MRP (GPAO) evolution in standard Dolibarr

[atm-thibaultf]

Feature Request

In order to improve the management of computer-aided production within Dolibarr, ATM proposes to implement the following elements and push them to the community. This work was carried out in consultation with various community stakeholders. Your comments are welcome.

Link to the Dolibarr french forum of the feature : https://www.dolibarr.fr/forum/t/evolution-gpao-dans-le-coeur-dolibarr/38644

Suggested steps

BILLS OF MATERIAL MODULE - BOM (NOMENCLATURES) The BOM module will be changed as follows :

• Modification of the module name from “BOM” to “MBOM / SBOM (Manufacturing Bills Of Material / Service Bills Of Matérial)”
• The “BOM” tab will be changed as follows:
  • The tab should be renamed “MBOM” (“Nomenclature de produits”)
  • Allow only products and no longer services to be added to this table. Indeed, services do not have the same characteristics and some information in the table does not make sense for services.
  • Allow to add other MBOMs and visualize the sub-levels (the first sub-level only here to prevent performance issues).
• A new tab “SBOM” should be create and should offer :
  • A table allowing the addition of services from the Dolibarr catalog. It should be possible for each service to define:
  • the unit (hours, days, etc.).
  • the quantity
  • a default workstation from the “Workstation” module if activated (optional).
  • It will be possible to order the different services in the desired order.
  • The description of the service (on the service card) will make it possible to write the operating protocol. This description will be editable on the SBOM form locally.
  • In a second phase : addition of a "Complete tree" tab should be added to view the complete tree structure of the MBOM down to the lowest level of components as well as the quantities (view inspired by the tags / categories view). This tab should offer:
  • a "Group by product" button allowing to no longer display the tree structure but to group this list by product, each product line displaying the total quantity required for the MBOM.
  • a "Display tree" button allowing to return to the tree view.

“PROCESS” MODULE A new “Process” module should be created and should add a new “Process” tab on the “MBOM / SBOM” sheets offering the following functionalities:

• A “Add a step” button allowing to create a step by choosing:

  • The step number
  • A unique service among the services from the SBOM tab
  • One or more products from the MBOM tab and a quantity for each product

• Once the step added, it should be visible in a table summarizing all the information entered on the step as illustrated below:

• Possibility of ordering these steps in the desired order.

• Possibility of parallelizing several steps by assigning the same step number to two different steps.

• A “Create OF” button should allow to create a production order from this tab.

• It should be possible to edit a PDF document allowing to view all the steps with for each:

  • The number of the step
  • The reference and the label of the service
  • The workstation if defined as well as the resources and user groups defined on the workstation
  • The reference, label, and description of the product(s) and their quantities

[ToniTen]

I agree with most of what you propose, but I want to point out something:

* Modification of the module name from “BOM” to “MBOM / SBOM (Manufacturing Bills Of Material / Service Bills Of Matérial)”

* The “BOM” tab will be changed as follows:

  * The tab should be renamed “MBOM” (“Nomenclature de produits”)
  * Allow only products and no longer services to be added to this table. Indeed, services do not have the same characteristics and some information in the table does not make sense for services.

Imagine you've got a product where say, part of the production is outsourced to a different company, and that company basically takes some product (that might be the final product) and performs an operation on it (say, painting, or electroplating). Wouldn't that be a service that is required in the production of the product, and thus need to be in the BOM?

[edupulpillo]

First, thank you to ATM for sharing and their great contribution to the community. As ToniTen mention very often in the supply chain of the products and services have a mix of components outsourced by several suppliers and mixed with the processes made in the own factory. To make the module useful, is a key point to be able to control this topic. So it will be great if is possible to implement it in the next PR

[dolibarr95]

@atm-thibaultf tks a lot for all this job !!!!

[atm-thibaultf]

In response to @ToniTen and @edupulpillo, in fact if I need to outsource one part of my production with several component, I can manage it like explain below :

• MBOM tab : I add all my components needed in the process including the component needed for the outsourcing
• SBOM tab : I add my services needed to build my product including the service corresponding to the outsourced part
• Process tab : I define the steps for the production, including for each step :
  • One service for the SBOM tab (only one service by step)
  • All the products from the MBOM tab needed for this step of the production

The objectif at the end is to be able to buy to a supplier the service of the step that I want to outsource if I want to outsource it OR to be able to assign a workstation on this service if I want to produce it with a manufacturing order.

Maybe, It's better to add another table for the services on the same tab (by renaming the "BOM" tab in "MBOM / SBOM"). The objectif is to make a difference between products needed and services/workstations.

[edupulpillo]

Also it should be nice to review a management of the defects/returns of materials during the manufacturing process, and also about the waste ratio. May i ask if Is the module already pushed to v15 of Dolibarr to test it, or not yet ?

[ToniTen]

Maybe, It's better to add another table for the services on the same tab (by renaming the "BOM" tab in "MBOM / SBOM"). The objectif is to make a difference between products needed and services/workstations.

Could this be controlled by a preference? We do not sell services, but we purchase them (and some of them will go into a BOM). I have no issues with having them separated for those that have more complex workflows, but having to have 1 extra table cluttering the UI for one single line would be a step backwards. Nothing we couldn't adapt to, though, so if this is really needed by a huge share of the users of the MRP modules, I would understand its inclusion.

[atm-thibaultf]

@edupulpillo the feature described above is not pushed to v15. For your idea of the defects/returns of materials during the manufacturing process, I agree with you that Dolibarr need to understand this information but I think it's more a point which to be manage in manufacturing order and not in the BOM.

@ToniTen I understand the need to keep with a simple UI and workflow if we don't need this feature. The interface is not decided yet but I understand your use case.

[atm-maxime]

@lmag

[atm-maxime]

@eldy we plan to start working on the use of services in BOM, a prerequisite to have the process module in a near future. Is this ok for you ?

[JuanBrillo]

I think it should be allowed to allow services in BOM, in fact, on the web, and even in its image on said page, as it announces.

"Create your nomenclatures (BOMs) to define how to consume raw products or services to produce manufactured products (Quantity to consume, efficiency, stock impact, ...)."

BOM

A product cannot be manufactured without the labor of operators who operate lathes, milling machines, welders, drills, cutters...

[atm-maxime]

Yes, that's why we are currently adding this feature

[edupulpillo]

Since services are going to be added in BOM, please kindly considerate to add the feature "subcontracted". A lot of times during the manufacturing process the services are subcontracted, and the materials need to be moved from one factory to another to make the process.

An example:

• Plastic piece production: Factory one
• Plastic painting: Factory two
• Laser engraving: factory three
• Assembly of the piece.

[csteh]

It will be more comfortable working if you add tags and categories to MRP (GPAO)

[Jean-BaptisteDes]

FR : bonjour merci pour ces développements. Un gros manque en l'état actuel est de pouvoir lancer les approvisionnement à la création d'un OF : -> dans un process classique, on créée l'OF pour réserver des capacités de production et la matière. Hors il n'est pas possible de simplement lancer des achats liés à un ordre de fabrication. Si ce point peut être mis dans la pile des améliorations à venir, ce serait top.

EN: hello thank you for these developments. A big lack in the current state is to be able to launch the supplies when creating an OF: -> in a classic process, the OF is created to reserve production capacities and materials. However, it is not possible to simply launch purchases linked to a production order. If this point can be put in the pile of future improvements, that would be great.

[Jeromeerm]

Hello to all,

I think that the request @Jean-BaptisteDes is a primordial thing to implement in dolibarr, indeed it is not simple to replenish the product of an OF currently. This is an essential aspect of an MRP.

Also I agree completely with the explanations of @edupulpillo. Our company is in this situation and it is currently unmanageable without any headaches.

It would be necessary to be able to follow the different steps and the third party through a module of production steps.

For me, the simplest is to have a tab allowing to manufacture a product P1 made of product and services (external or not).

Initially, a product P1-1 is ordered (raw material or draft material). After receiving this P1-1, we can order the service S1-2 to consume P1-1 and produce P1-2. At the end of this OF, the last service S1-X allows to consume P1-(X-1) and to produce P1.

I hope I have made myself clear. In any case, this is a feature we are looking forward to.

Already, thank you very much to @atm-thibaultf and to all the concerned team.

Now the question : when or on which version do you think that the announced improvements will be integrated in the heart of dolibarr ?

[lmag]

Hello to all,

I agree with the explanations of @edupulpillo. I think we shouldn't to mix production orders (OF) and planned production orders (PPO) in this first step.

Scheduling can be done in a second step with :

• Production order proposal are planned
• Purchase order proposal are calculated
• Order are placed or not by users

These steps can be carried out as part of the scheduling @ATM-Thibault @atm-maxime

[Jean-BaptisteDes]

https://github.com/Dolibarr/dolibarr/issues/19661#issuecomment-1275654274

FR : Une première étape serait de pouvoir lier une OF à une commande fournisseur.

EN : A first step would be to be able to link an OF to a supplier order.

[lmag]

Je ne pense pas que cela soit aussi simple. L'OF n'est pas relié aux commandes fournisseurs. Il faudra qu'il propose une quantité de commande a passer en fonctions des éléments

• Stock
• Commandes en cours
• Etc...

EN : I don't think it is that simple. OF is not linked to supplier orders. It will have to propose an order quantity to be placed according to the elements

• Stock
• Current orders
• Etc...

[Humml87]

Hi, i think the MO makes only a requirement on a Product to consume (this is the current state, equals an Sales Order). Wath we need is to implement in the "Replenishment" (.../htdocs/product/stock/replenish.php) the replenishment for Products where produced by "Nature of product = Manufactured product" (see my Issue #21858) .

Additional we need a view to see witch "Products can assign to a MO" (enough stock in the warehouse), a view for "MO´s where can consume Products" and a view for "MO´s where can produce". In the "MO´s where can produce" meens all products are consumed/assigned, there we need a flag equals "shipabel" in Sales Orders, if all services also complete consomed and we can finished the MO.

This Issue(s) are our problem to integrate Dolibarr in the company :-(

Best regards Christian

[fecarian21]

Hello,

Any news about the evolution of the GPAO module ?

[lmag]

https://github.com/Dolibarr/dolibarr/issues/28357