I’m looking to baseline with anyone that has both make direct jobs and MRP jobs in work at the same time.
We have a mix of MRP jobs and Make direct jobs. Many of the MRP parts have a min stock level. When these different job types are scheduled through the same resource, the MRP jobs typically trump the make direct jobs because of the start date that is needed for inventory is earlier than the start date for the other jobs. I’m curious if anyone else has this condition, and if so, how you manipulate the schedule? What modifiers do you use? If we lock all the dates, we would never achieve the min stock levels required.
OK.. i will bite… Why do you stock an item and then also have a make direct order for that same item? why not just ship from stock?
4 Likes
To @timshuwy point if you have stock and do a make direct it will NEVER use that stock since you told it where its product was coming from. We went only make to stock ship from stock to make sure that does not happen.
Great questions, let me clarify. We don’t have the same part set up as MRP and make direct. Part A is MRP, Part B is Make Direct but both go across the lathe. When they go across this resource the start dates set the priority. Since the MRP parts have a min stock level, if we dip below that, the required by date is “Today” and since we allow dates in the past, it jumps up in the queue. I’m looking to see if there are modifiers that can be used to recognize order demand vs warehouse demand that would schedule the requirements to satisfy those demands differently.
1 Like
We have a similar but not exactly the same situation. For us, there are resources that we want to schedule, but we don’t want all the MRP jobs to be in the schedule right away, we want it to prioritize the ones the planner has firmed and gotten ready to release already, and then if there is space to schedule the unfirm MRP jobs. To get this working, I set the default scheduling priority code to have a very low priority factor and then did a BPM that when jobs are firmed it defaults to a different scheduling code with a higher priority factor. this isn’t 100% fool prof but it works.
2 Likes
Based on my research the scheduling priority only works in a finite environment. Are you infinite or finite?
in that area we are using finite. we don’t use the queue for the areas that are set as infinite so others would be able to say, but if you run calculate global scheduling order, does it order it by that priority in the queue?
OK… you are breaking two of my cardinal rules 
- you should "Allow consumption of Minimum, and then also have a lead time set. IF you do this, then it will not set TODAY as the due date. It will trigger the new order, and will set the start date to today, and due date to the lead time.
- Historical Dates? Really? hahah.. I dont believe that you can ever do anything yesterday. If you can prove me wrong, then lets hear it… but in my world, you can only do things from this moment going forward. This means that I dont allow historical scheduling. I have heard all the arguments… people like to do this to set priorities, but that is not the right way (in my opinion). Use REAL dates (dates that are acheivable) and then you will have a better picture of what WILL happen instead of what you should have done.
2 Likes
I hear ya Tim! We are migrating to a “backward finite schedule that doesn’t allow dates in the past” system set up. This is a now problem however. The only other solution that I’ve been able to come up with for it near term would be to use forecast application. The impact of this particular situation is being felt a bit more right now because we made min stock adjustments on the majority of the components on one of our biggest BOM’s. My suggestion has been to remove the min stock, put it in as a forecast in the future, then once completed/stocked adding the min stock level at that time to lessen the impact. That process would be a bit cumbersome. Any other ideas for near term?