Document Controls Via MPF - Am I Crazy !?

Yahoo Archive
1
And you are 100% correct on this...you cannot control revs in inventory.
However, at one company I used to work at, we decided it would be easier
to have sub-bins if a part had different revs. That was how they
tracked their revs in inventory. Can be a pain but it worked for them.

For instance, all of their bins were labeled for the part and its rev
and the description of the bin was added to the traveler. I think we
had to re-create the pick list with this as well.

So if I had a bin called BWH-1 (for back warehouse), the description had
the part number and rev level in it. Then we would have BWH-1A, BWH-1B,
or whatever the rev was.

Can't remember how many spaces the bin has for the ID field but again it
worked for them...and yes they had 1000s of bins!



M. Manasa Reddy
manasa@...
P: 630-806-2000
F: 630-806-2001


________________________________

From: vantage@yahoogroups.com [mailto:vantage@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf
Of nmtaylor1969
Sent: Tuesday, August 12, 2008 11:51 AM
To: vantage@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [Vantage] Re: Document Controls Via MPF - Am I Crazy !?



I agree Manasa, with the global replace, not the pills of course...

Can I ask: for your MPF parts ( that's your real parts not the fake
ones ) are you using the Vantage revision control or do you specify
revisions as part of the part number string itself thereby forcing
MRP to treat different revisions as seperate parts.

I am worried about the fact that I can't specify different revision
levels of a part in inventory, and I think we may well need to do
this. I wondered if you had come up against this issue or whether you
have not found it necessary...

Thanks,

Nick

--- In vantage@yahoogroups.com <mailto:vantage%40yahoogroups.com> ,
"Manasa Reddy" <manasa@...> wrote:
>
> Oh god...at least take the pills, slllooowwwwllllyyyyy...
>
> What I like about this approach is if I had new part numbers to
replace
> old ones, a global replace is just the best thing on earth!
Printing
> out a where used report is helpful because sometimes not everything
> needs the new part number and we know which BOMs to take care
of....can
> be a data entry nightmare, but well worth it. Plus, anytime I do
this
> approach, I document (keep the printed reports and what I global
> replaced)and keep in a binder if I ever have to refer to changes
that
> occurred.
>
> The other thing I was going to suggestion to you is if you had to
print
> these documents out (for your traveler, shipping, etc), the print
> management program is supposed to work as well (I said SUPPOSED TO).
> But this would work if you did associate the docs to the parts in
> question.
>
> Good luck with this!
>
>
>
> M. Manasa Reddy
> manasa@...
> P: 630-806-2000
> F: 630-806-2001
>
>
> ________________________________
>
> From: vantage@yahoogroups.com <mailto:vantage%40yahoogroups.com>
[mailto:vantage@yahoogroups.com <mailto:vantage%40yahoogroups.com> ] On
Behalf
> Of nmtaylor1969
> Sent: Tuesday, August 12, 2008 10:46 AM
> To: vantage@yahoogroups.com <mailto:vantage%40yahoogroups.com>
> Subject: [Vantage] Re: Document Controls Via MPF - Am I Crazy !?
>
>
>
> I wasn't crazy until we purchased Vantage Manasa - I just need to
> keep taking the tablets now...! :o)
>
> Are there any pitfalls of adopting this approach or do you find it
> works well for you...?
>
> Thanks,
>
> Nick
>
> --- In vantage@yahoogroups.com <mailto:vantage%40yahoogroups.com>
<mailto:vantage%40yahoogroups.com> ,
> "Manasa Reddy" <manasa@> wrote:
> >
> > We do the same thing with certs that call out gauges for some of
our
> > parts...so no you are not crazy....but then I don't know you! :)
> >
> >
> > M. Manasa Reddy
> > manasa@
> > P: 630-806-2000
> > F: 630-806-2001
> >
> >
> > ________________________________
> >
> > From: vantage@yahoogroups.com <mailto:vantage%40yahoogroups.com>
<mailto:vantage%40yahoogroups.com>
> [mailto:vantage@yahoogroups.com <mailto:vantage%40yahoogroups.com>
<mailto:vantage%
40yahoogroups.com> ] On
> Behalf
> > Of nmtaylor1969
> > Sent: Tuesday, August 12, 2008 9:41 AM
> > To: vantage@yahoogroups.com <mailto:vantage%40yahoogroups.com>
<mailto:vantage%40yahoogroups.com>
> > Subject: [Vantage] Document Controls Via MPF - Am I Crazy !?
> >
> >
> >
> > Can anyone tell me if you are doing anything like this please, or
> am
> > I just plain crazy...?
> >
> > We have a need to control large quantities of manufacturing
> > documents, text rigs and fixtures, production aids, workmanship
> > standards etc. etc. ideally via a central register with each
having
> a
> > unique identification number. Typically these items will be sent
to
> > us by our customers and must be controlled formally whilst in our
> > care ( which will be throughout the life of the product we are
> > making ). It is imperative that we maintain full revision control
> on
> > each item, and we ensure the right documents etc. are associated
> with
> > the right product in the MPF. Our old ERP system had bespoke code
> to
> > do all of this, and it worked very well.
> >
> > Out of the box, Vantage does not appear to provide the controls
we
> > are looking for. It does however provide the capability to attach
> > documents to parts in the MPF however this is a touch crude as
> there
> > is no central register which holds unique references for all
> > documents etc., and documents do not have revision control
> associated
> > wihth them.
> >
> > I could start messing around with UD tables to act as the
register,
> > but, after some thought I realised that by creating a part number
> in
> > the MPF to act as a proxy for each document / test fixture etc.,
> and
> > then attaching these "parts" to the BOM for each manufactured
part,
> I
> > might well be able to get Vantage to do what I want. These parts
> > would have their MRP flag unchecked, and would not be qty bearing
> so
> > that they are just ignored by the MRP engine. Of course when
placed
> > on the BOM the quantities would be zero anyway.
> >
> > This gives me a number of advantages:-
> >
> > I refer to the "part" as the entry in the MPF which in reality
> > relates to a document or physical item.
> >
> > The MPF provides me a register of all "parts" - Additionally they
> > might have a part class of "Document" or "Test Fixture" for
example
> > Each "part" can have a revision history associated with it
> > Each "part" can be used to control both electronic and physical
> items
> > "Parts" are placed on the BOM instead of via an attachment ( you
> > can't attach physical things unless you create a dummy text file
> and
> > attach this )
> > I can run a where used report to show where each "part" is used.
> This
> > is great when a new document revision is received from our
customer.
> >
> > Has anybody found the need to do this ?
> >
> > Am I making sense ? Am I crazy for wanting to do this ?!
> >
> > Thanks,
> >
> > Nick Taylor
> > Kingfield Electronics Limited
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> >
>
>
>
>
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>






[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
2
Can anyone tell me if you are doing anything like this please, or am
I just plain crazy...?

We have a need to control large quantities of manufacturing
documents, text rigs and fixtures, production aids, workmanship
standards etc. etc. ideally via a central register with each having a
unique identification number. Typically these items will be sent to
us by our customers and must be controlled formally whilst in our
care ( which will be throughout the life of the product we are
making ). It is imperative that we maintain full revision control on
each item, and we ensure the right documents etc. are associated with
the right product in the MPF. Our old ERP system had bespoke code to
do all of this, and it worked very well.

Out of the box, Vantage does not appear to provide the controls we
are looking for. It does however provide the capability to attach
documents to parts in the MPF however this is a touch crude as there
is no central register which holds unique references for all
documents etc., and documents do not have revision control associated
wihth them.

I could start messing around with UD tables to act as the register,
but, after some thought I realised that by creating a part number in
the MPF to act as a proxy for each document / test fixture etc., and
then attaching these "parts" to the BOM for each manufactured part, I
might well be able to get Vantage to do what I want. These parts
would have their MRP flag unchecked, and would not be qty bearing so
that they are just ignored by the MRP engine. Of course when placed
on the BOM the quantities would be zero anyway.

This gives me a number of advantages:-

I refer to the "part" as the entry in the MPF which in reality
relates to a document or physical item.

The MPF provides me a register of all "parts" - Additionally they
might have a part class of "Document" or "Test Fixture" for example
Each "part" can have a revision history associated with it
Each "part" can be used to control both electronic and physical items
"Parts" are placed on the BOM instead of via an attachment ( you
can't attach physical things unless you create a dummy text file and
attach this )
I can run a where used report to show where each "part" is used. This
is great when a new document revision is received from our customer.

Has anybody found the need to do this ?

Am I making sense ? Am I crazy for wanting to do this ?!

Thanks,

Nick Taylor
Kingfield Electronics Limited
3
We do the same thing with certs that call out gauges for some of our
parts...so no you are not crazy....but then I don't know you! :)


M. Manasa Reddy
manasa@...
P: 630-806-2000
F: 630-806-2001


________________________________

From: vantage@yahoogroups.com [mailto:vantage@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf
Of nmtaylor1969
Sent: Tuesday, August 12, 2008 9:41 AM
To: vantage@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [Vantage] Document Controls Via MPF - Am I Crazy !?



Can anyone tell me if you are doing anything like this please, or am
I just plain crazy...?

We have a need to control large quantities of manufacturing
documents, text rigs and fixtures, production aids, workmanship
standards etc. etc. ideally via a central register with each having a
unique identification number. Typically these items will be sent to
us by our customers and must be controlled formally whilst in our
care ( which will be throughout the life of the product we are
making ). It is imperative that we maintain full revision control on
each item, and we ensure the right documents etc. are associated with
the right product in the MPF. Our old ERP system had bespoke code to
do all of this, and it worked very well.

Out of the box, Vantage does not appear to provide the controls we
are looking for. It does however provide the capability to attach
documents to parts in the MPF however this is a touch crude as there
is no central register which holds unique references for all
documents etc., and documents do not have revision control associated
wihth them.

I could start messing around with UD tables to act as the register,
but, after some thought I realised that by creating a part number in
the MPF to act as a proxy for each document / test fixture etc., and
then attaching these "parts" to the BOM for each manufactured part, I
might well be able to get Vantage to do what I want. These parts
would have their MRP flag unchecked, and would not be qty bearing so
that they are just ignored by the MRP engine. Of course when placed
on the BOM the quantities would be zero anyway.

This gives me a number of advantages:-

I refer to the "part" as the entry in the MPF which in reality
relates to a document or physical item.

The MPF provides me a register of all "parts" - Additionally they
might have a part class of "Document" or "Test Fixture" for example
Each "part" can have a revision history associated with it
Each "part" can be used to control both electronic and physical items
"Parts" are placed on the BOM instead of via an attachment ( you
can't attach physical things unless you create a dummy text file and
attach this )
I can run a where used report to show where each "part" is used. This
is great when a new document revision is received from our customer.

Has anybody found the need to do this ?

Am I making sense ? Am I crazy for wanting to do this ?!

Thanks,

Nick Taylor
Kingfield Electronics Limited






[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
4
I wasn't crazy until we purchased Vantage Manasa - I just need to
keep taking the tablets now...! :o)

Are there any pitfalls of adopting this approach or do you find it
works well for you...?

Thanks,

Nick


--- In vantage@yahoogroups.com, "Manasa Reddy" <manasa@...> wrote:
>
> We do the same thing with certs that call out gauges for some of our
> parts...so no you are not crazy....but then I don't know you! :)
>
>
> M. Manasa Reddy
> manasa@...
> P: 630-806-2000
> F: 630-806-2001
>
>
> ________________________________
>
> From: vantage@yahoogroups.com [mailto:vantage@yahoogroups.com] On
Behalf
> Of nmtaylor1969
> Sent: Tuesday, August 12, 2008 9:41 AM
> To: vantage@yahoogroups.com
> Subject: [Vantage] Document Controls Via MPF - Am I Crazy !?
>
>
>
> Can anyone tell me if you are doing anything like this please, or
am
> I just plain crazy...?
>
> We have a need to control large quantities of manufacturing
> documents, text rigs and fixtures, production aids, workmanship
> standards etc. etc. ideally via a central register with each having
a
> unique identification number. Typically these items will be sent to
> us by our customers and must be controlled formally whilst in our
> care ( which will be throughout the life of the product we are
> making ). It is imperative that we maintain full revision control
on
> each item, and we ensure the right documents etc. are associated
with
> the right product in the MPF. Our old ERP system had bespoke code
to
> do all of this, and it worked very well.
>
> Out of the box, Vantage does not appear to provide the controls we
> are looking for. It does however provide the capability to attach
> documents to parts in the MPF however this is a touch crude as
there
> is no central register which holds unique references for all
> documents etc., and documents do not have revision control
associated
> wihth them.
>
> I could start messing around with UD tables to act as the register,
> but, after some thought I realised that by creating a part number
in
> the MPF to act as a proxy for each document / test fixture etc.,
and
> then attaching these "parts" to the BOM for each manufactured part,
I
> might well be able to get Vantage to do what I want. These parts
> would have their MRP flag unchecked, and would not be qty bearing
so
> that they are just ignored by the MRP engine. Of course when placed
> on the BOM the quantities would be zero anyway.
>
> This gives me a number of advantages:-
>
> I refer to the "part" as the entry in the MPF which in reality
> relates to a document or physical item.
>
> The MPF provides me a register of all "parts" - Additionally they
> might have a part class of "Document" or "Test Fixture" for example
> Each "part" can have a revision history associated with it
> Each "part" can be used to control both electronic and physical
items
> "Parts" are placed on the BOM instead of via an attachment ( you
> can't attach physical things unless you create a dummy text file
and
> attach this )
> I can run a where used report to show where each "part" is used.
This
> is great when a new document revision is received from our customer.
>
> Has anybody found the need to do this ?
>
> Am I making sense ? Am I crazy for wanting to do this ?!
>
> Thanks,
>
> Nick Taylor
> Kingfield Electronics Limited
>
>
>
>
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
5
Oh god...at least take the pills, slllooowwwwllllyyyyy...

What I like about this approach is if I had new part numbers to replace
old ones, a global replace is just the best thing on earth! Printing
out a where used report is helpful because sometimes not everything
needs the new part number and we know which BOMs to take care of....can
be a data entry nightmare, but well worth it. Plus, anytime I do this
approach, I document (keep the printed reports and what I global
replaced)and keep in a binder if I ever have to refer to changes that
occurred.

The other thing I was going to suggestion to you is if you had to print
these documents out (for your traveler, shipping, etc), the print
management program is supposed to work as well (I said SUPPOSED TO).
But this would work if you did associate the docs to the parts in
question.

Good luck with this!



M. Manasa Reddy
manasa@...
P: 630-806-2000
F: 630-806-2001


________________________________

From: vantage@yahoogroups.com [mailto:vantage@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf
Of nmtaylor1969
Sent: Tuesday, August 12, 2008 10:46 AM
To: vantage@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [Vantage] Re: Document Controls Via MPF - Am I Crazy !?



I wasn't crazy until we purchased Vantage Manasa - I just need to
keep taking the tablets now...! :o)

Are there any pitfalls of adopting this approach or do you find it
works well for you...?

Thanks,

Nick

--- In vantage@yahoogroups.com <mailto:vantage%40yahoogroups.com> ,
"Manasa Reddy" <manasa@...> wrote:
>
> We do the same thing with certs that call out gauges for some of our
> parts...so no you are not crazy....but then I don't know you! :)
>
>
> M. Manasa Reddy
> manasa@...
> P: 630-806-2000
> F: 630-806-2001
>
>
> ________________________________
>
> From: vantage@yahoogroups.com <mailto:vantage%40yahoogroups.com>
[mailto:vantage@yahoogroups.com <mailto:vantage%40yahoogroups.com> ] On
Behalf
> Of nmtaylor1969
> Sent: Tuesday, August 12, 2008 9:41 AM
> To: vantage@yahoogroups.com <mailto:vantage%40yahoogroups.com>
> Subject: [Vantage] Document Controls Via MPF - Am I Crazy !?
>
>
>
> Can anyone tell me if you are doing anything like this please, or
am
> I just plain crazy...?
>
> We have a need to control large quantities of manufacturing
> documents, text rigs and fixtures, production aids, workmanship
> standards etc. etc. ideally via a central register with each having
a
> unique identification number. Typically these items will be sent to
> us by our customers and must be controlled formally whilst in our
> care ( which will be throughout the life of the product we are
> making ). It is imperative that we maintain full revision control
on
> each item, and we ensure the right documents etc. are associated
with
> the right product in the MPF. Our old ERP system had bespoke code
to
> do all of this, and it worked very well.
>
> Out of the box, Vantage does not appear to provide the controls we
> are looking for. It does however provide the capability to attach
> documents to parts in the MPF however this is a touch crude as
there
> is no central register which holds unique references for all
> documents etc., and documents do not have revision control
associated
> wihth them.
>
> I could start messing around with UD tables to act as the register,
> but, after some thought I realised that by creating a part number
in
> the MPF to act as a proxy for each document / test fixture etc.,
and
> then attaching these "parts" to the BOM for each manufactured part,
I
> might well be able to get Vantage to do what I want. These parts
> would have their MRP flag unchecked, and would not be qty bearing
so
> that they are just ignored by the MRP engine. Of course when placed
> on the BOM the quantities would be zero anyway.
>
> This gives me a number of advantages:-
>
> I refer to the "part" as the entry in the MPF which in reality
> relates to a document or physical item.
>
> The MPF provides me a register of all "parts" - Additionally they
> might have a part class of "Document" or "Test Fixture" for example
> Each "part" can have a revision history associated with it
> Each "part" can be used to control both electronic and physical
items
> "Parts" are placed on the BOM instead of via an attachment ( you
> can't attach physical things unless you create a dummy text file
and
> attach this )
> I can run a where used report to show where each "part" is used.
This
> is great when a new document revision is received from our customer.
>
> Has anybody found the need to do this ?
>
> Am I making sense ? Am I crazy for wanting to do this ?!
>
> Thanks,
>
> Nick Taylor
> Kingfield Electronics Limited
>
>
>
>
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>






[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
6
I agree Manasa, with the global replace, not the pills of course...

Can I ask: for your MPF parts ( that's your real parts not the fake
ones ) are you using the Vantage revision control or do you specify
revisions as part of the part number string itself thereby forcing
MRP to treat different revisions as seperate parts.

I am worried about the fact that I can't specify different revision
levels of a part in inventory, and I think we may well need to do
this. I wondered if you had come up against this issue or whether you
have not found it necessary...

Thanks,

Nick

--- In vantage@yahoogroups.com, "Manasa Reddy" <manasa@...> wrote:
>
> Oh god...at least take the pills, slllooowwwwllllyyyyy...
>
> What I like about this approach is if I had new part numbers to
replace
> old ones, a global replace is just the best thing on earth!
Printing
> out a where used report is helpful because sometimes not everything
> needs the new part number and we know which BOMs to take care
of....can
> be a data entry nightmare, but well worth it. Plus, anytime I do
this
> approach, I document (keep the printed reports and what I global
> replaced)and keep in a binder if I ever have to refer to changes
that
> occurred.
>
> The other thing I was going to suggestion to you is if you had to
print
> these documents out (for your traveler, shipping, etc), the print
> management program is supposed to work as well (I said SUPPOSED TO).
> But this would work if you did associate the docs to the parts in
> question.
>
> Good luck with this!
>
>
>
> M. Manasa Reddy
> manasa@...
> P: 630-806-2000
> F: 630-806-2001
>
>
> ________________________________
>
> From: vantage@yahoogroups.com [mailto:vantage@yahoogroups.com] On
Behalf
> Of nmtaylor1969
> Sent: Tuesday, August 12, 2008 10:46 AM
> To: vantage@yahoogroups.com
> Subject: [Vantage] Re: Document Controls Via MPF - Am I Crazy !?
>
>
>
> I wasn't crazy until we purchased Vantage Manasa - I just need to
> keep taking the tablets now...! :o)
>
> Are there any pitfalls of adopting this approach or do you find it
> works well for you...?
>
> Thanks,
>
> Nick
>
> --- In vantage@yahoogroups.com <mailto:vantage%40yahoogroups.com> ,
> "Manasa Reddy" <manasa@> wrote:
> >
> > We do the same thing with certs that call out gauges for some of
our
> > parts...so no you are not crazy....but then I don't know you! :)
> >
> >
> > M. Manasa Reddy
> > manasa@
> > P: 630-806-2000
> > F: 630-806-2001
> >
> >
> > ________________________________
> >
> > From: vantage@yahoogroups.com <mailto:vantage%40yahoogroups.com>
> [mailto:vantage@yahoogroups.com <mailto:vantage%
40yahoogroups.com> ] On
> Behalf
> > Of nmtaylor1969
> > Sent: Tuesday, August 12, 2008 9:41 AM
> > To: vantage@yahoogroups.com <mailto:vantage%40yahoogroups.com>
> > Subject: [Vantage] Document Controls Via MPF - Am I Crazy !?
> >
> >
> >
> > Can anyone tell me if you are doing anything like this please, or
> am
> > I just plain crazy...?
> >
> > We have a need to control large quantities of manufacturing
> > documents, text rigs and fixtures, production aids, workmanship
> > standards etc. etc. ideally via a central register with each
having
> a
> > unique identification number. Typically these items will be sent
to
> > us by our customers and must be controlled formally whilst in our
> > care ( which will be throughout the life of the product we are
> > making ). It is imperative that we maintain full revision control
> on
> > each item, and we ensure the right documents etc. are associated
> with
> > the right product in the MPF. Our old ERP system had bespoke code
> to
> > do all of this, and it worked very well.
> >
> > Out of the box, Vantage does not appear to provide the controls
we
> > are looking for. It does however provide the capability to attach
> > documents to parts in the MPF however this is a touch crude as
> there
> > is no central register which holds unique references for all
> > documents etc., and documents do not have revision control
> associated
> > wihth them.
> >
> > I could start messing around with UD tables to act as the
register,
> > but, after some thought I realised that by creating a part number
> in
> > the MPF to act as a proxy for each document / test fixture etc.,
> and
> > then attaching these "parts" to the BOM for each manufactured
part,
> I
> > might well be able to get Vantage to do what I want. These parts
> > would have their MRP flag unchecked, and would not be qty bearing
> so
> > that they are just ignored by the MRP engine. Of course when
placed
> > on the BOM the quantities would be zero anyway.
> >
> > This gives me a number of advantages:-
> >
> > I refer to the "part" as the entry in the MPF which in reality
> > relates to a document or physical item.
> >
> > The MPF provides me a register of all "parts" - Additionally they
> > might have a part class of "Document" or "Test Fixture" for
example
> > Each "part" can have a revision history associated with it
> > Each "part" can be used to control both electronic and physical
> items
> > "Parts" are placed on the BOM instead of via an attachment ( you
> > can't attach physical things unless you create a dummy text file
> and
> > attach this )
> > I can run a where used report to show where each "part" is used.
> This
> > is great when a new document revision is received from our
customer.
> >
> > Has anybody found the need to do this ?
> >
> > Am I making sense ? Am I crazy for wanting to do this ?!
> >
> > Thanks,
> >
> > Nick Taylor
> > Kingfield Electronics Limited
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> >
>
>
>
>
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>