Make operation standard appear zero on job tracker labor hour calculation

(Jayaram Krishna) #1

Parts we manufacture gets air-dried out in the open, and the drying time incurs no labor or oven cost. each part will take a different time to dry, and drying times can be substantial. I am building a separate drying operation, no costs connected to it. This operation will be using a separate Resource Group with infinite Resources, and $0 cost and it is a Back Flush Operation. Is there any way to make them not affect the estimated production hours calculation under job tracker? I am only using this operation for scheduling purpose ONLYimage

(Brandon Anderson) #2

You can add queue hours or move hours so that it doesn’t add it up as labor hours, but still spaces it out in scheduling.

(Jayaram Krishna) #3

Thanks for the fast response @Banderson. The time to dry varies significantly based on the size of the part, so I cannot use the move time.

(Brandon Anderson) #4

That’s the only way that I know how to add time without adding labor time. Off the top of my head, could you make categories that would get it close enough? Like short med long, or based on part size? or time range?, etc, then apply the operation that you need for the part? Depending on how you are doing reporting that can make things painful, but if it’s a back flush operation, then maybe it wouldn’t matter. Just one possible solution.

(Greg Payne) #5

Some potential ways to go after this.

  1. You can assign the que start date and que start time to manipulate the queue time assigned to a job. Like in the job scheduling board using the move option of Subsequent Operations.

  2. Set the time and scheduling blocks on the operation which will translate into resources assigned to change the time used.
    Then remove the operation time after scheduling which would leave the dates set, but reduce your job estimated time.

  3. Calculate your own estimate. I calculate our own production time estimate which skips kitting, mold cure time and testing.

(Jayaram Krishna) #6

Thanks for the reply. I will have to test it.

(Jayaram Krishna) #7

If anybody got more creative solution, I would appreciate that!!