Revisions on Purchase Orders

We are multi-site and I’ve discovered that the default PO behavior will only fill in the revision on a PO line if the following are true:

  1. The part revision must be in the same site as the PO.
  2. There must be at least 1 approved revision.
  3. The effective date of the approved revision must be in the past.

Why on earth does it care what site it’s in? Is there a setting somewhere that I can change? Or do I have to hack into the system using a BPM to tell it to pick the approved revision even if it’s in a different site?

Or are they expecting me to have a different approved revision for each site? Yikes I hope not.

@dr_dan There is a field on the part master Use Part Rev that we use to influence the PO suggestion revs. I do not know if it has any sway over this issue.

If not it is super easy to change the PO suggestion when the buyers workbench is opened and you could just update the Revision there and that should carry to the PO when generated.

1 Like

Revisions are site-specific. Classically (meaning back in the Dark Ages of ERP), a manufacturer might make the same part and revision in multiple sites, but their physical layout and machine mix could vary greatly… so Rev A in Cleveland might have a vastly different method of manufacture than Rev A in Kansas City.

Revision on purchased parts are still revisions… and will have that same restriction.

1 Like

I totally understand the different method of manufacture. It wouldn’t be an issue except we have a flag on the revision that sets received parts to go to inspection… without the revision, it doesn’t work right. So that’s why I ask.

@dr_dan We use PartPlant.RcvinspectionReq and a bpm to set PODetail.RcvInspectionReq from it. It is still by site, but easy to maintain and doesn’t require any revisions.

I had to go back and revisit why we chose to put it on the revision. In our case, we wanted the ability to have multiple channels per part… so for instance we might want to require inspection for revision 5 while still able to receive revision 4 without inspection. For the amount of effort that the BPM requires to work properly, it may not be worth it given the very small likelihood that this situation would occur. That’s hindsight for you. Thanks for the feedback, as always!

1 Like