Skip to main content
Solved

Weight in Product Center and Shipping list and Shipping Charges

athobie
Sidekick (Partner)
Forum|alt.badge.img+11
  • athobie
  • Sidekick (Partner)
  • 185 replies

Hi

1/ In a product center we define a weight for a product in KG  : for example 3 KG
In the shipping list, the unit is in Gr and not KG. 
How to set the KG unit in shipping process despite of gramme ?


2/ In the ship List, we can define a shipping charges. 
How to set Alliance in order to always have this cost in the service order ?
Is it linked to the setting of a pricing rule in a contract (expense rule) ? 

In the Financial tab or Resolve tab/Complete order, sometimes we have the price of the part without the charge of shipping and sometimes we have the line for the ship_charges included

Product Center
 

Ship list

 


Shipping Charge
 


Thanks and Regards

anthony

Best answer by Phil Seifert

HI Anthony.

Ok, checked further on the auto-pulation.  It seems that I forgot to define the weight for the product itself while only defining the UOM for the product.  So, once I set the weight to 1 kg per unit, the calculation was made and inserted automatically into the Ship List Shipping Details for the same scenario as 20000 (20 * 1000) grams.

 

For the grams designation in the ship list, I checked with R&D and have this response:

The weight is configured in the UOM small table – for weight ( hard-coded UOM type for packing and shipping) it is defined as gram, and this is an is_astea record.

I guess this cannot be changed, unless a DB script is executed to change this to another UOM ( there is code that convert kg to lb when shipping is done with carrier, but this is not relevant to this issue).

The system calculate the weight of the product as defined in the product center , convert to the requested UOM and multiply by the QTY to set the total weight on the shipping page.

View original

5 replies

Phil Seifert
Ultimate Hero (Employee)
Forum|alt.badge.img+24
  • Phil Seifert
  • Ultimate Hero (Employee)
  • 1324 replies
  • April 9, 2023

 

Hi Anthony,

The shipping details for the total weight of the package is not directly related to what is being shipped.  It is supposed to reflect the weight of the package itself which would usually be more than the one product you are shipping.

Think of it this way, what if you shipped in the same package multiple products each with a different unit of measure.  The weight here is supposed to tell the shipping company how much the package weighs with all its contents.

 

I believe the shipping charges are defined in the contract price rule and would be applied to the ship list when executing a ship list.

 

When I executed the shipping, the charge was added to the service order.  I don’t think it is added until you actually shipped the product.

 

Please mark any comments which answered your question as Best Answer so the topic is easier recognised as answered and closed.
athobie
Sidekick (Partner)
Forum|alt.badge.img+11
  • athobie
  • Author
  • Sidekick (Partner)
  • 185 replies
  • April 9, 2023

Hi @Phil Seifert 

Thanks for your support.
For the weight : If I understood correctly, the weight in the shipping list is not directly linked with the weight of the product. But it seems that the weight is “initialized” with the weight of the product.
In my example, I didn’t put 3 on the weight in the ship list, so I assume that it was linked to the weight of the product.
Do you think is not the case ? In this way do you have an idea why 3 was populated in the field ?

Understood for the shipping charges 👌

Thanks and Regards
anthony

Phil Seifert
Ultimate Hero (Employee)
Forum|alt.badge.img+24
  • Phil Seifert
  • Ultimate Hero (Employee)
  • 1324 replies
  • April 10, 2023

Hi Anthony,

Now you have me confused as well when you say it was initialised automatically.  I just went through the following test on QAC:

Create a service order with two material demands both for the same weighted product source to be shipped direct from the warehouse:

Going to General Queue, I selected the two demands as they were allocated to be shipped and created a ship list document:

(note, this had the automated shipping charges from the customer contract… 😁)

Looking at the shipping details, the value is zero for the total weight:

I even saved the ship list at this point and it still did not populate a value in the Total Weight field on the form.

Now I shipped it and checked it again. It still said 0 gram in my test case.

 

Please mark any comments which answered your question as Best Answer so the topic is easier recognised as answered and closed.
Phil Seifert
Ultimate Hero (Employee)
Forum|alt.badge.img+24
  • Phil Seifert
  • Ultimate Hero (Employee)
  • 1324 replies
  • Answer
  • April 10, 2023

HI Anthony.

Ok, checked further on the auto-pulation.  It seems that I forgot to define the weight for the product itself while only defining the UOM for the product.  So, once I set the weight to 1 kg per unit, the calculation was made and inserted automatically into the Ship List Shipping Details for the same scenario as 20000 (20 * 1000) grams.

 

For the grams designation in the ship list, I checked with R&D and have this response:

The weight is configured in the UOM small table – for weight ( hard-coded UOM type for packing and shipping) it is defined as gram, and this is an is_astea record.

I guess this cannot be changed, unless a DB script is executed to change this to another UOM ( there is code that convert kg to lb when shipping is done with carrier, but this is not relevant to this issue).

The system calculate the weight of the product as defined in the product center , convert to the requested UOM and multiply by the QTY to set the total weight on the shipping page.

Please mark any comments which answered your question as Best Answer so the topic is easier recognised as answered and closed.
athobie
Sidekick (Partner)
Forum|alt.badge.img+11
  • athobie
  • Author
  • Sidekick (Partner)
  • 185 replies
  • April 19, 2023

HI @Phil Seifert 

Thanks you very much for your time and Research 👍

anthony

Phil Seifert
1 person likes this
  • Phil Seifert
    Phil Seifert

Reply


Terms & ConditionsCookie settings

Cookie policy

We use cookies to enhance and personalize your experience. If you accept you agree to our full cookie policy. Learn more about our cookies.

 
Cookie settings