|
If you look in INV300 F21 filter on # (pound or number sign) what you are seeing is the history of cost changes to the item via CST100.
I find it easier to navigate cost complexities by using the terminology of COST DIMENSIONS: Buckets; Sets; Types, Levels, Facilities, Bugs, Perceptions & Expectations
We can have the same item in more than one facility, with different costs.IIM Item master file contains cost by item, but depending on System Parameter settings (ZPA file controlled by SYS800 settings) some programs extract cost not from IIM but from CIC summary or CMF detail
There are 2 cost levels ... this and previous (child items)There can be up to 99 sets defined by CST140 (stored in CSM file) ... start with standard actual, add frozen, various kinds of simulated ... I have suggested we add "physical" which would be a copy of standard costs as of the last physical inventory, so if the auditors ask 6 months later "What was the cost of this item AS OF the time of the physical?" or "How has this cost changed between time of physical inventory and today?" easier to deliver.
There can be up to 999 buckets defined by CST150 & stored in CBU file ... think accumulated totals where bucket zero is the total of all the other buckets
typically material labor overhead and granularization of thisfor example we have some raw material whose pricing is volatile. At one time we wanted to be able to show how much of our material content was that material so as to see the impact on the bottom line when the raw material price fluctuated
Beware of cost buckets not adding up correctly to bucket zero. There are BPCS programs where you not get to see bucket zero.An important aspect of cost buckets is how we define what bucket rolls to what bucket
There can be up to ? types ... I think this is set by BPCS without the option of parole ... think controls over how activity flows into the cost bucket dimension
typically labor machine setup material can be broken into types of material depending on industry, can include stuff like electricity In our case Bucket 4 is Machine but type 2 LaborWe have a cost bucket that is the total costs in one facility, transferred to another facility, that rolls to material
Other files referenced when BPCS calculates costs CEM employee clock file used for costing some labor CIC cost plan item by facility CMF cost master LWK work center master used for costing some labor and overhead We are BPCS 405 CD mixed mode, costing by facility.We have had bad data showing up in our costs by facility when the global cost is populated, with something different than the facility cost. It seems like it adds the global to the facility total.
At one time any time an engineer updated an item, they would do a cost rollup on that item's BOM. Then we learned that if two or more people doing this at same time, mutual crash, because BPCS assumes only one person at a time doing this, it messes with all components, all where-used, all items "networked" to the one being rolled up, so if two people messing with some of the same items in this way, the math not come out right.
We have a facility that is purely distribution ... we buy parts for resale. This facility is not supposed to have any production costs.
At one time we had a facility that manufactured parts that were used as raw materials in another facility. Thus, the cost dimensions structure was not identical across facilities ... the cost rules varied by facility.
When you transfer an item in BPCS across facilities, it carries with it all the cost ingredients from the other facility.
So we have this item in the distribution facility and it has no labor costs.The same identical item is in the manufacturing facility, and it has labor costs. Someone transfers some excess stock from the manufacturing facility into the distribution facility. Now it has labor costs in the distribution facility. Some people might call this a bug, because they want to make it easier to move quantities, without moving the costs associated with those quantities.
The shop order purge processes cost updates in the sequence of the shop order#s that have been completed, which can result in some bogus costs.
Suppose we release a shop order to make part 123 which has component assemblies 123-A 123-B 123-C etc.This might end up with shop order #s 30,001 for end item 123 and shop orders AFTER 30,001 for the sub-assemblies If the work all gets finished on the same day, then the shop order purge updates the cost for shop order 30,001 BEFORE the costs of the items that went into that shop order. Our parts are not made smoothly ... we might have a small order with high unit costs, alternating with larger quantity production, with lower unit costs. This pattern, combined with shop order purge not processing closed orders in BOM where used sequence, results in our actual costs spiking to an excess.
Some people might label this as being a bug in BPCSAt our version, BPCS costing, and other areas have some bugs with respect to rounding errors, especially when using what IBM calls extreme values like zero and one. This may have been fixed in later versions. Basically the problem is that numeric values in RPG go up to 15 positions, with up to 9 decimal ... if you do math with maximum size fields, RPG needs some other logic to handle the odd digits that could fly outside of the 15 wide, even temporarily. BPCS does not do so, which according to the IBM manual can have unpredictable results. We reported this bug when we were still on OSG and were told that's the way it is supposed to work.
The bug does not bite us very often, except through CST900 actual production cost purge. Typically it causes previous level of actual cost to be off by plus or minus 0.00001 ... in a few cases it drives the cost negative, and we have had a tiny number of instances of it driving a cost that should be something like XX.X to 9999999999.99999 or 9999999999.99998 plus or minus (because the unpredictable results include the number "wrapping around zero and infinity"
We are using BPCS V6.0.02. I have set up an item with both setup time and machine time in the routing. I am using a basis of per 100. Also, I have established a lot size for this item in the Item Master. When I perform a cost rollup and produce the costing sheet, the correct cost is shown for the setup and machine time based on the established overhead rate. The cost in the bucket for the parent item as well as the total standard cost incorrectly includes the total setup cost for the entire lot. What are all the parameters that affect the cost calculation? At one time, facility specific costing was turned on. It has now been turned off. Not sure if this could be part of the issue. To date, all costs have been loaded either by an upload from MIS or through CST100. The cost roll process has not been used. (Embedded image moved to file: pic00086.gif) -- This is the SSA's BPCS ERP System (BPCS-L) mailing list To post a message email: BPCS-L@xxxxxxxxxxxx To subscribe, unsubscribe, or change list options, visit: http://lists.midrange.com/mailman/listinfo/bpcs-l or email: BPCS-L-request@xxxxxxxxxxxx Before posting, please take a moment to review the archives at http://archive.midrange.com/bpcs-l. Delivered-To: macwheel99@xxxxxxxxxxx
As an Amazon Associate we earn from qualifying purchases.
This mailing list archive is Copyright 1997-2024 by midrange.com and David Gibbs as a compilation work. Use of the archive is restricted to research of a business or technical nature. Any other uses are prohibited. Full details are available on our policy page. If you have questions about this, please contact [javascript protected email address].
Operating expenses for this site are earned using the Amazon Associate program and Google Adsense.
midrange.com
