Former Member

### Question on proportional factors and disgaggregation

Hi:

I have a question on proportional factors.

1.

KF1 has disaggregation type P and has KF2 in the planning area maintenance.

KF4 has disaggregation type P and has KF4 in the planning area maintenance.

Now, in transaction MC8V, we generate proportional factors for the planning area. The system will update the values for the key figure APODPDANT. Suppose that the proportions that would be generated by KF2 will be different from the proportions that would be generated when KF4 is used.

1.a But how can the proportions for both KF1 and KF3 be stored in the one key figure APODPDANT (actually APDPDANT in 7.0)?

1.b If we give APODPDANT as the key figure for KF1 in the planning area maintenance. How will the system know that it should calculate based on KF2?

2. Suppose that KF2 is actually a decimal (example 0.3056). In this case, I would just give KF2 as the disaggregation key figure for KF1 correct? How are the decimal places that are more than 3 handled?

Thanks.

Satish

10|10000 characters needed characters exceeded

• Former Member
Jul 13, 2011 at 07:43 PM

Hi;

Sorry. Please ignore the statement that it is APDPDANT in 7.0 - it seems to be APODPDANT only.

Satish

10|10000 characters needed characters exceeded
• Former Member
Jul 13, 2011 at 09:28 PM

Satish,

KF1 has disaggregation type P and has KF2 in the planning area maintenance.

KF4 has disaggregation type P and has KF4 in the planning area maintenance.

I don't know what this means, but I will assume that when you say 'has KF2 in the planning area maintenance', your are talking about 'Disaggregation Key Figure'. Please confirm.

1.a But how can the proportions for both KF1 and KF3 be stored in the one key figure APODPDANT

They aren't. You said that KF1 is disaggregated by KF2, not by APODPDANT. You said that KF4 is disaggregated by KF4. This makes no sense. What would it mean to disaggregate a KF by itself?

At any rate, APODPDANT is irrelevant for any disaggregation unless the KF is disaggregated by APODPDANT.

1.b If we give APODPDANT as the key figure for KF1 in the planning area maintenance. How will the system know that it should calculate based on KF2?

It doesn't. Why would you think so?

2. Suppose that KF2 is actually a decimal (example 0.3056). In this case, I would just give KF2 as the disaggregation key figure for KF1 correct?

?? Beats me. It depends upon what you are trying to do, which at this point is totally unclear.

How are the decimal places that are more than 3 handled?

Depends. In your KF definitions, you can use decimals greater than 3 places. In your planning area, then, when you use 'maximum' accuracy, it will calculate to the limit of the KF definition. I believe max possible is 9 decimals. The smaller the value in the KF, though, the more likely you are to get a rounding error somewhere.

Best Regards,

DB49

10|10000 characters needed characters exceeded
• Former Member
Jul 13, 2011 at 09:44 PM

Hi:

Sorry about that. The sentence should have been the following:

1.

KF1 has disaggregation type P and has KF2 in the planning area maintenance.

KF3 has disaggregation type P and has KF4 in the planning area maintenance.

Thanks. Appreciate if you con respond based on the clirification.

Satish

10|10000 characters needed characters exceeded
• Former Member

Satish,

KF1 has disaggregation type P and has KF2 in the planning area maintenance.

KF3 has disaggregation type P and has KF4 in the planning area maintenance.

I don't know what this means, but I will assume that when you say 'has KF2 in the planning area maintenance', your are talking about 'Disaggregation Key Figure'. Please confirm.

1.a But how can the proportions for both KF1 and KF3 be stored in the one key figure APODPDANT

They aren't. You said that KF1 is disaggregated by KF2, not by APODPDANT. You said that KF3 is disaggregated by KF4, not by APODPDANT. For K1 and K3, APODPDANT is irrelevant.

1.b If we give APODPDANT as the key figure for KF1 in the planning area maintenance. How will the system know that it should calculate based on KF2?

It wouldn't. Why would you think so? You just got done telling me you now want to disaggregate by APODPDANT. Why now would you want to disaggregate by KF2? Which is it going to be?

2. Suppose that KF2 is actually a decimal (example 0.3056). In this case, I would just give KF2 as the disaggregation key figure for KF1 correct?

?? Correct? I don't know. It depends what you want to do. Any Key Figure you use for disaggregation is in the end a collection of numeric values, with time dimensions, stored at the most detailed level of CVCs. This is true whether the KF is APODPDANT, or KF2, or KF4. You have to figure out how to populate these values. It is acceptable to make these Key figures visible and editable in a book, and then manually enter the values. More often, though, there are so many values that must be populated that a program of some sort is used to populate the values. In the end, though, once you have filled all those values in, then the next drill up or drill down will aggregate/disaggregate according to the ratios contained in your disaggregation KF.

How are the decimal places that are more than 3 handled?

Depends. In your KF definitions (RSA1), you can use decimals greater than 3 places. In your planning area, then, when you use 'maximum' accuracy, it will calculate to the limit of the KF definition. I believe max possible is 9 decimals. The smaller the value in the KF, though, the more likely you are to get a rounding error somewhere.

Best Regards,

DB49