Availability check in planning

[former_member184737]

Hi All,

    We are using planning strategy 52 for our final product. We maintain PIR for our Finished goods. Our problem here is, due to insufficient component or lack of machine/labor, shop-floor didn't produce as much qty as per the Sales Order's qty with specific delivery date. Planner would expect, the sales person should adjust the SO delivery date based on material's next available date. After adjusting the delivery date, planner will re-run MRP to get the updated planning information to meet the customer requirement for delivery. Planner/Logistic person would like to know about the next availability of the material for delivery.

We maintain planning strategy as 52 for Finished Material

Maintain PIR for Finished material with Requirement type as VSE

Availability check as 02 for finished material

Requirement type in Sales Order  is KSVS

Our requirement is more similar to this

What is the Sales Order ATP exception process for Strategy 52?

But, still not clear. Any suggestion please

Thanks

[Former Member]

AKS,

I am not sure I understand the logic of your proposed Strat 52 business process for dealing with shortages.

Are you saying that some poor little sales clerk is supposed to know that there was a failure in the manufacturing process, and also to be able to predict what will be the date that the delayed order will actually be shippable? And how do expect this person to know this, unless they get the information from the planner?

Best Regards,

DB49

[former_member184737]

Hi DB,

      Thanks, We aware that in planning strategy 52 except final product, all other low assembly / RM are planned well advanced to meet the final product production when the sales order arrives. When we run the MRP, system generate planned order/PR for the low assembly/ RM with start date and end date. In some cases, due to RM unavailability (due to lack of supply or some other reason) it will reach/receive at plant latter than already planned date. Planner should adjust the next level material's (which is using the specific Raw materials which having insufficient qty) planing start date /end date automatically by system based on last RM arrival date.

      And also, logistic person should check the next material availability date for delivery to customer to finalize the  item's delivery date in Sales order. In planning strategy 52, availability check will perform against PIR. How to check the availability to fix delivery date?

       Whether planning strategy 52 is the correct choice for the above scenario or can we change to another strategy with respect to the above requirements?

Thanks

[Former Member]

AKS,

OK, now I am really getting confused.  You now are describing some of the business tasks that might or might not be executed during use of strategy 52, and then you ask if you should be using strategy 52....?

The answer is "i don't know" because you haven't given any actual business requirements.

I had a tough time figuring out what your question actually was in the first post, and now on the last post, the question seems to be somewhat unrelated to the question in the first post.

So, lets back up, and start all over.  What is the question you want to be answered?  If you want me to tell you what strategy you should be using, then sorry, can't help you.

Best Regard,s

DB49

[former_member184737]

Hi DB,

       Our final product has multi level BOM. For example, FERT has 2  semi-finished material along with 3 raw materials in it's BOM. We are using planing strategy 52 for our FERT, no planing strategy maintained for sub-assy and RM. We maintained PIR for this FERT for example 1 month plan. When we run the MRP, system will propose planned order/PR against PIR which are able to convert into process order/ Purchase Order. System will propose us the planned order start date and end date based on the requirement. Semi finished material has 2 more raw materials in it bom. Now, one of the raw material delivery date will be expected delay than system proposed date. planner adjust the date in Purchase order as per real situation and the planner expect these changes will be reflect in their higher assy material's planning (Re-run) which is using this RM as an component in it's BOM. As per our business scenario, we use the planning strategy 52 and also want to use the same.

Thanks

[Former Member]

AKS,

Is there a question somewhere in there?

Best Regards,

DB49

[former_member184737]

Hi DB,

Semi finished material has 2 more raw materials in it's bom. Now, one of the raw material delivery date will be expected delay than system proposed date. planner adjust the date in Purchase order as per real situation and the planner expect these changes will be reflect in their higher assy material's(Semi finished) plan. Planner expects, system always wants to propose the plan date (start/finish) based on material's availability if any delay happened. How system will adjust the plan information based on later material(RM) availability date?

Thanks

[Former Member]

AKS,

Aha, that one is easy.  It doesn't.  The planner does that.

Best Regards,

DB49

[former_member569215]

Hi AKS,

As per my understanding, whtever delay occur due to raw material deficit should refelect in Re Run of higher assmbly material planning.

You can relate your case with lead time planning. By using lead time concept changes will refelect in Re Run.

Regards,

Tanvir 

[Former Member]

Tanvir,

I am intrigued by your answer.  I will admit that I do not always keep up with the latest technology being released by SAP in support of ECC PP planning.

Please tell me the ECC planning strategy where a delay in the lowest level material in a multilevel bom will automatically generate any impact whatsoever on the FGS schedule, no matter how many times your re-run MRP.

Best Regards,

DB49

[former_member569215]

Hi DogBoy,

I think by keeping in mind this lead time, planner can manage this delay in Re run of MRP.

My intention is not to misguide anyone. I am new  to SAP PP, so i was jst trying to share wht i understood.

Regards,

Tanvir