# Transaction groups shift end vs workorder end

**URL:** <https://forum.inductiveautomation.com/t/transaction-groups-shift-end-vs-workorder-end/88229>\
**Category:** Ignition\
**Created:** [April 2, 2024, 2:38pm UTC](https://forum.inductiveautomation.com/t/transaction-groups-shift-end-vs-workorder-end/88229 "2024-04-02T14:38:20Z")\
**Posts on this page:** 3\
**Page:** 1

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Zach\_Larson](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/inductiveautomation/user_avatar/forum.inductiveautomation.com/zach_larson/32/54388_2.png) [@Zach\_Larson](https://forum.inductiveautomation.com/u/Zach_Larson)\
**Post date:** [April 2, 2024, 2:38pm UTC](https://forum.inductiveautomation.com/t/transaction-groups-shift-end-vs-workorder-end/88229/1 "2024-04-02T14:38:20Z")

</div>

What do you do to get good numbers for your shifts when your ideal rate is based on a sku/workorder/part that changes mid shift sometimes?

| Problems | Problem description | | | | | |
| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |
| 1 | Workers work shifts, need accurate performance numbers by shift to give workers the most fair marks | | | | | |
| 2 | Ideal run rates are based on partnumbers running on the line | | | | | |

![image](https://us1.discourse-cdn.com/inductiveautomation/original/3X/a/d/ad27eec961639ed703796842b43cd09fe353ab87.png)

 ![image](https://us1.discourse-cdn.com/inductiveautomation/original/3X/5/d/5df6e4456d04df171c47a8ad3cbdcd8f3158175a.png)

If I try to combine them:

 ![image](https://us1.discourse-cdn.com/inductiveautomation/original/3X/8/d/8d6d94f28f9c53c3718c21e39e41c95e739e6421.png)

Option 1  
Capture by end of work order  
Good: I get accurate workorder numbers  
Bad: The shift numbers will be fudged

Option 2  
Try to combine them  
Good: Totals will be captured  
Bad: Still have to split the ideal rates over the shifts, WO can start and finish during a shift

Option 3  
Separate tables, separate captures  
Use ideal rate of the machine for the shift captures  
Good: Gets accurate equipment performance  
Bad: Not good for getting the operator performance because of sku impact

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Bushmatic](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/inductiveautomation/user_avatar/forum.inductiveautomation.com/bushmatic/32/87014_2.png) [@Bushmatic](https://forum.inductiveautomation.com/u/Bushmatic)\
**Post date:** [April 2, 2024, 4:20pm UTC](https://forum.inductiveautomation.com/t/transaction-groups-shift-end-vs-workorder-end/88229/2 "2024-04-02T16:20:02Z")

</div>

What is stopping you from capturing data at the end of each shift? I didn't quite understand your options 2 and 3. In theory each shift has a total time elapsed -- which itself comprises a total time elapsed on work order 1 (part number a), a total time elapsed on work order 2 (part number b), etc... And each of these individual work order "totals" also corresponds to an "ideal rate" or even just a "total parts produced in this time period" which you can weigh total time elapsed against, giving you a solid performance indicator coming out of each shift. Kind of like this:

- Shift length: 8 hours
  - Work Order (1) calculations
    - Time spent on work order (1): 3 hours
    - Ideal rate on work order (1): 60 parts per hour
    - Actual parts made for work order (1): 155 parts
    - Actual rate achieved: 52 parts per hour
    - Score: 155 parts actual / 180 parts possible = 0.86

  - Work Order (2) calculations
    - Time spent on work order (2): 5 hours
    - Ideal rate on work order (2): 110 parts per hour
    - Actual parts made for work order (2): 410 parts
    - Actual rate achieved: 96 parts per hour
    - Score: 410 parts actual / 550 parts possible = 0.75

- Overall: 565 parts actual / 730 parts possible = 0.77 [shift result]

When you say "work order numbers" what do you mean? What KPI(s) are getting messed up here exactly?

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Zach\_Larson](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/inductiveautomation/user_avatar/forum.inductiveautomation.com/zach_larson/32/54388_2.png) [@Zach\_Larson](https://forum.inductiveautomation.com/u/Zach_Larson)\
**Post date:** [April 2, 2024, 4:29pm UTC](https://forum.inductiveautomation.com/t/transaction-groups-shift-end-vs-workorder-end/88229/3 "2024-04-02T16:29:55Z")

</div>

> [@Bushmatic](#):
>
> What is stopping you from capturing data at the end of each shift?

The workorders and shifts overlap such that I will have incorrect data, miss data, or I will have to have 2 sets of inserts and 2 sets of resets for my infeeds and outfeeds.

The 3 different skus run in a shift will have 3 different sku ideal rates.  
One sku/workorder overlaps the start of shift and one sku/workorder overlaps the end of shift.  
The equipment will have it's equipment ideal rate.

I want to get:  
Equipment performance to make good choices on what to run  
Sku performance to make good choices how to improve  
Operator performance on what to train to improve

> [@Bushmatic](#):
>
> When you say "work order numbers" what do you mean? What KPI(s) are getting messed up here exactly?

In this example, my workorder, sku, and part number are all 1 to 1.  
It just means the thing that I making with the equipment.

* * *

@Bushmatic  
Would you show me how you mean the table to look for your example?  
What will you do when the workorder overlaps the shift?

When are your inserts?  
You mean to use 7-10 tags per production line?  
You mean to use option 2?

Are you going to trigger resets of the infeed and outfeed on both workorder end and shift end?

* * *

Thanks @Bushmatic  
I will test option 4.

Option 4  
Insert end of shift, reset infeed and outfeed  
Insert end of workorder, reset infeed outfeed  
Then I can apply either ideal run rate or record both.  
Good: I think I get all of the data, probably I will test this  
Bad: I don't like the complexity, seems less robust