In BaanERP it is possible to have a main and sub work center setup. With respect to that there are a couple of questions I like to raise.
The following might sound theoretical and I admit it is, but I like to know the real business practises for this/these scenario(s).
Suppose the following data setup:

There is one main work center called MAIN.
There are two sub work center that have MAIN as their main work center. These are called SUB1 resp. SUB2.
Work center SUB1 has one operator and two machines.
Work center SUB2 has also one operator and one machines.

Questions:

What about setting up work center MAIN?
Does this imply that work center MAIN has 2 operators and 3 machines (i.e. aggregating SUB1 and SUB2)?
What if it is modelled as one operator that handles both SUB1 and SUB2?
Or is it possible to have one operator and one machine that are unique entities next to SUB1 and SUB2?
In production planning it is possible to have SUB1 and SUB2 as the work center to do the work, but it can also be done on work center Main. The utilization data for SUB1 and SUB2 can be determined pretty easily, but how about the utilization of the main work center? Does one aggregate the man and machine capacities of the sub work centers?
Normal capacity. The normal (man) capacity of a work center is calculated as number of operators multiplied with the basic week capacity as defined at the work center. What is the normal capacity of a main work center? Does the same rule apply or does one have to aggregate?

Dear Frans,

Which version of BaanERP are you in? Also, which service pack do you use there?

I'm in BaanERP 5.0c and initially the main and sub work center concept was still used. But later on, Baan disabled the main and sub work center concept as of a certain service pack of 5.0c (I forgot which exact service pack). Because of that, now we use main work centres only in our updated 5.0c system

Rgds,
Paul

For info: BaanIV also has the concept of Main and Sub Work Centers.

However, the use of these is fairly limited within the system.
The help screen lists the use as being: "Print Hours History by Work Center (tihra3450m000) and in capacity graphs which can be displayed or printed in CRP, MPS, SFC and PCS modules..."

We do use main and sub work centers in a number of our customised reports.

Terry

Thanks Paul and Terry for your response.

Within SFC one can have utilization figures by week and day, work center and machine. For the work centers the utilization figures are taken from the production planning data.
If you take into account the main and sub work center concept I was wondering how the utilization data for the main work center should be derived. As in the given scenarios there are quite some degrees of freedom in modelling the setup.

If work center MAIN only serves as "container" for sub work centers SUB1 and SUB2 then there is no utilization data within SFC for work center MAIN.
If work center MAIN also appears as work center at operation level then there is utilization data only for operations that have work center MAIN. The utilization data of SUB1 and SUB2 will not be aggregated to MAIN.

In the latter case the main question is: What should be defined as the normal capacity for work center MAIN? As explained the normal capacity will be calculated from the data of the work center (i.e. basic week capacity and number of operators / number of machines). Must one aggregate the data of the sub work centers to the main?

Dear all,
I want to discuss this case again.
May case is almost same,
SUB 1 have 2 machine.
SUB 2 have 2 machine.
It means that we have capacity 4 machines.
One (1) machine can be operated only by one operator.
We have only 3 operator.
When it was scheduled in production, how to limit the capacity of
MAIN W/C (agregate SUB 1 + SUB 2) that will have only 3 machines?

Is that right that I have to fill the amount of machine in Main W/C with 3 machine as the constraint of production planning?
Thank you very much for your help.

Best Regards,


Sigit