This was going to be a question about where the method tracker gets the costs for the materials, but I figured out that it’s looking at the revision, even if it’s a purchased part. Now I have a different question. If we have custom parts that are modeled, they get imported into E-10 with materials on them (the amount is 999999999 or something like that for length materials, long story as to why). Then it’s decided to outsource due to various reasons, so the method never gets built, because we shouldn’t need it, the part is purchased. But now it looks like the view cost is still looking at the material in the revision rather than the cost of the actual purchased part. Can anyone tell me if there is some logic to be able to control this so the view cost looks at whether the parts is purchased or manufactured? I’ll do some trial and error stuff, like put a cost on the part, however if someone knows the hierarchy (or where to find it) that would be helpful.
So I did some testing in our Pilot system, and nothing so far has made a difference, although I highly suspect I am doing something wrong.
From what I can tell from reading so far though, this cost rollup is for maintaining standard costs correct? Considering the fact that the View Cost from the method tracker does not ask for a Costing Group, I’m guessing that it’s not using the same information as the cost rollup, it should be looking at the information that is the costing section of the part. I can verify that by changing the cost of a part that doesn’t have a revision. So If I posted the cost rollup information, It should change the costs in that section, however unless there is some hidden field that the view cost screen is looking at to determine whether or not to ignore the manufacturing details on a revision and go with the part cost, I’m thinking it’s still going look at the revision unless there is null material on the revision.
Looking at the cost rollup, it looks like the cost rollup was performed once in our company, by the consultant that was helping with the initial go live of E-10. We haven’t run it since. (that was in March of 2016). So IF the method tracker was for some reason using information generated by the cost roll-up, you would think we would have had to run that in order to see any cost information on newly created BOM’s, which we don’t.
I’m not saying that it’s not possible that there is some hidden logic or field affecting what it’s reading, and from reading the help snippet above, it seems to mean that, but I suspect that the help article is referring to the cost roll-up report and not the Method Tracker view cost screen as far as whether to look at the revision or not. Even if I un-approve the revision, the view cost screen still looks at the revision cost, not the costing method cost.
I’ll probably need some help to figure out if my assumptions/theories are right or wrong. I have a case sent into support, so maybe someone there will have an idea of what’s going on…
What costing method do you use for the part currently? Did you post the cost roll up information, because if you have not then the pricing structures are not completely updated? What is the cost of the part in part transaction history? What is the current quantity on hand as well?
costing method is average, qty on hand is 0 and current cost in the system is 0. (per the screen shot above) Part cost is 0 because the parts were purchased directly to the job. I tried posting costing rollup in test, although, like I said I am probably doing it wrong. If I delete the revision, however, the view cost screen in method tracker will change, which is why I don’t think it’s tied to costing roll-up other than the fact that it updates the part cost.
There is a check box in sit cost maintenance that says whether to skip the revision for the cost rollup. (the bottom one in the screen shot). I’m going to do a little looking to make sure it doesn’t mess anything else up, but preliminary tests look like it makes it behave the way that I would expect it to.
