***** Long post alert *****
My colleague has been doing lots of work on MRP - we’re not using it at all currently, but have been testing a subset of parts with a view to using them as a springboard for all parts eventually. I think the timing of our product is pushing the boundary of base MRP, and wanted to get thoughts from people here if possible.
We’re a dairy manufacturer - our products get turned from raw materials (Milk/Skim/Skin Conc/Cream) into finished products in a maximum of 24 hours. The problem we’re having is getting MRP to put jobs next to each other on the same day, when there is plenty of resource availability. I think it’s because there are 3 jobs, and job 2 uses job 1 as a material, and job 3 uses job 2 as a material. I’ll try and demonstrate why it is that way, and why Pull as Assembly won’t do it for us.
Produce Pallecon (1 tonne capacity metal box pallet)
Consumes Raw materials (skim and cream)
Finished product is assigned a Lot Number for traceability, and to allow it to be tracked around our facility
Involves consuming the pallecon from Job 1 by Lot Number (Issue Material)
Also backflushes bottle, label, cap
Receipted to stock
Qty here might be say 3600 BTL
Produce shrink wrapped 6 packs of the above bottles
Backflushes BTL part num that was produced on Job 2
Multiple jobs at this step, 1 job = 1 pallet of stock = 300 packs
2 jobs required for the 3600 BTL produced in this example
Our typical schedule on this line would look like this:
Day 1 (Send liquid raw materials to incubation tank, add starter cultures, wait 8-10 hours for pH to develop - elapsed time 12 hours
Day 1 Pack above product into pallecon - elapsed time 1 hour
Day 2 Consume pallecon on production line, and there is a continuous flow from filling to capping, labelling, metal detecting, and then shrink wrapping.
At present it wants to have each job on a separate day, but Job 2 and 3 are all on the same line so happen concurrently.
We can’t ask the operator on the filling part of the line to issue materials to each “finished pallet” qty as per Job 3, because it’s just a continuous stream of bottles past a point. As they go, they issue material to the job and then when finished on that SKU can take a total bottle count and record production.
Through the other side of a hygiene barrier another operator is recording against Job 3, 4, etc each time they have a full pallet. For them it’s very easy to see the separate between jobs, but they have no idea what pallecon of base product is in the bottles - so they can’t do both parts of the recording activity.
The nice thing about recording both separate, is that the finished packs might end up at 600 (6 BTL per pack), but the high care team might have recorded that they actually made 3650 bottles - enables us to calculate yield and wastage of packaging.
Hopefully that kind of makes sense, and somebody fancies a little challenge to see if there is a way to configure MRP so that it is aware it can run Job 2 and 3 simultaneously and therefore schedules it that way.
Thanks if you’ve managed to read all the way day to this point!