In the previous post, I described that the item is the primary entity used in the connection between a PLM system and an ERP system. The initial definition comes from the engineering department, defining the main characteristics of the item, like ID (part number), Description and Classification Data for engineering usage.
Next when the item reaches a certain maturity stage, that it will be purchased or produced, the initial definition needs to be transferred to the ERP system and to be completed in ERP with logistical data. Often as part of the classification data, the engineer has already defined what type of item it will be. This information can be used in ERP to apply default data based on a certain template item or derived-from item.
Item identification / Part Number
Most of the manufacturing companies are using so called ‘intelligent’ part numbers to identify their items. This was done for historical reasons. As there was no IT system in the company, the part number contained logic and information in order to ‘immediately’ understand its usage.
For example M210-23-4-00-A3.C tells me immediately it is a manufactured part, first time used in the milling product line (210) and it is used for hydraulic (23), not in stock (4), a preferred item for engineering (00) and its definition can be found on the drawing with the same name, size A3 revision C.
If you did not understand this directly from the number, it does not mean you are not intelligent, although it is an intelligent part number. This shows that intelligent numbers are useful when people are trained and have a good memory. For everyone else in the company (and joining the company later) the number is initially the same as a meaningless number.
For that reason is is recommended to use ‘non-intelligent’ numbers to identify parts. This creates no overhead for people to learn all kind of intelligent numbering mechanisms and it pushes everyone to look to additional information which can be understood immediately, like the description or classification data. We have now IT systems like a PLM or ERP system that allows us to display more than a number.
For backwards tractability of course beside the new meaningless part number, there can be also a place holder in the IT system to define what the origin of the part was (with the intelligent part number). Specially when companies merge this will happen. The same part exists in different numbering schemes in each company. The only way to solve this is to add a new identifier, preferred to be the ‘non-intelligent’ number.
Conclusion: For part numbers it is recommended to use non-intelligent numbers based on a sequence, avoiding the creation of legacy information (merge) or training to understand the items by number.
Now the new created part has a meaningless identifier, we have achieved two things:
- The PLM and ERP system have unique key to share. Identifying this number with its revision (if relevant) immediately makes it clear for both the PLM and ERP system which part is meant.
- To understand what the item really does, we need to understand additional information like its description
Note
Description / Classification
Initially when an item is defined the engineer might create a description, like HYDRAULIC CLAMP without any further details. Some years later there might be 10 or more hydraulic clamps in the system, where some of them might be identical and others differ. However the description HYDRAULIC CLAMP might be sufficient for a part list to be shipped to a customer (we do not want the customer to know the exact item characteristics in order to have him order the spare parts through us).
Often on the engineering side an additional description field is added, which is a detailed description. This description is used internally and should be standardized in order to support the engineer to select the right item.
So HYDRAULIC CLAMP could have an internal definition HYDRAULIC CLAMP 400-600 describing its usage. This detailed description should be either enforced and generated by the PLM or should be handled through a librarian or standardization role in engineering. This should be combined with a classification of the new item. The advantage of a detailed description and classification is two-fold:
- It supports engineers to search for existing items – so reuse is more likely. Often the description in the ERP system was not built in this way and for that reason engineers re-invent items while they might exist.
- The classification will alert the engineer or librarian that an item with the same classification characteristics already exists. This means it might be identical or an additional classification characteristic is needed to differentiate the two items.
The definition of a new item would go through the following steps:
- The engineer defines the description and can work with the item in a temporary mode as he is not sure of using the new item in this way
- The item becomes mature and he needs to generate the detailed description.
- At this stage the librarian or a standardization committee might come in, to analyze the need for the new item. And if so to define all its classification data, knowing it is a new and unique item needed.
- Once the engineering definition is completed, the item definition can be send to the ERP system in order to complete it with logistical data – who can manufacture it and tens of attributes more. The item still is not released
- A hand-shake from the ERP system will confirm that the item definition is completed and as part of the release process the item can be approved for manufacturing. In case no pre-production stage exists it might be released even.
Conclusion: Standard Description, Detailed Description and Classification information is done on the PLM side to support reuse of items and to avoid creation of similar items with a different part number. The ERP systems uses the description definition and completes the definition with ERP required information. Data relevant for the engineering is synchronized back once the full definition is available.
The next post in this sequence will be discussing the BOM transfer to ERP
5 comments
Comments feed for this article
July 28, 2008 at 3:07 pm
Naeem
There are cases were the item is configured and created outside the PLM according to very restricted / complicated rules. Some ERP system have these abilities of configurations, such as Baan and SAP, where the item Id, structure, cost and routing process are all defined using configurators (sales and engineering configurators).
the question then is: Can PLM still be the item generator system, or we should be applying other methodologies where the item is imported to PLM from ERP/Configuration system?
LikeLike
July 29, 2008 at 5:23 pm
josvoskuil
I disagree with the statement the item is created outside PLM.
ERP systems using a configurator have two options:
1. Resolve a completly defined generic product. This means all items are available and defined. The configurator only add the configuration rules for what fits together and calculates delivery time and cost
2. A sales configurator might add new items as place holders in a product configuration, possibly with an estimated cost. To create the place holder in the structure the ERP system might generate a number and description. But no-one claims this is the ultimate definition. Only when engineering starts working on the defintion, they will create a top-item with the right master attributes (standardized description, classification info). The item generated by the ERP configurator can be considered a temporaty item
LikeLike
July 30, 2008 at 7:04 am
Neil
If it is a Sales Configurator then in my experience the rules within this will have been defined by design engineering in the first place. The configurator is simply ensuring the validity of what is offered to the customer so that re-use is made of existing items rather than requiring new items, and that existing constraints (both product and process) are not broken.
Perhaps you could explain the difference between sales and engineering configurators: isn’t a sales configurator a subset of the rule-base of an engineering configurator? If so then prime authorship must surely reside within the engineering function.
the question then is: Why/Does it matter whether we use a PLM application that is part of an ERP tool or a PLM tool to do this?
LikeLike
July 30, 2008 at 11:30 pm
josvoskuil
Although literature is not fully consistent around product configurators and sales configurators, i would define them as follows:
A product configurator allows you to define a product based on options / variants. In general all possibilties are defined by engineering
A sales configurator provides you with the capability of existing modules but also to add place holders for estimated functionality. This would be later defined by the engineering department in detail.
The question if it matters to use a PLM applicaiton that is part of ERP or to use a separate PLM system is for me easy to answer. ERP system are transactional systems. Extending them with PLM functionality will always be based on the transactional system concept. PLM is a complete different discipline complementary to ERP but with a different approach. Innovation and product IP management are complete different business. I believe PLM and ERP are two different disciplines, like CRM is another discipline. Instead of a unified system I guess customers want to use best of breed
LikeLike
August 15, 2008 at 7:18 am
Menk Slot
There is a difference between a Sales Configurator and a product configurator. A Sales configurator is only used for generating the modules of a product and this is used to define a Price and a Proposal. The result of a Sales Configurator is the input for the Product Configurator. In a lot of cases 80% of the BOM will be generated by the configurator and 20% still needs engineering. With the 20% engineering a lot of ERP Systems (like SAP) have problems.
For this the best solution will be to define the Product Configurator inside PLM, make the 20% Engineering and send the BOM to ERP.
I see the product rules also as part of the IP, so it has to be managed in the PLM System
LikeLike