Question

Workaround for Product Structure Error

  • 28 April 2021
  • 5 replies
  • 252 views
J
Rank
Userlevel 5
Badge +10
  • jtobin
  • Sidekick (Customer)
  • 117 replies

Hello,

 

@Cjoslin  Have you by any chance encountered something like this?  This is a question from LCL:

 

We are using IFS Apps 10, UPD9.  We have encountered an error and wonder if anyone has a suggestion for working around it that doesn’t involve creating a separate part number.

 

 

To build part A -  I need part B & C

To build part C – I need A & B

 

End Item :           PN (2472505)  92B-28; 92B-28 HIGH PRESSURE PILOT  25-75 PSIG SPRING RANGE  .  PILOTE A HAUTE PRESSION,  GAMME DE PRESSION 25-75 PSIG

 

Component :     PN (2472031)  92B-1.5-NPT-CI-SST-92B-5@15psig (92B-75)   

PN (2471990)   92B-1.5-NPT-CI-SST-92B-25@75psig (92B-78)

 

 

End ITEM: PN (2471990) - 92B-1.5-NPT-CI-SST-92B-25@75psig (92B-78)

 

Component:      PN (2472031) 92B-1.5-NPT-CI-SST-92B-5@15psig (92B-75)

PN (2472505) 92B-28; 92B-28 HIGH PRESSURE PILOT  25-75 PSIG SPRING RANGE  .  PILOTE A HAUTE PRESSION,  GAMME DE PRESSION 25-75 PSIG

 

 

 

Thank you,

Joann

This topic has been closed for comments

5 replies

A
Rank
Userlevel 4
Badge +7

I would have the same question as IFS does - trying to think how your scenario is even practically possible? Essentially, you need C to make A, and need A to make C. It is a vicious cycle isn’t it? How would the system even calculate the materials requirement? Say you need qty 100 of A, and you need 100 of C to make it, and then you need 100 of A to make 100 of C, but to make 100 of A, you need 100 of C again - now you already need 200 of C - and it keeps going on an infinite loop. Sounds more like a modern variant of the old “which came first - egg or hen” problem.

 

Sorry, I haven’t had the morning coffee yet, so probably I am bit hazy and not understanding something.

~hope is a good thing, maybe the best of things, and no good thing ever dies...
Pradeep de Alwis
Rank
Userlevel 4
Badge +7

Hi @jtobin ,

While theoretically such a structure may be possible, I find it very hard to imagine a practical scenario.
Maybe you can tell us a bit more of the context? However, I imagine it is a real exception even in your organization, if indeed it was not a user mistake.

As you can imagine, even if the product structure was possible, it may not be feasible to do material planning for such a part, as it could continue in an infinite loop.

Best Regards,

Pradeep

J
Rank
Userlevel 5
Badge +10

Hello, @asanka @Pradeep de Alwis 

Thank you both for your responses.  I have sent this feedback to the person requesting the information.

Best regards,

Joann

Pradeep de Alwis
Rank
Userlevel 4
Badge +7

Hi @jtobin and @kumar3vineet ,

There is, however, the possibility to include a circular reference in recipe structures. I did not refer to it earlier since Joann’s question was related to a product structure. 

In a recipe structure , you can create alternates other than the default one (*), which has the “rework” option enabled. This allows a part to be included in its own structure
 

 

@jtobin , I am not sure if this option would suite your scenario, but if you can give a bit more context of the business scenario in your case it may make a compelling idea for an enhancement to match the solution available in recipe structures.

Best Regards,

Pradeep
 

K
Rank
Badge +1

Hi @jtobin and @kumar3vineet ,

There is, however, the possibility to include a circular reference in recipe structures. I did not refer to it earlier since Joann’s question was related to a product structure. 

In a recipe structure , you can create alternates other than the default one (*), which has the “rework” option enabled. This allows a part to be included in its own structure vidmate apk instasave.onl

 

@jtobin , I am not sure if this option would suite your scenario, but if you can give a bit more context of the business scenario in your case it may make a compelling idea for an enhancement to match the solution available in recipe structures.

Best Regards,

Pradeep
 

Thanks for quick reply !

Terms & ConditionsCookie settings