Every picking is based on pick reports from IFS, these reports are paper formats which is handed out to the operators. Ideally, this process should be digitalized where you get a digital pick list and check everything that has been picked instead of do picking based of a paper report. Anyone has worked with this type of requirement?
Page 2 / 2
The route order you can change manually to get the desired sorting, by default the route order gets the same ID as the Warehouse-Bay-Row-Tier-Bin. However this can be changed to get the desired sorting.
The change can be done on relevant object in the Warehouse Navigator page. This should be possible to use to get your desired sorting.
The route order you can change manually to get the desired sorting, by default the route order gets the same ID as the Warehouse-Bay-Row-Tier-Bin. However this can be changed to get the desired sorting.
The change can be done on relevant object in the Warehouse Navigator page. This should be possible to use to get your desired sorting.
This is not going to change the fact that it’s still going to sort by Bay first then Row, but that they have switched the concept of bays and rows overall.
The only way he would have to achieve sorting by Row first is to make ALL bays have the exact same Route Order; which might have unintended consequences (this is basically equivalent to making bays “the same” in terms of physical proximity).
This makes them effectively irrelevant in the sorting algorithm, but if Bays are actually used by this customer in “reality,” it risks sending the warehouse operator all over the place.
The route order you can change manually to get the desired sorting, by default the route order gets the same ID as the Warehouse-Bay-Row-Tier-Bin. However this can be changed to get the desired sorting.
The change can be done on relevant object in the Warehouse Navigator page. This should be possible to use to get your desired sorting.
This is not going to change the fact that it’s still going to sort by Bay first then Row, but that they have switched the concept of bays and rows overall.
The only way he would have to achieve sorting by Row first is to make ALL bays have the exact same Route Order; which might have unintended consequences (this is basically equivalent to making bays “the same” in terms of physical proximity).
This makes them effectively irrelevant in the sorting algorithm, but if Bays are actually used by this customer in “reality,” it risks sending the warehouse operator all over the place.
From previous comments I got the impression that it was indicated that it was not possible to change those route orders now, just wanted to make that clear. Then I see that there is a challenge when it comes to deciding how how to do these changes to get the desired behavior in this specific case.
Reply
Enter your E-mail address. We'll send you an e-mail with instructions to reset your password.