Re: [OFBiz] Users - the industrial costs
Locked
Re: [OFBiz] Users - the industrial costs
 
|
Mario, In general it's probably best to associate cost information directly to the resource, ie to the FixedAsset or the Party. Done that way it wouldn't matter how the FixedAsset or Party is attached to the WorkEffort. That would be a natural cost or cost to the company. The amount charged to a client or customer is another issue altogether and should probably be represented by a product that is sold to the customer. That product could be a manufactured or assembled good where they are not charged directly for the use of the resource, or a product that represents sales of a use of the resource, ie man-hours or asset-hours. -David On Jul 12, 2005, at 2:55 AM, TAU - Mario Cappellato wrote: > Hi all, > > I'm doing the design for the industrial cost subcomponent of the > manufacturing component; my goal is to compute the total standard > cost of a manufactured product taking into account the product's > standard routing times and the fixed assets and persons involved in > the manufacturing process. > > Initially I'd like to keep things simple, so I'd like to store the > information about the fixed asset's costs per hour (setup cost and > running cost). > > Should I use the following entities? > WorkEffortSkillStandard: to store information about the standard > costs for the persons involved in the manufacturing process > > WorkEffortFixedAssetStd: to store information about the standard > costs for the fixed asset needed in the manufacturing process; or > should I use the WorkEffortFixedAssetAssign entity also for this? > > Is this the right way to go? > Any input would be greatly appreciated. > > Thanks, > > Mario Cappellato > > > _______________________________________________ > Users mailing list > [hidden email] > http://lists.ofbiz.org/mailman/listinfo/users > _______________________________________________ Users mailing list [hidden email] http://lists.ofbiz.org/mailman/listinfo/users |
smime.p7s (3K)
Re: [OFBiz] Users - the industrial costs
|
|
David,
thanks for your help. Are you suggesting to add new fields to the FixedAsset entity? Something like "setupTimeCost" and "runTimeCost" to store information about the industrial costs related to the usage of a given fixed asset. This could be a good solution for me... Or are you suggesting to store this kind of information in a new entity (e.g. "FixedAssetStandardCost")? At the moment I'm not interested in calculating the cost to charge to a client, but I agree with you that this could/should be implemented according with the "product" data model. Thanks for your time, Mario ----- Original Message ----- From: "David E. Jones" <[hidden email]> To: "OFBiz Users / Usage Discussion" <[hidden email]> Sent: Friday, July 15, 2005 9:26 AM Subject: Re: [OFBiz] Users - the industrial costs Mario, In general it's probably best to associate cost information directly to the resource, ie to the FixedAsset or the Party. Done that way it wouldn't matter how the FixedAsset or Party is attached to the WorkEffort. That would be a natural cost or cost to the company. The amount charged to a client or customer is another issue altogether and should probably be represented by a product that is sold to the customer. That product could be a manufactured or assembled good where they are not charged directly for the use of the resource, or a product that represents sales of a use of the resource, ie man-hours or asset-hours. -David On Jul 12, 2005, at 2:55 AM, TAU - Mario Cappellato wrote: > Hi all, > > I'm doing the design for the industrial cost subcomponent of the > manufacturing component; my goal is to compute the total standard > cost of a manufactured product taking into account the product's > standard routing times and the fixed assets and persons involved in > the manufacturing process. > > Initially I'd like to keep things simple, so I'd like to store the > information about the fixed asset's costs per hour (setup cost and > running cost). > > Should I use the following entities? > WorkEffortSkillStandard: to store information about the standard > costs for the persons involved in the manufacturing process > > WorkEffortFixedAssetStd: to store information about the standard > costs for the fixed asset needed in the manufacturing process; or > should I use the WorkEffortFixedAssetAssign entity also for this? > > Is this the right way to go? > Any input would be greatly appreciated. > > Thanks, > > Mario Cappellato > > > _______________________________________________ > Users mailing list > [hidden email] > http://lists.ofbiz.org/mailman/listinfo/users > _______________________________________________ Users mailing list [hidden email] http://lists.ofbiz.org/mailman/listinfo/users |
Re: [OFBiz] Users - the industrial costs
|
|
It might be good to have these in a different entity. It would be easier to add other types of costs, and it could be effective dated. I was thinking this might be applicable for maintenance costs, but after thinking about it more I don't think that would apply. We need something special to model maintenance activities, schedules, and costs. -David On Jul 17, 2005, at 4:56 AM, TAU - Mario Cappellato wrote: > David, > > thanks for your help. > Are you suggesting to add new fields to the FixedAsset entity? > Something like "setupTimeCost" and "runTimeCost" to store > information about the industrial costs related to the usage of a > given fixed asset. > This could be a good solution for me... > Or are you suggesting to store this kind of information in a new > entity (e.g. "FixedAssetStandardCost")? > > At the moment I'm not interested in calculating the cost to charge > to a client, but I agree with you that this could/should be > implemented according with the "product" data model. > > Thanks for your time, > > Mario > > ----- Original Message ----- From: "David E. Jones" > <[hidden email]> > To: "OFBiz Users / Usage Discussion" <[hidden email]> > Sent: Friday, July 15, 2005 9:26 AM > Subject: Re: [OFBiz] Users - the industrial costs > > > Mario, > > In general it's probably best to associate cost information directly > to the resource, ie to the FixedAsset or the Party. Done that way it > wouldn't matter how the FixedAsset or Party is attached to the > WorkEffort. > > That would be a natural cost or cost to the company. The amount > charged to a client or customer is another issue altogether and > should probably be represented by a product that is sold to the > customer. That product could be a manufactured or assembled good > where they are not charged directly for the use of the resource, or a > product that represents sales of a use of the resource, ie man-hours > or asset-hours. > > -David > > > On Jul 12, 2005, at 2:55 AM, TAU - Mario Cappellato wrote: > > >> Hi all, >> >> I'm doing the design for the industrial cost subcomponent of the >> manufacturing component; my goal is to compute the total standard >> cost of a manufactured product taking into account the product's >> standard routing times and the fixed assets and persons involved in >> the manufacturing process. >> >> Initially I'd like to keep things simple, so I'd like to store the >> information about the fixed asset's costs per hour (setup cost and >> running cost). >> >> Should I use the following entities? >> WorkEffortSkillStandard: to store information about the standard >> costs for the persons involved in the manufacturing process >> >> WorkEffortFixedAssetStd: to store information about the standard >> costs for the fixed asset needed in the manufacturing process; or >> should I use the WorkEffortFixedAssetAssign entity also for this? >> >> Is this the right way to go? >> Any input would be greatly appreciated. >> >> Thanks, >> >> Mario Cappellato >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Users mailing list >> [hidden email] >> http://lists.ofbiz.org/mailman/listinfo/users >> >> > > _______________________________________________ > Users mailing list > [hidden email] > http://lists.ofbiz.org/mailman/listinfo/users > _______________________________________________ Users mailing list [hidden email] http://lists.ofbiz.org/mailman/listinfo/users |
Re: [OFBiz] Users - the industrial costs
|
|
Hi David,
ok, following your suggestions, here are the first draft for two new entities: FixedAssetStdCost fixedAssetId (*) fixedAssetStdCostTypeId (*) fromDate (*) thruDate currencyUomId amount and FixedAssetStdCostType fixedAssetStdCostTypeId (*) description Any remarks/comments? Thanks, Mario ----- Original Message ----- From: "David E. Jones" <[hidden email]> To: "OFBiz Users / Usage Discussion" <[hidden email]> Sent: Monday, July 18, 2005 6:57 AM Subject: Re: [OFBiz] Users - the industrial costs > > It might be good to have these in a different entity. It would be easier > to add other types of costs, and it could be effective dated. > > I was thinking this might be applicable for maintenance costs, but after > thinking about it more I don't think that would apply. We need something > special to model maintenance activities, schedules, and costs. > > -David > > > On Jul 17, 2005, at 4:56 AM, TAU - Mario Cappellato wrote: > >> David, >> >> thanks for your help. >> Are you suggesting to add new fields to the FixedAsset entity? Something >> like "setupTimeCost" and "runTimeCost" to store information about the >> industrial costs related to the usage of a given fixed asset. >> This could be a good solution for me... >> Or are you suggesting to store this kind of information in a new entity >> (e.g. "FixedAssetStandardCost")? >> >> At the moment I'm not interested in calculating the cost to charge to a >> client, but I agree with you that this could/should be implemented >> according with the "product" data model. >> >> Thanks for your time, >> >> Mario >> >> ----- Original Message ----- From: "David E. Jones" <[hidden email]> >> To: "OFBiz Users / Usage Discussion" <[hidden email]> >> Sent: Friday, July 15, 2005 9:26 AM >> Subject: Re: [OFBiz] Users - the industrial costs >> >> >> Mario, >> >> In general it's probably best to associate cost information directly >> to the resource, ie to the FixedAsset or the Party. Done that way it >> wouldn't matter how the FixedAsset or Party is attached to the >> WorkEffort. >> >> That would be a natural cost or cost to the company. The amount >> charged to a client or customer is another issue altogether and >> should probably be represented by a product that is sold to the >> customer. That product could be a manufactured or assembled good >> where they are not charged directly for the use of the resource, or a >> product that represents sales of a use of the resource, ie man-hours >> or asset-hours. >> >> -David >> >> >> On Jul 12, 2005, at 2:55 AM, TAU - Mario Cappellato wrote: >> >> >>> Hi all, >>> >>> I'm doing the design for the industrial cost subcomponent of the >>> manufacturing component; my goal is to compute the total standard >>> cost of a manufactured product taking into account the product's >>> standard routing times and the fixed assets and persons involved in >>> the manufacturing process. >>> >>> Initially I'd like to keep things simple, so I'd like to store the >>> information about the fixed asset's costs per hour (setup cost and >>> running cost). >>> >>> Should I use the following entities? >>> WorkEffortSkillStandard: to store information about the standard >>> costs for the persons involved in the manufacturing process >>> >>> WorkEffortFixedAssetStd: to store information about the standard >>> costs for the fixed asset needed in the manufacturing process; or >>> should I use the WorkEffortFixedAssetAssign entity also for this? >>> >>> Is this the right way to go? >>> Any input would be greatly appreciated. >>> >>> Thanks, >>> >>> Mario Cappellato >>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Users mailing list >>> [hidden email] >>> http://lists.ofbiz.org/mailman/listinfo/users >>> >>> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Users mailing list >> [hidden email] >> http://lists.ofbiz.org/mailman/listinfo/users >> > > > _______________________________________________ > Users mailing list > [hidden email] > http://lists.ofbiz.org/mailman/listinfo/users _______________________________________________ Users mailing list [hidden email] http://lists.ofbiz.org/mailman/listinfo/users |
Re: [OFBiz] Users - the industrial costs
|
|
Looks good. The only change I would make is from "currencyUomId" to "amountUomId", making it clear what the Uom applies to. This is an issue in other areas in the OFBiz data model so I've been trying to do it more this way with newer entities. -David On Jul 18, 2005, at 1:41 PM, TAU - Mario Cappellato wrote: > Hi David, > > ok, following your suggestions, here are the first draft for two > new entities: > > FixedAssetStdCost > fixedAssetId (*) > fixedAssetStdCostTypeId (*) > fromDate (*) > thruDate > currencyUomId > amount > > and > > FixedAssetStdCostType > fixedAssetStdCostTypeId (*) > description > > Any remarks/comments? > > Thanks, > > Mario > > ----- Original Message ----- From: "David E. Jones" > <[hidden email]> > To: "OFBiz Users / Usage Discussion" <[hidden email]> > Sent: Monday, July 18, 2005 6:57 AM > Subject: Re: [OFBiz] Users - the industrial costs > > > >> >> It might be good to have these in a different entity. It would be >> easier to add other types of costs, and it could be effective dated. >> >> I was thinking this might be applicable for maintenance costs, >> but after thinking about it more I don't think that would apply. >> We need something special to model maintenance activities, >> schedules, and costs. >> >> -David >> >> >> On Jul 17, 2005, at 4:56 AM, TAU - Mario Cappellato wrote: >> >> >>> David, >>> >>> thanks for your help. >>> Are you suggesting to add new fields to the FixedAsset entity? >>> Something like "setupTimeCost" and "runTimeCost" to store >>> information about the industrial costs related to the usage of a >>> given fixed asset. >>> This could be a good solution for me... >>> Or are you suggesting to store this kind of information in a new >>> entity (e.g. "FixedAssetStandardCost")? >>> >>> At the moment I'm not interested in calculating the cost to >>> charge to a client, but I agree with you that this could/should >>> be implemented according with the "product" data model. >>> >>> Thanks for your time, >>> >>> Mario >>> >>> ----- Original Message ----- From: "David E. Jones" >>> <[hidden email]> >>> To: "OFBiz Users / Usage Discussion" <[hidden email]> >>> Sent: Friday, July 15, 2005 9:26 AM >>> Subject: Re: [OFBiz] Users - the industrial costs >>> >>> >>> Mario, >>> >>> In general it's probably best to associate cost information directly >>> to the resource, ie to the FixedAsset or the Party. Done that way it >>> wouldn't matter how the FixedAsset or Party is attached to the >>> WorkEffort. >>> >>> That would be a natural cost or cost to the company. The amount >>> charged to a client or customer is another issue altogether and >>> should probably be represented by a product that is sold to the >>> customer. That product could be a manufactured or assembled good >>> where they are not charged directly for the use of the resource, >>> or a >>> product that represents sales of a use of the resource, ie man-hours >>> or asset-hours. >>> >>> -David >>> >>> >>> On Jul 12, 2005, at 2:55 AM, TAU - Mario Cappellato wrote: >>> >>> >>> >>>> Hi all, >>>> >>>> I'm doing the design for the industrial cost subcomponent of the >>>> manufacturing component; my goal is to compute the total standard >>>> cost of a manufactured product taking into account the product's >>>> standard routing times and the fixed assets and persons involved in >>>> the manufacturing process. >>>> >>>> Initially I'd like to keep things simple, so I'd like to store the >>>> information about the fixed asset's costs per hour (setup cost and >>>> running cost). >>>> >>>> Should I use the following entities? >>>> WorkEffortSkillStandard: to store information about the standard >>>> costs for the persons involved in the manufacturing process >>>> >>>> WorkEffortFixedAssetStd: to store information about the standard >>>> costs for the fixed asset needed in the manufacturing process; or >>>> should I use the WorkEffortFixedAssetAssign entity also for this? >>>> >>>> Is this the right way to go? >>>> Any input would be greatly appreciated. >>>> >>>> Thanks, >>>> >>>> Mario Cappellato >>>> >>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> Users mailing list >>>> [hidden email] >>>> http://lists.ofbiz.org/mailman/listinfo/users >>>> >>>> >>>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Users mailing list >>> [hidden email] >>> http://lists.ofbiz.org/mailman/listinfo/users >>> >>> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Users mailing list >> [hidden email] >> http://lists.ofbiz.org/mailman/listinfo/users >> > > _______________________________________________ > Users mailing list > [hidden email] > http://lists.ofbiz.org/mailman/listinfo/users > _______________________________________________ Users mailing list [hidden email] http://lists.ofbiz.org/mailman/listinfo/users |
Re: [OFBiz] Users - the industrial costs
|
|
Hi David,
It's ok. I'll go for it tanks Mario ----- Original Message ----- From: "David E. Jones" <[hidden email]> To: "OFBiz Users / Usage Discussion" <[hidden email]> Sent: Monday, July 18, 2005 10:23 PM Subject: Re: [OFBiz] Users - the industrial costs > > Looks good. The only change I would make is from "currencyUomId" to > "amountUomId", making it clear what the Uom applies to. This is an > issue in other areas in the OFBiz data model so I've been trying to > do it more this way with newer entities. > > -David > > > On Jul 18, 2005, at 1:41 PM, TAU - Mario Cappellato wrote: > >> Hi David, >> >> ok, following your suggestions, here are the first draft for two >> new entities: >> >> FixedAssetStdCost >> fixedAssetId (*) >> fixedAssetStdCostTypeId (*) >> fromDate (*) >> thruDate >> currencyUomId >> amount >> >> and >> >> FixedAssetStdCostType >> fixedAssetStdCostTypeId (*) >> description >> >> Any remarks/comments? >> >> Thanks, >> >> Mario >> >> ----- Original Message ----- From: "David E. Jones" >> <[hidden email]> >> To: "OFBiz Users / Usage Discussion" <[hidden email]> >> Sent: Monday, July 18, 2005 6:57 AM >> Subject: Re: [OFBiz] Users - the industrial costs >> >> >> >>> >>> It might be good to have these in a different entity. It would be >>> easier to add other types of costs, and it could be effective dated. >>> >>> I was thinking this might be applicable for maintenance costs, >>> but after thinking about it more I don't think that would apply. >>> We need something special to model maintenance activities, >>> schedules, and costs. >>> >>> -David >>> >>> >>> On Jul 17, 2005, at 4:56 AM, TAU - Mario Cappellato wrote: >>> >>> >>>> David, >>>> >>>> thanks for your help. >>>> Are you suggesting to add new fields to the FixedAsset entity? >>>> Something like "setupTimeCost" and "runTimeCost" to store >>>> information about the industrial costs related to the usage of a >>>> given fixed asset. >>>> This could be a good solution for me... >>>> Or are you suggesting to store this kind of information in a new >>>> entity (e.g. "FixedAssetStandardCost")? >>>> >>>> At the moment I'm not interested in calculating the cost to >>>> charge to a client, but I agree with you that this could/should >>>> be implemented according with the "product" data model. >>>> >>>> Thanks for your time, >>>> >>>> Mario >>>> >>>> ----- Original Message ----- From: "David E. Jones" >>>> <[hidden email]> >>>> To: "OFBiz Users / Usage Discussion" <[hidden email]> >>>> Sent: Friday, July 15, 2005 9:26 AM >>>> Subject: Re: [OFBiz] Users - the industrial costs >>>> >>>> >>>> Mario, >>>> >>>> In general it's probably best to associate cost information directly >>>> to the resource, ie to the FixedAsset or the Party. Done that way it >>>> wouldn't matter how the FixedAsset or Party is attached to the >>>> WorkEffort. >>>> >>>> That would be a natural cost or cost to the company. The amount >>>> charged to a client or customer is another issue altogether and >>>> should probably be represented by a product that is sold to the >>>> customer. That product could be a manufactured or assembled good >>>> where they are not charged directly for the use of the resource, >>>> or a >>>> product that represents sales of a use of the resource, ie man-hours >>>> or asset-hours. >>>> >>>> -David >>>> >>>> >>>> On Jul 12, 2005, at 2:55 AM, TAU - Mario Cappellato wrote: >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>>> Hi all, >>>>> >>>>> I'm doing the design for the industrial cost subcomponent of the >>>>> manufacturing component; my goal is to compute the total standard >>>>> cost of a manufactured product taking into account the product's >>>>> standard routing times and the fixed assets and persons involved in >>>>> the manufacturing process. >>>>> >>>>> Initially I'd like to keep things simple, so I'd like to store the >>>>> information about the fixed asset's costs per hour (setup cost and >>>>> running cost). >>>>> >>>>> Should I use the following entities? >>>>> WorkEffortSkillStandard: to store information about the standard >>>>> costs for the persons involved in the manufacturing process >>>>> >>>>> WorkEffortFixedAssetStd: to store information about the standard >>>>> costs for the fixed asset needed in the manufacturing process; or >>>>> should I use the WorkEffortFixedAssetAssign entity also for this? >>>>> >>>>> Is this the right way to go? >>>>> Any input would be greatly appreciated. >>>>> >>>>> Thanks, >>>>> >>>>> Mario Cappellato >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>> Users mailing list >>>>> [hidden email] >>>>> http://lists.ofbiz.org/mailman/listinfo/users >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> Users mailing list >>>> [hidden email] >>>> http://lists.ofbiz.org/mailman/listinfo/users >>>> >>>> >>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Users mailing list >>> [hidden email] >>> http://lists.ofbiz.org/mailman/listinfo/users >>> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Users mailing list >> [hidden email] >> http://lists.ofbiz.org/mailman/listinfo/users >> > > > _______________________________________________ > Users mailing list > [hidden email] > http://lists.ofbiz.org/mailman/listinfo/users _______________________________________________ Users mailing list [hidden email] http://lists.ofbiz.org/mailman/listinfo/users |
«
Return to OFBiz - User
|
1 view|%1 views
| Free forum by Nabble | Edit this page |