Our engineering manager noticed that Method Tracker does not show the same results as Engineering Workbench. Is this expected behavior? Is there a way to have Method Tracker use the latest approved revision for materials\parts?
The parts do have “Use Part Rev” checked in part maintenance.
Her complaint is as follows:
I am seeing conflicting information on a BOM. What would cause this and is this going to cause some future issue?
Part # 57-06200-00-1 has revision A approved. (3rd screen shot below)
Part # 57-06202-60-1 if you look at method tracker and expand the tree, part # 57-06200-00-1 says it is at rev New. (1st screen shot below)
Part # 57-06202-60-1 if you look at Engineering Workbench and expand the tree, part # 57-06200-00-1 says it is at rev A. (2nd screen shot below)
Method Tracker and Engineering Workbench should match.
Last screen shot is the job, I was concerned since Engineering Workbench and Method Tracker showed different what the job would do so I had sales get details in the job to check.
I’ll take a stab at this. I believe that once something is checked out into Eng WB, any changes you make don’t show up in method tracker unless you approve and check the part back in. As long as the part is checked out in EngWB, there are essentially two versions of the given part/rev. One version is the approved version visible in method tracker. The other version is a copy (that may or may not have been modified) in the EngWB tables (ECORev). Does that make sense?
Hi Nate, I thought this as well. I have made sure that both parts are checked in and approved and we get the same result.
The only thing I can think is that Method Tracker is looking for matching revisions while Engineering Workbench uses the latest approved revision due to the “Use Part Rev” checkbox in Part Maintenance.
The Material has 2 revisions, “NEW”, which is not approved, and “A”, which is approved. The top level part only has 1 revision, NEW, which is approved, leading me to my theory.
Sorry about necroposting.
We are occasionally having this issue where our method tracker partmtl in bom revision does not agree with what’s shown on the same rev checked out in engrg workbench. Also the Bom listing report that’s standard pulls wrong old rev for the same part in the print.
Did you ever figure out why the method tracker and engrg wb boms didn’t agree for latest effective approved part rev on both? Mine is pulling an unapproved rev of the partmtl. It happens to be non quantity bearing… but it works fine on many non qty bearing part nos.
We worked with Epicor support on this. This is what we figured out.
The problem is on the ECOMtl and PartMtl tables, they have the MtlRevisionNum specified. If it had an old MtlRevisionNum, that’s what would show up on the Method Tracker.
The fix was to unapprove and reapprove the MOM using engineering workbench, which would refresh the data on the tables the Method Tracker gets the information from.
Check out the Parent Part, select the Asm Mtl that has the problem, make a change in Method of Manufacturing > Materials (we went to purchasing comments tab and typed a letter on the material comments section), click save, undo the change you made (delete the letter), click on Save again, then go to actions, approve and check it in. The next time you go into Method Tracker it will show up with the latest Mtl.
Thanks so much Justin! This worked for us too. I really appreciate it. This has been a pia for awhile and I am so glad to be able to give engineering an answer on it finally.
