on 2016 Nov 27 9:10 AM
Hi,
I was wondering if it is possible to use block planning in apo pp/ds(7.3) if the resource capacity is maintained in r3 (external capacity set in capacity of wc in r3 = shift model, shifts, breaks are maintained in r3) ?
I have such a situation and see that I can assign the block class to the resource, define block definitions and then assign the block intervals on resource version dependent,
but for some reasons the planning heuristic SAP_PP_002 is not considering the blocks. It takes all the time the first pds with the highest priority even if this pds cannot run according to the block definition in that period of time.
we use non-configurable products and hence I classified the operations/routings with class type 018 in r3. On APO side used class type 400. the characteristic is ciffed from r3.
In APO the organizational area used is assigned in customizing of classification to the table /sapapo/matkey.
But my question is:
is it possible to use block planning in apo pp/ds(7.3) if the resource capacity is maintained in r3 (external capacity set in capacity of wc in r3 = shift model, shifts, breaks are maintained in r3) ?
thank you in advance for any hints?
br,
Pilvi
Request clarification before answering.
Hi Pilvi,
I don't think there is such a restriction.
In your scenario, are the block definitions not being respected? Or is the issue simply that the receipts could have been created in earlier dates with a different PDS, but the PDS with higher priority was chosen anyway?
If you want to consider resource capacity in addition to block planning with Planning of Standard Lots heuristic, you could change in /SAPAPO/RES01, tab PP/DS Bucket Capacity, the field "Finite Capacity" to "Bucket Capacity" and in the heuristic change the Scheduling Mode to Search for Bucket with Free Capacity.
Regards,
Tiago
You must be a registered user to add a comment. If you've already registered, sign in. Otherwise, register and sign in.
still one question: the planned orders are sometimes created on a PDS with higher priority...what might be the reason for that?
You must be a registered user to add a comment. If you've already registered, sign in. Otherwise, register and sign in.
| User | Count |
|---|---|
| 12 | |
| 11 | |
| 8 | |
| 2 | |
| 2 | |
| 2 | |
| 2 | |
| 1 | |
| 1 | |
| 1 |
You must be a registered user to add a comment. If you've already registered, sign in. Otherwise, register and sign in.