Hi, A customer needs to have the machine costs and operator costs seperated. This means that I have to make machine/work centers for employees, hence allowing to have them have better reporting (financial and production). Since they all operations will be exploded in the output journal, they can enter for example more employees hours when they want or less… Now, the employees work on the product at the same time as the machine does : it is not serial, but it is a parallel routing. If I take this option I need to create a dummy machine to allow me to set the operations in parallel. So you end up with strange looking routings full of DUMMY operations… Another option I looked at was to set it to serial and use the send ahaead quantity, which theoretically also should allow me to start operations on machines and employees “at the same time”. However I keep on locking Navision (not responding) when I use send ahead in 360 (standard Cronus). Anyone of you implemented this ever ?
Hi Gunther Could you not define the work centre/machine centre as the operation itself and use the line times as a definitive split between labour and machine time? For instance if operation 1 used machine centre A the timing could be set as follows: Set-up time: 60 minutes - Labour Run time: 12 minutes - Machine I am presuming you are using the scheduling functions or the capacity reporting that prevents any fudging of the serial routing - i.e. put the labour after the machine, and split the numbering with L and M prefixes (trouble is it doubles the perceived run time and skews your capacity [:D]) I have not had to put this in in this detail, but I will think about it.
Hi Gunther When you refer to the DUMMY operations, if you have one machine centre as the machine and another as the person and call them in a parallel format, no operations will be dummy, instead you will see the labour and the machine element in parallel. What part of the parallel approach does not work? Is it the fact you want to report on teh separation of labour and machines but only see the operations from a machine perspective? Am I confusing myself now? [:D]
I think I did not make myself very clear. The parallel scheduling of machines and operators is working but the routing lines require some kind of dummy operations to : 1) start the parallel routing 2) close the parallel sequence … which is kind of confusing, when you show something like that in a demo … routings messed up with dummies. Your setup/run - time split of labour/machines is a good idea, but will post everything to the same accounts, will be difficult to make decent reports, concurrent capacities will not work on setup times, … and more fun stuff. So guess we are stuck with parallel routings and dummy machine centers which allow us to define parallel operations (labour and machine times scheduled at same moment, allowing different postings, allowing reports to be split up into labour/machine efficiency ) ?
Hi Gunther I understand what you mean, but you can simply have these as a start operation with no time, leading to the parallel routing of the labout split. They could be considered dummy steps, but in reality you should be able to phrase these in a manner that are not, for example OP10 withdraw materials from stores next OP 20…30 OP20 forming machine OP30 forming labour OP40 book into stores. Anyway have a good weekend!
quote:
Originally posted by SBWEAVER
Hi Gunther I understand what you mean, but you can simply have these as a start operation with no time, leading to the parallel routing of the labout split. They could be considered dummy steps, but in reality you should be able to phrase these in a manner that are not, for example OP10 withdraw materials from stores next OP 20…30 OP20 forming machine OP30 forming labour OP40 book into stores. Anyway have a good weekend!
[:D]