Skip to main content

In our metal shop, we’re attempting to optimize raw material by producing parts that will consume full steel sheets. As an example, if we are producing A123, Quantity 50, we want to automatically produce Quantity 50 of B123. These two parts/quantities can be produced on one sheet of sheet.

 We looked at the byproduct receipt function, however we do not think that will work. To us, the byproduct receipt function is more for donuts and donut holes. If you are making a donut, you simply punch out the center and you have your finished product. In our example with steel the byproduct needs additional operations.

We looked into setting it up in the structure, however that doesn’t look like an option either.

Ideas that will help us make this work. Or are we chasing something that IFS Apps10 cannot accommodate?

I think you have two choices how to handle this in IFS:

  1. Define A123 as a main product with B123 as a By-Product
    • The BOM and routing of A123 must contain the material and operations to produce both A123 and B123
    • If you use weighted average cost, you can distribute the % of the cost for the operations and material from A123 to B123 
    • You can setup B123 to be visible as a supply in MRP
    • You can also mirror the setup so that B123 has a similar BOM and routing where A123 is the by-product
    • Note that by-products cannot be serial tracked
  2. Define A123 and B123 both as main products
    • Each part would have their own BOM that would include just the portion of the metal sheet that goes into the respective product.
    • Each part would also have their own routing. For the common operation where the metal sheet is consumed, you can use resource share to indicate that say just 50% of the resource capacity will be utilized to produce part A123 and hence, part A123 can be planned to utilize the resource simultaneously.
    • Separate shop orders would need to be created for A123 and B123, however, you can use an operation block to group the common operation where the metal sheet is consumed. The resource share can be used to plan the operation block, and you can also connect a common characteristic to A123 and B123 to easily identify that they can be combined into an operation block. 
    • In shop floor workbench you can scan the operation block barcode and start/stop the operations for A123 and B123 simultaneously (and time will be split). You can also select both operations and use the manual issue of operations material to issue 1 sheet of metal which will the be distributed between the two shop orders based on their planned quantity.

Dear sir,

Mentioned requirement can only be achieved by By-Product functionality only and there is no other such option available to produce two different Products from a single Shop Order irrespective of how many different raw materials are there.

As we know, By Product functionality gives option to distribute raw material(s) cost as well.

 

Regards,

Abdul Rehman 


Thanks for reply, Yes, By Product could be good solution if it supports serialized part as well but due to this limitation, we are not able to use the By Product solution. Now we are trying other options also


@Reeturaj What version are you on? From IFS Cloud 23R1 an onwards you can also define Disassembly Components as a part that is produced in addition to the main product. These are handled very similar to by-product, but does allow serial tracked parts.

Give it a try and let me know whether it fulfills your requirements!

 


Thanks, Bjonr for this update this looks a great option but unfortunately, we are currently at Apps10.


I think you have two choices how to handle this in IFS:

  1. Define A123 as a main product with B123 as a By-Product
    • The BOM and routing of A123 must contain the material and operations to produce both A123 and B123
    • If you use weighted average cost, you can distribute the % of the cost for the operations and material from A123 to B123 
    • You can setup B123 to be visible as a supply in MRP
    • You can also mirror the setup so that B123 has a similar BOM and routing where A123 is the by-product
    • Note that by-products cannot be serial tracked
  2. Define A123 and B123 both as main products
    • Each part would have their own BOM that would include just the portion of the metal sheet that goes into the respective product.
    • Each part would also have their own routing. For the common operation where the metal sheet is consumed, you can use resource share to indicate that say just 50% of the resource capacity will be utilized to produce part A123 and hence, part A123 can be planned to utilize the resource simultaneously.
    • Separate shop orders would need to be created for A123 and B123, however, you can use an operation block to group the common operation where the metal sheet is consumed. The resource share can be used to plan the operation block, and you can also connect a common characteristic to A123 and B123 to easily identify that they can be combined into an operation block. 
    • In shop floor workbench you can scan the operation block barcode and start/stop the operations for A123 and B123 simultaneously (and time will be split). You can also select both operations and use the manual issue of operations material to issue 1 sheet of metal which will the be distributed between the two shop orders based on their planned quantity.

 

Hi Björn,

thanks for this summary. I’ve got one question regarding the distribution of the cost for the option based on By-Products.

 

It is possible to distribute the cost of the operation per received By-Product by the filed illustrated below. How we are able to distribute costs related to the shared RM independently on the reported time on operations? In general, it can be in a different factor than in case of the reported time, but I have not found any setup on this. Neither on tab Produced Part, nor on tab Materials.

 

If this is possible only for the case of Dissasembly Components, then could You navigate me where?

 

Thanks for feedback in advance.

 

Best regards,

Zdenek B.
 

 


Reply