It looks like Egypt and Romania's time zone is the same - GMT+3 - which is good. Thursday and Saturday time slots identified by Groza are fine with me.
Regards, Emad On Tue, Aug 27, 2024 at 1:45 PM Groza Danut <[email protected]> wrote: > Here are my time slots > > Romania local time: > 29 Thu 15:00 to 20:00 > 30 Fri available from 17:00 > 31 Sat available from 14:00 > 01 Sun pretty much all day > 03 Tue 07:00 to 11:00 or 15:00 to 18:00 > 04-06 available after 17:00 > > GMT time: > 29 Thu 12:00 to 17:00 > 30 Fri available from 14:00 > 31 Sat available from 11:00 > 01 Sun pretty much all day > 03 Tue 04:00 to 08:00 or 12:00 to 15:00 > 04-06 available after 14:00 > > Groza Danut > > On Tue, 27 Aug 2024, 13:04 Pierre Smits, <[email protected]> wrote: > > > Please include your country, so we can factor in timezone corrections (if > > needed). > > > > Met vriendelijke groet, > > > > Pierre Smits > > *Proud* *contributor** of* Apache OFBiz <https://ofbiz.apache.org/> > since > > 2008 (without privileges) > > Proud contributor to the ASF since 2006 > > *Apache Directory <https://directory.apache.org>, PMC Member* > > > > Anyone could have been you, whereas I've always been anyone. > > > > > > On Tue, Aug 27, 2024 at 11:55 AM Pierre Smits <[email protected]> > > wrote: > > > >> Hi Emad, Groza, all, > >> > >> If you can provide me with a few date and time slots, I can schedule > >> something that might be least inconvenient for all. > >> > >> Met vriendelijke groet, > >> > >> Pierre > >> > >> > >> On Tue, Aug 27, 2024 at 10:14 AM Groza Danut <[email protected]> > >> wrote: > >> > >>> Hi Pierre, > >>> > >>> I would also be interested in this. Do you think the brewery process > >>> would > >>> also apply to coffee shops, for the process manufacturing of coffees? > >>> > >>> Groza Danut > >>> > >>> On Tue, 27 Aug 2024, 11:02 Emad Radwan, <[email protected]> wrote: > >>> > >>> > That will be great. I'm in, anytime. > >>> > > >>> > Regards, > >>> > Emad > >>> > > >>> > On Tue, Aug 27, 2024 at 9:33 AM Pierre Smits <[email protected] > > > >>> > wrote: > >>> > > >>> > > Hi Emad, All > >>> > > > >>> > > How about scheduling a 30-60 minutes video conference where I give > a > >>> > > walk-through based on my BMS 4 Brewery solution? > >>> > > > >>> > > IMO, that would give the most bang-for-buck for you allowing for an > >>> > higher > >>> > > interaction and addressing questions without having to wait going > >>> through > >>> > > longer cycles. > >>> > > > >>> > > > >>> > > > >>> > > Met vriendelijke groet, > >>> > > > >>> > > Pierre Smits > >>> > > *Proud* *contributor** of* Apache OFBiz <https://ofbiz.apache.org/ > > > >>> > since > >>> > > 2008 (without privileges) > >>> > > Proud contributor to the ASF since 2006 > >>> > > *Apache Directory <https://directory.apache.org>, PMC Member* > >>> > > > >>> > > Anyone could have been you, whereas I've always been anyone. > >>> > > > >>> > > > >>> > > On Mon, Aug 26, 2024 at 1:27 PM Emad Radwan <[email protected] > > > >>> > wrote: > >>> > > > >>> > >> Hello Pierre, > >>> > >> > >>> > >> Many thanks. I now understand the difference between WIP as a > >>> product > >>> > type > >>> > >> and as an inventory and accounting concept. I also - correct me if > >>> I am > >>> > >> wrong - understand that in 'ProductionRunDeclaration.groovy ' it > >>> > requires > >>> > >> product type NOT to be WIP in order to 'produce'. However, and > as I > >>> > >> understand better from data and code, could you kindly share - > from > >>> your > >>> > >> mentioned implementation - those records that explain the > >>> relationship > >>> > >> between the different production runs? data from ProductAssocs and > >>> > >> WorkEffortAssocs will give me a clearer understanding. > >>> > >> > >>> > >> Regards, > >>> > >> Emad > >>> > >> > >>> > >> On Mon, Aug 26, 2024 at 10:39 AM Pierre Smits < > >>> [email protected]> > >>> > >> wrote: > >>> > >> > >>> > >> > Hi Emad, all, > >>> > >> > > >>> > >> > First, for a better understanding of what a WIP product is about > >>> have > >>> > a > >>> > >> > look at: > https://www.investopedia.com/terms/w/workinprogress.asp > >>> > >> > > >>> > >> > A WIP product is in essence a a means to facilitate asset value > >>> > >> > calculation at the end of a reporting period (month, quarter, > >>> year). > >>> > >> > > >>> > >> > So, it depends.... Not only on the complexity of the BOM and > >>> schema > >>> > >> steps, > >>> > >> > but also on when the financial/fiscal reporting requirements > (like > >>> > e.g. > >>> > >> > when the reporting year ends). > >>> > >> > > >>> > >> > If you have a production schema which has steps that can lead > to a > >>> > step > >>> > >> in > >>> > >> > a production run going from one day to the next, it can run from > >>> one > >>> > >> > reporting period to the next (e.g. long duration steps in the > >>> brewing > >>> > >> > process, where fermentation/maturing can take multiple days, or > >>> even > >>> > >> short > >>> > >> > steps happening in evening/night shifts). > >>> > >> > In such a case you can use the WIP classification as production > >>> type. > >>> > >> But > >>> > >> > I would say this adds additional accounting complexities in your > >>> > setup, > >>> > >> > that need to be investigated and tested. > >>> > >> > > >>> > >> > in the first iteration of me implementing OFBiz for breweries ( > >>> see > >>> > >> #1), > >>> > >> > I started out with defining a single BOM and associated > production > >>> > >> schema > >>> > >> > to get to the first finished product (beer), but that led to a > >>> unique > >>> > >> > schema for each style/variant of beer. Which made production > >>> planning > >>> > >> (and > >>> > >> > reporting) a nightmare. Breaking up such a production schema > (and > >>> its > >>> > >> BOM) > >>> > >> > into multiple (dependent/linked schemas) made life easier wrt > >>> using > >>> > >> OFBiz > >>> > >> > regarding production planning and execution, registration of > >>> inventory > >>> > >> > movements and resource utilization, and reporting (accounting) > on > >>> > asset > >>> > >> > value and costs. > >>> > >> > > >>> > >> > > >>> > >> > #1: > >>> > >> > > >>> > >> > >>> > > >>> > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OFBIZ/Brewing+with+OFBiz+at+a+small+or+medium+sized+brewery > >>> > >> > > >>> > >> > I trust the above helps you in finding the optimal solution for > >>> your > >>> > >> > 'unique' business case/scenario. Should you have additional > >>> questions > >>> > >> > and/or remarks, feel free to reach out. > >>> > >> > > >>> > >> > Met vriendelijke groet, > >>> > >> > > >>> > >> > Pierre Smits > >>> > >> > *Proud* *contributor** of* Apache OFBiz < > >>> https://ofbiz.apache.org/> > >>> > >> since > >>> > >> > 2008 (without privileges) > >>> > >> > Proud contributor to the ASF since 2006 > >>> > >> > *Apache Directory <https://directory.apache.org>, PMC Member* > >>> > >> > > >>> > >> > Anyone could have been you, whereas I've always been anyone. > >>> > >> > > >>> > >> > > >>> > >> > On Tue, Aug 20, 2024 at 10:31 AM Emad Radwan < > >>> [email protected]> > >>> > >> > wrote: > >>> > >> > > >>> > >> >> Hello Pierre, > >>> > >> >> > >>> > >> >> Few clarifications, please. First, for the new products that > >>> we'll > >>> > >> create > >>> > >> >> - using your explanation above - is it correct to say that > >>> they'll be > >>> > >> >> 'intermediate' products with 'WIP' product type? > >>> > >> >> > >>> > >> >> Second, Can we have the the whole process - while having the > >>> > >> possibility > >>> > >> >> to declare intermediate products - in a single production run > or > >>> it > >>> > >> >> requires 'child' production runs? > >>> > >> >> > >>> > >> >> If the process above can fit in one production run, then what > >>> > >> >> configuration is required to make this happen? > >>> > >> >> > >>> > >> >> Regards, > >>> > >> >> Emad > >>> > >> >> > >>> > >> >> On Fri, Jul 19, 2024 at 2:02 PM Emad Radwan < > >>> [email protected]> > >>> > >> >> wrote: > >>> > >> >> > >>> > >> >>> Hello Pierre, > >>> > >> >>> > >>> > >> >>> Many thanks for the detailed explanation. I have a number of > >>> > >> >>> follow-up questions that I'll get back to you on in the next > few > >>> > days > >>> > >> as I > >>> > >> >>> review the relevant code to make sure I'm asking the right > >>> > questions. > >>> > >> >>> > >>> > >> >>> Regards, > >>> > >> >>> Emad > >>> > >> >>> > >>> > >> >>> On Wed, Jul 17, 2024 at 1:36 PM Pierre Smits < > >>> > [email protected]> > >>> > >> >>> wrote: > >>> > >> >>> > >>> > >> >>>> Hi Emad, > >>> > >> >>>> > >>> > >> >>>> A production run to produce Asprin sounds like a > >>> process-oriented > >>> > >> >>>> manufacturing method (similar to producing 'scrambled eggs' > you > >>> > >> can't unmix > >>> > >> >>>> the Asprin mixture). > >>> > >> >>>> > >>> > >> >>>> If you have a requirement for 100.000 tablets, I would break > it > >>> > down > >>> > >> to > >>> > >> >>>> multiple production schemas to keep it simple: 1 for > producing > >>> the > >>> > >> mixture, > >>> > >> >>>> 1 for producing the tablets from the mixture, and 1 for > >>> packaging > >>> > the > >>> > >> >>>> tablets. The reason for this is to factoring the waste > aspects > >>> for > >>> > >> the > >>> > >> >>>> production runs, but also to have intermediate inventory > >>> > >> registration: > >>> > >> >>>> > >>> > >> >>>> > >>> > >> >>>> 1. in the mixture process, residue could remain in the > >>> mixing > >>> > and > >>> > >> >>>> transport equipment leading to 100% (of the weight) of > >>> > >> ingredients going in > >>> > >> >>>> results in > 100% of output. E.g. 100 kg of ingredients > > >>> 98 kg > >>> > >> of mixture > >>> > >> >>>> 2. in the tablet production process, again 100% of the > >>> mixture > >>> > of > >>> > >> 1 > >>> > >> >>>> (98 kg) could lead to > 100% of output. > >>> > >> >>>> 3. in the packaging process, the tablets registered in 2 > may > >>> > lead > >>> > >> >>>> to the last container (box, bag, etc.) not having the > >>> correct > >>> > >> quantity. > >>> > >> >>>> > >>> > >> >>>> Thus process 1 (schema 1) should have a weight step at the > end, > >>> > which > >>> > >> >>>> could account for the actual going into an intermediate > >>> inventory > >>> > >> product > >>> > >> >>>> And process (schema2) should have a 'tablet' counter at the > >>> end to > >>> > >> >>>> determine the 'actual' quantity of produced tablets that goes > >>> into > >>> > >> >>>> inventory. > >>> > >> >>>> > >>> > >> >>>> Also, given that you're talking about a food related product, > >>> > >> batch/lot > >>> > >> >>>> registration is essential. Mixing different batches/lots from > >>> > >> production > >>> > >> >>>> run 1 and 2 to get to the required output (100.000 tablets) > >>> would > >>> > >> introduce > >>> > >> >>>> unmanageable risks. > >>> > >> >>>> > >>> > >> >>>> Now, coming back to your ask about the 'Declare' on a task, > >>> this > >>> > >> would > >>> > >> >>>> do something similar within a production run. In a production > >>> run > >>> > >> task you > >>> > >> >>>> can 'declare' the output of a task (e.g. the mixture), which > is > >>> > then > >>> > >> the > >>> > >> >>>> starting point of the next task (but I have found it to be > more > >>> > >> difficult > >>> > >> >>>> to explain regarding waste, by-products and batch/lot > >>> registration, > >>> > >> when I > >>> > >> >>>> introduced OFBiz as a Brewery Management Solution at several > >>> > >> breweries). > >>> > >> >>>> > >>> > >> >>>> I trust the above helps. > >>> > >> >>>> > >>> > >> >>>> > >>> > >> >>>> Met vriendelijke groet, > >>> > >> >>>> > >>> > >> >>>> Pierre > >>> > >> >>>> > >>> > >> >>>> > >>> > >> >>>> On Thu, Jul 11, 2024 at 8:33 PM Emad Radwan < > >>> [email protected] > >>> > > > >>> > >> >>>> wrote: > >>> > >> >>>> > >>> > >> >>>>> Hello Community, > >>> > >> >>>>> > >>> > >> >>>>> Assume I have a routing for Asprin - a batch of 100000 > >>> tablets - > >>> > >> >>>>> manufacturing where there're 7 tasks to make the product. > >>> Lets say > >>> > >> >>>>> that in > >>> > >> >>>>> the first 5 tasks we didn't reach the 'tablet' form yet. My > >>> > question > >>> > >> >>>>> is, > >>> > >> >>>>> why the 'Declare' button for one of those tasks is > available? > >>> > >> >>>>> > >>> > >> >>>>> By pressing 'declare' we have a form to edit the task where > >>> some > >>> > >> >>>>> fields I > >>> > >> >>>>> understand like actual timings but I don't get fields like > >>> > >> >>>>> QuantityProduced > >>> > >> >>>>> for such tasks where we don't have a 'finished product' yet. > >>> > >> >>>>> > >>> > >> >>>>> Also appear another form - in the - Production Run > Declaration > >>> > >> section > >>> > >> >>>>> - > >>> > >> >>>>> that allow to add an inventory item for 'any' product the > user > >>> > >> selects! > >>> > >> >>>>> > >>> > >> >>>>> Do you find it logical to have the above visible for such > >>> middle > >>> > >> >>>>> tasks? Is > >>> > >> >>>>> there a way to configure it to display with tasks that will > >>> > actually > >>> > >> >>>>> deliver the finished product? > >>> > >> >>>>> > >>> > >> >>>>> Are the uses cases for this that I'm missing? > >>> > >> >>>>> > >>> > >> >>>>> Regards, > >>> > >> >>>>> Emad > >>> > >> >>>>> > >>> > >> >>>> > >>> > >> > >>> > > > >>> > > >>> > >> >
