The description of production technology in the 1C:UPP program is carried out in the “Technological map” object. It standardizes manufacturing technology according to a specific specification.

The technological map is not specified for the product, but for the procedure for fulfilling a specific specification!

Technological map in 1C:UPP - this is a decoding of what procedures, what operations the production process consists of according to a certain specification.

Let's consider, for example, the following production scheme: from the Tube and Cable, through the intermediate semi-finished product "Framework" and the material "Lampshade", we assemble the products "Floor Lamp".

Figure 1 - Complete production diagram

The number of technological maps to describe such a scheme depends on the selected number of specifications. Since there is a possibility that the semi-finished product “Framework” will be produced independently (otherwise it would not have been identified as a separate nomenclature at all), it should have its own specification. And the second specification is for the production of the “Floor Lamp” product from the “Frame” and “Lampshade”. This means there will also be two technological maps.

Figure 2 – Production diagram according to specifications and technological maps

Technological map - planning tool (interface “Planning”, Directories - Planning - Production flow sheets). Contains inside:

• List of technological operations that need to be done.
• Operation connections - each operation knows to which next operation it needs to transfer its results. If the operation is final, it has an empty link to the next operation (a sign that this is the final operation).
• The work center on which the operation is performed (or the work center replacement group).
• Stage execution parameters – execution time and number of operations performed at the stage.

Figure 3 – Technological map

The "Division" and "Status" fields are optional.

The attribute of the tabular part “Operation No.” is the unique name of the operation in this card; it can contain both numbers and letters; commas, semicolons, periods and spaces cannot be used.

Work center - performing equipment (machines, production lines, units, sections, departments) or a group of replaceability. It is used only for planning (work center availability schedule), that is, if preliminary or shift planning is not used, work centers do not even need to be described in routings.

A technological operation is an operation performed at this stage. A list of them is stored in the directory "Technological Operations" (the directory is intended for the purposes of cost planning, shift production planning and accounting for piecework wages).

Execution time is the duration of the operation. More precisely, this will be the basis for calculating the operation time, which is calculated as the product of the “Execution time” attribute by the “K” coefficient. By default, it is filled in from the technological operation, but can be adjusted by the user.

Quantity is how many operations should be performed. It is clear that both the total cost of processing and the execution time depend on this.

The "Next operation" field is the name of the next operation along the route (or the names of several next ones, separated by commas). If the field is left empty, then this operation is final. There can be several final operations.

The “Transfer” attribute is used exclusively for shift production planning - it determines whether this operation can be performed in several days, and not in one. Or an indivisible operation, for example, heat treatment, which cannot be broken.

The sequence in which operations will be performed is determined by the system using the “Next operation” field, in which the number of one (several) next operations may be indicated or not specified (the final operation). Due to this description of the route, we can describe both divergences and convergences along the route:

• If there is a stage (operation) in the flow chart, in which several numbers of subsequent operations are listed in the “Next operation” field, separated by commas, this is a “branching” of the route. After this operation, several subsequent ones can be launched (and not necessarily in parallel).
• If two stages (operations) have the same number of the third operation specified in the “Next operation” field, then the branches will “converge” when the two operations end with the third operation.

The connection of technological maps with specifications in 1C:UPP is carried out through the information register "Technological maps of item specifications":

Figure 4 – Relationship between specifications and technological maps.

You can also assign a routing to a specification directly from the specification form (for the first time). Changing and editing this connection in subsequent cases is only through the register.

The second connection between specifications and technological maps is not so obvious. There is one more point: inside the technological map for any operation, information is not stored about what material is processed in this operation - the technological map does not know what item it is processing, it describes only the execution procedure, and what is “slipped” to it to perform for each She doesn't care about the surgery. Therefore, we ourselves must describe in the system:

• For each incoming item - at what operation in the routing it is absorbed.
• For each item produced - the result of which operation it is.

This is indicated in the specification associated with our routing. That is, each material must know which operation it is supplied to, and each product must know which operation it is produced in. But linking specification items with technological operations is not necessary - the functionality of linking inputs and outputs with operations in the routing is used only in shift planning tasks.

If we do not use shift planning, we can use technological maps to fill out production accounting documents (for example, filling out a list of technological operations in a production report for a shift). In addition, technological maps are used for standardization (calculation of labor cost standards for the formation of planned cost - processing "Calculation of planned cost").

Analogs

Analogues of materials and components in 1C:UPP are those materials and components that can be used instead of the main ones, and their use will not change the quality of the manufactured product. As a rule, analogues of materials have to be used after the fact, as a result of a shortage of basic materials. There is no planning for the use of analogues in the configuration.

Analogs are specified in the information register "Item analogs" (interface "Production" - Nomenclature - Item analogs). The following details are required:

· “Nomenclature” – nomenclature that will be replaced by an analogue, additional specification of characteristics is possible

· “Analogue type” – component or assembly

· “Analogue” – the item or item unit to which the replacement will be made; for the item it is also possible to indicate the characteristics

· “Quantity” and “Unit” – quantity and unit of measurement of the item to be replaced

· “Quantity of analogue” and “Unit” – quantity and unit of measurement of the analogue to which the replacement will be performed.

Additionally, you can specify the conditions under which replacement can occur. For example, you can explicitly indicate a specification, product, product characteristics, during the production of which components can be replaced with analogues. If several analogue options are specified for one component, then the analogues can be selected according to priority. The priority of using the analogue is indicated in the “Priority” attribute. Priority zero (set by default) is the highest, that is, analogues with this priority will be used first.

Analogues are used to select components that were used in the production of products in product release documents. For example, "Production report for a shift" (when filling out the "Materials" tab in the "Fill out with selection of analogues" mode).

Figure 5 – Selection of materials and analogues

The assistant window opens and a tree of possible components is built according to the product manufacturing specifications. The tree has four levels of nesting. The first level shows the product, the second - a list of components according to the specification, the third - possible analogues of the components, if the analogue is an assembly, then the fourth level will show all the components of the assembly.

For components and analogues, the following information is displayed for reference:

"Operation number" – the number of the technological operation to which materials are supplied according to the production flow chart (visible only if shift planning is used)

“Standard” – standard consumption of components according to the specification

"Unit" – unit of measurement of the number of components

· "Free balance in warehouse" – the number of components or analogues that are available in the free balance in the warehouse

· "Free balance in WIP" - the number of components or analogues that is in the free balance in work in progress is shown only for that item for which the indicator of the need to maintain operational balances of materials in WIP is included in the "Nomenclature" directory

"Priority" – the priority of using analogues, which is specified in the information register "Nomenclature analogues"

The selection of analogues can be performed automatically (the "Auto-replacement" button). When you click on the “Ok” button, those lines that are marked in the “Used for release” column will be transferred to the tabular part of the document.

Thank you!

Since the task of writing “analogs” and “alternatives” to 1C is non-trivial, it makes sense to present your vision and key points based on the experience of writing your own handicraft. Well, as a bonus, it’s a bonus to hear criticism and redo in time where you missed.

In fact, at the moment 1C occupies the overwhelming segment in the niche of accounting systems. This is due to a number of reasons, including aggressive marketing. Let me remind you of the technical side. 1C in general consists of two physically separate parts - the platform itself (core, engine) and the so-called configuration.

Configuration is the part where the applied business logic is actually implemented. The platform provides persistent storage, high-level business objects, all kinds of designers and report builders, and a special programming language. But the technology platform itself, even with such capabilities, would not be successful. Therefore, the configuration comes with already written logic - accounting, trade, warehouse, etc. taking into account current legislation. This is quite a lot of work, but as a result the user receives a ready-made, complete solution. And since the code of the configuration itself is open, it remains possible to adjust the business logic as desired and adapt it to your business.

These are the advantages. But there are also a lot of disadvantages. In order not to describe here, you can read for example.

There are a lot of attempts to displace 1C. Most projects try to outdo the advantages of 1C. Competing with a huge corporation is not very promising. Products written in Delphi or .NET, that is, requiring recompilation, are generally non-competitive; those who try to attach javascript or VBA engines as a DSL look a little better, but in any case, such solutions can be used mainly if there is a full-time programmer, which is small business, as a rule, cannot afford it.

Let's try to get to the other side. Do not try to outdo the advantages of 1C, but offer solutions to those problems where 1C has disadvantages.

Since the minuses somewhere balance the pluses, and we won’t have these minuses, even if we don’t have the pluses at the 1C level, the balance will be approximately the same.

So, what characteristics should the system being created have?

Open source. Cross-platform.

No explanation required here.

Web application.

Multi-user mode with the ability to directly access from mobile devices without the need to write special clients, synchronize directories, etc.

PHP

A language with a low barrier to entry, familiar to most web developers. Only a text editor is required to make changes. The web application can be easily updated by replacing individual files (hello to the 1C configurator). A weakly typed scripting language combined with a set of high-level business objects is well suited for writing business logic.

It would seem that what else is needed for happiness. However, in reality, open source accounting systems are, as a rule, a crooked porting of foreign developments.

Moreover, the curve is not only localization. Bringing it to domestic legislation requires a lot of work. But that's not all. An accountant, looking at the page of such a system, will not understand what half of the fields are for and in general how to work here. Do not forget that the user probably already has experience with 1C and this is probably his only experience with the accounting system. This means that from hundreds of ways to make the layout of the invoice input page and sign the input elements, you need to choose the one that most closely resembles 1C (which means you need to go through all the pages of the foreign creation).

When I let freelancers fill out their system with demo data (like a demo configuration in 1C), the question never arose - how to work here.

A more common problem is that the system becomes overcomplicated. I think this is the main reason why projects are not brought to fruition.

The programmer usually makes the system as flexible as possible (and how could it be otherwise!) spends two-thirds of his time writing numerous settings, wizards, generators, or worse, tools for the command line, etc.

The user, an accountant, not being an IT specialist, looks longingly at all this stuff, not understanding why she can’t just install a couple of buttons. Then he calls the programmer to come and set up the program after the next order from the Ministry of Finance. The programmer is sincerely indignant, what a stupid user, is it really difficult to deal with a couple of dozen checkers and comboboxes? True, his passion subsides when it turns out that configuration is not enough and now we have to wade through the jungle of infrastructure code that provides the notorious flexibility.

An example is 1C itself - from version 2.0, where accountants actually entered formulas in a special “bird” language, to the monster 8.3. Try to give the manual to the uninitiated and count how hard it takes him to grasp the ornate verbal construction “plan of types of characteristics.”

This leads to the next idea. Since it’s all the same to invite a programmer and the cost of this programmer’s work is proportional to the complexity of the system, then why bother with it. Isn’t it easier to throw out everything from the evil one and give the programmer the opportunity to work only with business logic, because the implementation of business logic is actually the task of the program.

Let me explain with an example. Accounting chart of accounts. Changes extremely rarely. It is configured once when implementing the program and, as a rule, does not change during operation (I remind you that we are not talking about enterprise systems). Perhaps at some point you will need to add a subaccount. But the code probably needs to be adjusted to accommodate it, which means calling a programmer. But the programmer will insert a new entry into the chart of accounts in two seconds using the usual phpMyAdmin and there is no need to write a chart of accounts editor and force the user to specify unknown accounts in advance in the forms for entering primary documents.

Similarly, you can leave only the business logic settings that are really necessary and, most importantly, understandable to the user - addresses, tax rates, etc.

This is the main ideology that, in my opinion, should be present in the implementation of this class of tasks.

And now some general technical ideas that may be useful to “cyclists” when writing their own 1C “killer”.

Document storage

A typical question on forums asked by writers of CRM, accounting, warehouse and document management systems. How to store documents that obviously have a heterogeneous structure. A separate table for each type of document, a common table with a bunch of universal fields, NoSQL storage that is fashionable these days...
It is proposed to store all documents in one table in a blob, packed in XML. Separately - only general fields that are shown in lists and journals - document number, creation date, author, status. Packaging in XML has an advantage over serialization or json - each value is surrounded by a named tag, which means you can perform end-to-end searches without bumping into unnecessary lines. That is, find a link to the counterparty by
12
is not difficult, especially since most database servers support XPath. Packing and unpacking occurs automatically in the base class, for example, Document, which contains two predefined associative arrays - header and details (an array of arrays for the tabular part) and which are filled by child classes - primary documents as they please. The key of the associative array becomes the tag, the value becomes the content.

The packing and unpacking functions are called before writing and after reading a document from the database, respectively.
Additionally, it is recommended to use denormalization. For example, not only the id of the counterparty is written into the document, but also its name, which is presented to the user. It doesn’t ask for much, but it allows you to do without joins to other tables and the use of “historical” attributes.

Similarly, you can store directories - contractors, employees, etc. Separately, in the corresponding tables, only fields of identifiers, names, types. That is, something by which sorting or selection may be needed. The rest is packaged in XML. This approach, among other things, will avoid the need to change the database structure when changes are made to the system (for example, the appearance of a new directory attribute).
Ideally, the database structure should change only when some completely new business entities appear in the system.

Printed forms of documents and reports.

Just HTML. Plus a simple template engine, for example, Fenom.

The advantages are obvious - we can create any printed form without any builders, display it in a browser or print it. Additionally, HTML is exported to Word and Excel. This is done simply - HTML is saved with the docx or xslx extension. When you open the file, the office (at least Microsoft office) will convert it to the required format. Yes, it's bad. But it’s simple, universal and doesn’t require special coding. As a last resort, you can always correct it manually in Excel.

If you wish, you can convert it to pdf, but libraries like TCPDF are sensitive to layout and stylization, so whoever needs it will install PDFCreator and be happy.

However, with the introduction of electronic reporting and exchange of electronic documents, export-import rather than printing on paper comes to the fore, so the purpose of printed forms is mainly to quickly view documents on the screen.

Analytics storage

Analytical data associated with synthetic accounts in transactions. Subconto in terms of 1C. The implementation is one table, which is essentially a fact table in ROLAP of the star type. Link to document, synthetic account (a separate entry for each corresponding account - semiconductor type), quantity, amount. Additional dimensions - links to main business entities - counterparties, consignments of goods, employees, cash accounts. The quantity and amount (scaled to whole numbers) for debit are written with a plus; for credit - with a minus. This allows a simple summation through a complete recalculation to obtain balances and turnover for any period in the context of the main business entities without the need to store subtotals. Synthetic accounts in postings are also calculated.

This scheme allows you to delete, post and repost documents retroactively without recalculating the results. And also carry out advances, for example, by implementing the reservation of goods.

I note that the hardcode of synthetic accounts allows you not to display their numbers on forms for entering primary documents. That is, if the user only needs warehouse accounting, he can ignore accounting or use it for management accounting.

Modularity

Something that 1C suffers from lack of. In a sense, the system can be divided into the conditional “platform” and “configurator”. The actual structure of the site, system objects and pages can be considered a platform (core). Business logic objects - directories, documents, reports, etc. can be connected in any combination. In fact, each object is implemented by several files. For the most complex document, these are 4 files: an input page template, a php file - the input page class (back-end), a print form template file and a php file of a persistent entity (Entity), which is responsible for saving the document in storage. The PHP files and classes within them must have a common “generic” name. For example, invoice or goodsissue. Files are copied to predefined folders. Then a new menu item is added to the admin panel with a link to this name and the name of the menu item, respectively Invoice or Invoice. When you open the main page, the menu is generated automatically, grouped, if specified, and we get a kind of “configuration”. When you select a menu item, the system finds a deliberately unfamiliar page file by its “generic” name, and then templates and printed forms are pulled up...

That is, the application part of the program is assembled and reassembled like a Lego constructor. Even a non-programmer can steal from the office. website or any resource, the corrected document or report and upload it to the website. Well, technically there is no problem organizing auto-update.

By the way, for single users who do not know how to deploy websites, it is not a problem to create a build based on a WAMP server.

It may seem that some kind of low-level programming is being proposed - everything should be hardcoded. But the 1C language is essentially no higher level than PHP. It’s just that there the manipulation of business data is carried out using high-level business objects (documents, directories), which is what is proposed to be done here.

So, the bottom line is to throw out, if possible, everything that does not relate to business logic, make simple and universal everything that can be done simply and universally. In my opinion, this approach is the only competitive one, in contrast to attempts to create direct functional analogues of 1C.

Of course, a system made in this way is unlikely to be suitable for serious decisions. But the majority of 1C consumers are small businesses and it is unlikely that a situation will arise that the server cannot cope with data processing, but system support is much simpler and cheaper. And the work of a programmer is now much more expensive than a piece of memory or a processor.

The module includes the following functions:

1. Matching several or one product as similar to the selected one
2. Selection of a similar product at the time of drawing up an invoice or registering a sale in the absence of a selected item
3. Automatic mutual analogical dependence of goods. Those. Having selected an analogue for product 1 - product 2 and product 3, the system will automatically consider the analog for product 2 - product 1 and product 3, and for product 3 - product 1 and product 2

Video presentation of the module for UT 11.4

If necessary, you can order modifications on a paid basis to suit your needs or your configuration, if it is not from the list of compatible ones, at the rate of 900 rubles per hour.

The source code is completely open. Processing can be used on an unlimited number of workstations but within one database.

Upon purchase, implementation into the customer database is provided free of charge and free technical support for a month.

Versions of configurations where implementation can be carried out, if desired, at no additional cost:

1. Trade and Warehouse 926

2. Trade Management 10.3

3. Trade Management 11

4. Managing Our Company

For other configurations, the calculation of the amount for implementation is individual, by contacting technical support.

Money back guarantee

Infostart LLC guarantees you a 100% refund if the program does not correspond to the declared functionality from the description. The money can be returned in full if you request this within 14 days from the date the money is received in our account.

The program has been so proven to work that we can give such a guarantee with complete confidence. We want all our customers to be satisfied with their purchase.

10.29.2016 (admin)

Any enterprise strives to streamline the control and accounting system in all areas of activity: financial, economic and others. However, well-known 1C products are not suitable for everyone. In addition, 1C is paid, both in acquisition and in maintenance. Modern software developers offer free analogues of accounting programs.

The Debit Plus program performs well in use. It is free and will be useful for newly opened and small businesses. The functionality is not limited and allows you to balance the balance sheet, calculate salaries and maintain inventory records. The interface is friendly, all options and directories are signed. The program is suitable for all operating systems.

Participants in small and medium-sized businesses can pay attention to the “Own Technology” program. The program options help you customize it, completely adapting it to the user. All functions are retained in full, such as: warehouse accounting, settlements with clients, preparation of primary documents, interaction with the client bank. Users note the high speed of the program, convenient filtering systems when creating reports, and the ability to work with multiple databases.

The management system in the GrossBee program is suitable for both small businesses and large organizations. The number of functions allows you to carry out almost any operation. In addition, each block of functions is subordinate to its own subsystem, which form a single database. All databases exchange information with each other, which increases the accuracy of information display and its relevance. The developers are actively working on the program, new modules and systems are appearing in it.

The VS:Accounting program is exclusively accounting. It allows you to keep records in different tax regimes. There is the ability to create reports on any filters, cash transactions, create tax returns, all kinds of accounting and client bank. Users note that the interface is pleasant and understandable. The disadvantages of the program include the fact that its development has been stopped. Officially, the program can be used and is fully functional, but technical support is completely absent.

"ERP Monolith" is a set of programs developed to solve a variety of enterprise problems. This includes products such as financial management, planning, sales and personnel management, electronic document management, and more. Each block displays current information and is available for editing by several users at once. Together they interact and exchange data. Separately, the ability to manage procurement and organize tenders is included. Developers always stay in touch with their users and provide technical support. The program is distributed for a fee and is a good alternative to 1C products.

For a small enterprise, the online service “Class365” will be an excellent alternative to 1C accounting products. The free version contains functionality for serving one organization with one user. Users note the program’s pleasant color scheme and user-friendly interface. The free version even includes functions such as CRM, trade and warehouse accounting. Technical support is provided in full for all users, regardless of the program version. In the field of trade, the service has shown itself especially well, since it has a built-in function for integration with online stores.

Free analogs of 1c updated: November 6, 2016 by: admin

Quite often, users think about looking for an analogue of 1C Enterprise. They are mainly driven by purely subjective reasons, such as irritation caused by slow operation, poor configuration of the software product, or simple ignorance of configuration capabilities.

You ask:“Is there a foreign or domestic analogue of 1C Enterprise that includes all the usual capabilities of this well-known software product?” Let's look at the main competitors of 1C in the field of enterprise resource planning (ERP systems) in our software market.

An alternative to 1C among domestic programs can be called the Galaktika and Parus systems, and among foreign software products SAP and Microsoft Dynamics AX (Navision Axta) stand out.

So, let's look at all the programs listed above in more detail.

"Galaxy"

This system is a worthy analogue of 1C, which has been on the market for 25 years. It has long taken its place in the field of ERP systems and a fairly large number of clients have built automation of resource management for their enterprise on its platform. It is safe to say that this program is a full-fledged analogue of 1C. However, there are a few points worth paying attention to:

1) not very friendly interface (certain similarities with Excel);

2) system adjustments are not possible (except for minor interface corrections);

3) all modifications are ordered from the software developer, which, in comparison with 1C, is much more expensive and time consuming;

4) external integration with the system is carried out using COM, ODBS, XML, ActiveX tools.

"Sail"

The history of this software product began in 1989 with the development of a program for calculating payroll at the PAH Central Clinical Hospital. In 1990, the Parus company was founded, whose main clients are government agencies. Thanks to its long history of development, this system can be considered as a good analogue of 1C.

The pros and cons of this program are as follows:

1) a fairly nice interface (better than that of the Galaktika system);

2) there is the possibility of scaling the solution;

3) just like 1C, Parus has a modular system (MRP, accounting, CRM, finance, etc.);

4) the program is modified only by the developers (the principle of use “as is”);

5) installation takes place in the Oracle database, which is quite expensive when using licensed software.

« SAP"

This ERP system, developed by the company of the same name from Germany in 1990, can be considered as the most promising and developing analogue of 1C. The features of this software product are as follows:

1) good reputation and high popularity among ERP systems in the world;

2) there are a fairly large number of modules for various purposes;

3) highly scalable solution;

4) high price for services and licenses (3 to 10 times higher compared to 1C), so implementation occurs mainly in large enterprises;

5) possible, but labor-intensive modification of the system (in 1C 1 - 2 hours, whereas in SAP 1 - 2 days), therefore in most cases SAP is only configured.

"Microsoft Dynamics AX (Navision Axpta)"

The progenitor of this system is the program “Ahapta 1.0 » , which was released in 1998 and provided enterprise management functions using MSQL Server and Oracle database servers. Time passed and Ahapta 1.0 » has turned into a huge ERP system that provides a variety of services for medium and large companies to automate the management of finances, logistics, goods, supplies, etc. Like any software product, Microsoft Dynamics AX has its pros and cons:

1) the interface is extremely similar to Excel spreadsheets;

2) not very widespread in the Russian market;

3) the presence of all modern modules (MRP, HR, CRM, etc.);

4) integration with programs from Microsoft (Outlook, Excel, etc.);

5) just like in SAP, labor-intensive modification of the software, given the small number of specialists in the Russian market.

So we looked at the main competitors of 1C. Now let's try to answer the question: “Is there a foreign or domestic analogue of 1C Enterprise that includes all the usual capabilities of this well-known software product?”

Answer: Currently (with the release of ERP 2.0) 1C:Enterprise has no worthy analogues either in terms of “price - quality” ratio or in terms of “solution scaling - configuration” ratio.