Is there any way to pair resources across resource groups on operations to say that when one resource in a group is scheduled on an operation, it must be scheduled with a specific resource in another group if both groups are required? For example, if I have a Saw resource group that contains Saw 1 and Saw 2 and a Punch Press resource group that contains Punch Press 1 and Punch Press 2, is there any way to say that on an operation that requires both the Saw resource group and the Punch Press resource group, that if Saw 1 is scheduled, then Punch Press 1 must be scheduled with it and if Saw 2 is scheduled, then Punch Press 2 must be scheduled with that resource? The practical reason for this is because Saw 1 and Punch Press 1 are set up in effectively a line and the same thing with Saw 2 and Punch Press 2. If I have an operation that requires one saw and one punch press, and I don’t care which one, I don’t want the scheduling engine to schedule Saw 1 and Punch Press 2 together.
I also can’t set up Saw 1 and Punch Press 1 as a single resource and Saw 2 and Punch Press 2 as a single resource and lump them into a resource group called Saws and Punch Presses because I still need to be able to schedule the saws and punch presses independently. If Saw 1 and Punch Press 1 aren’t required at the same time on the same job, one operator might be working on one job on Saw 1 at the same time another operator is working on Punch Press 1 on another job. We have APS, so we’re not limited on the number of scheduling requirements we can add to an operation. I don’t think capabilities can help me here either. Is my best bet to use alternate methods? I don’t know enough about them to know how that would affect priority. I wouldn’t want MRP and the Scheduling Engine to be overloading an arbitrarily assigned primary method if I truly do not care which method is used. Additionally, it seems like it would be a lot of extra setup work; work that the concept of resource groups is supposed to eliminate.