on ‎2014 May 09 7:48 PM
Hello all,
Need your guidance again.
The planned order's generated from the Planning table are created with order type PE(Run Schedule Quantity), whereas the ones that are generated (through MRP run) from the requirements via Demand Management are defaulted to order type : LA.
Note:
1. REM indicator is activated and a valid REM profile is maintained as well.
2. Prod version is allowed with REM.
3. Necessary Scheduling Parameters are defined in OPU5.
what do i miss here ?
Please do help me out.
Regards,
Rahul
Request clarification before answering.
Hello all,
Will running MRP impart changes to planned order's created through planning table ?
Regards,
Rahul
You must be a registered user to add a comment. If you've already registered, sign in. Otherwise, register and sign in.
Hello all,
Upon reviewing the planned order's of both the types (LA and PE) i could see one difference among them which is nothing but the storage location.
The one with type PE has a valid value in the storage location field whereas the other one (type LA) has no value in the storage location field.
Upon manual filling of the storage location entry i see the order type being changed to PE from LA.
The receiving location in the production version concerned and prod. storage location in MRP 2 has a value of '1000' (storage location) maintained but still the planned order generated dint have them determined.
I had multiple MRP runs carried out with planning mode 3 (Delete and Recreate) but still they weren't determined on few planned order.
The MRP type used here is 'P1 - fixing type 1' which wouldn't change the procurement proposals right after it's creation i mean changes done later to it's creation ? correct me if wrong
But as here there weren't any changes to the prod storage location and receiving storage location in the recent while.
Am all confused, Please share your thoughts.
Regards,
Rahul
You must be a registered user to add a comment. If you've already registered, sign in. Otherwise, register and sign in.
You must be a registered user to add a comment. If you've already registered, sign in. Otherwise, register and sign in.
Dear Rahul,
If I remember correctly, then this is the standard SAP behavior and kindly check if the production
version is assigned/linked in the planned orders , For example 0062251415,416 etc . If not then assign
the production version for these planned orders(generated through planning table) in MD12 then check if
the planned order is displayed as PE.Also check this thread,
Regards
Mangalraj.S
Your C223/Prod version details show that the last consistency check has been carried out on 20.09.2013. Many things would have happened/changed and so execute a new check now and look for new details and make corrections as required.
Also most of your order proposals look firmed with the asterisk. Can you delete them and check again after you do your consistency check? Hopefully things should look normal.
Hello Mangalraj,
Thanks for your comments.
The production version is assigned for all the planned orders available. I tried running MRP again with planning mode 3 ( Delete and recreate) but still the planned orders are generated with type 'LA'.
A sample as follows:
Another question:
Is there any constraint like the production version should be assigned to the schedule line concerned in PIR ? well i tried without assigning them to other material's (had the prod version field empty in PIR) still it had a planned order generated with type 'PE'. If so in which scenario's they are brought into picture ?
Please do help me out.
Regards,
Rahul
Rahul, OPU5 specifies details based on plant/order type/prod scheduler.
Do you have a prod scheduler set for your material?
Plant ord type Prod sched
0001 * *
0001 * PS1
If a material has PS1 set as prod scheduler system should go with scheduling/order type details specific to it.
Check if this is the case.
Hi Rahul,
Check the Scheduling Level selected in Config t code OPU5- Schedule for Planned order was different from the scheduling type used in the production version it's look like. i think bcoz this you will be getting planned order type LA instead of PE.
If you use Rate Routing use Rate Based Planing in Prod Ver. and in OPU5 make Rate Base Scheduling.
If you used Std routing the make change detailed planning as Routing in Prod Ver and keep OPU5 settings.
Once you done change then run Prod Ver Consistency check and run MRP again you will get planned order type LA instead of PE for REM mfg.
Regards,
Divakar Rane
Message was edited by: Divakar Baliram Rane
Hello Rahul,
Please check this point,
If the PIR is created without reference to the Production version, then after MRP run you would get planned orders of type LA. Once this planned order is assigned with Production version/Production Line then automatically the planned order type is changed from LA to PE.
I hope this information helpful to you,
Thanks & Regards
Umesh Mali
You must be a registered user to add a comment. If you've already registered, sign in. Otherwise, register and sign in.
Hello Umesh,
Thanks for your comments.
The production version date and selection method is all fine.
Yes the PIR was created without production version reference. Even upon assigning the concerned Prod version and re running MRP (Planning Mode: Delete and Recreate) planned order's type still remains in LA.
Plz advice.
Regards,
Rahul
Hello Rahul,,
This are pre step which we have to maintained for the REM process
1. Select the check box for Repetitive Manufacturing is included in MRP4 view and suitable REM profile has been assigned.
2. Production version is relevant to REM is included in the production version of that material master, Prod version valid period, valid lot size of prod version
3. Make sure production version is not locked. ( Prod Version Test status is green )
4. BOM selection method should be 2 in MRP4 view of the material master.
5. Maintained the preliminary and standard cost estimate through KKf6N and Ck11n.
6. Check whether the suitable scheduling parameter has been maintained in OPU5 for the order type PE for the plant.
Please cross verify all the step once again,
Thanks &Regards
Umesh Mali,
| User | Count |
|---|---|
| 36 | |
| 26 | |
| 20 | |
| 4 | |
| 4 | |
| 4 | |
| 3 | |
| 3 | |
| 2 | |
| 2 |
You must be a registered user to add a comment. If you've already registered, sign in. Otherwise, register and sign in.