Author Archive for Kowboy

Page 3 of 6

Dead stock report – MC50

Published on November 20, 2008 in MM. 5 Comments Tags: , .

The dead stock report often leads to misinterpretations. Hence a little guidance on the dead stock report.

The dead stock report analyses what part of stock is never touched in a defined period of time. If you look at the below graph you will see stock level through time.

Stock level through time

Stock level through time

In analyzing stock movement between period 1 and 5, stock never drops below 30. 30 is your dead stock. It’s the part of stock that was never touched. Now what does this tell you? That’s not easy to say:

Continue reading ‘Dead stock report – MC50′

MRP processing keys

Published on November 19, 2008 in MM and PP. 5 Comments Tags: , , .

NETCH, NETPL and NEUPL are three fundamentally different ways to schedule your MRP run:

  • NETCH – Net Change Planning
  • NETPL – Net Change Planning within Planning Horizon
  • NEUPL – Regenerative Planning
MRP Processing Keys

MRP Processing Keys

I will elaborate on these three options and their workings:

Continue reading ‘MRP processing keys’

Different planning views

Published on November 16, 2008 in MM, PP, Process and SD. 4 Comments Tags: , , .

End-users can get confused about the difference between MD04 – Stock/requirement List and MD05 – MRP List. This post will give you the answer on when to use what report and why:

Continue reading ‘Different planning views’

Printing barcode labels in SAP R/3

Published on November 13, 2008 in Basis. 9 Comments Tags: , , , .

Last week I spent some time finding out how to implement barcode printing in SAP. As usual I googled the internet and a couple of alternatives were flung at me: middleware, hardware vendor applications, installing fonts, etc.

Interestingly enough there is one very simple solution: using the standard barcode font that SAP standard offers for SmartForms.  You wonder why there are so many alternatives while SAP already includes the easiest one. The main requirements for printing barcodes this way are:

Continue reading ‘Printing barcode labels in SAP R/3′

Replenishment to Maximum Stock Level

Published on November 11, 2008 in PP. 3 Comments Tags: , .
Replenishment to maximum stock level

Replenishment to maximum stock level

It is not uncommon that the use of the field Maximum Stock Level in the MRP1 tab in the Material Master leads to misinterpretations. This field can only be properly used together with lot-sizing procedure HB: Replenishment up to maximum stock level. This is commonly used for tanker planning where storage is limited to the tank capacity. This lot sizing can be used in conjunction with re-order point planning or MRP. It cannot be properly used independent of lot sizing HB as a procurement ceiling (see my suggestion at the end of this post for a way to address this).

Continue reading ‘Replenishment to Maximum Stock Level’

Change log SE16N

Published on November 11, 2008 in Basis. 1 Comment Tags: .

In SE16N you can change SAP tables directly. I explained how to in a previous post. I also warned for the risks involved in doing this. Luckily direct changes in SAP tables are also logged, so you can trace back to the culprit who messed things up. You can query the following SAP tables to report on hacks:
SE16N_CD_KEY : Change Documents – Header
SE16N_CD_DATA : Change Documents – Data

Firming types in MRP

Published on November 6, 2008 in PP. 1 Comment Tags: , .

In a production environment it may not be preferable that new requirements on the short term can influence production quantities. The length of the term can be determined by the planning time fence. How MRP treats new requirements in this period can be determined using the firming type in customizing for MRP type:

Continue reading ‘Firming types in MRP’

Planned independent requirement reorganization

Published on November 5, 2008 in PP. 4 Comments Tags: .

You can use the reorganization function to get rid of outdated and/or obsolete planned independent requirements. Furthermore you can delete histories of the requirements from the database.

In these transactions you work with a key date. Requirements before this date are impacted by the transactions. It is possible that a Reorganization Period is set for your plant:
IMG > >Production>Production planning>Planned independent requirements > Define the reorganization interval
You enter here the number of days that the system subtracts from the system date to fix the key date. This setting overrides any manual key date that you enter in the transactions!

ATP on semi-finished materials

Published on November 4, 2008 in PP. 0 Comments Tags: , .

Today we learned from SAP Support that it is not possible to distribute dependent requirements through time for Available to Promise.

What does that mean? Well in our case (process industry) it means the following:

We have a material B1 that is made from A1. We sell both items A1 and B1. Since this is process industry we want weekly process orders to become available on a daily basis. Enter distribution function. When we release a process order for B1, SAP neatly distributes the total process order quantity over 7 days of the week. At the same time dependent requirements are created for material A1. When we check the stock/requirement list (MD04) for materials B1 and A1, in both cases SAP distributes the required quantities during the week.

When we do an ATP check (CO09) for material B1 we can see that every day some quantity becomes available. However, for material A1 the dependent requirements from MD04 are not visible anymore The dependent requirement is taken on the first day of production for the full quantity. This seriously disturbs ATP. This leads to a shortage at the beginning of the week that isn’t there in real time.

How on earth is this not supported by standard SAP R/3, since this seems a standard requirement for any material that is both a sales item AND a component?

SAP Notes: 574800, 572347, 77895

The Beer Game – Supply Chain Simulation

Published on November 3, 2008 in Process. 0 Comments Tags: , .

In Supply Chain project environments it is not uncommon that the project goals can be considered rather conceptual for the business key-users. Even when the key-users (or end-users alike) have a good sense they’re contributing to something valuable, the true benefits are hard for them to explain. How do you explain someone how integrated planning and planning across Supply Chain parties contributes to lower stocks and a nicer looking bottom line? Answer: let them experience it!

A classic way of teaching Supply Chain inefficiencies and how to avoid them is the Beer Game. In the Beer Game participants play an actor in a four stage supply chain (from raw material provider to retailer). Each participant’s aim is to fulfill incoming orders by making sure sufficient stock is available for supply. This usually leads to creating the bullwhip effect (small demand variations downstream lead to amplified variations upstream). This is a great way of letting users (but also consultants with more technical background) experience motions in the supply chain.

For detailed instructions on how to play, a primary source is The Beer Game Portal.