Problem is they don't want to use batch/lot control. Plus they just asked about having two separate costed BOMs based on the vendor. I told them they have to create a different item number for the finished product with the second vendors items added since the cost is different.

Hi Kevin, we've solved this for some of our clients. Assuming you manage controlled warehouses, define the raw materials and manufactured items in question as Batch/Lot control = Yes. When you receive both the raw materials (RP) and the manufactured goods (RM), assign a Batch ID that represents the origin of the raw materials. This way, you'll have the traceability you need in the transaction history and inventory. And if the manufactured goods are finished products, you'll have traceability  Read more...all the way to the point of sale. Show less...

Thanks for the responses guys. I came to the same conclusions as you Christophe. Randy I will speak with Agility thank you. I was hoping someone had a magic bullet idea.

Hi Kevin,

As Christophe has said it can get complicated depending on your requirements. I do know that Agility has a product to handle multi-sourced items in XA (called Multi-Source MRP). May be worth reach out to see if it would fit your needs. Here is their website: https://www.agility-inc.com/

Hi kevin , i prepared a post on that topic this morning. it is just a base for additional chat if necessary
Hope that i understand quite well the question 😊

Yes, I have some recommendations on that topic.
The traceability tree in XA is a topic which keeps on coming back, and which is not still completely “solved” in standard. Infor proposed a long time ago to carry Infor LN STTI module (Serialization and Trace) on XA but we never saw it coming.
 Read more...Let’s start by the beginning. The Item Batch/lot management field in XA (ITMRVA/BLCF) could be switched *on or *off. Depending on that “simple” value , traceability could be tricky or not.
In any case , when you want to record , store and/or retrieve XA Finished good traceability you have to manage the lot numbers. The best way is obviously to manage it in XA on the full material consumption flow , from raw material to finished good through semi-finished goods too , but that is easier to say than to make it happen.
Something important to remember in XA : Even if you don’t activate batch/lot management for the item, if you give a lot number to an IP / IS / IU or TW transaction , XA will keep it in IMHIST. The transaction below is made on a item which is NOT lot controlled but we asked to the operator to fill the lot number used in the transaction.
However, when BLCF is Off, the SQLNTY lot number doesn’t mean anything, because it is only the last transaction lot number that populated the stock location.
Whatever you want to do, Lot management starts from the purchase items receipt transaction (RP/RC/RI/RD)
What I should advise first is to record the link between the Item Supplier lot number and an internal lot number. Because the supplier’s lot numbers could have different lengths or structure , It is quite impossible to manage it in LBHNO field in XA, which is 10 characters length only. So, please prefer and internal lot number structure as you want but less or equal 10 characters length. E.g YY/XXXXX where YY is year and xxxxx is a chrono and YY/Mxxxxxx for MO lot numbers .
To store the supplier lot number you can chose a IMHIST field (or extension) or you also can build a custom file to store the link. Don’t choose the Good Receive Note Number for the lot number because you can encounter some issues depending on XA tailoring. This LGWNO field is more dedicated to the supplier shipment number (document).
Once you have the link between the supplier lot number and internal lot number you’ll be able to retrieve the information later. For me it is a mandatory pre-req !
Another big pre-req is to get (or to build) a solution to scan and retrieve lot numbers (wired or mobile solutions) at all the steps or locations where you have to record the lot numbers. Managing it with manual entries is definitely a trap , for operators and for traceability (non) quality.
Secondly we need to consider the multiple batch/lot management contexts
a) Full Batch/lot management (from Raw Material to semi-finished goods and finished good)
b) No Lot management. The lot number is not managed internally on the item level
c) Partial lot management. Some items are lot managed and some of them are not managed by lot number.
Last but not least, the way you manage your floor stock items could also impact the way to retrieve traceability- I’ll write a word at the tend of this (long) post.
Let’s describe the three cases of figure.
a) Each RM or SFG/FG transaction (IP/IS/IU/RM/TW….) needs a lot number to be supplied by the operator. The lot number is checked by XA, and it is stored in IMHIST file transaction. With that, you can build a SQL recursive request which will give you the traceability history and you can import this view into XA ( you can display it like a Bill of material tree, for example). Be careful, don’t run this kind of recursive SQL on the whole imhist database because it could be really time and performance consuming. Prefer to run the SQL request from a single finished good MO and to launch a temporary file before displaying it) rateher than all the MO which doesn’t presents any interest (traceacility is used only in case of a problem or an audit) .

b) When you don’t manage the lot management inside XA, it is quite tricky to have a reliable lot usage history. As I told before , if you’re able to force operator to supply a lot number, which could be printed on identification label (e.g by customized mobile solution) you’ll find the lot number in IMHIST , BUT you don’t have any real check on lot number existence (in stock) – you can try to build the same SQL View I was talking about before but I’m nearly sure there will probably some issues or traceability holes in the tree. If your choice is this one , I believe you won’t avoid to create a custom file to store the “Lot used history” which will be populated each time you scan a lot number and an item on a label. That means implementing triggers for all concerned stock transactions in XA (TRGMST)

c) Partial lot management (e.g Raw material and Finished Goods). It could be a mix-up of both a) and b) solution.

Don’t forget to think about the shipment lot file (MBCOREP) which store lot numbers shipped and which will help you to analyze the traceability from a shipment notice …
Regarding the floor stock consideration, you need to remember that if you manage all your raw material on uncontroled floor stock (FLSTK = ‘U’) the moment you’ll get the lot number will be the IS transaction moment. And there is no link between an IS and a manufacturing order (some people uses reference number field but it is really unreliable).
The best choice for floor stock management and for a good lot management is to process the consumption transaction (IP/IU) the closer it could be from the workcenter it is made. In that case FLSTK is equal to blank.

To end this long, long post, I advise to design a flowchart to show the full material flow from its arrival to its consumption and to analyze each location where there will be consumption or manufacturing receipt transactions in the workshop. It will help a lot to be sure that the traceability will be available at each step.

Hope that help.

 Show less...

More raw material traceability. For example same part supplied from two vendors supplying from two different countries, but for compliance they need to be costed separate and they need to be able to identify the finished good as having one or the other. I know XA does not have a good method of handling mutti-sourcing without separate item revisions.

Hi Kevin,
Is the question relative to process management or manufactured item traceability ?
Thank you
Christophe