We have a drawing for a material that is needed on a part. The drawing specifies the material meets a mil-spec, and has a suggested product and supplier. The drawing is Rev E. Any change to the rev could change the mil-spec and the suggested product/supplier.
We have two part numbers in the system that are almost equivalent.
ABC-1234 is the specific part number for the material that meets the spec.
123-12345 rev E is the specific part number our drawings call out. Right now, rev E calls out ABC-1234 as the material suggested.
We have both part numbers in the system because some methods require specifically the ABC-1234 part, while other parts require any material that fulfills the drawing 123-12345 Rev E.
In reality this is all the same lube. I want to keep our inventory clean and simple. So I want to inactivate one of these parts and make the engineers use only one of them.
What is the right way to setup this part? I think we need some kind of internal part number. Iâd like it to be the number printed on the container of lube. (ABC-1234)
I think there is a way to do this with part cross references, but I am not sure the correct approach.
Purchased. I agree, I hate revving a purchased part. Between this and @hackaphreakaâs comment, you can clearly see the disconnect.
We could in theory order the material and receive it under both part numbers. Even though it is literally the same stuff. I donât want two cans of the same lube with different part numbers!
But you do have two cans with different non-interchangeable critical use cases, otherwise youâd have the same can for both. In most of reality itâs the same thing, but in the end itâs the customerâs reality that matter.
If revisions differentiated the two products adequately enough, different part numbers wouldnât matter, but Epicorâs revisions arenât really built like that. There are too many defaulting opportunities, too much âmake-sureâ user requirement, and it doesnât reflect alignment with cost differences, inventory partitioning, and engineering.
Briefly, but I am not sure the best way to implement it given this kind of scenario.
We did receive two cans, but they are both the same exact material. They are interchangeable. It is the part numbers that are not interchangeable.
I will try to use more realistic numbers:
The material in question is Kluberpaste HEL- 46-450. We order as HEL 46-450. The drawing is 123-12345 Rev E says that HEL 46-450 is suggested product, but I guess we technically could use anything that meets that spec.
I forget the exact steps, but if you mark one part as Run Out and then put the other part as the alternate, MRP wonât give suggestions for the Run Out. Plus, I think it does a pop up when entering the part that says it is on Run Out.
This is why I state that you should not use the supplier part number on your drawings or in your inventory system. Companies should create their OWN part numbers and then assign the supplier part number in the supplier price list.
For example, your supplier has HEL 46-450 as their part number, but you can call this anything you want â4260-1647-01â⌠then in the supplier part, you can still reference HEL 46-450âŚ
FURTHERMORE, there are situations where you might have your own part, you SUPPLIER might have a different part, and then they are just a distributor for multiple manufacturersâŚ
So below, we have ONE PART NUMBER that can be referenced in your BOMs⌠but it actually represents four different manufactured parts from two different suppliers. This can be all done within Kinetic.
BUT ALSO⌠Part Numbering now (as of a few releases ago) can include quantity tracking to the Part Revision level, and you can also specify the revision of the part that is to be used directly in the BOM⌠so if you DO need to have part # / Revision specific inventory tracking and inventory usage, we now support that in Kinetic without the need to create new part nubmers for each revision.
This is a great use of dynamic part attributes. Create 2 planning sets and you are good to go. refer the the right attribute set in each masters. An attribute class with a single attribute is probably the best case scenario for tracked dynamic attributes with planning sets .
I am curious about this as we donât use dynamic part attributes. Can you tell me more? Or do you know which user guide might have this information? Thank you!
you need to have advanced UOM, if this is the case, create a attributte class with type basic. you then create a single attribute master of type combox box. you then add those choices in a list.The attribute master need to be selected as MRP . the attribute , in the specific class, need to be available as planning set . You then add that attribute set to your part and select track attribute . THe part is now 2 parts in reality but under the same part number as different planning set . you would need to change the PO report to show your attributes.
