Skip to content

Contact us

    Talk to our Experts


    +1 920 303 0470
    info@smart-is.com 1302 S Main ST , Oshkosh , WI 54902-6518

    Auto-Waving in BlueYonder WMS Application

    The BlueYonder TM (BY) WMS product comes with a rich featured Wave Planning process. However, it is limited in automating the business rules that are generally operationally implemented during the wave planning process by an organization. When we evaluate Wave Planning SOPs for an organization the following common aspects surface:

    · A naming convention for effectively planning waves

    · A criteria logic for filtering wave-able orders into manageable waves

    · A limit on wave size by number of orders, number of lines, weight, or other criteria

    · Contingency for emergency orders that may be dropping continuously during the day

    · A cut-off time for waves

    · Guidelines for allocating and releasing the waves

    With these common goals, the problem statement quickly surfaces — Why can this not be automated?

    The Waving process in BY WMS is inherently SOP driven with specific operational limits that need to be enforced. However, enforcing the operational controls becomes tedious in otherwise, a very powerful order selection tool!

    As a Wave Planner, there are operational guidelines to follow when planning a set of orders into waves. However, the wave planning tool, while quite robust and easy to use, does not offer any tools to automate my known parameters. Majority of my orders follow strict operational guidelines to be waved and work created for the floor on set intervals.

    As a wave planner, I would like to focus more on resolving the minority of orders that do not fit my operational profile and further invest my time in resolving allocation issues and work related issues on the floor.

    Welcome to Auto-Waving

    The BYTM WMS offers robust wave planning features. Often these features are not utilized to their full potential. The Auto-Waving functionality offered by Smart IS extends the existing “Criteria” logic in Wave Planning as follows:

    1. Allow for added criteria

    2. Allow for the named criteria to drive a naming convention for the wave name

    3. Allow for the named criteria to launch on a preset schedule

    4. Allow for actions to be taken automatically for the planned waves like allocating, cancelling if shortages encountered, allocating and releasing etc.

    5. Allow for waves to accumulate to the same name for a given interval and then start a new name when limits are exceeded

    The user builds the criteria using the standard Criteria Feature in the Wave Operations Planning screen. These criteria are saved in standard Criteria Data sets where additional data elements are added as part of the Auto-Waving modification provided.

    The criteria can be tested by the user in the Wave Planning operation by simply applying it.

    Once the criteria is tested and validated, it can be enabled for auto processing.

    A job is scheduled to run in the background to look at the available order pool at the set job interval and plan them into appropriate waves, based on the criteria that are enabled. The job provides the following key functions:

    1. Look at the available criteria that is enabled for Auto-Waving

    2. If the criteria fits the time parameters for planning, then initiate the plan.

    3. The planning portion calls standard BY routines to list the available orders and filters them to the criteria fields being worked on. For example, if the criteria requires a given customer to be planned, then only these customers are selected.

    4. The data set is then limited to any limits imposed by the criteria. For example, if only X number of orders should be in the wave then the data set is cut-off at that limit.

    5. The wave is then planned using the naming convention provided.

    6. After planning, the job checks to see if any further actions should be taken like allocating and releasing the wave.

    7. If the wave limits are not reached during a given iteration of the job, then the job will wait to plan more orders into the same wave on the next iteration. Unless a provided time limit expires, after which the planned wave is considered complete and actionable.

    8. An important feature is to cancel the reservations if any shortages are encountered during the allocation. This provides an automated process that a given wave does not sit on allocated inventory for a longer period of time.

    9. A robust logging feature is available to1. monitor the execution of this job and follow-up on any failed executions.

    The setup for this process in your existing live environment is quite easy:

    1. Initial dialogue is conducted to ensure that the solution will fit in with your operational needs.

    2. The solution is offered as a fixed price consulting engagement so, any gaps, if encountered, are fixed before the rollout is provided.

    3. Initial rollout is installed in the Development/QA environment of choice and training is conducted for the Wave Planners.

    4. A smooth in period is provided for the Wave Planners to get comfortable with the process and validate the execution of business logic properly.

    5. Any issues that may be encountered are resolved

    6. The solution is then migrated to production.

    The wave criteria continues to be improved in a live environment as new business requirements emerge. This solution is designed to grow with client needs and since it utilizes all standard JDA routines, it is upgradeable to subsequent JDA versions when the client wishes to upgrade.

    Smart-IS, LLC is a full services Consulting Organization. Smart-IS has a long-standing expertise in implementing BY TM WMS for Industry Leading organizations. Smart-IS is also the only Solution Provider in this Solution Space with firm dedication to R&D.

    Leave a Reply

    Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

    Recent Stories

    View All
    Blog Feature Image
    ForgeViu: Visual Experiences for an Intent-Centric Enterprise
    Jun 12, 2026

    Technology has a habit of making us believe that every new breakthrough renders everything that came before it obsolete. When television became mainstream, many predicted the end of radio. When e-commerce emerged, some predicted the end of physical retail. When smartphones arrived, there were predictions that desktop computing would become irrelevant. Reality is usually more

    Read More
    Beyond the Crawl: A Coding Agent for Proprietary Programming Languages
    May 17, 2026

    General-purpose coding models perform well on languages that are well-represented on the public internet. They fail predictably on proprietary or domain-specific languages: hallucinated identifiers, wrong call shapes, and confident reproduction of deprecated patterns. MOCA, the scripting language inside Blue Yonder’s Warehouse Management System, is one of those failure cases, the entire ecosystem (grammar, command catalog,

    Read More
    The Generalist Manifesto: Why “Broad Intelligence + Skill” Is the Future of AI
    May 08, 2026

    For the past couple of years, we’ve seen a massive push toward Specialized LLMs. The argument seems intuitive: if you need legal expertise, use a legal model. If you need medical expertise, use a medical model. Why rely on a “general” model when you can have one trained specifically for the task at hand? In

    Read More
    Safety by Ignorance vs Safety by Understanding: What the Claude–DoD Debate Is Really About
    Apr 03, 2026

    There is a growing debate in AI governance that is often framed as a dispute over “safeguards,” “alignment,” or “responsible AI.” A recent flashpoint involves models developed by Anthropic (notably Claude) and the U.S. Department of Defense, but the disagreement is deeper than any single vendor or contract. At its core, the debate is not

    Read More
    From Chat to Capability: Operationalizing Enterprise AI Intents
    Apr 02, 2026

    In earlier posts, I argued two related ideas: This post builds directly on those ideas and takes the next logical step. If intent is the real abstraction — and if enterprises need repeatable, governed intelligence — then the obvious question is: Where does intent actually live, and how does it execute? The Missing Layer: Intent

    Read More
    Enterprise Cognitive Intelligence, Without the Complexity
    Feb 17, 2026

      In our previous post, we showed how our MCP framework removes the friction from exposing system capabilities to AI. MCP solves access. Cognition requires meaning. Because enterprises don’t think in systems.They think in business concepts. The Limits of System-Level Intelligence Most MCP servers today expose a single system — ERP, WMS, OMS, planning engines —

    Read More
    From APIs to Intelligence: How Our MCP Framework Makes Any System AI-Ready
    Feb 17, 2026

    Everyone wants to “add AI” to their systems — but few succeed. Not because AI models aren’t powerful — they are. But because exposing enterprise systems to AI is still too hard. So for most teams, the friction is simply too high. A Useful Analogy: AI as a Researcher Think of AI as a researcher. At

    Read More
    F
    From System Silos to System Intelligence: The AI Shift Enterprises Cannot Afford to Ignore
    Dec 10, 2025

    Enterprises today operate in an environment where systems multiply, data sits fragmented, and real-time decisions depend on information scattered across platforms. The divide between organizations’ need for instant, secure, conversational access to enterprise intelligence and their reliance on siloed screens, complicated integrations, and manual reporting processes is increasing each year.   According to a survey report

    Read More
    Why Traditional Deployment Playbooks No Longer Keep Up with Modern Warehouses
    Oct 30, 2025

    Modern warehouses are evolving faster than the deployment practices that support them. What was once a predictable, linear, and manual deployment cycle has turned into a complex, high-stakes process that no longer fits the pace of operations. Traditional deployment playbooks were designed for slower systems with fewer moving parts. Today’s warehouses operate across multiple sites,

    Read More
    The Hidden Cost of Screen Development in Warehouse Reporting and the Solution
    The Hidden Cost of Screen Development in Warehouse Reporting and the Solution
    Oct 16, 2025

    Reporting sits at the core of every warehouse operation. It is the lens through which leaders make decisions, monitor performance, and anticipate challenges. Yet, behind the charts and dashboards lies a process that is often far more complex and costly than it should be. Screen development in warehouse reporting has become a silent drain on

    Read More