Issue

This Key Design Decision (KDD) document describes the critical decisions, recommendations, and main pros and cons for the implementation of Manufacturing modules in the ERP Rebuild project.
The document aims to clarify the rationale behind exploring and evaluating SAP PP and SAP PP-PI modules. It highlights the benefits and drawbacks of each solution, including factors such as compliance with Best Practices, available functionalities, scalability, maintainability. 
Production Planning for Process Industries (PP-PI) is the SAP module for Process Production.
Production Planning (PP) is the SAP module for Discrete Production.
It is clear that most of the Syensqo Manufacturing activity are best suited to SAP PP-PI. We must define whether use it also for Discrete Production, adapting the PP-PI module to suit them as much as possible, or introduce the implementation of SAP PP for those plants and production lines running Discrete Production.

Recommendation

The Option 3 - introduce PP only in the Pure Discrete plant(s), and use PP-PI across all other plants, also for those running both Process and Discrete Manufacturing, emerges as the preferred options by large:

• Hybrid plants (Process and Discrete Manufacturing together) will run on PP-PI SAP module
• Process plants will run on PP-PI
• Only pure Discrete Plant(s) will run on PP. At the moment this affects only Newark plant.

Background & Context

PP-PI module is the SAP Best Practice for Process Productions: Continuous Flows, Splitting Towers, Reactors, which are the vast majority of processes in Syensqo. PP-PI is also easily adaptable to manage packing activities. 

Syensqo Manufacturing Plants in WP1 or PF1 systems are currently managed in 99% of the cases via SAP PP-PI module, with a variety of implementations and  different subsets of functionalities activated.  The only exception: plant 4048 is currently using Rate Routings and therefore PP Repetitive Manufacturing. It makes no sense for the processes managed in that plant, it must move to PP-PI.

However, Syensqo Manufacturing landscape includes relevant cases of Discrete Production.

The main example of Discrete Manufacturing is Plant Newark, Product Ajedium: extrusion of thermoplastic film. This plant is 100% Discrete Manufacturing. It is not on SAP systems at the moment.

Other Plants in Syensqo have Discrete Production together with Process Production:

• Case 1: plants with Compounding units: Oudenaarde, Changsu, Kallo, Marietta
• Case 2: Plant Oestringen, filming, pre-pegging and slitting.

For these productions, the SAP Best Practice is SAP PP. They are currently running SAP PP-PI module.

There are specific functionalities that exist only in SAP PP-PI and missing in SAP PP and vice versa, and there are different ways to manage the same activities in the two modules. Here we describe the main differences.

Master Data

the PP Routing is a sequence of operations, PP-PI Recipe is composed by Operations and Phases. Phases are the actual activities to be performed and confirmed in PP-PI, while operations are the actual activities in PP. The relationships are differently managed:

• in PP-PI, Finish-Start, Finish-FInish and Start-Start relationships can be defined, offset can be defined only as a time
• in PP the relationship is by default Finish-Start, Start-Start can be achieved via parallel sequences, and offset can be defined both in terms of time and in terms of quantities produced by an operation before the subsequent can start

Also the definition of Setup time is different:

• in PP-PI a dedicated phase for Setup is required, to allow setup optimization in fine scheduling. Fixed Duration and Qty dependent Duration are two Standard Values used in Phases, however Setup optimization only takes into account the Fixed Duration of the first phase assigned to an operation
• In PP, Setup, Machine and Labor time are the default standard value and Setup time is subject to Setup Matrix and FIne Scheduling optimization wherever it is used 

PP-PI Recipes allow the usage of complex formulas, to calculate the quantities of produced materials based on the quantity of the components: bottom-up BOM/Recipe composition. In PP, the BOM logic is always top-down.

Production Versions are mandatory in both modules, however, they are automatically generated in PP-PI at Recipe Creation, when a BOM is assigned. In PP, Production Versions must be explicitly created with a dedicated App.

The default assignment of unassigned components to the first operation can be customized in PP, it is implicit and not flexible in PP-PI. Hence, in PP-PI is mandatory to explicitly assign the components to the operations in the Recipe to use the Fine Scheduling functions.

Order Management

Process Orders Campaigns exist only in PP-PI. 

Detailed Scheduling is the functionality to dispatch orders  precisely in the production plan taking into account capacity constraints and material availability. It can work via two main tools:

• Optimizer is a multi-criteria method to find the best possible solution for the Production Plan using weights of the different criteria (service level, setup optimization, cost reduction, warehouse occupation, etc.)
• Heuristics are different functions tht can be sued in sequence or combination, addressing the planning criteria one by one to arrive to an efficient plan via subsequent approximations.
• Some heuristics are only available for PP and some heuristics have more options and flexibility in PP than PP-PI

One of the main differences in the past was the Control Recipes and PI-Sheet functionality: it was the only way to define and collect data from process parameters like temperature, pressure, flux-meters data, etc. It was part of PP-PI only. It is defined as obsolete by SAP and maintained only to 2027, the new functionalities are in Digital Manufacturing and available both for PP and PP-PI

Production Confirmations and Goods Movements

There are not relevant differences here, just cosmetics. 

Month End Closing and Order Settlement

The simultaneous adoption of PP-PI and PP in different plants or in different production lines of the same plant will require two different order settlement activities to run at Month End Closing, one for Process Orders and one for Production Orders.

Assumptions

The new ERP system will run on SAP S4/HANA 2023 FPS01 or higher version.

There is only one plant in Syensqo currently running on Repetitive Manufacturing, using Planned Order and Product Cost Collector. It will move to PP or PP-PI accordingly to what defined in this document: Repetitive Manufacturing and Product Cost Collector are not in scope.

Constraints

Impacts

The adoption of PP for the Discrete Productions currently on PP-PI would have the following impacts:

• Data migration will become more complex, as Recipes must be converted in Routings and open Process Orders in open Production Orders
• Project configuration, testing and training will increase as more objects must be configured and tested and more Fiori Apps must be included in training
• Authorization Matrix will be more complex, as some users of some plants must be able to operate both on Process and Production Orders, both in Recipes and Routings, while users of the other plants will be authorized to Process orders and Recipes only
• Once PP is introduced for Discrete activities in some plants, it can be used all across Syensqo production plants to manage Packing actvities, which are compatible with PP-PI, but PP is definitely a better fit for them. Setup optimization is the typical business case for this.

Continue the usage of PP-PI for the plants running both Process and Discrete Manufacturing, and force it to manage also Discrete Production would have the following impacts:

• it will be more difficult to leverage the advantages of all available Apps in S4 system, as their design is tailored on the specific typical requirements of each module. Example: Manage Process Orders App does not allow to book directly confirmations, as in PP-PI they normally comes from Process Control, Manage Production Orders App allows to book directly and quickly confirmations and status updates 
• the solution will be less future-proof as the Digital Manufacturing, and the new Fiori Apps are and will be designed to work for each module in different specific ways for Discrete/Process environments
• Some fine-scheduling functions will be unavailable. For instance, it won't be possible to schedule different capacities of the same Work Center on different orders simultaneously, it won't be possible to schedule the start of a subsequent operations based on quantity elaborated by the previous one.
• If a product can be obtained via different sequences of operations, in PP-PI this can be achieved only creating completely different Recipes and Production Versions, while in PP it is also possible the creation of alternative sequences inside the same Routing.

Interfaces: the project will have anyway a huge impact on Production Interfaces (MES, LIMS and other satellite systems). They must be recreated anyway with new technologies, hence, the 3 options are neutral on this aspect.

Reporting: likewise interfaces, there are many new reporting opportunities in the system, we consider the huge impact of the project absorbing any effect of each of the 3 options considered here.

Business Rules

No Specific Business Rule should change in the 3 options.

Options considered

Option 1: Adopt PP-PI for all Discrete Production Activities

The PP-PI module will be the only one used across the company. Discrete activities will be managed via Recipes and Process Orders.

This option simplifies and accelerates the implementation, but sacrifices the Best Practice concept for the sake of cost and time savings.

Option 2: Adopt PP-PI for Process Activities and PP for Discrete Manufacturing

This is the option that better adopts the Best Practice concept. It requires the most complex implementation and the largest investment in training and Change Management.

Option 3: Adopt PP-PI for Process and Discrete Manufacturing activities in all mixed plants, adopt PP only in the pure Discrete Plant in Newark.

This option allows the plant(s) with pure discrete manufacturing to run on the Best Practices and leverage all functionalities, while the plants with mixed activities will have a simplified model and reduced efforts and training as they keep the current PP-PI module and will deal with familiar concepts. The opportunity of this option comes from the fact that the only pure Discrete plant in the company, Newark, is not on SAP yet. The option to introduce SAP in the plant here at the same time of the project Go-Live is considered.

Note, in all cases, we consider to move plant 4048 Zhenjiang to PP-PI, Repetitive Manufacturing is not a good solution there.

Evaluation

The simple decision matrix lists all considered criteria and the estimated weights and scores for each of the 3 options. The total is the sum of each score multiplied by the weight of the criteria and gives a global evaluation of the options across the different points of view.

The Option 3 - introduce PP only in the Pure Discrete plant(s), and use PP-PI across all other plants, also for Discrete Productions operations that a few of them are running, emerges as the preferred options by large. Hybrid plants (Process and Discrete Manufacturing together) will run on PP-PI SAP module.

Although all options have their advantages and disadvantages, the Option 3 has the indisputable merit of introducing a PP model in the new ERP system, opening the door for leveraging it for future Discrete Production Plants that may be acquired, rolling it out to progressively to the Discrete operations running in the current plant and keeping the company up to date with all SAP innovations and new functionalities that will be introduced in that area by SAP. It is also the best balance between the aim for Best Practice and the containment of complexity and costs.

See also

See Plant Details Tab of:

Business Process Questionnaire - Manufacturing v3 - Google Sheets

for a full map of production processes in the Syensqo plants as assessed in the AS-IS phase.

Change log

Workflow history