This content has been marked as final. Show 7 replies
Use an MPS if you want to modify the entries by "smoothing" them to whatever build plan you expect to execute. In other words, you would probably make items MPS planned if you make them and MRP planned if you buy them. The MPS items should have a demand time fence set up on them so that they don't get overwritten the next time you launch an MPS plan. Make sure to set the MPS parameters to Overwrite outside time fence and your smoothed MPS entries will be preserved.
As far as loading an MPS versus launching one, loading an MPS is just like loading and MDS, it simply copies the entries into the MPS. Launching on the other hand works like an MRP launch in that it offsets lead time, honors order modifiers, takes into account scheduled receipts and on hand balances etc before suggesting an MPS planned order.
Once the MPS plan is launched and then "smoothed" to represent your "build plan" you use that MPS as a demand input into your MRP plan. In esscence this syncs up your MRP plan (purchase plan) with the MPS (build plan)
There is no difference in functionality between an MPS workbench and an MRP workbench
Ok, so my conclusions are the following:
a) MPS is generally used for[b] independent demand items, that usually include finished goods. MPS is used to smooth the demand, adjusting quantities/dates/etc. in accordance with the desired production plan and the available capacity.
b) MRP should be used for dependent demand items only, that includes raw materials and subassemblies. So you can include both Make and Buy codes.
c) an MRP can have as demand origin and MDS or an MPS. If we use also MPS, I think it is maybe more correct to upload the MPS file itself.
I do not agree with your MRP approach : items in MPSHello...
or MRP plan can be either Made or Bought.
Roughly, MP's is for Independent demand (End
Items) , and MRP is for Dependant demand
(Sub-assembly and components).
I am intrigued by this discussion and seek sanity checks. I agree with the above rules/guidelines and have a context where I am working on three alternative scenarios to evaluate. All have to do with what is the best inventory replenishment strategy (minimize cost, maximize fleet uptime) in a fleet maintenance environment. The implementation is relatively new.
Currently we are running Oracle 11.5.2 and not using Order Management. In addition, a separate shop floor job execution system is used to generate and manage shop WIP for executing vehicle maintenance work.
Fleet maintenance jobs are discrete and consume individual items per maintenance plan based on mileage levels, i.e. 50K, 100K, 200K, 300K etc. Misc transactions are used to consume inventory for shop jobs at an item level.
On a regular basis "stuff" happens and a down vehicle is brought in for repair which can include some of the components that are part of maintenance "kits". Forecasting is not working well and the objective is to use the available tools to better forecast and manage inventory and depot facilities.
Maintenance "Kits" are defined that pull together individual components to support the Maintenance Plan (MP). There is a question whether the Kits should be considered Independent or Dependent. My view is that the MP works like a MPS and that the Kits would be dependent demand. The components (all level 1) are more independent demand. With this, the Kit becomes more of a "phantom" assembly for tracking purposes.
Rather than blather on... Three scenarios to evaluate for adoption as a primary material forecasting/planning strategy. Here are the options (sorry, not able to send pictures).
1) All items are independent, de-emphasize kits and use demand classes to track inventory and Kit consumption trends.
2) Mirror the MP with an associated MPS and use to forecast Kit demand. Kits would be built as phantoms.
3) Same as number 2 but structure the Kit BOMS to be setup like Model/Option with a strategy to follow a vehicle system approach. This would not be based on milage but more on vehicle systems like fuel, power, electrical, etc. Perhaps a hierarchy can be combined depending on the MP requirements.
This probably seems like a "stream of conciousness", however any thoughts you can share would be appreciated! I am looking for your opinions on how these evaluations could be setup and measured in our existing environment.
There is no hard and fast rule to say only Dependent Demand to Plan in MRP and Independent Demand to in MPS.
MPS: It is basically applicable where you want to drive your manufacturing facility according to capacity what you can do. In turn this Plan will be input for MRP(which may have sub assembly or any bought-outs..etc).
But Please revember that, you Production schedule should not have any much fluctuation in time and it is steady enough to follow.Using MPS, you will smooth the load and freeze the Plan.
Say for example, There is a Demand in MPS. and it is input schedule to MRP as well as. Due some reasons, the Demand in MPS is no longer needed.(let us have reason may be anything.). In this case, if the planner is seeking what steps to be take on exising released schedules. however MRP will still drive to buy the lower lever it will not suggest you to cancel. more danger!!!!
In Todays context, MRP is good for all kind of things and no need to define MPS. Except the industry like Project type or where there is no much fluctuation in demand , can follow MPS.
This discussion is quite interesting, but is out of an Oracle forum scope.
In fact, you are right about MPS modification not reflected in an MRP plan. This is technically right. But in a Planning process point of view (such as MRP2 logic), it would be a nonsense to change the MPS and not refresh the MRP.
But keep in mind these points :
- MRP is a Planning process, not an Execution process and last minute changes will not be necessarily applied on plan
- it is not stability of the production level which allows to use a planning system, but a planning system which helps to have a better control on production levels.
- logic used for planning process are specific to company requirements, perhaps in your company you do not need MPS, but it can not be applied to all companies.
If the Business depends on purly what we produce and we can sell then MPs is best. In todays context it is gone. We need to respond to customer even for small change and we need tochange the Production flow according to what we can sell.
I did implementation for 5 companies with MRP and removed the MPs. They are still in MPR> .....all r MNS's.They are quite agreed.