Re: MRP Dates Education

[Harry.Nicholl@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx]

engineering changes ... is MRP going to plan the sub-components correctly
on the new version?
It will not plan correctly for anything that has a requirement prior to the
change effectivity, or for shop orders already created, regardless of
effectivity date.


Yes Al, I think you are about to make things worse - it is never a good
idea to muck around with system parameters after the initial
implementation. Besides, unless you only have one problem part at any one
time how do you keep the parameters in sync with all the problem parts in
different stages of resolution?
The process you describe for planning bills can be duplicated with regular
BoM's - leave the offending sub-assembly off the BoM, or leave it in with a
quantity per of zero, or with an effectivity date in the future. You can
reverse this action when the problem is solved. If it remains part of the
original BoM, you do not have to do affect the customer order either, and
you have correct historical information for how it was built.

Sorry I can?t be more help, but the problems you describe could be
attributed to many causes intertwined. (This is something you are already
aware of)

Regards,
Harry Nicholl

Catalyst Solutions LLC
500 West Madison
Chicago, IL 60661
U.S.A.

http://www.catalyst-solutions.com
Email: Harry.Nicholl@catalyst-solutions.com

Telephone: +1 312 559 1025
DDI: +1 312 559 1025 ext.125
Facsimile: +1 312 559 1026



+---
| This is the BPCS Users Mailing List!
| To submit a new message, send your mail to BPCS-L@midrange.com.
| To subscribe to this list send email to BPCS-L-SUB@midrange.com.
| To unsubscribe from this list send email to BPCS-L-UNSUB@midrange.com.
| Questions should be directed to the list owner: dasmussen@aol.com
+---