MRP Logic Blank Title 54686

That does seem to be the case. In some cases, and I'm still looking
for the trigger, the system will issue an
expedite/postpone 'suggestion'. If you lock the scheduling priority
on the job, then it will also leave the dates alone.
The reason that we were not doing these things already is that when
we went live originally, the lock boxes caused MRP to completely
ignore locked jobs and to generate new plans for all demand. As
that was clearly not what we wanted, we abandoned it. The
functionality does seem to work correctly now, at least in the 810C
patch...



--- In vantage@yahoogroups.com, "wmr_44129" <wrupert@...> wrote:
>
> Joe,
> We use the quantity lock feature as you have, to eliminate MRP
> quantity change suggestions on firm jobs. But you mention here the
> job schedules lock as well. The help text seems to indicate that
it
> only locks out changes when running the global finite and load
> leveling tools. Does that lock work to elimiate date change
> suggestions made by an MRP run?
>
> Thanks,
> Bill (Long-time-lurker / first-time-poster)
>
>
>
>
> --- In vantage@yahoogroups.com, "Joe Rojas" <jrojas@> wrote:
> >
> > Well, I don't have an answer for you but we have experienced
these
> same
> > kind of issues.
> >
> > We found that we had to lock job schedules and lock job
quantities
> in
> > order to work around this.
> >
> > This tells MRP that we are going to do what the job says to do
and
> when
> > it says to and to not make any suggestions for this job.
> >
> >
> >
> > I major pain but it helps.
> >
> >
> >
> > Thanks,
> >
> > Joe Rojas
> >
> > IT Manager
> >
> > TNCO, Inc.
> >
> > 781-447-6661 x7506
> >
> > jrojas@
> >
> >
> >
> > ________________________________
> >
> > From: vantage@yahoogroups.com [mailto:vantage@yahoogroups.com]
On
> Behalf
> > Of progress92000
> > Sent: Thursday, February 08, 2007 4:49 PM
> > To: vantage@yahoogroups.com
> > Subject: [Vantage] Re: MRP Logic
> >
> >
> >
> > So do I. I would like to understand it as well.
> > Thanks,
> > Nam
> > --- In vantage@yahoogroups.com <mailto:vantage%
40yahoogroups.com> ,
> > "cpsadp" <cpsadp@> wrote:
> > >
> > > Hi,
> > >
> > > We've spent extensive time trying to figure out the logic
behind
> why
> > > MRP plans like it does. Sometimes it suggests we increase or
> reduce
> > a
> > > job that's already been firmed, in fact is already in
production
> and
> > > beyond being able to be changed. Other times it does not. The
> real
> > > problem with that is that when it makes a
> > > reduce/increase "suggestion", the system assumes that you will
> do it,
> > > and it plans our raw material ordering accordingly. So now
we're
> > > overbuying material unless we stop and check every step of the
> way.
> > >
> > > Anyway: I've found no detailed explanation of how/why MRP
plans
> the
> > > way it does, and I'd truly like to understand it.
> > >
> > > Amy
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> >
>
Hi,

We've spent extensive time trying to figure out the logic behind why
MRP plans like it does. Sometimes it suggests we increase or reduce a
job that's already been firmed, in fact is already in production and
beyond being able to be changed. Other times it does not. The real
problem with that is that when it makes a
reduce/increase "suggestion", the system assumes that you will do it,
and it plans our raw material ordering accordingly. So now we're
overbuying material unless we stop and check every step of the way.

Anyway: I've found no detailed explanation of how/why MRP plans the
way it does, and I'd truly like to understand it.

Amy
So do I. I would like to understand it as well.
Thanks,
Nam
--- In vantage@yahoogroups.com, "cpsadp" <cpsadp@...> wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> We've spent extensive time trying to figure out the logic behind why
> MRP plans like it does. Sometimes it suggests we increase or reduce
a
> job that's already been firmed, in fact is already in production and
> beyond being able to be changed. Other times it does not. The real
> problem with that is that when it makes a
> reduce/increase "suggestion", the system assumes that you will do it,
> and it plans our raw material ordering accordingly. So now we're
> overbuying material unless we stop and check every step of the way.
>
> Anyway: I've found no detailed explanation of how/why MRP plans the
> way it does, and I'd truly like to understand it.
>
> Amy
>
Well, I don't have an answer for you but we have experienced these same
kind of issues.

We found that we had to lock job schedules and lock job quantities in
order to work around this.

This tells MRP that we are going to do what the job says to do and when
it says to and to not make any suggestions for this job.



I major pain but it helps.



Thanks,

Joe Rojas

IT Manager

TNCO, Inc.

781-447-6661 x7506

jrojas@...



________________________________

From: vantage@yahoogroups.com [mailto:vantage@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf
Of progress92000
Sent: Thursday, February 08, 2007 4:49 PM
To: vantage@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [Vantage] Re: MRP Logic



So do I. I would like to understand it as well.
Thanks,
Nam
--- In vantage@yahoogroups.com <mailto:vantage%40yahoogroups.com> ,
"cpsadp" <cpsadp@...> wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> We've spent extensive time trying to figure out the logic behind why
> MRP plans like it does. Sometimes it suggests we increase or reduce
a
> job that's already been firmed, in fact is already in production and
> beyond being able to be changed. Other times it does not. The real
> problem with that is that when it makes a
> reduce/increase "suggestion", the system assumes that you will do it,
> and it plans our raw material ordering accordingly. So now we're
> overbuying material unless we stop and check every step of the way.
>
> Anyway: I've found no detailed explanation of how/why MRP plans the
> way it does, and I'd truly like to understand it.
>
> Amy
>





[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Joe,
We use the quantity lock feature as you have, to eliminate MRP
quantity change suggestions on firm jobs. But you mention here the
job schedules lock as well. The help text seems to indicate that it
only locks out changes when running the global finite and load
leveling tools. Does that lock work to elimiate date change
suggestions made by an MRP run?

Thanks,
Bill (Long-time-lurker / first-time-poster)




--- In vantage@yahoogroups.com, "Joe Rojas" <jrojas@...> wrote:
>
> Well, I don't have an answer for you but we have experienced these
same
> kind of issues.
>
> We found that we had to lock job schedules and lock job quantities
in
> order to work around this.
>
> This tells MRP that we are going to do what the job says to do and
when
> it says to and to not make any suggestions for this job.
>
>
>
> I major pain but it helps.
>
>
>
> Thanks,
>
> Joe Rojas
>
> IT Manager
>
> TNCO, Inc.
>
> 781-447-6661 x7506
>
> jrojas@...
>
>
>
> ________________________________
>
> From: vantage@yahoogroups.com [mailto:vantage@yahoogroups.com] On
Behalf
> Of progress92000
> Sent: Thursday, February 08, 2007 4:49 PM
> To: vantage@yahoogroups.com
> Subject: [Vantage] Re: MRP Logic
>
>
>
> So do I. I would like to understand it as well.
> Thanks,
> Nam
> --- In vantage@yahoogroups.com <mailto:vantage%40yahoogroups.com> ,
> "cpsadp" <cpsadp@> wrote:
> >
> > Hi,
> >
> > We've spent extensive time trying to figure out the logic behind
why
> > MRP plans like it does. Sometimes it suggests we increase or
reduce
> a
> > job that's already been firmed, in fact is already in production
and
> > beyond being able to be changed. Other times it does not. The
real
> > problem with that is that when it makes a
> > reduce/increase "suggestion", the system assumes that you will
do it,
> > and it plans our raw material ordering accordingly. So now we're
> > overbuying material unless we stop and check every step of the
way.
> >
> > Anyway: I've found no detailed explanation of how/why MRP plans
the
> > way it does, and I'd truly like to understand it.
> >
> > Amy
> >
>
>
>
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>