Phantom BOM is on the subassy Part but sometimes we want it to not phantom upon get details. Is this possible?
I’m thinking we need two subassy parts one phantom and one not. Too bad phantom isn’t on the rev level.
What is the actual requirement for the two different behaviours?
Thanks for your reply.
We have subassys parts that were setup as Phantom because they’re more like optional mods to the top level. We want the mod easily managed on its own and easily added to the top MOM while also invisible on the job because we it won’t be made separately in practice.
Now what if we change our mind and wish to see it as assy on the top and/or plan it as assy?
Must we recreate the assy part and uncheck phantom or is there another way.
In my opinion, the easiest way to handle this would be with separate revs. I say easy, but it would actually be a lot of work to maintain.
Do you have configurator? This scenario is exactly what the configurator does.
1 Like
Thanks. No we have a 3rd party CPQ that we’re really happy with so configurator seems redundant. Yeah seems like duplicating the sunassy part (when if changed) and unchecking phantom may be the easiest if no other way.
Just to confirm, separate revs of the asm part one phantom, one not phantom isn’t a thing, correct?
So separate rev of top-part where one has asm as phantom and the other as not phantom still requires two asm parts, correct?
you could handle this with a minor mod, add a checkbox to the material detail called explode, and write a function that will explode the MOM.
This will allow exploding of non phantoms,
1 Like
That depends on what you mean by “change your mind” if that means “Going forward from here” just uncheck the phantom part checkbox and you’re fine.
If it’s just willy nilly, because it’s tuesday on the waning gibbons and I microwaved shrimp for lunch in the break room, so today I want to see it be “not phantom”… then no. Any system that is intended to automate and plan needs a plan to follow, and “it depends” will break any automation that you have in place. (FYI, I’m mostly joking to make a point, I’m sure you have better reasons than that, but still, it’s hard for everyone when things aren’t consistent)
You can manually collapse an assembly on a job, which basically turn it into a phantom by removing the assembly moving all of it’s operations, materials, and subassemblies to the next level up. So if you want to go the other way of “Sometimes phantom” you can manually change it when you want. But there isn’t any out of the box way to automate that, and you can’t undo that action without manually deleting the stuff and re-adding the assembly.
Also be careful about quantity per’s and double check that they end up correct if you do that. In the past there has been some bugs around that where things didn’t get multiplied correctly. I think they have them fixed, but I haven’t used it in so long, that I can’t say I’m sure.
Long story short, pick how you want to manage your stuff, and stick with it. “It depends” is a recipe for confusion and delay.
1 Like
Phantom parts behave as a placeholder, all components promote in the phantom to the next assembly above.
I have used part asm. setup as “Pull as Assembly” on the MOM and no operation linked on each material part in the MOM and this would function similar to phantom. Then each revision of this part asm could have a operation or not have an operation and the part asm could be produced/put into inventory.
The non-stock portion of phantom is challenging to deal with, which is why I did this configured approach to part asms as described above.