Part Revisions in Multiplant

Epicor ERP 9
1

Hi All,

We are loading data into our new Epicor environment.
We are going from single plant to multi-plant.

When loading Part Revisions, I see that one of the required fields is Plant.
I’m trying to understand the implications of this?

If a revision has Plant A listed, can it be used in Plant B. For example, create can I create a job in Plant B based off of the part revision with Plant A listed?
As I type it, I believe the answer is no because the MOM on a revision could have an operation with a resource and resources are plant specific.

JOE ROJAS
Epicor Applications Manager
VENTION MEDICAL
A NORDSON COMPANY

261 Cedar Hill Street | Marlborough, MA 01752
DIRECT: 508.597.1392 x1625 | MOBILE: 774.826.9245
EMAIL: JoRojas@ventionmedical.commailto:JoRojas@ventionmedical.com | WEB: ventionmedical.com http://www.ventionmedical.com/

This communication may contain information that is confidential, proprietary or exempt from disclosure, and is intended only for the use of the individual and/or entity it is addressed to. If you are not the intended recipient, please note that any other dissemination, distribution, use or copying of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this message in error, please notify the sender immediately by telephone or by return e-mail, and delete this information from your computer.

2

Use one revision for all parts, add an alternate method so that each plant can have a separate Method.

Sales order entry can become difficult if you use separate revisions per plant. Unless you want separate revs per plant.

3

BE SURE TO:

  1. Each plant should have a PLANT COST ID!!!
    Plant A makes the same part as PLANT B (and may also procure similar raw materials at different cost!)

The PLANT COST ID will keep costing separate! (per plant)
2) unsure what release you are on… BUT (how are you loading data?)
Whether it’s DMT, or direct entry (years ago I fell on this knife)… be sure you are logged into the PLANT that requires the appropriate data!

  1. While you may be temped to call a similar RG the same name in Plant A and Plant B (YIKES)
    Initially, you’d say "heck it is easier to have similar MOM-ops and it will be less work to have similar names for the CNC or laser cutter… etc. The mom would call out the RG/Resource and ‘piece-of-cake’ Until there is the necessity to possibly bring the plants together OR send mfg-sections/depts. to the other plant permanently! [Epicor does offer a RG transfer capability, but… it is sensitive!]

For me… I was questioning the prior response per Alt-methods…
Are u using GLOBAL PARTS??? If Plant A is going to control Engineering… then I get it!
Plant A would create REV A thru eng-wkbench and have an Alt method for Plant B!

IF each site will be managing their OWM MOM’s… then the MOM is already plant specific, if logged into that PLANT during ENG-Wkbench!!!
Feedback from the experts appreciated!

Regards

4

Hi Joe,

Frankly, I hate to tell you this, but our biggest headaches with Epicor are due to 1. Serial numbers, 2. Multiplant manufacturing. Our problems dealing with multiplant are:

  1. transfer of subassemblies prior to supply job financial closing… causes accounting adjustments to be needed because inventory value not known at time of transfer.
  2. MRP not counting in-transit parts setup as transfer parts, thus making unneeded unfirm jobs and po suggestions to satisfy part that’s in transit
  3. alt methods not getting automatically selected for use by MRP when demand is on the alt method plant
  4. E10 method tracker not showing details of lower level parts that are manufacturing in another plant.
  5. E10 BOM not showing details of lower level parts that are manufactured in another plant.
  6. E10 not allowing lower level phantom parts to be pulled for jobs made in a different revision plant

I hope you are on E9 still. The E10 problems above did not exist for us on E9.
To date, (i.e., E10 go-live this past July 31 ) we have found many problems trying to deal with multiple revision plants since go live on 10.1. 600.5

Nancy

1 Like
5

Hello Nancy - Appears EPICOR moves ahead, but puts you behind!

Per your input, my response: [Currently not serializing or multi-plant… whew …using 10.1.440.22]

  1. Serial numbers, [Under impression ‘enhancements’ to serialization were to be bitter {I mean better} on 10.1.600… sorry for the rough pun]

  2. Multiplant manufacturing. Our problems dealing with multiplant are:
    transfer of subassemblies prior to supply job financial closing… [Cost method? If ‘last’ and Epi-processing is fowled, I might see how developers screwed this up in looking at only closed-job-cost, but JOB should not be completed or closed until FIN-folks are happy. Yet, any job should move part-cost either to STK, or to the other plant {geez Louise!}]

causes accounting adjustments to be needed because inventory value not known at time of transfer [Should be KNOWN! epi-coders pulling wrong cost-field?? Suggest TESTING a std-cost-part (unless that is your cost-method now)].
MRP not counting in-transit parts setup as transfer parts, thus making unneeded unfirm jobs and po suggestions to satisfy part that’s in transit [ understand the logic that should be in play… Epi-coders labeling in-transit parts as not-available. Is this a time-phase thing were parts are being transferred late? Quick-fix??? set-up a transfer-wse or bin at receiving plant and auto-receive transfer mtl the instant it ships from supplying plant, add INSP process to inbound parts to account for days of transfer along with dock-to-stock days movement, which will align timephase accordingly (until parts truly arrive]
alt methods not getting automatically selected for use by MRP when demand is on the alt method plant [BPM ???]
E10 method tracker not showing details of lower level parts that are manufacturing in another plant. [if a part is mfgered in another plant, isn’t it a purchased part (with a MOM)? …you’d need to customize the detailed output for any purchased part’s MOM]
E10 BOM not showing details of lower level parts that are manufactured in another plant.[ditto prior notation]
E10 not allowing lower level phantom parts to be pulled for jobs made in a different revision plant [ ditto continuation]

I hope you are on E9 still. The E10 problems above did not exist for us on E9.

[looks like aspects of E-10 were not comparatively audited and proven on E-10 per mlti-plant ! Best of luck!]
[/quote]

6

Quick side question regarding “transfer of subassemblies” in a multi-plant environment.

I’m under the impression that manufactured items (sub-assemblies and finished goods) must be received into stock before they can be transferred between plants. Thus requiring a Part mater record being created for every sub-assy or FG, even for the one-offs. Is this correct?

Right now wee need the following transactions MFG-STK, STK-PLT, PLT-STK, STK-CUS

A MFG-MFG (transfer from WIP of one plant to WIP of another) would be sweet.

Calvin

7

Hi Joe,I believe you need to use an Alternate Revision for the second plant. Most plant should have different resource and resourcegroup then the other plant. So you would be able to use the one revision for the part but an alternate for the other plant.

Larry Barriere barriere@polyvac.com W 603-626-3160

joerojas
September 27 |

Hi All,

We are loading data into our new Epicor environment.
We are going from single plant to multi-plant.

When loading Part Revisions, I see that one of the required fields is Plant.
I’m trying to understand the implications of this?

If a revision has Plant A listed, can it be used in Plant B. For example, create can I create a job in Plant B based off of the part revision with Plant A listed?
As I type it, I believe the answer is no because the MOM on a revision could have an operation with a resource and resources are plant specific.

JOE ROJAS
Epicor Applications Manager
VENTION MEDICAL
A NORDSON COMPANY

261 Cedar Hill Street | Marlborough, MA 01752
DIRECT: 508.597.1392 x1625 | MOBILE: 774.826.9245
EMAIL: JoRojas@ventionmedical.commailto:JoRojas@ventionmedical.com | WEB: ventionmedical.com http://www.ventionmedical.com/

This communication may contain information that is confidential, proprietary or exempt from disclosure, and is intended only for the use of the individual and/or entity it is addressed to. If you are not the intended recipient, please note that any other dissemination, distribution, use or copying of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this message in error, please notify the sender immediately by telephone or by return e-mail, and delete this information from your computer.

Visit Topic or reply to this email to respond.

You are receiving this because you enabled mailing list mode.

To unsubscribe from these emails, click here.