Folks… having been working with EPICOR since VANTAGE 8.03.305
and not experiencing extreme issues with MRP processing…
I am hearing some tales of MRP issues in E-10 (and E-9) where
lower-level information of an exploded MOM is not fully processing all data.
While I will be digging deeper into this issue/area, it’d be awesome to have insight(no pun intended)!
Appreciate any feedback?
Additionally - different company: Had the experience in Mexico where application was adding 103 days to “ALL” suggested jobs! Worked thru the EPICOR support chain to top-level-specialist, EPICOR sent a guru on-site, upgraded to 10.1.200 (back in Dec) and EPICOR is still working on the issue!
We just went live on E10.1.600.5 yesterday. We continue to struggle with Epicor half baking their design of some of the multiple plant (now called site) issues, which were a primary struggle in E9 for us as well.
New experience in MRP (didn’t happen E905702) phantom part boms are not pulled if the part revision plant is not the same as the parent. WTH? Not only do they not pull, entire unfirm job comes up empty in mrp run. I guess on positive side, we know there’s a phantom in that empty parent job that needs temporary switcheroo of part rev plant to get it to appropriately pull the method. Damn!
Scheduled the stream of nightly jobs in the system agent for MRP and PO sugg’s???
Those folks actually processing MRP,etc… thru the scheduler… what are you running? sequence?
We run MRP every night. There should be no need to run PO Suggestions too because MRP will create the suggestions.
In prior releases… it did.
E-10… (I believe) it does not?!
UPDATE - discoveries as to MRP laxities in E-10 in custom mfg environments !!
The complexity of FOREWARD scheduling in a CUSTOM-part shop and a multi-tier MOM (Sub-asmblies)
EX: Top-level (TL) has two sub-asm’s (S1) and (S2)
S2 has three sub-asm’s (S2-1 S2-2 S2-3)
MRP is processed and the demand for (TL) is evident, un-firm job suggested for the TL part…
…but unlike many other ERP/MRP systems, EPICOR does not fully explode the entire MOM to evaluate all asmbly demand thru the entire tree, as the application ‘presumes’ sub-asm’s will be stocked!
HUMAN schedules JOB for (TL) and does so with FOREWARD scheduling [TL will take 5 weeks to complete, and E-10 presumes (based on capacity availability is can start this job next week)]
MRP runs, and system now knows TL requires S1 & S2… resulting in unfirm suggestions for (S1 & S2)
HUMAN schedules JOB for S1 & S2 (which, these items may not be manufactured and available next week for the TL job, especially if S1 and/or S2 take a few weeks to produce, along with potential procurement lead-time for part-specific raw materials that may not be stocked)
Along the way, the system will advise re-scheduling of TL job, as to the projected completion of S1 and S2!
MRP runs overnight… and you can complete the scenario…
S2-1 S2-2 S2-3 unfirm suggestions generated, jobs created…
further updates to re-schedule jobs above this level, since output of jobs at this level are required on higher-level sub-asm’s
So EPICOR does not FULLY explode a MOM providing job-suggestions at all levels and meld-that into timephase!!! OUCH!
Need to leverage CTP processing and ensure SO’s need-by date do not violate Lead Time, then ALSO backward schedule!!!
Dang… I have worked on a number of ERP systems since the 80’s and they FULLY EXPLODE the entire TREE thru all sub-asm’s !
Hi Joe, do you know if you have the “Auto-Consume” field checked in your Part records? This may be contributing to some of what you are seeing. The Auto Consume Stock check box is located on the Part - Sites - Planning sheet.
Auto Consume Stock
_Select this check box to indicate, that when MRP creates a job, it should verify the on hand quantities when a part being used as material is marked as Pull As Assembly on the job’s parent part. Clear the check box if it should not. When the MRP engine evaluates an auto-consumed part, it uses the Available to Promise calculation to determine whether stock is available for materials marked as Pull As Assembly, when required by the job. The expected stock on hand quantity for the material is then set as a Pull Quantity on the subassembly, and the production quantity for the subassembly is reduced by the pull quantity. The Available to Promise calculation determines when some of this material quantity will be available in the future. This quantity amount is then considered when the MRP engine calculates whether a firm job (or jobs) should be created for the subassembly through the Plan As Assembly functionality.
Per your supplied response and my scenario…
would following your suggestions:
- Generate MRP JOB suggestions for what? and in what sequence? All Levels?
Would Job-suggs from MRP be for the entire tree?
S2-1 S2-2 S2-3 timephase 1st (incorporating INVENTORY requirements)
followed by S-1 and S2 as to scheduling and time-phase (and raw inventory)
Ergo 6 job suggs?
- and if FOREWARD SCHEDULING is set, not attempt to forward schedule TL until the expected availability of S-1 and S-2 (along with (S2-1 S2-2 and S2-3) for S-2)
BTW (thanks for your response!
Hope that I am interpreting your questions correctly. If not, please do elaborate. Below is some additional information on how E10 MRP hierarchy works and I hope you find this information helpful.
1st) Exploding - Explosion uses the Bill of Materials (BOM). The BOM lists the number and types of components needed for each item of manufacture. For example, a car requires five wheels including the spare. BOMs are characterized by the number of levels involved, following the structure of assemblies and sub assemblies. The first level the MPS represents explodes down to the final assembly. Thus a given number of finished products is exploded to see how many items are required at the final assembly stage.
2nd) Netting - The next step in the process is netting. Netting is the subtraction of stock on hand from the gross requirement determined through explosion. This gives the quantity of each item needed to manufacture the required finished products.
3rd) Offsetting - The final step is offsetting. This determines when manufacturing should start so that the finished items are available when required. To offset, a lead time has to be assumed for the operation. The lead time is the anticipated time for manufacturing. This whole process repeats for the next level in the BOM until the bottom level is reached. These will give the requirements and timings to outside suppliers.
Plan as Assembly - This functionality enables MRP to plan the lower level component manufactured parts in a direct planning relationship to the top level part without those parts actually being included in the assembly structure. This uses Epicor’s multiple-level assembly structure for planning purposes, correctly synchronizing the required demand. The functionality further enables increased flexibility in planning execution by enabling subassembly parts to be manufactured to stock or manufactured on a job directly linked to the parent requirements.This capability minimizes the impact to standard MRP by using the Pull as Assembly (PAA) logic for creating PAA assemblies, using Auto-Consume stock during the scheduling process, and creating a new process to firm up jobs which breaks off PAA assemblies to separate jobs and creates the material demand links.
It also might be helpful to review the Material Requirements Planning Technical Reference Guide which will show you how the MRP engine calculates job suggestions and purchase suggestions and the primary components that make up the MRP engine, base calculations that run the engine, and the modifiers used to refine the suggestion results.
Appreciate your detail… really!
FYI - been in MFG since 1982 on about 6 or more fully integrated/MRP platforms
have Worked with EPICOR for last 10 years
Have an MBA in Finance and mostly focused on the financial side of EPCOR especially with E-9 and the changes with GL CONTROLS, but have reasonably extensive MFG understanding
Collectively know how MRP is intended to process as per exploded MOM(BOM), Timephase, inclusive of raw material/lead time, min’s/max’es et-al, yet EPICOR has nuances that continue to challenge me.
The AUTO CONSUME STOCK field
on the SITES > PLANNING > sheet does not ring a bell per VANTAGE 8.03.305 where I started (as an EPICOR consultant for 3 years - even though the extent of total learning of the system was absorb system intricacies yourself). Do not remember the field per E-9, but I was mostly FInance…
PULL AS ASSEMBLY setting had been described to me as,
not setting it… the sub-asm as individual parts will be available for use in the hands-on Assembly… setting it, the entire assembly is supposed to be available, completely assembled.
WHAT SETTINGS will FULLY EXPLODE all levels of a MOM/BOM, inclusive of all RAW part inventory requirements??? Aligned per lead time and time phase?
While we have a very limited number of items we can stock due to yield/tensile regarding heat-treat and the specific material, over-all we manufacture to demand without stocked-sub-assemblies, because everything we make that looks the same has differing composition. .
Therefore, awareness to and coordination of completion of lowest level assembly UP to the top-level as per required (or requested) Ship-date in a MAKE DIRECT WORLD is what we seek.
Understandably, the way you use the system… the CTP (Generate MFG lead time application) and overriding that with a Manual date, as well as trying to assure Cust-Service is not undercutting the CTP date to benefit the customer for Sales Order delivery and cripple MFG with too short a lead time is vital for smooth production.
I also understand Backward and forward scheduling and how E-10 will look for a solid chunk of available time to complete an Operation! Therefore it becomes vital to clean-up the Resource Group scheduling board, especially when you need 20+ hours for set-up…
currently, EPICOR only sees the first level of a multi-level BOM based on the Sales Order.
Would LOVE TO HAVE FULL REQUIREMENTS for all levels a s MRP suggested JOBS!
Always learning, every day… how do we achieve full awareness… of all levels?!
Awesome experience! I’ve been in the manufacturing world for over 20 years, used various ERP, and also using Epicor for about 7 years. In E10, MRP certainly considers all the levels on a MOM. It uses a calculation to determine a parts ‘level’ or ‘low level code’. Level 0 is something that is only sold. Level 1 is something that is used to make level 0 items, level 2 is used to make level 1 and so on. Then, all level 0’s are planned/calculated first since the demand for these is driven from the sales orders. Then the level 1’s are planned and so on. MRP does backwards scheduling only.
Pull as Assembly, when selected, basically is putting the exploded BOM of a sub-assembly on the job - even if it’s stocked - so you wouldn’t just see the finished good material, but you’d see the components of it also. Even if a part is marked Stocked, if you have Pull as Assembly checked, it will make the sub-assembly on the job instead of pulling from stock.
Plan as Assembly, when selected, assumes you will fill demand from stock, however, if stock is not available within the manufacturing lead time, MRP will then plan it as a sub-assembly. This is done only when the job required date falls within the cumulative lead time; jobs outside of the cumulative lead time are created in MRP. If Clear the material requirement is fulfilled from stock and is not being planned as an assembly in MRP if not enough stock is available during the manufacturing lead time, then make sure the checkbox is cleared/unchecked.
If you are seeing different results, you may want to log a call with Epicor support to determine the issue.
Thanks for sharing your experience and questions! I hope I could help in some small way.
@RMI gives us more info on this 10.1.500.26 fix =)
Desc: Schedule - MRP and Scheuling errors; does not schedule jobs / operation details
Have you received any help on this matter? We are currently experiencing an MRP issue where if we set a Safety Stock of a specific part, MRP will create a bad job with no materials or operations and it prevents MRP from running on other parts. If i set the safety stock below 6, we get good jobs. Anything above 6 causes the issue. So far Epicor has stated that we would need an open order with MfgJobType set to Manufactured but that is not the case as in my testing, we still got bad jobs. I am able to run MRP on this part without any open order and the job that gets created is to make the safety stock. We are pretty perplexed by this situation
When I saw “Laxities” I thought it said “Laxatives”
Which reminds me that some dilemmas are so bad, they should be called “dilenemas”.
Those are issues that you know, no matter what choice you make, you will end up producing lots of sh!t
Don’t want to talk out of school here, but we’ve identified a constraint functionality issue that extends through most versions of Epicor 8, 9 and 10.
Confirmed this with an Epicor-selected consultant, no resolution yet. Since we’re on 8, we’re suffering through it, but we expect resolution as part of our planned upgrade to 10.
Could you possibly elaborate on that? We are on 10.1.500.20.
Have you tried marking your sub level parts as “Constrained” materials? In theory, if they are constrained, then MRP will not allow the top level job to start until the sub-level materials are available (or scheduled to be available).
We do have sub level parts listed as “Constrained” materials. We manufacture each part so each material is typically listed as Plan as Assembly. If it is a Phantom Part, it will be listed as Pull as Assembly. It is odd to us that this only occurs when we have a Safety Stock of 6 or more so it appears to me that it could be a combination of our Lead Times and Safety Stock of Sub Level Parts maybe preventing availability of parts