Evert Bos Technical Fellow

We have gotten used to the double approval and the activation of BOMs and Route as if it is a normal thing. But after many years working with customers I have never seen any useful use of it. It adds non value added steps, especially the double approval is really a pain and has no link with any business scenario. Why would I approve a BOM but NOT approve the BOM version? Same for routing. Without much redesign here is a simple idea to make life a lot easier and user friendlier: allow that approve and activate to happen in batch.This is most urgent for Routings as they are typically not imported from an engineeringsystem. Companies that create many new routes, because new part numbers come in from the engineering system, would really benefit from a batch for the approval and activation of routings.

The vendor production order can be created manually or automatically by putting an assembly or a mfg item in the BOM with line type "vendor". We want a third way to create them: via firming of planned production orders. This is a more natural way in my view. The buyers are responsible for these production orders, they will filter them out of the planned production orders , for example because the routing-id is intelligent and shows that it is outsourced labor. Then the firming should allow an option to a vendor production order. This would be a very tiny adjustment of the logic. THen in the PRoduction order grid we have a very easy way to filter these vendor production orders for the buyers, and the production supervisors can filter the vendor prod orders out.

The wizard called "Maintain resource requirements" should not be showing as a choice in the routing. It is a mass update thing and should only be in the periodic menu choices. Because the wording is so simlar to the tab "resource requirements" the user may be tempted to click on the wizard instead of on the tab. It is really a mistake to have this mass update function showing in every routing. The idea is simple: remove it.

When I have a number of fixed variants for a prod master I proceed to define a BOM and a route for each. THese are very similar BOM's and Routes, naturally, but they are having different times and net quantities. Each variant has a distinct BOM and Route, and that is what the system expects, we thought. We have checked the box 'cost price by variant' = yes. In our opinion , with this box checked, it is crystal clear that the user will define different BOM's and Routes for each variant. WIht the box not checked, one could conceive that the BOM and Route for each variant is the same (still not very likely in the real world). We have the box checked. We create a BOM while sitting on a variant. And the config id we are on is NOT popping in. We have to enter it manually. Same for Route. That seems very strange to us. THe user can easily put the wrong config id in because while in the BOM screen you do not see "which variant you are working on". You have to write it down. THis is very user unfriendly and risky behavior of the software. OUR IDEA: -when the box "cost price per variant" - yes, pop in automatically the config id you are sitting on while creating a BOM or routing.

I am starting to beg. I have asked for this before. No answer. In the "create Released product" screen , the field "Reservation hierarchy" is instantly added when I select a Storage dim group that has advanced warehousing checked. That is how it should be. The Unit sequence group field should also pop up. That is a mandatory field. But this does not happen. This is very bad. This has to be fixed. I create a new item and a critical field is blank .

This is a very old request that goes back to the beginning of AX 2012 when the item type no longer indicated whether an item was make or buy but you had to go to default order parameters. This created instant problems (1) - I cannot easily filter on Make versus BUy items anymore. I need a join. (2) - When I use item templates (and all customers do) it is no longer possible to create a MFG item from a template. The default order type is out of reach for the item template because that supporting table is not part of the template. Number 2 is really disastrous and every customer has strongly objected to this, yet nothing was done. Here is another attempt to convince you this is really important and has to be fixed.

The COPY option for Prod BOM and Prod Route is important functionality. It is however close to unusuable because of the unreasonable restrictions on order status. It is very real life to have the need for COPY BOM or COPY ROUTE when the prod order is in estimated status or scheduled status. The system only allows COPY when status is created. This is unnecessarily strict. Prod orders are typically already in scheduled status when they emerge after firming. I should not have to reset status to do a BOM copy or a Route copy. THe system should only object to the copy when the order is "started". The standard logic to 're-estimate' and 're-schedule' that kicks in after BOM change or Route change is perfect. If I copy BOM or Route, it will ask for re-estimate and re-schedule, THere is no risk whatsoever removing these status restrictions. (we have done it many times as a customization, no problems)

Once production orders are in started status, one typically does not want to increase their quantity. Materials have been reserved and most likely already consumed partially, and hours could have been posted. MRP does not know anything about prod order status. It will cheerfully suggest to increase the quantity of a production order, no matter what the status. This idea wants to change this and make the behaviour more intelligent. I don't want increase messages for started prod orders. I only want them for prod orders in lesser status then started. This is an additional parameter that can be added to the coverage groups.

We always needed a where - used look up for routings , for example this : -Show me all routing steps that have Resource or Resource group XYZ. -Show me all routing steps for Finished good item 1234 that have resource or resource group XYZ (search all subassembly routings below this finished good item, so use the BOM to browse through routings) THere is a wizard to UPDATE resource requirements but that one is company wide and has no part number selection. It also is built to change something. We dn't want to change anything. We just want to know. Please consider this where-used functionality. For BOM's it is a necessity, each ERP system has a where used for BOM's. For Routings it is very important also, especially for companies that have complex products with many routings on many BOM levels.

Manufacturing companies always ask about a "costed BOM". We have the cost details screen in the Cost calculation screen that has all the info of the "costed BOM", material , labor overhead. But it is user unfriendly. It has a number of flaws that make it hard to use. 1.For setup labor cost, the rate per hour that is used in the calc. is not displayed for some strange reason. There is blank. That has to be fixed. 2.The Labor cost coming out of routing steps is not displaying below the MFG Item the routing is attached to. The routing lines get a level number that is the MFG Part number's level + 1. So you would expect that the item on level 4, displayed above labor cost lines on level 5, would be the item that has the routing steps that you are looking at. This is not the case. You have no idea where that item on level 4 is that has these routing steps. It could be anywhere. 3.The printed version of the Cost details does not show the labor rate used at all.