This website is not affiliated with, sponsored by, or approved by SAP AG.

Repetitive Manufacturing Mid Point Component Backflush

Logistics : PP

Moderators: Snowy, thx4allthefish, Ha Tran

Repetitive Manufacturing Mid Point Component Backflush

Postby kirkupm » Fri Dec 24, 2010 10:03 am

I am currently using SAP 4.7 where it is not possible to backflush yield at a reporting point to deduct the component stock up until that point without having the bom and routing split out into a mid point bom/routing and then a final bom/routing.

I want to be able to have the full routing in one place although it doesnt matter if the bom is in more than one level because I can have that set to a phantom so the components of the lower level can be allocated to operations of the top level.

I would like to know is it possible to configure ECC6 differently to 4.7 which seems to be limited to my requirements.

Any information would be greatly welcomed.

Mark
Last edited by kirkupm on Mon Feb 10, 2014 9:35 am, edited 1 time in total.
kirkupm
 
Posts: 30
Joined: Tue Dec 05, 2006 5:30 pm

Re: ECC6 Repetitive Mid Point Backflush

Postby Sharpshooter » Thu Jan 06, 2011 1:02 pm

Mark,

We do this on ECC6 and have done it since 4.5 & 4.6 days. Nothing has changed AFAIK.
When a reporting point is confirmed, all components allocated to that operation (or a previous one) or not allocated to any specific operation, are backflushed. We have phantom subassemblies whose components are backflushed.
Maybe I'm not understanding your situation?
Good luck!
Sharpshooter
 
Posts: 1171
Joined: Wed Mar 17, 2010 12:01 pm
Location: In the dark

ECC6 Repetitive Mid Point Backflush

Postby kirkupm » Mon Feb 10, 2014 8:28 am

I am revisting this topic for another reason but during testing I am finding that if a confirmation is done at say Operation 0120 the system only backflushes the components for that operation and not for the previous operation(s) where components are allocated. I have tried several test scenarios and it appears to me that Repetitive Manufacturing is no very flexible with confirmations like the production orders work. With production orders if an earlier confirmation has not took place the later confirmation also backflushes components for the previous operations as well.

I have tried various different parameters in the REM profile but still can't get the system to work like I need it to, any further advise would be greatly appreciated.
kirkupm
 
Posts: 30
Joined: Tue Dec 05, 2006 5:30 pm

Re: Repetitive Manufacturing Mid Point Component Backflush

Postby Sharpshooter » Mon Feb 10, 2014 11:05 am

I suspect the use of incorrect control keys or control key settings. The reporting point must have a milestone operation (Confirmations = '1'). Previous operations you want to get confirmed when a later reporting point is confirmed must not be Milestone or confirmations required (Confirmations = '1' or '2').
As I stated previously, I have use reporting point functionality since 4.5 and it works flawlessly.
Good luck!
Sharpshooter
 
Posts: 1171
Joined: Wed Mar 17, 2010 12:01 pm
Location: In the dark

Repetitive Manufacturing Mid Point Component Backflush

Postby kirkupm » Tue Feb 11, 2014 4:30 am

It's been many years since I have looked at this in detail and after doing some more testing this morning I agree fully that the confirmation control keys are what need to be changed to find the solution. So far I was able to modify the control keys to confirm yield and backflush previous operation(s) components but now I have a problem because when we are scrapping we do this at any operation in the routing and not just the normal confirmation points.

I need to test this further to come up with a solution where we can confirm yield to backflush components up until and including that operation but still be able to post scrap at any operation and backflush the components.

I now remember doing this kind of testing when I raised the original question and wasn't able to set the control keys to deal with the yield and scrap scenario's.

If you have a similar scenario from your experience and have a solution to this then any more advice would be welcomed.
kirkupm
 
Posts: 30
Joined: Tue Dec 05, 2006 5:30 pm

Re: Repetitive Manufacturing Mid Point Component Backflush

Postby Sharpshooter » Tue Feb 11, 2014 7:53 am

Scrap in repetitive can get ugly. I see 2 options for you:
1) Use optional reporting points and instill discipline in the process to force what you consider "mandatory" reporting points.
2) With mandatory reporting points, when posting the scrap at a reporting point, manually adjust the activities as necessary to reflect the actual case.

I am not a fan of elaborate scrap reporting anyway - When the business gets all wrapped up in this, I like to tell them "If you put half as much effort into scrap avoidance as you want me to put into a scrap reporting system, the business will be money ahead by a factor of 10".

Dave
Good luck!
Sharpshooter
 
Posts: 1171
Joined: Wed Mar 17, 2010 12:01 pm
Location: In the dark

Repetitive Manufacturing Mid Point Component Backflush

Postby kirkupm » Tue Feb 11, 2014 8:29 am

The problem we have is all of the REM confirmations are done via an EDI interface with our traceability system so we can't do any manual modifications because all that gets sent is a material number, quantity, reporting point and scrap reason code (obviously for scrap only).

The other problem is whilst the data capture points in the traceability system will work the majority of the time there will be some instances where the information does not get captured, for example if there is an issue with a bar code being read by one of the machines it will not have the required information to send to SAP via the IDOC. This is why I wanted the final confirmation to act as a mop up in case any previous confirmations had somehow been missed to ensure that the parts are all completely backflushed. I expect these instances to be very few but it is something that I must cover before introducing additional reporting points.

I know we have options where we can split the BOM's and Routing's into more sub assembly materials or optionally have two production versions and routings to handle both scenarios but I'm not comfortable going down either of those routes at this point.

I will continue to work on this and let you know what solution I come up with as I would expect at some point someone will have the same problems.

Mark
kirkupm
 
Posts: 30
Joined: Tue Dec 05, 2006 5:30 pm

Re: Repetitive Manufacturing Mid Point Component Backflush

Postby Sharpshooter » Tue Feb 11, 2014 8:54 am

Interesting scenario -

Since whatever system generates the IDOC will enforce which reporting points require confirmation, my option 1 should generally work.
As far as the "mop up" situation is concerned, have you looked at the function for "Backflushing reporting points subsequently"? When you tick this field, a RP backflush will also confirm missing confirmations from previous reporting points as necessary - of course if you use optional reporting points, this happens automatically. The PP-REM documentation has all the details.

Dave
Good luck!
Sharpshooter
 
Posts: 1171
Joined: Wed Mar 17, 2010 12:01 pm
Location: In the dark

Repetitive Manufacturing Mid Point Component Backflush

Postby kirkupm » Wed Feb 12, 2014 5:57 am

I've looked at the PP-REM documentation and chose the option "Follow-up posting of previous reporting point quantities" in the details tab and my control key for all routing operations and the REM profile is set to mandatory confirmation.

Even with the above set up the system is still only backflushing the components at the operation entered and not at the previous operations as expected.

If I can get the system to work like the "Post scrap up to RP currently being backflushed" option then this would meet our requirement.

I have tried every different option available in the REM profile and control keys in the routing operations but at the moment can only get the system to work with the yield scenario I need OR the scrap scenario that we already currently use. Going back to your comments about using REM for scrap management we may have to decide to completely change that process to accommodate our yield requirement which I can get working by setting mandatory reporting points for where the components are allocated and making the other routing operations not possible to confirm against.

I will go back to the drawing board :(
kirkupm
 
Posts: 30
Joined: Tue Dec 05, 2006 5:30 pm


Return to Logistics PP

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Exabot [Bot] and 4 guests





loading...


This website is not affiliated with, sponsored by, or approved by SAP AG.