× The internal search function is temporarily non-functional. The current search engine is no longer viable and we are researching alternatives.
As a stop gap measure, we are using Google's custom search engine service.
If you know of an easy to use, open source, search engine ... please contact support@midrange.com.


  • Subject: Re: MRP Dates Education & effectivity dates
  • From: "Coen,Gordon" <gordon.coen@xxxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Mon, 18 Oct 1999 06:46:12 -0500

Hi folks,

AS400 6.0.04 MM

I have been reading your ideas on back dating the effectivity dates on the
BOM. We currently do the same because we noticed that effectivity dates were
causing problems with requirements , especially where offsets are used.  Am I
the only one who would expect the effectivity date to function in conjunction
with other BPCS functionality ?
 As it stands it leaves us with a situation where the BOM can be keyed
with an effective date of x. Then when x arrives we have to go back in and
set the effective date to x - 30 (to back date thirty days). This causes
major change control issues as our process is very tightly controlled. Does
anyone out there have a better way of getting effectivity dates to work ????

In hopeful anticipation,
Gordon.





owner-bpcs-l@midrange.com on 10/15/99 06:04:03 AM
Please respond to BPCS-L@midrange.com @ INTERNET
To: BPCS-L@midrange.com @ INTERNET
cc:
Subject: Re: MRP Dates Education



Al,

There could be several sources to your problem, but the most likely is that
the
first few times the item is planned requirements are getting created earlier
than the effectivety date of the components on the BOM. The BOM effective date
defaults to date of entry. If in planning the parent, the components end up
being scheduled before 'today' and the bill was entered today, 'effectively'
no
components exist and nothing will be planned. As you screw around and plot and
plan, and days go by and the MPS horizon pushes orders out further, suddenly
bills become effective and planning works, I doubt playing with planning dates
has anything to do with it. If you just back date the effective dates of new
assemblies you should be fine.

The default of today for bill changes is entirely reasonable. However for new
assemblies the default should be back dated to prevent the chaos you are
seeing.

Harmon Zieske
Nexgen Consulting


+---
| 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
+---



+---
| 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
+---


As an Amazon Associate we earn from qualifying purchases.

This thread ...


Follow On AppleNews
Return to Archive home page | Return to MIDRANGE.COM home page

This mailing list archive is Copyright 1997-2024 by midrange.com and David Gibbs as a compilation work. Use of the archive is restricted to research of a business or technical nature. Any other uses are prohibited. Full details are available on our policy page. If you have questions about this, please contact [javascript protected email address].

Operating expenses for this site are earned using the Amazon Associate program and Google Adsense.