[Billy Sell]

We bought a couple Canon DR 2580’s about 5 years ago and they’ve been working flawlessly. They’re were pretty pricey but after a lot of wear and tear, I can now say that they were worth the money paid.

[Billy Sell]

We’re running v9.0.2. It’s an older version but change stock location is working fine for us.

Just curious b/c we’re due for an upgrade, what version are you running?

[Billy Sell]

Paul,

I asked CC about the screen scriptor module and was told that it is not available anymore and only used “in-house”. Can you verify this is true?

[Billy Sell]

Good to know. Thank you.

[Billy Sell]

Kristen Orlando wrote:

Hello QueGroup-

We are just starting to utilize the Shop Control Module and are still trying to become more firmiliar with Quantum as we went live in January.

Question for everyone- Say we get a repair order from a customer to teardown and repair a main component. The main componenet breaks down into 40 separate piece parts with individual part numbers. We opened one Work Order for the initial component. Is there a way to include the additional 40 parts (with varrying part numbers- serialized and/or non-serialized) on one work order?

If I understand it correctly a sub work order is for outsourcing part of the job-not for adding additional PN’s?

Having to create 40 separate work orders does not seem like the most efficient approach here.

Any feedback would be greatly appreciated.

Best Regards

Kristen

Paul’s right, you’d add them to the BOM. The disposition is key to what you plan to do with the part when it’s added. WO, Repair, Turn-In, Consumable, etc all have different functions and by the way I understand what you’re saying, I believe you’d want to use the WO disposition which allows you to create sub-work orders off the main component and roll the cost of the repairing the sub-components back into the main component.

[Billy Sell]

Have you looked at “modify template”? It’ll do most of the heavy lifting but it won’t create the wo and fill in any header info.

[Billy Sell]

Sandy,

We use a UDF to populate box 23 on our 8130’s. The UDF (Misc Tab in WO Header) is labeled “Tag Date” and entered manually when we close the WO. That way, if we ever need to change, we can simply go to the header, change the date and reprint the 8130.

Should be a pretty simple change in forms designer.

Billy

[Billy Sell]

Not trying to hijack this thread, but I agree with the CC comment, Leo. It seems whenever they find someone working the help desk with a firm understanding of the software, they’re moved or promoted out. Good for them, bad for us. With only one level of support, if the initial tech can’t help, You’re generally out of luck.

Kudos to all who help in this forum b/c, like Leo said, we’d be on our own without it!

[Billy Sell]

We implemented contact management last year and have very similar setup as you listed in your test.

Once you determine your contact masters, the settings will be similar for each. We have fewer than Paul, but the ones we do use are similar (Accounting, Customer Service, IT, and Sales).

One obstacle we’re still trying to overcome is making users actually use it. Previously, accounting kept company records and collection attempts in Company Notes, Customer service keeps spreadsheets of their customer contacts, etc. Slowly, they’re beginning to see that this tool can consolidate a lot of their work.

Good luck.

[Billy Sell]

Joyce,

PI batches are created by location and warehouse. Do you keep tools in the same locations as your inventory?

[Billy Sell]

Anthony,

I’ve found that many times when it seems that Quantum is locked up, it’s because there’s an active window waiting on a response that’s hidden or behind one of the inactive windows.

Try this…next time it seems it’s locked up, click on Quantum in the task bar to bring up the active window. You may have to click on it a couple times but it most always fixes the problem for us.

I reported this to CC. They said it was a problem with windows, not their software (even though it only happens with Quantum), so I don’t expect any action from them.

Hope this helps.

Billy

[Billy Sell]

LEO DRUKEN wrote:

We have the Zebra S4M 203dpi ZPL Thermal Transfer that we purchased from Ahearn & Soper they recommended this to us because of the aging label issue. We knew some stock would be in stock for prolonged periods of time so went with Thermal Transfer instead. We’ve never had an issue with aging faded labels. The old labels still scan and work even after a couple years. We have never used them in a chemical environment however.

Leo

Leo,

This may sound like an odd request….but would you consider sending us a couple printed labels from your S4M?

We’ve done some chemical testing with our direct thermal printer that has produced negative results. If I could do the same with a thermal transfer printer, it would go a long way in determining whether or not we could use that option.

Billy

[Billy Sell]

I just had another issue with barcoding come up and I’m wondering if any of you are doing anything different that’s working for you.

Since we started using Quantum in 2003, we always printed barcode labels via Zebra LP2844 thermal printers. In the course of our inventory this month, we came across a large number of labels that were completely unreadable. This, no doubt, was from skydrol residue on tag serviceable parts that were put into inventory. Some of which were wrapped in paper towel and double bagged.

In doing some research on this subject, I’ve found that the direct thermal labels can become illegible if exposed to “chemical vapors” which would include many of the cleaning and hydraulic fluids that we use in our shop.

My question is…is anyone using a thermal transfer printer as opposed to the direct thermal printing that the LP2844’s use?

[Billy Sell]

Thank you guys for your help.

Paul, Great presentation. Wish I could’ve been there. Maybe next year I’ll be able to get away.

[Billy Sell]

LEO DRUKEN wrote:

Billy,

We’ve been using the barcode module for about 4 years now. I have nothing but good things to say about it. We use it for shipping & receiving currently and are incorporating it into our work flow now as well. Not sure what information you would need but i can honestly say for things like inventory moves etc i’m not sure how we would live without it.

Leo

Leo,

Thanks for the insight. We would primarily start off using it for receiving but I’d like to be able to issue parts to wo’s as well. Just don’t know if we’ll be able to convince management to change procedures for that to happen. Of course, I’d eventually like to be able to track time with them but that’s more of a longer term project.

The Worth scanners are very pricey. Have you or anyone else tried another scanner? If so, were there any differences?

[Billy Sell]

Paul Stewart wrote:

Billy, I did a presentation at this year’s conference on bar coding.

You can download it from the web site here. I think it would informative for you.

Paul,

Are you talking about the physical inventory barcoding? I actually watched that last week…two weeks AFTER we did a physical inventory for the first time in the 5 years I’ve been here at Genesis. It would’ve been helpful to have found that before we created our own procedures (which are actually very similar to yours).

We considered purchasing scanners and the barcode module to expedite a physical inventory but in reviewing the procedures, it seemed that manually entering the counts via physical inventory would be more efficient. A few select people familiar with the numkeys were able to enter counts nearly as fast as counters were able to turn in count sheets. For batches with variances, we had a couple people authorized to post and, for the most part, they were able to keep up as well.

The slowest part of the process was entering parts found in locations that were not on the count sheets but since those parts are not available to be reserved or issued, we chose to add them after we opened back up for business.

Minus the additions that were completed over the next couple workdays, we were able to complete the inventory with about 50 people in 24 hours (12 on Friday and 12 on Saturday). I expected to have about a dozen people in on Sunday to finish up so we actually came out ahead of schedule….and were able to have at least one day to rest before having to get back in here bright and early Monday! :))