× The internal search function is temporarily non-functional. The current search engine is no longer viable and we are researching alternatives.
As a stop gap measure, we are using Google's custom search engine service.
If you know of an easy to use, open source, search engine ... please contact support@midrange.com.



Dave,

You should check your Transaction listing to see if you have the "RJ" 
transaction activated. When doing JIT reporting and you put a "quantity 
rejected"  amount in the labor ticket it should create an "RJ" transaction 
for that amount of product, at the level of the routing you are reporting. 
The key is that you must have all your bill-of-material items assigned 
with an operation where used value (Routing Op) so that BPCS can identify 
what parts have been consumed up to the point that the product was 
rejected. You should test this approach to see exactly how it works with 
your version, but normally the shop order quantity is reduced for 
subsequent operations based on the quantity rejected. Good luck.

Frederick C. Davy, CPIM, PMP
Business Systems Analyst
Interface Solution, Inc.
Phone: (315) 592-8101
Fax: (315) 592-8481
e-mail: fcdavy@xxxxxxxxxxxx




daparnin@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx 
Sent by: bpcs-l-bounces+fcdavy=sealinfo.com@xxxxxxxxxxxx
11/08/2006 09:19 AM
Please respond to
SSA's BPCS ERP System <bpcs-l@xxxxxxxxxxxx>


To
bpcs-l@xxxxxxxxxxxx
cc

Subject
[BPCS-L] Backflushing components only










The other day I had a user ask if it was possible to enter scrap
transactions that would backflush components only but no labor or 
overhead.
There's nothing that I'm aware of in the transaction effect code that 
would
accommodate this.  The only thing that I could think of was duplicate 
parts
with duplicate bills-of-material and duplicate routings.  I REALLY don't
want to go down that road because it would be a mess to maintain.  My 
other
thought is that if it's work in process there's probably some amount of
labor and overhead associated with it.  Is it possible to partially scrap 
a
finished good at a particular operation in the routing?  The only other
option that comes to mind is scrapping out the components individually.
Any thoughts?

We are on 4.02.  Thanks.


Dave Parnin
--
Nishikawa Standard Company
Topeka, IN  46571
daparnin@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx


As an Amazon Associate we earn from qualifying purchases.

This thread ...

Replies:

Follow On AppleNews
Return to Archive home page | Return to MIDRANGE.COM home page

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.