Hung Records holding stock - LawsonGuru.com

Name	Points
Greg Moeller	4184
David Williams	3349
JonA	3288
Kat V	2984
Woozy	1973
Jimmy Chiu	1883
Kwane McNeal	1437
Ragu Raghavan	1351
Roger French	1311
mark.cook	1244

MS

Basic Member

Posts: 5

11/23/2011 3:09 PM

Have an issue with hung records holding stock. The issue stems from reqs not allocating fully or the system breaking a req into two shipments. Part of the req closes, the other part does not. When looking at IC12 for an item, after drilling and checking stock status we have found numerous items that have allocations from as long ago as 2006. We cannot clear these records by conventional means, when we try, we see that req is closed but with open lines.

We have also rearranged our storage facility and these allocations prevent the moving of material from the old bin to the new. This condition really has a negetive impact on our overall location accuracy when cycle counting. The system looks at the total number of widgets when counting the item. When correcting the item either through PI or IC24 in row "A" the next time we count row "C" (the other bin location)we have no choice but count the phantom bin location as 100% which adversley effects the counts to row "A". So.....it is a perpetual Catch 22. This is going on with about 100 items.

It has been suggested that we run a DVT program to try and clear these records, when we ran it in test it took 24 hours to complete. It is unlikely we will be able to shut the system completely off for that period of time to run that program due to the amount users and program schedules.

Has anyone else experienced this issue and how have you cleaned up the records?

Greg Moeller

Veteran Member

Posts: 1498

11/23/2011 4:53 PM

Do you have the IC99.2 program?

Bring up the item and keep hitting next until you find the offending bin. Delete and maybe Change..... unsure (haven't used it in a while)... The offending bin should now be removed from your system, and you should be able to move forward.

MS

Basic Member

Posts: 5

11/24/2011 11:24 AM

My Security settings prevent me from using that program, I have time scheduled with my IT counterpart next week. I believe we have tried using IC99 in the past....I do recall a period in time when we deleted some allocations but it did not seem to correct the problem

MS

Basic Member

Posts: 5

11/30/2011 4:36 PM

Have found a process to look up and reassign shipment info to some of the reqs that are only partially completed. Have completed that task and released numerous items and frozen bins.

Next issue is some documents in question do not have any shipment info associated with them...they are processed and have document numbers, just no shipment info. Is there a way to reassign a shipment number to these orphan reqs?

Greg Moeller

Veteran Member

Posts: 1498

11/30/2011 6:10 PM

Let me check with my expert to get some feedback. I'll let you know.

Greg Moeller

Veteran Member

Posts: 1498

12/1/2011 6:22 PM

My expert uses IC99.1 for to reassign shipment numbers to those orphan reqs.

The Alchemist

Advanced Member

Posts: 34

12/1/2011 8:45 PM

Great feed as we are having a similar problem. Can someone tell me how to get the Trans Seq number in IC99.1?

MS

Basic Member

Posts: 5

12/7/2011 3:49 PM

Posted By Greg Moeller on 12/01/2011 01:22 PM
My expert uses IC99.1 for to reassign shipment numbers to those orphan reqs.

Does he add them as current shipment numbers. For example Our current documents are in the 525000 range with shipping documents in the 240000 range. Some or our hung records are in the 200000 range which should have shipments in the 90000 range.....is he assigning shipping numbers in the 240000 range to the early requisitions?

Greg Moeller

Veteran Member

Posts: 1498

12/8/2011 1:38 PM

I sent an email to my procurement expert: Here is her response:
The problem with assigning shipment numbers would be running into ones that are already used. If I were him or her I would assign a block of numbers specifically for this clean up that are new and they could later track that block of numbers if they had to.