SO Unit Cost Overridden by R42520

[Bottler]

Hello All,

This is my first JDEList posting so please be gentle.

My problem is as follows:-

I am running the R42520 (Print Pick Slips) UBE with processing options 1 & 2 on the 'Process' tab set to "1". This enables the hard commitment of inventory, and turns on the preference commit processing.

When running the UBE over any given sales order the preference commit logic is overriding the Unit Cost (F4211.UNCS) field on the sales order with a different value to the one that was populated into the unit Cost field when the sales order was originally entered.

I wish to leave the preference commit processing on, but to retain the value of the F4211.UNCS field that was set when the sales order was entered.

The business analyst who referred the problem to me said that he had experimented with the preferences set up and had consulted the JDE Manual, but was unable to 'turn off' the F4211.UNCS override.

I was asked to debug R42520, and found the following:-

When the preference commit processing is 'turned on' R42520 retrieves a unit cost from the UNCS field of the F4105 (Item Cost File). The way that it selects the records from F4105 is as follows:-

WHERE F4105.ITM = F4211.ITM AND F4105.MCU = F4211.MCU

The primary key of F4105 (ITM, MCU, LOCN, LOTN, LEDG) is being used to retrieve records, and the unit cost will ALWAYS come from the UNCS field of the first record that is returned. This often does not match the unit cost that is on the sales order.

The unit cost from F4105 is then written into an interim workfile (F42UI130) which is then used by the 'F42UI130 F4211 SO Detail Line Split' business function to update the F4211.UNCS field on the sales order.

The logic that selects records from the F4105 file is part of an internal function (IB4200780_GetItemCostFromF4105) within the B4200780 (F42UI130 Get/Update Commitment Work File) business function. As far as I can tell (having looked at the source code) this logic will always be executed whenever the preference commit processing is 'turned on' for R42520.

My questions are:-

1) Is there any way that I can guarantee that the unit price from the sales order will not be overridden by the preference commit processing (without having to make any code changes)?

So far the only solution that I have come up with is to create a record in F4105 which has the right unit cost and will always be picked up first. This is not ideal, as there may still end up being a mismatch between the unit cost on the F4105 record and that on the F4211 record.

2) Does anybody know of any decent documentation covering the Preference Commit set-up? Just for future reference. I promised the business analyst that I would give him an overview of the preferences logic, but it could take me a long time to determine what that logic is.

Hopefully this explanation isn't too garbled, and nobody has fallen asleep reading it!

Thanks in advance

Bottler

 

[andyklee]

Bottler,

Good start--nice to see a new poster trying to figure things out. Better
than the usual "Can anyone help me. I have no idea what I'm doing" newbie
post.

It's possible you could run the Update Sales Price/Cost (R42950) program as
part of your end of day processing, and that might be able to reset your
cost to how you want it. You'll probably have to run a custom job to clear
out the Cost Override field in the F4211 field, if that has been set by
commitment processing. If that field is flagged, then the Price/Cost Update
program will skip those sales order lines.

It's worth testing. Also consider if you are updating inventory and
writing to the F4111 during Ship Confirm. If you are, then you might need
to run the Update Price/Cost program prior to Ship Confirm so that the cost
in the F4111 is also the same cost that gets written to the F0911 by Sales
Update.

We have a chapter from our Sales Order manual on Preferences which gives a
good overview, and I'd be glad to send it to you. Email me at
[email protected].

Andy
www.JDEtips.com

 

[Bottler]

Re: RE: SO Unit Cost Overridden by R42520

Excellent. Thanks Andy. I'll forward this information to our business analyst.

Cheers

Bottler

 

[Gary P]

Re: RE: SO Unit Cost Overridden by R42520

Hi, I'm not a business expert like Mr. Klee, but I can help you programmer-to-programmer. I hope your system setup is like mine.

If I understand correctly, it appears as though the cost in those orders is being overwritten by the "Weighted Average" cost for the part. The Weighted Average cost is the average price your company has paid for an item, when you factor in all the parts you bought and the total price you've paid for it. I've had many assignments to grab the actual cost paid for those parts from the lot information. Here's how you can do it:

1) Take the lot and branch fields from the sales detail file, and do a fetch on the lot master table F4108 for the KCOO, DOCO, DCTO. This gives you the information on the lot that was used to fill the order.

2) Take those fields and do a fetch in the purchase order detail file F4311. Fetch by KCOO, DOCO, DCTO, and ITM (from F4211) for the PRRC purchasing unit price. That gives you the dollar amount per part that was paid to fill up that lot, and can be used as the cost per part for that order.

You can create a custom batch job that joins these tables in a business view to fix any discrepancies. I guess using the weighted average on the sales order rather than the actual purchase order helps keep better accounting, but there have also been many times where we needed to know the exact cost paid for that item.

Hope that helps!

 

[peterbruce]

Bottler,

What a "Bottler" of a first post! Congratulations on a first class effort. I agree with Andy's comments on your post. Your post is a good example for other "newbies" on JDEList.

The result of such a post, including the effort you put in to try and resolve your issues that was obvious in it, was the "instant" and direct help you have received.

The only thing you forgot was your system configuration.

 

[Bottler]

Re: RE: SO Unit Cost Overridden by R42520

Excellent advice. I must remember to post more often. Thanks for the help.

Bottler

 

[Bottler]

Thanks Peter. I've been impressed with the service. I'll try and find out the full system config and stick it on my signature.