Reply from CWK on Dec 17 at 11:29 AM Giso and Phil -
Thanks for your responses. They've been helpful, if only to confirm that we're going to need some serious customization. We cannot use component scrap the way it's designed.
If SAP provided two fields on the reservation record (one for actual required quantity and one for scrap quantity) or if (better still) SAP generated two reservations for scrap-relevant BOM Items (one with actual required quantity and one with the scrap quantity), then we'd have something to work with.
With a customized solution based on the current component scrap percentage, we can theoretically "reverse calculate" the actual requirement and scrap requirement for every reservation that includes a scrap percentage -- but we've always run into rounding problems when we try to do this in the past – and that's only the beginning of a tortured process.
If we customize our kitting functionality to allow kitting to recognize two distinct quantities (the reverse calculated requirement and scrap qtys) and made it easy for kitting to issue only the required quantity, we'd be close to a solution. (Maybe we will take this route eventually.) There are a number of problems with this. The scrap quantity looks like a material shortage when it really isn't. Annoying, but survivable. The required date on the scrap (short) quantity is inaccurate because operation confirmations have locked down the required date for the scrap. We end up with false overdue requirements in MRP. This is hard enough on MRP visibility accuracy and re-planning, but we also have metrics for the planning, purchasing, and manufacturing departments that cause people to get dinged for overdue components.
We also have customized rules that prohibit us from completing an order that still has material shortages. We'd have to update every order prior to completion to either reduce the required quantity or set the final issue flag on every scrap-relevant component. That's a lot of extra work and could easily lead to failure to recognize true material shortages.
Giso, regarding your BOM suggestion -- there's no way we can get anyone to manage (thousands of) BOMs that have two items for the same component (one for the actual requirement and one for the potential scrap requirement). Even if we did, we'd still have to get the scrap item moved to a later operation on the master routing so that it is scheduled better after the production order is released – and that is more industrial engineering time than we'd be willing to spend.
There is also no way that we'll be allowed to issue all of the requirements (actual plus scrap) when the order is released and then cross our fingers that the unused scrap is actually returned to inventory. Even if we did, we'd still end up with apparent shortages on the order unless we manually reduced the requirement quantity or flagged the component as final issue.
We have 10's of thousands of orders (with components that are relevant for factory attrition) open at any given point in time and 10's of thousands in planning – spread across dozens of WBS Elements. We can afford very little manual manipulation of orders just to fake out SAP's component scrap process.
Thanks for trying. The SAP Developer Network can't figure this problem out, either – so all of the best SAP minds in the world are stumped when it comes to managing attrition during the manufacturing process (although there are claims that the APO bolt-on can handle it – I wonder?).
Back to the drawing board.
Gratefully,
Carl
| | | ---------------Original Message---------------
From: CWK
Sent: Monday, December 15, 2014 12:43 PM
Subject: How Do You Handle Real Factory Attrition?
We suffer component losses DURING the manufacturing process, not before. The component losses we experience for any specific production order are unpredictable, but we are able to calculate fairly accurate attrition percentages for a given material when used in specific assemblies and, in aggregate, for a given plant. We do need to order and stock more than the (theoretical) required quantity of a component because of factory attrition DURING the manufacturing process.
Safety Stock functionality does not seem to solve our problem. We don't want to plan a specific quantity of "extra" material to keep in stock – we want a percentage and we want to purchase and store that material as project stock for specific WBS Elements. The safety stock service level seem to offer the potential for ordering extra material based on an attrition percentage, but we cannot seem to get it to work, regardless of how we configure – but we may not understand the full potential and configuration requirements of the service level. Can anyone explain how the service level % can be used to order extra material to cover attrition during the manufacturing process (for project stock)?
[Note: In the past, we have been advised to use the Component Scrap percentage on the material master. This does cause MRP to order extra project stock based on the component scrap percentage. Unfortunately, the definition of component scrap clearly states that this functionality is intended to identify component material that is lost or damaged BEFORE the actual manufacturing process begins. The extra component material appears on the planned order and the production order once the planned order is converted. The expectation is that you will issue all of the component's required quantity (including scrap requirements) to the order PRIOR to beginning the assembly process. Perhaps there are industries out there that lose or damage a meaningful percentage of their components before they are actually used in the manufacturing process, but that is not our company's problem.
We do not want attrition requirements to appear on production orders when the orders are created. We wish to issue the actual requirements to the order and only increase requirements as attrition is experienced.]
Regards,
Carl |
| Reply to this email to post your response. __.____._ |   _.____.__ |
