Re: Kan Ban

[Pluta@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx]

Unless I'm mistaken, your scenario requires more than I designed when I
originally wrote the backflushing code for BPCS oh so many years ago.  The
first cut of JIT backflushed only material, and then when the fullscreen
version of JIT600 was introduced, we added backflushing of labor.  Your
particular case requires not only the backflushing of labor and material,
but also the backflushing of PRODUCTION - specifically, backflushing the
production of the subassemblies.

You see, JIT is only designed to post the standard hours and consume the
standard quantities for the labor and materials of the current item.  It
assumes that the materials are already in inventory, which for
subassemblies would mean that you had already posted the labor and
inventory transactions for those subassembly items.  You could use JIT to
backflush those hours and materials, but you still have to post production
for each of the subassemblies.

What you'd like to have happen is that whenever a subassembly is consumed,
that BPCS would automagically backflush the labor and materials for the
subassembly as if you had posted production of the subassemblies that were
just consumed.  While not impossible, this would require quite a bit of
razzle-dazzle on the part of BPCS, and would in fact require an additional
switch somewhere to allow you to choose between "through-posting" of
subassemblies and the default of simply relieving inventory.  In the case
of "through-posting", the best bet would be to create a new JIT production
order (basically a shop order) for the subassembly and somehow "fake" a
posting of production to it.

The final kicker is that there's no good way to tie the shop orders
together, since each shop order only produces a single item, so the end
item costs would not reflect the "through-posted" labor and materials.

Of course, I've been away from the guts of BPCS for a good handful of
years, so take this with a grain of salt.  Anybody else care to comment?

Joe Pluta
www.java400.net
www.plutabrothers.com



                                                                                
                                     
                    David_Baxter@si                                             
                                     
                    emon.com               To:     bpcs-l@midrange.com          
                                     
                    Sent by:               cc:                                  
                                     
                    owner-bpcs-l@mi        Subject:     Kan Ban                 
                                     
                    drange.com                                                  
                                     
                                                                                
                                     
                                                                                
                                     
                    06/06/00 01:38                                              
                                     
                    PM                                                          
                                     
                    Please respond                                              
                                     
                    to BPCS-L                                                   
                                     
                                                                                
                                     
                                                                                
                                     




Currently using 405cd and looking for anyone using BPCS to support Kan Bans
or
reduced labor / production reporting. Ideally we want to eliminate the
cutting
of shop orders, backflushing and labor reporting at the sub-assm level and
only
cut shop orders and report production at the finished goods level. To
accomplish
this we need a way of attaching the sub-components to there grand parents
BOMs
so when we report the finished goods production we consume the lower level
components. If we simply add the components to the grand parent BOM we
would
need to re-do all work instructions and drawings. Additionaly, we would
end-up
with a finished goods BOM that is not accurate due to it showing the lowest
level components and not the sub-assm actualy used in production.
Any suggestions or experience would be appreciated.


+---
| 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
+---