Wendy:

I am glad that my suspicion was correct and that you were able to resolve
the problem. There is no impact if the Standard Batch Size was entered for
a Raw Material Item because a Raw Material does not have a BOM. The
Standard Batch Size is only used with the BOM calculations. The value
should be 1 for these Items which is what BPCS will set it to if nothing is
entered.

Thanks.

Thanks.

Les Mittman
BPCS Consultant with over 20 years experience.
847-858-5235


-----Original Message-----
From: bpcs-l-bounces+lmittman=sbcglobal.net@xxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:bpcs-l-bounces+lmittman=sbcglobal.net@xxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of
Bunch, Wendy
Sent: Wednesday, June 16, 2010 12:49 PM
To: bpcs-l@xxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: [BPCS-L] Bom problems



Thank you all - it was indeed Standard Batch size in the MRP140 (CIC
file) - the Item Master was ok - and yes I think it was Lot Size - they
had put the same number in both field...

I found more records as well but they were all raw materials, no more
mfg parts - not sure what effect that may have had, so I put them back
to 1 as well.

Wendy Bunch

------------------------------

message: 3
date: Tue, 15 Jun 2010 13:35:30 -0500
from: "Bailey, Dick" <Dick.Bailey@xxxxxxxx>
subject: Re: [BPCS-L] Bom problems

You might also check the scrap factor for that part in the BOM, and the
UOM Unit of Measure to make sure you have no problem there.
Does this happen every time you issue a shop order for that assembly,
or just some of the time?

Dick Bailey
MCFA,Inc

-----Original Message-----
From: bpcs-l-bounces+dick.bailey=mcfa.com@xxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:bpcs-l-bounces+dick.bailey=mcfa.com@xxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of
Les Mittman - SBC
Sent: Tuesday, June 15, 2010 12:59 PM
To: 'BPCS ERP System'
Subject: Re: [BPCS-L] Bom problems

Wendy:

It sounds like what you are saying is that when you look at the MBM
File, you are seeing that the BOM Quantity Required = 1.000. This value
is also shown in BOM300 and BOM500. However, when you use this BOM, the
Quantity shows as 0.25.

If I understand the problem correctly, I suspect that someone has
entered a value of 4.00 for the Standard Batch Size. This value is
IBTCH in the Item Master (IIM) and also ICBTCH in the MRP Facility
Planning Data (CIC) File.
The Standard Batch Size is the reference for how to interpret the BOM
Quantity Required when it is used. This problem often happens when
someone wants to enter a Lot Size for MRP Planning purposes, but places
it in the Standard Batch Size field rather than in the Lot Size field.

Hopefully, this is the problem which can easily be corrected.
Otherwise, I am not sure what would be causing this problem.
If you have any other questions, don't hesitate to contact me offline.

Thanks.

Les Mittman
BPCS Consultant with over 20 years experience.
847-858-5235

-----Original Message-----
From: bpcs-l-bounces+lmittman=sbcglobal.net@xxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:bpcs-l-bounces+lmittman=sbcglobal.net@xxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of
Bunch, Wendy
Sent: Tuesday, June 15, 2010 12:25 PM
To: bpcs-l@xxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [BPCS-L] Bom problems

BPCS v 8.2.01

Was notified of a Bom problem - End Item Part - has multilevel
components some subasy, phantom and stocking level. Indented Bom for
End item through BOM300, BOM500 and looking directly at the MBM file
show one thing (we do have multiple Method codes - blank for current
bom, FS for Frozen Standard (General Ledger/ Frozen Costs use), and some
backup ones -- but all are pretty much the same currently on components
and quantity.

However - CST280, CST300-02, SFC350 and shop orders generated from the
blank method code -- show a wrong Bom -- Where the "real" bom call for a
quantity of 1 per -- these are showing .025 per --- why is this doing
this? And were can it be finding this .025 per bom -- it's not in the
MBM file.... And is this just on this one part? If there are more, how
do I find them -- I checked a couple of others and they seem to be ok..

I have checked the Low level codes and that is ok. Any ideas?

Wendy Bunch
--



As an Amazon Associate we earn from qualifying purchases.

This thread ...

Replies:

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

This mailing list archive is Copyright 1997-2021 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.