Characteristics Planning vs Selection conditions for Child Components

[VigneshV]

Hi

Would like to understand if in MD61 we are planning for KMAT material along with MDP1/MDP2/MDP4/MDPH set up for forecast orders for header level [Finished Material] certain child components are mapped with same characteristics that are considered in MD61 screen while running MRP how system will consider the child components for which selection conditions are updated as same characteristics considered in MD61 screen.

I tried MRP run it is not showing the PIR generated for header material for the child components in which the selection is written in BoM.

PIR for Header shown in MD04

Child components based on characteristics inside selection condition is not shown

Vignesh V

[Ritz]

vigneshveerasamy,

Please check what strategy you are maintaining in material you are calling as KMAT. It should be 56 or 89.

Please use below link to compare your setup.

https://help.sap.com/erp_hcm_ias2_2015_02/helpdata/en/54/23bf53d25ab64ce10000000a174cb4/content.htm?...

please also see

Prerequisites

To maintain usage probabilities, the following are mandatory:

• The material must be a configurable material.
• The strategy group 56 (characteristics planning) or 89 (characteristics planning with assembly) must be maintained in the material master record.
• The characteristics of the configurable material to be planned must be flagged relevant to planning in the configuration menu. For more information,
• Flagging a Comb. Value Key as Relevant for Plannin

Thanks

RD

[VigneshV]

Hi RD

Thanks for reply.

Planning strategy is custom one.

Vignesh V

[Ritz]

vigneshveerasamy,,

I dont have training system handy so that's why asking , why don't you add all weekly demands using MD61 instead of using MD62? or in the example you shared you are modifying the demand entered earlier and changing quantity from 10 to 15 ?

I guess available Bapi will work for over write and while testing it for this scenario, i suggest even with BAPI try to simulate creation instead of change and it will overwrite the data.

Good Luck.

Thanks

RD

[Ritz]

vigneshveerasamy,

question: , is it PIR of KMAT right ? not the lower level components?

To me its looks good and logical as there are only 2 characteristic and in first week we entered 50/50 probability so next week also same possibility is pick as default but we have option to overwrite it , correct?

Thanks

RD

[VigneshV]

Hi RD,

PIR is for KMAT.

As sample Test case took 2 characteristics for planning,in real time will be more.

Default picking may not be ideal for Business team as based on Planning it may change & currently system is such a way that it need over write to be done but standard BAPI need to be explored to address this scenario as we get the demand from DMS system.

Vignesh V

[Ritz]

vigneshveerasamy,

to understand it better could you explain with an example on below.

We have multiple qty for weekwise�� / monthwise probability proposed is being automatically called for non filled config support points which will not be real time case.

Thanks

RD

[VigneshV]

Hi RD

Little held up in-between.

As requested sample screen shot & details for scenario I mentioned earlier.

Below is in one example where PIR for 10 is entered with use probability of 50 & 50, later I am adding 15 pieces for which when clicking config support point use probability of 50 & 50 is default shown.This is standard behavior which we may need to consider while trying any automation of PIR pushed from external material for KMAT material.

Vignesh V

[Ritz]

vigneshveerasamy,

sorry was busy since last couple of days, its strange my understanding is that once you plan KMAT with preferred usage probability for characteristic and run MRP the dependent requirement will be generated for child components.

I suggest please check all your setup once more time.

Please see below link explaining how a sample scenario will work for standard 56.

https://help.sap.com/viewer/5ea0a2df744e4c02bf98ae224bbe4eec/6.05.16/en-US/1b23bf53d25ab64ce10000000...

Thanks

RD

[VigneshV]

Hi RD

Thank you for support.

56 strategy is working fine.

Issue was the custom code requirement type being retained in items tab of MD61 which is not dynamic in nature when we change the qty in MD62 screen.

Observation in Standard SAP

We have multiple qty for weekwise🗓 / monthwise probability proposed is being automatically called for non filled config support points which will not be real time case.

Remembering similar instance reported by another user in forum.

Vignesh V

[Ritz]

vigneshveerasamy,

One doubt is in case if Planning Independent Requirement for header will flow to components ?

yes based upon usage probability maintained accordingly component will be planned.

Child components PIRs will be removed from system once the real time sale order is created in system ?

with creation of sales order its will consume PIR of header material.

Thanks

RD

[VigneshV]

Hi RD,

Thanks for reply.

Checked with standard 56 strategy group for header material.

Output Results :

1. PIR for KMAT Material & MRP ==> Header PIR is being created but while checking for components I am not getting the qty planned for Header flown to child components.

PIR generated shown with exception message as "52" - No BoM Selected.[Valid BoM+Routing mapping done & Production version is available too]

2. Sale order for KMAT Material & MRP ==> Separately created a sale order in which after MRP - Header followed by Child components is exploded.

Vignesh V

[Ritz]

vigneshveerasamy,,

Please check the links i shared in my previous post, and if possible use a test box and do setup using standard strategy if you are exploring it first time. Once clear then compare your business setup and it may help you finding the issue if there are any.

Thanks

RD

[VigneshV]

Hi RD

Thank you.

Parallelly checking the same.

One doubt is in case if Planning Independent Requirement for header will flow to components ?

Child components PIRs will be removed from system once the real time sale order is created in system ?

These points I am validating.

Vignesh V