RE: Alternate Routings / BOM -- BPCS-L

Hi,

Yes, this is so. We also use the F11 key to 'unfold' and key in the method
code before releasing of Shop Orders. We're on 4.05 CD.

I have a question on a related issue to the list.

How do you key in a plan for two different methods on the same day?

To clarify, we have two production lines on which the same product can be
packed. Line # 1 is the default line and Line # 2 is normally used for other
products. On days when sales so demands, we need to run both lines together
for one product. But, for production planning we are unable to key in plans
for both the lines.

At present we use a manual tracking and control method till the time of
releasing Shop Orders. We key in the total 'planned' quantity on one line
and when releasing Shop Orders, reduce the quantity and release for default
line. Then we go to SFC500 and release Shop Order in alternate method for
the balance quantity.

Any help on this would be welcome.

TIA.
-----
Bharat D. Balsavar
BPCS Implementation Support Team
Nestl� India Limited
Moga 142001 (Pb) India
Phone: +91 (1636) 36280 to 36290   x 2220
Fax: +91 (1636) 36279, 36509
Email: bharat.balsavar@IN.nestle.com


-----Original Message-----
From: Beth Norris [mailto:BNorris@wittern.com]
Sent: Monday, August 20, 2001 6:47 PM
To: 'BPCS-L@midrange.com'
Subject: RE: Alternate Routings / BOM


Al Mac,

I don't know about version 405 - but we are on 6.0.04, mixed mode, and you
can release shop orders with an alternate method from the MRP540 screen if
you 'unfold' it.

Beth

-----Original Message-----
From: MacWheel99@aol.com [mailto:MacWheel99@aol.com]
Sent: Saturday, August 18, 2001 9:22 AM
To: BPCS-L@midrange.com
Subject: Alternate Routings / BOM


Questions

Assuming Alternate Routings & BOM have been setup for some parts,
can production management from the MRP540 screens where they usually release

orders, make the selection of which method to use, or would that have to be
done through the SFC500 process?

As the labor gets reported against this or that method, does the shop order
propagate the method used into FLT ITH history so that subsequent evaluation

of overall performance & costs can see which method got which total results?

I have not seen anything in cost roll ups that references which method is
being used.  Is there some flag that needs setting by part that indiicates
which is the current official method?

Background on our latest situation

We have not been using Alternate Routings or Alternate BOM Methods in 405 CD

& one of my co-workers asked me to ask the BPCS_L group how they work out in

a new scenario we having, or if other companies have previously thought
through this challenge & have a better way of dealing with it.  If I was in
the APICS discussion group I would be asking the question there, because
this
seems to me more a question of the best way to rapidly manage method
revisions than what BPCS supports.

We had this sub-component with just one routing operation.
Run the part through one machine which cuts wires to right length, strips
the
ends of the wires (plastic off so bare wire shows), and attaches what are
called terminals at each end.
Some customer orders came along in which the order quanties were so small
that it would be like 20 minutes setup & 2 minutes run time, and the
department that does this is piled up with work, so they ran this part
through a different machine that just cuts & strips & not attach the
terminals, then gave the part to another department to attach the terminals,

inventing an operation that was not in the routing.
When the customer order volume picks up again they plan to return to the
original method.
Our engineers are now re-routing a bunch of sub-components to add the
operation that was invented on the shop floor.
The customer wiring harness has a whole bunch of wires that the same thing
was being done with each one.

I was asked if I thought this was the best way to handle this scenario.
Well I do not think it is a good idea, on general principles, to be making
changes in how we do things in BPCS or any ERP, without first exploring the
implications.
Apparently the shop floor made the parts, according to the new methods,
before engineering had been notified to change the routings.

First off I'd like to know if top management knows about this, because what
we are doing is saving 20 minutes times 32 wires in one shop department, per

weekly customer requirement, but it might be costing more time in other
department than what is saved.  It might be simpler to transfer some
personnel from the other department to the department that is piled up with
work, since they are all supposed to be cross-trained anyhow.

The timing of it also seems like there might be a conflict between the
corporate policy for approving engineering changes & the need for shop floor

supervisors to be able to make engineering changes on the fly in the
interests of getting the job done in THEIR department quickly.

I know that customer pricing is based on quantities they order precisely
because of this ratio between setup time & run time, so if the orders were
accepted according to the pricing structure, then the system should already
be setup to accommodate overtime in the department that is now passing the
buck to another department.

Our customer service folks need to communicate some forecast in volume
changes that would impact re-engineering of official methods, so this is
less
of a surprise to other corporate departments.

Now I know that production management can go into shop order maintenance,
after order released, and re-route any part, so that FOD has a totally
different story than FRT, but I do not know if they can cut & paste some
alternate routing in there & I suspect the time it will take them to do this

is going to wipe out whatever shop floor time is being saved.

A lot of the reports & inquiries that we have been using, to see how we are
doing, use labor history vs. routing standards to calculate performance
rates, so if we are going to be having production methods not reflected in
the official files, we need to rethink how we display past production
history
such as when quoting new parts structured similar to old ones, and a vast
spectrum of overall efficiency reports that will not be showing these
invisible operations.

Also we have modified creation of shop orders, losing ability to reprint
them, which needs to be reversed so that after production management
reroutes
how it is to be made, they'll want to reprint revised shop order package.

I think the simplest might be to have an alternate BOM.
One sub-assembly alternative uses the original method.
One sub-assembly alternative uses the new method.
This would drastically reduce keying for production control because each of
our routing operations have 40-50 lines of additional description notes that

spell out step by step instructions to direct work force how the part is to
be made & the quality standards needed.
Move decision which method to use to production management at time shop
order
created, based on quantities involved, or time to make the part, if MRP540
or
SFC500 will support that kind of substitution.

We did modify the order planning report used in association with MRP540 to
help production management consolidate related parts ... perhaps we should
add to that report, if it fits nice, something about setup time vs. run
time,
so that when setup is excessive for the size of the orders, this kind of
substitution can be made wholesale, at order creation time.

But if shop supervisors insist that they need to switch methods after shop
paperwork gets to floor, then the thing to do is cancel the orders they have

& re-release them under the other method.

MacWheel99@aol.com (Alister Wm Macintyre) (Al Mac)