QM - Next Inspection Date

[Former Member]

Hi Experts:

Is there a way to prevent the Next Inspection Date from defaulting in the batch? Currently the inspection interval is set to 0 in the MM, which I believe is causing today's date being set as the next inspection date in the batch when the inspection lot is changed. Would like to manually enter a value in Next Inspection Date in the batch instead of constantly overriding the date.

Any help is appreciated! I give points!

Thanks!

Nic

[former_member42744 · Accepted solution]

Go to the QM view and remove the value in the inspection interval field. This field is allowed to be null. You should not then have any inspection dates calculated.

Craig

[Former Member · Accepted solution]

I didn't get to test this yet, but that was my suspicion as well. Thanks for answering. I will update your points.

[former_member42744 · Accepted solution]

nic.. I was recently looking at this and found that when I changed an exisitng value to null, the system default in zero.

So I think if your creating new views/materials you'll be ok. But if you have to go back and change a value to null, I think you'll be out of luck.

You might need a program written to update that field to null directly in the MARC table. Have fun!

Craig

[Former Member · Accepted solution]

Oh - I do know what you mean actually. Thanks for letting me know. When I test it tomorrow I will be sure to test for both scenarios. Too bad there are no bonus points.

Nic

[Former Member · Accepted solution]

I am testing now, and when I create new materials and leave the Inspection Interval blank, it is populating it regardless with 0. So, it is blank when I save, then when I display the material is 0 and it is also 0 in MARC. Is this not happening in your system?

Nic

[former_member42744 · Accepted solution]

I went back and looked at this again. I might not have actually saved the material when I looked at this the other day.

So it is behaving the same way for me as it is you. Once I save after extending the material master it defaults to zero as well. But what is interesting is that if I use MM03 to display the QM view, it shows a zero for the inspection interval. If I go into the material using MM02, the inspection interval field is null, not 0. MARC does show a stored value of 0 however.

I did do a reinpsection with a value of zero and/or null in the field though and at the UD for the 09 insp. lot, a new next inspection date was calculated as the current date, (UD date + 0 days).

The key appears to be wether an initial value for the inspection date is created at GR or manually later on. If a value of 1 or more is stored in the inspection interval field, then the next inspection date is automatically populated at GR. If it is 0, no date is populated for the next inspection date and the batch will never be subject to reinspection. (Which makes sense since there is no date in the batch!)

If the batch is manually updated later on with a next inspection date it will then be subject to reinspection. (provided of course the deadline monitoring program is running and 09 inspection types are set up.)

Once a batch is created with an inspection date, it doesn't care what is in the inspection interval field. It will use 0 even if it looks like a null value in MM02 or it will what ever other value is in that field.

Sorry for the confusion on the previous post.

Craig

[Former Member]

I finally got to test this a bit more today. I reviewed several OSS notes as well.

I get the gist that the next inspection date in the batch is calculated based on the value in the material master + the date of last GR. I set up a bunch of test data today so I can test tomorrow again and see what date is proposed in the batch and if it really has anything to do with the inspection lot. Based on what I have read, I don't see any correlation.

I found an OSS note 954646 that could be a potential solution?? I need to get that applied to the sandbox and see specifically what it does.

Thanks for all your help! Hopefully this info will help someone else out in the process.

Cheers - Nic