of OPs within the multiOP methods often can be performed 'out of sequence' w/ absolutely no harm to design intent, cost and quality. (In fact, highly skilled machinists can and often do make these desicions on the fly - to the company's benefit - adapting to reality of people available, their skills, the actual timing of machine & and/or very specialized tooling or CNC prewritten code availability on any given day as the 'real world' fails to match your capacity & load detail models (as that is all the are: MODELs abstracted to be palletable to ERP).
Unless you have very repetitive, stringent (one way only!) scheduled work, skilled people (with defined limits of authority) can almost always improve upon a model schedule of production activity when inevitable real world surprises ('opportunities') arise.
What you want to do CAN be done (albeit with more difficulty than you would expect thanks to some less than optimal realities of the data schema) - but are you SURE you want to?
That differs from attempting to ID the sources of human error (employee scanned wrong job-op bar code for example).
OR - your product methods simply must be followed to letter/sequence (even low tech: Wash lubricants off fiber after spinning into yarn BEFORE dying - or dye results will vary or not even last: DRY/SET dye before winding & quality sampling: BEFORE setting up a tape loom to make miles of some product, etc., etc.,).
Be sure HOW locked down you need to be (and specifically where/when) & don't do so to band aid people, process, planning or managment problems that are best addressed other ways (or organization will never learn and grow up!)
ERP is supposed to be an enabler (though I'd bet if people were honest, they'd admit that is true in the teen pctg's - and more truthfully for every problem they reduce, the spawn 10 of various levels of impact: ERP too often becomes a never achieved end unto itself & money pit.... It's HARD to get the buy in, change acceptance, and long term commitment, process improvement, long term focus, injections of 'fresh blood' and new ideas necessary for ERP to come close to achieving it claimed benefits (some of which are out right false and little more than the digital age's - oft of 20 yrs ago - misguided and over reaching snake oil!)
Keep it simple until you are sure you have to tweak it and tighten the screws (which will prove true occasionally to prevent GIGO).
(Has Big Pharma, their eager counseling & med school minions, the FDA and insurers come up with a GIGO ERP d.s.m. & magic pill (for life) treatment yet?!?)
/:o
Seriously: Give some honest thought (wants verus needs being only 2 weeks from going live) - and fill in some blanks I just didn't follow (1-3) & maybe we can help in some way.
Rob
--- Original Message ---
From:"quixotic_42" <quixotic_42@...>
Sent:Mon 8/16/10 10:44 pm
To:vantage@yahoogroups.com
Subj:[Vantage] MES Customizations Question
We are going live with Epicor 9.04.506B in 2 weeks. We have a couple of issues
that we'd like to customize in MES:
1. Don't allow the user to clock onto an op if the previous isn't started.
(Warning in the system already)
2. Don't allow clocking if the operation isn't complete. (also a warning)
3. Don't allow the user to report more than the original job is for.
I see lots of examples of people doing this in the user groups, but I've spent
hours trying to implement some of your suggestions to no avail. I've played
around with BPMs and customizations, but I simply can't get anything to work.
Could someone lend a kind helping hand? I just can't seem to be able to figure
this out.
In some environments, it might be more efficient to allow over-entry & add code to force entry of a reason code (so org learns as someone reviews short/over entries marked complete). There may be valid things happenning here & you don't want to over lock entry down to hide it. (You and the system will lose cred.)
Explain (2) further please? (I have no idea what you are trying to say /:o ).
Re (1) - What are you methods DOING (physically)? In the machining world, not every ideally sequenced (by an ME on a computer) OP (out of perhaps dozens of OPs winding back & forth through a half dozen plus machines (more true for CNC Milling than often single OP CNC bar fed turning w/ live tooling - that can spit complex pc's off in what to your ERP part rev method may be a single OP - but is likely multiple, chained CNC programs).
GROUPS of OPs within the multiOP methods often can be performed 'out of sequence' w/ absolutely no harm to design intent, cost and quality. (In fact, highly skilled machinists can and often do make these desicions on the fly - to the company's benefit - adapting to reality of people available, their skills, the actual timing of machine & and/or very specialized tooling or CNC prewritten code availability on any given day as the 'real world' fails to match your capacity & load detail models (as that is all the are: MODELs abstracted to be palletable to ERP).
Unless you have very repetitive, stringent (one way only!) scheduled work, skilled people (with defined limits of authority) can almost always improve upon a model schedule of production activity when inevitable real world surprises ('opportunities') arise.
What you want to do CAN be done (albeit with more difficulty than you would expect thanks to some less than optimal realities of the data schema) - but are you SURE you want to?
That differs from attempting to ID the sources of human error (employee scanned wrong job-op bar code for example).
OR - your product methods simply must be followed to letter/sequence (even low tech: Wash lubricants off fiber after spinning into yarn BEFORE dying - or dye results will vary or not even last: DRY/SET dye before winding & quality sampling: BEFORE setting up a tape loom to make miles of some product, etc., etc.,).
Be sure HOW locked down you need to be (and specifically where/when) & don't do so to band aid people, process, planning or managment problems that are best addressed other ways (or organization will never learn and grow up!)
ERP is supposed to be an enabler (though I'd bet if people were honest, they'd admit that is true in the teen pctg's - and more truthfully for every problem they reduce, the spawn 10 of various levels of impact: ERP too often becomes a never achieved end unto itself & money pit.... It's HARD to get the buy in, change acceptance, and long term commitment, process improvement, long term focus, injections of 'fresh blood' and new ideas necessary for ERP to come close to achieving it claimed benefits (some of which are out right false and little more than the digital age's - oft of 20 yrs ago - misguided and over reaching snake oil!)
Keep it simple until you are sure you have to tweak it and tighten the screws (which will prove true occasionally to prevent GIGO).
(Has Big Pharma, their eager counseling & med school minions, the FDA and insurers come up with a GIGO ERP d.s.m. & magic pill (for life) treatment yet?!?)
/:o
Seriously: Give some honest thought (wants verus needs being only 2 weeks from going live) - and fill in some blanks I just didn't follow (1-3) & maybe we can help in some way.
Rob
--- Original Message ---
From:"quixotic_42" <quixotic_42@...>
Sent:Mon 8/16/10 10:44 pm
To:vantage@yahoogroups.com
Subj:[Vantage] MES Customizations Question
We are going live with Epicor 9.04.506B in 2 weeks. We have a couple of issues
that we'd like to customize in MES:
1. Don't allow the user to clock onto an op if the previous isn't started.
(Warning in the system already)
2. Don't allow clocking if the operation isn't complete. (also a warning)
3. Don't allow the user to report more than the original job is for.
I see lots of examples of people doing this in the user groups, but I've spent
hours trying to implement some of your suggestions to no avail. I've played
around with BPMs and customizations, but I simply can't get anything to work.
Could someone lend a kind helping hand? I just can't seem to be able to figure
this out.