|
We also have similar problem on 405 CD.It is not unusual for a new item, an engineering change, move to different facility, other revisions, to not get implemented as rapidly as some people might wish. When some item is in the middle of a change in how things are to be done, that item can temporarily have a different planner code, so that lists of the work to be done, when generated by planner code, groups together all the items that are in transition. Then when all else resolved, make the official planner code. We do not use that approach, but it is one you might consider.
Customers have a lengthy approval process for us to make their parts, where they request samples and quotes from us and several competitors. Thus, even though we know they approved our sample, we do not know if they will approve our price. There are managers who not want the engineers spending time keying in details on some part when we not know if we going to get the business. When approval does come, they tend to want immediate manufacture, and yes, our raw materials have 4-6 weeks lead time. Fortunately similar raw materials are used on other parts, and we have safety stock there.
BPCS supports several Forecast methods. I believe MRP100 is the simplest to manage, although some companies may need the more sophisticated FOR module. We use dummy customer orders, which sometimes have problems.
Even though the engineering details may not have been completed being entered to BPCS, we get the BOM in first, and create a customer order. The purpose of this is to expedite PUR seeking raw materials needed. Generally, Production Control releases shop orders on anything that is due in the next 4 weeks, while everyone knows that 5+ weeks out is for scheduling raw materials. There are some exceptions to every rule.
We use Item Classes very heavily to communicate throughout our company that certain items are to be handled in a particular manner. e.g. Class SA means Samples, which are priced differently than regular product, and the consumed raw materials are tracked differently. We also have item classes designating items on consignment (some components are owned by our customer), using outside operations (not the normal manufacturing flow), records in the item master that are not real items, but are being used for other purposes.
In theory, you could have an item class for prototypes, then on whatever reports list the requirements, where you need people to do things differently, make sure the item class shows up there. For example, we have heavily modified the releaseable shop orders report, to show what customer we making the parts for, and what production is already in progress ... sometimes it makes more sense to increase quantity on an existing order, than to release a new order.
Some of our reports have sorts added, where items involving a particular item class, either that item, or in their BOM, are grouped separately on the reports.
BPCS also has a quoting system that is a sub-set of ORD that creates records in the ECH ECL etc. format, like RMAs and real orders. This does not meet our needs for quotes, which are heavily based in the engineering specifics.
- Al Macintyre http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:AlMac BPCS/400 Computer Janitor ... see http://radio.weblogs.com/0107846/stories/2002/11/08/bpcsDocSources.html -
Hello all, I'm very new to BPCS. I've searched the archives to no avail. I was wondering if anyone could help me with a situation at our company. We are running BPCS version 6.1, release 01, and there is a situation that I feel is sapping a lot of resources to resolve. Basically, when a new part number is set up in BPCS, orders can immediately be taken. This is a problem, because there is typically a leadtime of 4-6 week minimum, to get product in inventory. We have been working around it by having the part description read "NPD", so that the planner knows that the product is not yet available. But, the planners are upset because they're fill rate is being hurt. Is there a way to set up everything in BPCS, but not have it available for sale? Perhaps a prototype status? Thanks, Hyok Lee Engineering Manager Corona Clipper
As an Amazon Associate we earn from qualifying purchases.
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.
midrange.com
