Co-Parts in Epicor Kinetic allow manufacturers to produce multiple components in a single production operation. This feature is handy when creating parts together, such as molded top and bottom pieces.
While powerful, co-parts are often misunderstood. Especially when it comes to setup, costing, and job execution. If you’re using Epicor Kinetic ERP, understanding how to manage co-parts effectively can save time, reduce errors, and improve visibility across operations.
This article outlines how co-parts work, key system limitations, costing strategies, and how TeccWeb helps you get it right.
Co-parts in Epicor ERP refer to multiple finished goods produced together during the same job operation. These aren’t components or sub-assemblies. Co-parts are treated as distinct finished parts with unique SKUs tracked individually.
Use Case: Injection molding may yield a top and bottom part in the same mold cycle. Co-parts let you treat each as a separate finished good without splitting the job. These parts are not separate assemblies but true co-parts; distinct SKUs made from one manufacturing process using one set of materials.
This setup reduces overhead, improves production planning accuracy, and simplifies execution for repetitive or high-volume production scenarios.
It is important not to confuse co-parts with batching jobs. While both produce more than one item in a shared process, their structure and costing behavior differ.
Using the co-parts feature ensures better cost visibility, more accurate inventory updates, and fewer manual adjustments at job completion.
While co-parts offer a powerful way to manage multi-output production, they come with considerable constraints that manufacturers must plan around.
If a co-part can be produced as a separate part in a job (without the other co-parts), you will want a separate revision for that part that doesn’t include the other co-parts.
An example would be a set of injection-molded parts, such as a top and bottom, which are manufactured in one shot. Suppose you can produce the top separately by using a runner shut-off. In that case, you will want a second revision that only produces the top and has the material amount required to produce the top, not the full amount to make both parts.
This could be an alternate method that can be chosen when creating/scheduling jobs.
This flexibility ensures that costing and material usage stay accurate and that the job reflects the actual scope of work.
Co-parts in Epicor Kinetic introduce specific challenges regarding material planning and job setup. To ensure correct outputs and accurate costing, manufacturers must define their methods of manufacture carefully.
Let us start by defining how Epicor calculates production for each part and how this affects material configuration.
Epicor calculates co-part quantities using the following logic:
“Co-Part Quantity = Primary Part Quantity × Yield Per”
So, if the primary part quantity is 100 and the Yield Per for a co-part is 0.24, the system will plan 24 co-parts automatically.
This calculation ensures that all co-parts are scaled appropriately based on the job quantity. But it also means your Yield Per value must be precise. Incorrect yield entries can throw off quantities, costing, and inventory accuracy.
Once your yield logic is correct, your next step is building the method.
You must define all material required to produce a complete set of parts, not just the primary item. If you’re molding a set of components (e.g., 100 A parts and 24 B parts), the material setup must reflect everything needed to create both together.
Here’s how TeccWeb’s co-parts expert, Beth Rye, explains it:
“If you create a job for 1 piece of part A and part A has a Yield Per of 100 and Part B has a Yield Per of 24, you would get 124 pieces total: 100 pieces of A and 24 pieces of B. Note that the job must be for a quantity of 1 for each set of parts you want to produce”
Failing to do so leads to underreported material consumption and cost variances that are difficult to trace.
Co-parts streamline production, but they introduce complexity in costing. Especially for companies using Standard Cost.
Costing can be an issue with Co-parts as there is no separate cost for the child part. All costs show for the parent part only in a cost roll. Without adjustments, this creates a gap in cost traceability for the secondary parts.
This limitation can impact reporting, pricing, and margin tracking, especially if co-parts are sold independently.
With Standard Cost, you will need to cost roll parts in the following manner to get costing:
💡IMPORTANT
Only one co-part should have the approved checkbox on it when cost rolling. All other co-parts that set should have their methods unchecked.
With co-parts, you now have the ability to scrap or non-conform one of the co-parts directly from the job. However, because of only being able to report co-parts as separate parts on the last operation, it can only be done at the final operation.
If your job includes multiple operations, co-parts cannot be reported independently at any step before the last one. This applies to both production reporting and scrap entry.
To manage this properly, ensure:
Epicor does allow scrapping of individual co-parts, but only when reported from the final operation. This restriction is important when managing rework, yield tracking, or compliance.
Failing to follow this rule can result in inaccurate inventory, mismatched production records, and quality reporting issues.
For many manufacturers, this is a critical point where job configuration and operator training intersect. TeccWeb helps align both through tailored workflows and practical floor-level guidance.
Co-parts in Epicor Kinetic can deliver real efficiency if configured correctly. But between system constraints, cost roll complexity, and final-operation reporting rules, it’s easy to get it wrong without expert help.
At TeccWeb, we guide manufacturers through every setup step, from method configuration to yield logic and costing alignment. Our approach is grounded in real-world experience, not theory. We contribute to the community and support real users in solving real problems.
Our expert, Beth Rye, is known across the Epicor ecosystem for her practical guidance on complex manufacturing configurations, including co-parts.
This level of clarity is what our clients value most—insight that reduces error, avoids rework, and maximizes their ERP investment. It’s not just about system functionality; it’s about applying it correctly every time.