Cancel
Showing results for 
Search instead for 
Did you mean: 

150% EBOM-MBOM-BOP??

Experimenter
Experimenter

Some questions that I had:

 

1. Would you have 150% (with variants/effectivities etc.) MBOMs with a corresponding 150% BOP for every 150% EBOM

 

2. If the answer is YES, this would mean that top level part number for every 100% configuration of your MBOM remains the same. 100% MBOMs are just filtered views of 150% MBOMs based on the effectivity/variant values you choose. Correspondingly for every 100% configuration of MBOM, the 150% BOP will get configured automatically but the top level ID of the BOP remains the same for every config.

Now, this data would be integrated with SAP/ERP and MES systems. If Top level IDs of BOP remain the same. How are the routings / BOPs for 100% configs managed on ERP/SAp and MES side.

 

3. if the answer is NO. Every 100% MBOM and the Corresponding 100% BOP will have a separate Top level ID. But for every possible configuration (saleable) Teamcenter would have to maintain separate 100% MBOMs and 100% BOPs. This scenario becomes easier to manage on SAP and MES side but too cumbersome and messy on Tc side.

 

Whats your opinion?

 

Thanks

9 REPLIES

Re: 150% EBOM-MBOM-BOP??

Solution Partner Honored Contributor Solution Partner Honored Contributor
Solution Partner Honored Contributor
The 150% EBOM w/options and variants is configured then the configuration saved off as a new Item. The new Item EBOM is then used for the MBOM/BOP and communicated to ERP. Basically the 150% EBOM is a "master" for creating the individual configured EBOM's. Then all is normal after they have been saved off.

Randy Ellsworth, Teamcenter Architect, Applied CAx, LLC
NX 11 | SW 2016 | Creo 4 | TcUA 11.4
Evaluating: AW 3.4

Re: 150% EBOM-MBOM-BOP??

Experimenter
Experimenter

Thanks Randy.

 

This way for each 100% EBOM configuration, we would have to maintain a 100% MBOM and 100% BOP. Can we not have 150% MBOMs and corresponding 150% BOPs as well? As we configure 100% MBOM BOPs get configured automatically for that 100% MBOM. This would reduce lot of overhead of maintaining each 100% configuration separately.

 

Any thoughts?

Re: 150% EBOM-MBOM-BOP??

Solution Partner Honored Contributor Solution Partner Honored Contributor
Solution Partner Honored Contributor
The 150% EBOM to 100% MBOM/BOP is a one-to-many relationship configured using variants. Only classic variants support the sharing of variant structures (150% EBOM > 150% MBOM > 150% BOP). Variant structures consist of options, defaults and variant rule checks. They must be added to the top-level Item unless the assembly is shared with multiple top-levels then they must reside at the assembly level. Variants at the top-level override variants lower in the tree so some duplication may be needed to ensure the correct default is applied. You may need to duplicate variant rule checks lower in the assembly if the top-levels are not fully loaded. The modularity of the product becomes crucial.

Let's say you've completed all the above (not an easy task). Now you want to create the MBOM. Each plant has its own way of structuring the MBOM specific to its own workstations and resources. Same with the BOP.

A change to the EBOM to accommodate a new option would require a change to each of the MBOM and BOP that reference it even if the current product isn't modified. The work required for a change is still happening but at a different level of complexity. Maintaining 150% structures is not a small undertaking and requires "enlightened" users. In my opinion, users can deal with 100% structures as they are straight forward and the work is known where as 150% structures adds mystery and the impact is hard to predict. I can't even begin to fathom what an ERP interface would look like.

In summary, 150% structures are easy to break and hard to fix. Only classic variants are supported. Change requires modification of all top-levels (or their modular sub-assemblies). My recommendation is 150% EBOM > 100% EBOM > 100% MBOM > 100% BOP. And only for products where change is fairly static.

Randy Ellsworth, Teamcenter Architect, Applied CAx, LLC
NX 11 | SW 2016 | Creo 4 | TcUA 11.4
Evaluating: AW 3.4

Re: 150% EBOM-MBOM-BOP??

Solution Partner Phenom Solution Partner Phenom
Solution Partner Phenom

The configured EBOM is closer to your product definition (minus the consumables, substitutes, BOM rearrangements etc).

 

Approach 1:

You may want to visualize this way and see if it solves your problem:

100% EBOM must be a child of a parent item/part. This parent item/part will be created each time you use an instance of an EBOM. The transfer to ERP must be done in the 'context' (not teamcenter in-context) of this top level. This top level parent object authored in PLM (through definition, training etc) can match your ERP Salesorder.

 

Approach 2:

You may want to create a collaboration context object (each time) to group your EBOM - MBOM - BOP (100%s). While you reuse your EBOM-MBOM-BOP, the collaboration context object (you can configure to allow your collaboration context object spit out a unique ID in Teamcenter) can be sent to ERP along with EBOM - MBOM - BOP.

 

Harish

Re: 150% EBOM-MBOM-BOP??

Solution Partner Experimenter Solution Partner Experimenter
Solution Partner Experimenter

thanks a lot Randy!. This helps

Re: 150% EBOM-MBOM-BOP??

Siemens Valued Contributor Siemens Valued Contributor
Siemens Valued Contributor

I'm glad to see this thread. 

If I'm designing a product in MCAD, I may design it as a family (Creo Family Table, SOlidworks Design Table, Inventor Factory).  The result of that in Teamcenter is a master document and an Item for each design alternative.  Lets say I have a Bicycle with 3 different handlebar widths. The result in Teamcenter would be a master document (Creo Generic, Solidworks Default) and 3 Assemblies (Creo Instance, Solidworks Configuration) and all 4 would have their own Item ID.

 

How does this feed into Configurator? What do people see as the relationship between configurator and MCAD design? 

This also may get into Top Down design discussions.  If I'm creating a new product, how much do I really know about the product until I start creating it?  Does  Configuration drive the design top-down or support configuration of existing designs?

- Peter Heath - PLM Business Development Manager
ITI - Siemens Development and Solution Partner

Re: 150% EBOM-MBOM-BOP??

Valued Contributor
Valued Contributor

Randy,

But that means you have to copy all of the knots in a BOM to a new Part. That is not possible with the classical Variants and Options (I think). The new Product Configurator doesn't support this also. I heard there is an extra module between Classical and Product Configurator that does support this functionality. The advantage is that you can change the Order specific BOM seperated from the 150% BOM. The disadvantage is that you create a new BOM.

 

Regards,

 

Menk

 

Re: 150% EBOM-MBOM-BOP??

Solution Partner Honored Contributor Solution Partner Honored Contributor
Solution Partner Honored Contributor
True. Every variation and option from the 150% BOM would need to be configured then saved off as a new 100% BOM for each product ordered by a customer. You wouldn't want to pre-create all these 100% BOM's because there may be configurations that are never ordered by a customer. The configured 100% Part BOM's can be sent to ERP for MBOM\BOP management or used in Teamcenter if you have MPP (or Technomatix) for the "neutral" structure. It's not easy and several companies I know had to write their own customization to manage the Design to Part creation just as you have.

As the concept gathers momentum I expect that Siemens will build better tools to manage the processes.

Randy Ellsworth, Teamcenter Architect, Applied CAx, LLC
NX 11 | SW 2016 | Creo 4 | TcUA 11.4
Evaluating: AW 3.4

Re: 150% EBOM-MBOM-BOP??

Valued Contributor
Valued Contributor
I think that Siemens will focus on the new product configurator. The question is: to start now with the product configurator or classical var/opt?