Group Assignment No.

Amani Raboudi Student No: 50207135 Email address: amanirab@buffalo.edu

Kaustubh Pawar Student No: 50168272 Email address: kpawar@buffalo.edu

Ehsan Sadri Student No: 50172021 Email address: ehsansad@buffalo.edu

1. The main problems associated with the Apix Polybob company are as follows;

 The inventory level is high and as a result, the system is not cost-efficient
 The specified re-order points were not determined properly
 And, they are faced with shortage and as a result, their customer servicing is weak

2. Based on the discussion and current problems in Apix Polybob company, MRP can be
developed as follows;

Part No. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11
Gross Requirements 50 50 60 60 50
Scheduled Receipts
Projected available
A
Net Requirements 50 50 60 60 50
Planned Order Receipt 50 50 60 60 50
Planned Order Release 50 50 60 60 50
Gross Requirements 0 0 50 0 50 0 60 0 60 0 50
Scheduled Receipts
Projected available 10 10 10 40 40 70 70 10 10 30 30 60
B
Net Requirements 40 10 50 20
Planned Order Receipt 80 80 80 80
Planned Order Release 80 80 80 80
Gross Requirements 0 0 100 0 100 0 120 0 120 0 100
Scheduled Receipts
Projected available 40 40 40 90 90 140 140 20 20 50 50 100
C
Net Requirements 60 10 100 50
Planned Order Receipt 150 150 150 150
Planned Order Release 150 150 150 150
Gross Requirements 0 150 0 150 0 0 0 150 0 150 0
Scheduled Receipts
Projected available 180 180 30 30 80 80 80 80 130 130 180 180
D
Net Requirements 120 70 20
Planned Order Receipt 200 200 200
Planned Order Release 200 200 200
Gross Requirements 0 390 0 390 0 0 0 390 0 390 0
Scheduled Receipts
E Projected available 400 400 10 10 20 20 20 20 30 30 40 40
Net Requirements 380 370 360
Planned Order Receipt 400 400 400
 Group Assignment No. 3

Planned Order Release 400 400 400

Gross Requirements 380 380 380 380
Scheduled Receipts 500
Projected available 50 550 170 170 290 290 290 290 410 410 30 30
F
Net Requirements 210 90
Planned Order Receipt 500 500 500
Planned Order Release 500 500

In that case, all the demands are satisfied, the inventory level is in its minimum level (and the total
cost as well).

3. In fact, with the current MRP system, the managers cannot pursue their re-order points to
order product, which in some organizations is a managerial policy. At first, we started to
develop the MRP system based on the specified re-order points (i.e., in such a case, when the
projected available gets lower than the re-order point, we have planned order receipts; while
in the current system, we re-order when the projected available level gets a negative value.
However, we saw that in some cases, we cannot keep up with the gross requirement; thus
changed the plan as to its traditional form). That is one of the shortcoming of the MRP system
in this problem.

4. As the developed MRP table shows, the demand for product type E for week 2 is 390, and
since the delivery time is 2 weeks, if the available inventory is less than 390 (i.e., 𝑃𝐴0 ≤ 390),
the demand cannot be met. And since production of product A is dependent to all of its sub-
assemblies, not meeting the demand of product type E results in the shortage of product type
A, which may further gives the company a bad reputation, internal contradictions, etc. Some
ways that can be addressed to prevent such problems are as follows;

 Reducing the lead-time of product type E by 1 week.

Gross Requirements 0 390 0 390 0 0 0 390 0 390 0

Scheduled Receipts
Projected available 250 250 260 260 270 270 270 270 280 280 290 290
E
Net Requirements 140 130 120 110
Planned Order Receipt 400 400 400 400
Planned Order Release 400 400 400 400

As we can see, in this case we are not faced with shortage for product type E.

 Conducting subcontracting of the remaining demand (i.e., 390 − 250 = 140) in order to fulfill
the demand of week 2. In that case, we can plan for meeting demand of week 4 at the end of
week 2. In that case, our results change to:

E Gross Requirements 0 390 0 390 0 0 0 390 0 390 0

 Group Assignment No. 3

Scheduled Receipts
Projected available 250 250 0 0 10 10 10 10 20 20 30 30
Net Requirements 390 380 370
Planned Order Receipt 400 400
Planned Order Release 400 400 400

 We can negotiate with the customer in order to know whether he/she accept the remaining
demand (390 − 250 = 140) with a delay (i.e., in week 3). If we can shift the 140 units demand
to week 3, our results will be changed to:

Gross Requirements 0 250 140 390 0 0 0 390 0 390 0

Scheduled Receipts
Projected available 250 250 0
260 270 270 270 270 280 280 290 290
E
Net Requirements 140 130 120 110
Planned Order Receipt 400 400 400 400
Planned Order Release 400 400 400 400

As we saw, if these approaches are conducted, we can optimize the planning demand with the aid of
MRP.

 Or, we can scheduled receipts of 400 in week 1. In that case, we will have:

Gross Requirements 390 390 390 390

Scheduled Receipts 400
Projected available 250 650 260 260 270 270 270 270 280 280 290 290
E
Net Requirements 130 120 110
Planned Order Receipt 400 400 400 400
Planned Order Release 400 400 400

5. In that case, it is recommended to use the L4L approach for the current model, and fixed-level
for the new model. The developed MRP can help us to use up all the old model, and use the
new designed product after week 4.

Gross Requirements 0 380 0 380 0 0 0 380 0 380 0

Scheduled Receipts
Projected available 50 50 170 170 0 0 0 0 120 120 240 240
F
Net Requirements 210 380 260
Planned Order Receipt 500 210 500
Planned Order Release 210 500 500
L4L Fixed-level