Materials Requirements Planning (MRP)

MRP is a planning tool geared specifically to assembly operations. The aim is to allow each manufacturing unit to tell its supplier what parts it requires and when it requires them. The supplier may be the upstream process within the plant or an outside supplier. Together with MRP II it is probably the most widely used planning and scheduling tool in the world. MRP was created to tackle the problem of 'dependent demand'; determining how many of a particular component is required knowing the number of finished products. Advances in computer hardware made the calculation possible.

Master Production Schedule

The process starts at the top level with a Master Production Schedule (MPS). This is an amalgam of known demand, forecasts and product to be made for finished stock. The phasing of the demand may reflect the availability of the plant to respond. The remainder of the schedule is derived from the MPS. Two key considerations in setting up the MPS are the size of `time buckets' and the `planning horizons'. A `time bucket' is the unit of time on which the schedule is constructed and is typically daily or weekly. The `planning horizon' is how far to plan forward, and is determined by how far ahead demand is known and by the lead times through the operation. There are three distinct steps in preparing an MRP schedule: 1. exploding 2. netting 3. offsetting. Exploding Explosion uses the Bill of Materials (BOM). This lists how many, of what components, are needed for each item (part, sub assembly, final assembly, finished product) of manufacture. Thus a car requires five wheels including the spare. BOM's are characterised by the number of levels involved, following the structure of assemblies and sub assemblies. The first level is represented by the MPS and is 'exploded' down to final assembly. Thus a given number of finished products is exploded to see how many items are required at the final assembly stage. Netting The next step is 'netting', in which any stock on hand is subtracted from the gross requirement determined through explosion, giving the quantity of each item needed to manufacture the required finished products. Offsetting The final step is 'offsetting'. This determines when manufacturing should start so that the finished items are available when required. To do so a 'lead time' has to be assumed for the operation. This is the anticipated time for manufacturing. The whole process is repeated for the next level in the BOM and so on until the bottom is reached. These will give the requirements and timings to outside suppliers.

Page 1 of 20

There are three major assumptions made when constructing an MRP schedule:
y y

The first, and possibly the most important, is that there is sufficient capacity available. For this reason MRP is sometimes called infinite capacity scheduling. The second is that the lead times are known, or can be estimated, in advance.

The third is that the date the order is required can be used as the starting date from which to develop the schedule.

MRP Steps

Material requirements planning (MRP) is a computer-based inventory management system designed to assist production managers in scheduling and placing orders for dependent demand items. Dependent demand items are components of finished goodssuch as raw materials, component parts, and subassembliesfor which the amount of inventory needed depends on the level of production of the final product. For example, in a plant that manufactured bicycles, dependent demand inventory items might include aluminum, tires, seats, and derailleurs. The first MRP systems of inventory management evolved in the 1940s and 1950s. They used mainframe computers to explode information from a bill of materials for a certain finished product into a production and purchasing plan for components. Before long, MRP was expanded to include information feedback loops so that production personnel could change and update the inputs into the system as needed. The next generation of MRP, known as manufacturing resources planning or MRP II, also incorporated marketing, finance, accounting, engineering, and human resources aspects into the planning process. A related concept that expands on MRP is enterprise resources planning (ERP), which uses computer technology to link the various functional areas across an entire business enterprise. MRP works backward from a production plan for finished goods to develop requirements for components and raw materials. "MRP begins with a schedule for finished goods that is converted into a schedule of requirements for the subassemblies, component parts, and raw materials needed to produce the finished items in the specified time frame," William J. Stevenson wrote in his book Production/Operations Management. "Thus, MRP is designed to answer three questions: what is needed? how much is needed? and when is it needed?" MRP breaks down inventory requirements into planning periods so that production can be completed in a timely manner while inventory levelsand related carrying costsare kept to a minimum. Implemented and used properly, it can help production managers plan for capacity needs and allocate production time. But MRP systems can be time consuming and costly to implement, which may put them out of range for some small businesses. In addition, the information that comes out of an MRP system is only as good as the information that goes into it. Companies must maintain current and accurate bills of materials, part numbers, and inventory records if they are to realize the potential benefits of MRP.

Page 2 of 20

MRP INPUTS
According to Stevenson, the information input into MRP systems comes from three main sources: a bill of materials, a master schedule, and an inventory records file. The bill of materials is a listing of all the raw materials, component parts, subassemblies, and assemblies required to produce one unit of a specific finished product. Each different product made by a given manufacturer will have its own separate bill of materials. The bill of materials is arranged in a hierarchy, so that managers can see what materials are needed to complete each level of production. MRP uses the bill of materials to determine the quantity of each component that is needed to produce a certain number of finished products. From this quantity, the system subtracts the quantity of that item already in inventory to determine order requirements. The master schedule outlines the anticipated production activities of the plant. Developed using both internal forecasts and external orders, it states the quantity of each product that will be manufactured and the time frame in which they will be needed. As Stevenson explained, the master schedule separates the planning horizon into time "buckets," which are usually calendar weeks. The schedule must cover a time frame long enough to produce the final product. This total production time is equal to the sum of the lead times of all the related fabrication and assembly operations. It is important to note that master schedules are often generated according to demand and without regard to capacity. An MRP system cannot tell in advance if a schedule is not feasible, so managers may have to run several possibilities through the system before they find one that works. The inventory records file provides an accounting of how much inventory is already on hand or on order, and thus should be subtracted from the material requirements. "The inventory records file is used to store information on the status of each item by time period," Stevenson noted. "This includes gross requirements, scheduled receipts, and expected amount on hand. It also includes other details for each item, such as supplier, lead time, and lot size."

MRP PROCESSING
Using information culled from the bill of materials, master schedule, and inventory records file, an MRP system determines the net requirements for raw materials, component parts, and subassemblies for each period on the planning horizon. MRP processing first determines gross material requirements, then subtracts out the inventory on hand and adds back in the safety stock in order to compute the net requirements. As Stevenson explained, the main outputs from MRP include three primary reports and three secondary reports. The primary reports consist of: planned order schedules, which outline the quantity and timing of future material orders; order releases, which authorize orders to be made; and changes to planned orders, which might include cancellations or revisions of the quantity or time frame. The secondary reports generated by MRP include: performance control reports, which are used to track problems like missed delivery dates and stock outs in order to evaluate system performance; planning reports, which can be used in forecasting future inventory requirements; and exception reports, which call managers' attention to major problems like late orders or excessive scrap rates.

Page 3 of 20

Although working backward from the production plan for a finished product to determine the requirements for components may seem like a simple process, it can actually be extremely complicated, especially when some raw materials or parts are used in a number of different products. Frequent changes in product design, order quantities, or production schedule also complicate matters. "The importance of the computer becomes evident when you consider that a typical firm would have not one but many end items for which it needs to develop material requirements plans, each with its own set of components," Stevenson explained. "Differences in timing of demands and quantities needed, revisions caused by late deliveries, high scrap rates, and canceled orders all have an impact on processing."

BENEFITS AND DRAWBACKS OF MRP

MRP systems offer a number of potential benefits to manufacturing firms. Some of the main benefits include helping production managers to minimize inventory levels and the associated carrying costs, track material requirements, determine the most economical lot sizes for orders, compute quantities needed as safety stock, allocate production time among various products, and plan for future capacity needs. The information generated by MRP systems is useful in other areas as well. "A range of people in a typical manufacturing company are important users of the information provided by an MRP system," Stevenson wrote. "Production planners are obvious users of MRP. Production managers, who must balance work loads across departments and make decisions about scheduling work, and plant foremen, who are responsible for issuing work orders and maintaining production schedules, also rely heavily on MRP output. Other users include customer service representatives, who must be able to supply customers with projected delivery dates, purchasing managers, and inventory managers." MRP systems also have several potential drawbacks, however. First, MRP relies upon accurate input information. If a small business has not maintained good inventory records or has not updated its bills of materials with all relevant changes, it may encounter serious problems with the outputs of its MRP system. The problems could range from missing parts and excessive order quantities to schedule delays and missed delivery dates. At a minimum, an MRP system must have an accurate master production schedule, good lead time estimates, and current inventory records in order to function effectively and produce useful information. Another potential drawback associated with MRP is that the systems can be difficult, time consuming, and costly to implement. Many businesses encounter resistance from employees when they try to implement MRP. For example, employees who once got by with sloppy record keeping may resent the discipline MRP requires. Or departments that became accustomed to hoarding parts in case of inventory shortages might find it difficult to trust the system and let go of that habit. The key to making MRP implementation work is to provide training and education for all affected employees. "It is vital to identify whose power base will be affected by a new system," William J. Sawaya wrote in Industrial Management. "These persons must be converted or the system will fail. Key personnel must be convinced that they personally will be better served by the new system than by any other alternative." One way to improve employee acceptance of MRP systems is to adjust reward systems to reflect production and inventory management goals. "People generally act in their own self-interest," Sawaya noted. "If the performance measures that are used in determining compensation and promotion do
Page 4 of 20

not adequately address materials management, then no system in the world can significantly improve the situation."

MRP II
In the 1980s, MRP technology was expanded to create a new approach called manufacturing resources planning, or MRP II. "The techniques developed in MRP to provide valid production schedules proved so successful that organizations became aware that with valid schedules other resources could be better planned and controlled," Gordon Minty noted in his book Production Planning and Controlling. "The areas of marketing, finance, and personnel were affected by the improvement in customer delivery commitments, cash flow projections, and personnel management projections." Minty went on to explain that MRP II "has not replaced MRP, nor is it an improved version of it. Rather, it represents an effort to expand the scope of production resource planning and to involve other functional areas of the firm in the planning process," such as marketing, finance, engineering, purchasing, and human resources. MRP II differs from MRP in that all of these functional areas have input into the master production schedule. From that point, MRP is used to generate material requirements and help production managers plan capacity. MRP II systems often include simulation capabilities so managers can evaluate various options. Materials requirements planning, referred to by the initials MRP, is a technique which assists a company in the detailed planning of its production. Recall here that the master production schedule sets out an aggregate plan for production. MRP translates that aggregate plan into an extremely detailed plan Example The production manager at Aldershot Manufacturing wishes to develop a materials requirements plan for producing chairs over an 8 week period. She estimates that the lead time between releasing an order to the shop floor and producing a finished chair is 2 weeks. The company currently has 260 chairs in stock and no safety stock (safety stock is stock held in reserve to meet customer demand if necessary). The forecast customer demand is for 150 chairs in week 1, 70 in week 3, 175 in week 5, 90 in week 7 and 60 in week 8. It helps to understand what is going on if we write out, over time, the demand for chairs as below.
Week 1 Demand 150 On-hand at end of week 110 Order ? 2 0 ? 3 70 ? 4 5 0 175 ? ? 6 0 ? 7 90 ? 8 60 ?

Here we have shown the demand in each of the eight weeks, initially we have 260 chairs available so if these are used to meet the demand of 150 in week 1 we have 260-150 = 110 left on-hand (i.e. in stock) at the end of the week. Plainly we will need to order some more chairs in order to meet all of the forecast future demand over the 8 week planning period. Conceptually therefore we face two related decisions about ordering:
Page 5 of 20

y y

timing - when to order quantity - how much to order

You can think of asking yourself the question, in each and every period, should I order in this period and if so how much? For the moment suppose we order nothing in week 1, nothing in week 2, etc. The situation by the time we reach the end of week 5 will be as below:
Week 1 2 Demand 150 0 On-hand at end of week 110 110 Order ? ? 3 70 40 ? 4 5 0 175 40 -135 ? ? 6 0 ? 7 90 ? 8 60 ?

If we are to avoid a stockout in week 5 we plainly need to order at least 135 chairs. Now we know that the lead time between ordering a chair and receiving it is 2 weeks. Therefore to avoid a stockout in week 5 we must have ordered 135 chairs either in week 3, or in any week before week 3. In other words ordering
y y y

135 chairs in week 1, or 135 chairs in week 2, or 135 chairs in week 3,

would each ensure that we have sufficient chairs available to meet forecast demand in week 5. If we order these chairs earlier than week 3 we will be carrying extra inventory (stock) for a number of periods and, as we know, carrying stock costs money. It would seem appropriate therefore to order 135 chairs in week 3. This will give:
Week 1 2 3 Demand 150 0 70 On-hand at end of week 110 110 40 Order 0 0 135 4 0 40 ? 5 175 0 ? 6 0 ? 7 90 ? 8 60 ?

Continuing on in the same manner we get:

Week 1 2 3 Demand 150 0 70 On-hand at end of week 110 110 40 Order 0 0 135 4 0 40 ? 5 175 0 ? 6 0 0 ? 7 90 -90 ? 8 60 ?

requiring an order of 90 chairs in week 5 and giving:

Week 1 2 3 Demand 150 0 70 On-hand at end of week 110 110 40 Order 0 0 135 4 5 0 175 40 0 0 90 6 0 0 ? 7 90 0 ? 8 60 ?

Continuing again we get:

Demand Week 1 150 2 0 3 70 4 5 0 175 6 0 7 90 8 60

Page 6 of 20

On-hand at end of week Order

110 0

110 0

40 135

40 0

0 90

0 ?

0 ?

-60 ?

requiring an order of 60 chairs in week 6 and giving:

Week 1 2 Demand 150 0 On-hand at end of week 110 110 Order 0 0 3 70 40 135 4 5 0 175 40 0 0 90 6 0 0 60 7 90 0 ? 8 60 0 ?

Note that we have no data given here on which to base order decisions in weeks 7 and 8. As we are at the end of the planning period these are usually taken as zero. Decisions Let us be clear about what we have done here with respect to our two decisions of:
y y

timing - when to order quantity - how much to order

With respect to the timing decision we always ordered as late as possible, but never planned a stockout. This is a driving principle in MRP, never order before you need to, never plan to stockout. With respect to the quantity decision we always ordered as little as possible, i.e. just enough to avoid a stockout. This is known as the lot for lot rule, sometimes called LFL or L4L or LL rule. This quantity decision rule can be varied in MRP and some other rules are:
y y

fixed order quantity rule (sometimes called FOQ or FO) - the quantity ordered is an integer multiple of the same fixed amount each time an order is made fixed period requirements rule (sometimes called FPR) - the quantity ordered should be enough for a fixed number of periods

To illustrate the FPR rule suppose that we decide to order enough for 3 weeks when we make an order. The situation at the end of week 5 is (from above) repeated below:
Week 1 2 Demand 150 0 On-hand at end of week 110 110 Order ? ? 3 70 40 ? 4 5 0 175 40 -135 ? ? 6 0 ? 7 90 ? 8 60 ?

To decide the FPR order quantity we continue this table until week 7. The quantity ordered must then be just sufficient to cover weeks 5 to 7 (i.e. to cover 3 weeks as required for a 3 week FPR). This is done below:
Week 1 Demand 150 On-hand at en d of week 110 Order ? 2 0 110 ? 3 70 40 ? 4 5 6 7 0 175 0 90 40 -135 -135 -225 ? ? ? ? 8 60 ?

Hence the 3 week FPR order is 225 units in week 3, giving the situation below:
Week 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

Page 7 of 20

Demand On-hand at end of week Order

150 110 0

0 110 0

70 40 225

0 40 ?

175 90 ?

0 90 ?

90 0 ?

60 -60 ?

Plainly we need some order in week 6 to cover the stockout in week 8. As we are at the end of the planning period we usually order just sufficient (i.e. revert to the LFL rule) and order 60 in week 6 to give:
Week 1 2 Demand 150 0 On-hand at end of week 110 110 Order 0 0 3 70 40 225 4 5 0 17 5 40 90 0 0 6 0 90 60 7 90 0 ? 8 60 0 ?

Note here that with the FPR rule applied to cover p periods you make (at most) one order every p periods (ignoring any order necessary at the end of the planning period). Choice of lot size rule How then are we to choose between different lot size rules (LFL, FPR and FOQ). We could, of course, redo our calculations with different lot size rules (e.g. a FOQ ordering multiples of 100 each time). We would see their different effects but would still have to choose between them. All of the rules ensure forecast demand is meet, i.e. no stockouts, so this is not a distinguishing feature. The LFL rule (by ordering as little as possible each time) will keep average inventory levels low, but will result in more orders on average. Both the FPR and FOQ rules will have higher inventory levels, but will result in less orders on average. Choosing a lot size rule therefore comes down to balancing the number of orders against the cost of holding inventory, just as we considered in deriving the EOQ formula in the inventory notes. Hence, given cost information, it is possible to derive the most effective (least costly) lot rule to use for any particular item. Extending the example Whilst for the example considered above, just a single item, we easily worked out the orders manually it is obvious that as the number of items increases, a manual calculation becomes too complicated and we need a computer package. We illustrate this below. For the chair production problem considered before suppose now that the production manager as well as planning the production of the chair must also plan the production of the components that make up the chair. These are: the seat, a back and four legs. The lead time for seats and backs is 2 weeks and the lead time for legs is one week. The company currently has an inventory of 60 seats, 40 backs and 80 legs. Scheduled receipts are 50 seats in week 1 and 10 backs in week 1. The lot size rules the production manager has decided to adopt is LFL for for all items. Now in planning the production of chairs we need also to plan the production of seats, backs and legs. For example we show below the situation as derived above where in week 3 we issued an order for 135 chairs.
Demand Week 1 150 2 0 3 70 4 0 5 175 6 0 7 90 8 60

Page 8 of 20

On-hand at end of week Order

110 0

110 0

40 135

40 ?

0 ?

Now to have 135 chairs made we need to have to hand (i.e. currently available) 135 seats, 135 backs and 4(135) = 540 legs. The current inventory of these items (plus scheduled receipts) is insufficient, so orders must be placed for these items. Just as we did for the chair itself above these orders must be phased in time so as to ensure that we never stockout. Now to do all this manually for chairs, seats, backs and legs would just be too timeconsuming and error-prone. It would be far better to do this via as a computr package, such as the package used in this course. In order to solve this example using the package we need to have a better overview of MRP. MRP overview In MRP two types of information are required:
y y

structural; and tactical.

Structural information is information about the items (parts/components) that the company uses and how different items are related to one another. It includes information for each item such as lead time and lot (or batch) size rule. The key point about this information is that it changes relatively infrequently. Tactical information is information about the current state of the company - for example sales orders (real and forecast) pending, the master production schedule, on-hand inventory levels and purchase orders. Obviously the key point about this information is that it changes frequently. Structural information The structural information required in MRP relates to:
y y

item information; and bill of materials.

We deal with each of these in turn below. Item information We have structural information relating to each of the items that we are producing. Below we give this structural information for each of the items in our simple example.
Item chair seat back Lead time (weeks) 2 2 2 Lot size rule LFL LFL LFL Unit Measure Each Each Each ABC code A B B

Page 9 of 20

legs

LFL

Each

Note that:
y

y y y y

the lead time is the time between placing an order and receiving that order - note that this lead time assumes that all the items needed for production are available at the time at which we place an order. For example for the chair we, as mentioned previously, need one seat, one back and four legs to make it - the lead time of 2 weeks for a chair assumes that all of these items are available when we place an order for a chair - the 2 weeks covers the time required to assemble them into a chair as mentioned above the lot size rule relates to deciding how large the lot (batch/order) should be each time an order is placed. in fact the package contains a total of ten different lot size rules. Unit Measure is the units of measurement for each item - here it is Each specifying that each item is identified individually. the ABC code relates to inventory analysis. Essentially items are divided into three inventory categories (A, B and C) where: o category A items are the most important inventory items and in total are responsible for 80% of inventory cost o category B items are only moderately important inventory items and in total are responsible for 15% of inventory cost o category C items are relatively unimportant inventory items and in total are responsible for 5% of inventory cost Obviously the idea here is that management attention should be primarily focused upon category A items. In the package the ABC code is used purely to produce different management reports.

In turns of entering our example problem into the package the screen below is the initial screen we need to set up number of items, time units etc.

The package input for our items is as below

Page 10 of 20

Bill of materials In order to show the make-up (in terms of the parts needed for production) we have a Bill of Materials (BOM) for the end-product (namely the chair). Below we show the BOM for the chair.
chair | +------------------------------- + | | | seat(1) back(1) legs(4)

This BOM means that to produce one chair we need:

y y y

one seat one back four legs

The Bill of Materials can be thought of as a diagrammatic recipe. Just as in cooking we need a list of ingredients and their quantities to know how to cook something, so here the BOM tells us what we need to make a chair. The BOM is best thought of as being divided into levels, with the final item (the chair) being at the top level and the items needed to make up a chair being at the second level. Other examples may have more levels, e.g. if items at the second level are themselves made up from further items. Plainly BOM's are structural information that change relatively infrequently. It is also plain that any mistakes in specifying BOM's could have disastrous consequences on the shop floor - e.g. consider what would happen if we fail to note that a particular part is needed in the production of some item. In terms of the package we can enter this BOM as below.

This BOM can also be shown graphically by the package, as below.

Page 11 of 20

Tactical information The tactical information required in MRP relates to:

y y

out-going inventory (sales) and planned production (master production schedule); and on-hand inventory and in-coming inventory (purchases).

We deal with each of these in turn below. Diagrammatic overview Below we give a diagrammatic overview of the situation.

We have specified above structural information about how the items relate to each other (BOM) and item information (e.g. lot size rule); and we will shortly (below) specify tactical information about planned production and inventory in/out/on-hand. Given all this information then (conceptually at least) we should be able to calculate what we should do, in terms of when to place orders with external suppliers (or internal suppliers) and
Page 12 of 20

the size of those orders, so that we never run out of stock of any item i.e. we always achieve the planned production and meet the sales orders. This process of calculating the orders needed is called a MRP EXPLOSION and produces the materials requirements (hence the name - Materials Requirements Planning). An important point to note is that MRP is not cost driven i.e. it does not seek to minimise cost (unlike the MPS system used in the package). Instead MRP is stockout driven - that is it will always order sufficient to avoid stockouts (using the lot size rule for each item) and order as late as possible. We can now specify the tactical information required. Out-going inventory and planned production The table below shows the current out-going inventory (predicted or expected sales). For our simple example this is just the forecast demand for chairs.
Time Week Week Week Week Week 1 3 5 7 8 Quan tity 150 70 175 90 60

We need to produce a detailed production plan for seats, backs and legs to meet this demand. To do this we enter this demand data into the package as below.

Then a detailed production plan can be obtained via an MRP explosion (as will be seen below). We can however use the MRP package another way - to examine meeting a predetermined production schedule for chairs. Above we have just taken our chair requirements as relating to the total demand. We could however, have entered any numbers there - for example a chair production plan as determined from a cost based master production schedule (MPS). In that case we simply enter the chair figures from the MPS as the chair requirements and the package will produce a detailed production plan for seats, backs and legs to met those requirements.
Page 13 of 20

For the simple example we consider here we shall just take the chair requirements as equal to the demand data. Note here that the feasibility in terms of production capacity etc of producing the seats, backs and legs in any period to met our chair requirements is not considered in MRP. This is an important point. MRP typically takes no account of capacity considerations. Such considerations must be taken into account when the MPS is produced. Note here that our package does not include the capability to take capacity into account. Although we can enter capacity data into the package this is only used for reporting proposes - to see whether we are exceeding production capacities or not. Capacities are not taken into account when the package decides what we need to produce and when. On-hand and in-coming inventory On-hand inventory is the amount of inventory on-hand at the start of the planning period. For our simple example this is:
Item chair seat back legs On -hand inventory (units) 260 60 40 80

In-coming inventory is the items we expect to receive as a result of buying-in (purchasing) from external suppliers, or items we expect to receive as a result of internal orders placed earlier. For our simple example this is:
Time Week 1 Week 1 Item seat back Qu antity 50 10

This data is entered into the package as below.

Output Below we show annotated MRP output from the package (after explosion "Explode Materials Requirements") for the example given above for all items. Chair

Page 14 of 20

From the last line "Planned Order Release" we see that we need to order 135 chairs in week 3, 90 in week 5 and 60 in week 6. These are as we would expect, since for our simple example we manually calculated when we needed to order chairs to met demand. The benefit of MRP is that the process is automated (hence quicker and less error-prone), and also that we can easily take other items that go to make up a chair (such as seat, back and legs) into account. In the output above the columns represent different periods and the rows mean:
y y y y y

Gross Requirement - the forecast demand for the item Scheduled Receipt - any scheduled receipts from previous orders that are currently being processed Projected On Hand - what the inventory level will be if we produce according to the plan above and the demand forecast is correct Projected Net Requirement - what we will need in each period to avoid a stockout, i.e. the amount that is required to avoid stockouts Planned Order Receipt - what we will receive each period as a result of planned orders (the orders the package has automatically calculated are needed to avoid stockouts) Planned Order Release - when we need to release (make) the planned orders having regard to the lead time required

Seat

Page 15 of 20

From this output we can see that we are advised to place an order for 25 seats in week 1. This advice should be followed unless there is a good reason for not doing so! You can see why this order occurs, because we have a gross requirement for seats of 135 in week 3, why because the Planned Order Release for the chair called for 135 chairs in week 3, and we need the seats to be available when we release the order to make the chairs. Other planned order releases for seats are 90 in week 3 and 60 in week 4. Back

From this output we can see that we are advised to place an order for 85 backs in week 1. This advice should be followed unless there is a good reason for not doing so! You can see why this order occurs, because we have a gross requirement for backs of 135 in week 3, why - because the Planned Order Release for the chair called for 135 chairs in week 3, and we need the backs available to make the chairs. We already have 40 backs on-hand, another 10 projected to be received in week 1 so we only need to order 135-10-40=85 new backs to have 135 backs available for the chairs in week 3. Legs

Page 16 of 20

From this output we can see that we are advised to place an order for 460 legs in week 2. This advice should be followed unless there is a good reason for not doing so! You can see why this order occurs, because we have a gross requirement for legs of 540 in week 3, why because the Planned Order Release for the chair called for 135 chairs in week 3, and we need the legs (4 per chair) available to make the chairs. Since we already have 80 legs on-hand we only need 540-80 = 460 new legs ordered. Using the package we can get a summary of all actions (planned order releases) as below.

Sensitivity It is often important to conduct sensitivity (what-if) analysis in MRP. Considering the example above, for instance, the only actions we need to take now relate to the orders suggested for the current period. All other actions relate to orders that we may (or may not) place at future points in time. These can be reviewed once the future arrives in the light of new information. Hence the orders suggested for the current period (for seats and backs in this case) are the ones to concentrate on with respect to sensitivity analysis. So, for example, suppose the demand for the chair is more than expected in week 8. Does this impact upon the actions we must take now or not? If it does then we perhaps need to review the suggested order quantities for seats and backs accordingly. To illustrate this suppose we change the demand for chairs in week 8 from 60 to 80, i.e. increase it. Changing the package data and re-exploding we get the action (planned order releases) list as

Page 17 of 20

compared with the previous action list of

Here it can be seen that the actions are identical until week 4. At that time we need to begin ordering more items to fulfil the projected increase in demand for chairs. Extensions To extend our example suppose that each leg is made up from two components (X and Y). Two units of X and 3 units of Y are needed for one leg and the lead time is 1 week. Then our BOM is:

with the item data being:

Page 18 of 20

Exploding we get that the action list is:

MRP II MRP II is (essentially) MRP but with more added. Typically an MRP II package will include features such as cost information, management reports and easy "what-if" analysis. It may also include capacity requirements planning (essentially try and automatically include capacity restrictions in the planning process). To confuse things MRP II stands for manufacturing resources planning, signifying that we are concentrating upon the planning of the manufacturing resources (e.g. people, machines, storage), rather than limiting ourselves to the planning of the materials requirements. As an example of the use of MRP II we have the following: ICI Agrochemicals This company looked at over 40 MRP II packages before choosing Control:Manufacturing from Cincom. The manufacturing operation at their Fernhurst plant is complex with as many as 4,500 finished products being processed from 13,500 different raw materials. Before the days of MRP II stock levels were high and forecasting was hit and miss. A 1 million MRP II installation has helped bring about some radical operational improvements since it was installed. A good example has been in inventory records and bill of materials accuracy. A BOM administrator was appointed to monitor data accuracy with a regular audit of a dozen BOM's. In addition, staff had to be trained to a very high detailed level, learning how to structure the BOM's to support customer service objectives, inventory objectives, order entry objectives and costing objectives. Data integrity increased from around 65% to 98% in just six months as a result. MRP packages
Page 19 of 20

There are many MRP packages available. One example can be seen here. JIT Just-in-time (JIT) and MRP are two different systems for controlling production. It is often said that:
y y

MRP = a 'Push' system JIT = a 'Pull' system

Really this is an incorrect analysis - MRP is a system based on fulfilling predicted usage in a set time period. This can be seen in the example considered above. We never stocked out. JIT is a system based on actual usage - parts of the production system are "linked" together via the use of Kanban's as the system runs. It is this linkage that is the distinguishing difference between MRP and JIT - JIT is a dynamic linked system, MRP is not. This implies that JIT can be used when lead times are short, MRP is more appropriate when lead times are long. In addition MRP is much better suited for computerised implementation then JIT. Consider, for example, the large number of finished products (4,500) and raw materials (13,500) mentioned in the ICI example considered above. Do you relish the idea of controlling that factory via a JIT system, or would you prefer a computerised MRP system?

References

Goddard, Walter E. "Focus on the Fundamentals of MRP II." Modern Materials Handling. December 1993. Hasin, M. Ahsan A., and P.C. Pandey. "MRP II: Should Its Simplicity Remain Unchanged?" Industrial Management. May-June 1996. "Manufacturing Execution Systems:Managing the Product through the Plant." Industry Week. September 18, 1995. Minty, Gordon. Production Planning and Controlling. Goodheart-Willcox, 1998. Orlicky, Joseph. Material Requirements Planning. McGraw-Hill, 1975. Sawaya, William J., et al. "Ten Guidelines for Implementing Manufacturing Systems." Industrial Management. January-February 1992. Stevenson, William J. Production/Operations Management. 5th ed. McGraw-Hill, 1996.

Page 20 of 20