How pegging tab record is display while update master scheduling from net requirement form

Hi,

Someone guide me,how the update master scheduling will work in net requirement form.I want to know,how the records are displayed in the pegging tab.can anyone clarify,In pegging tab first it will consider the on hand qty are something else(PO).

It is huge, you have cosniderations like the master plan, coverage group, parameters, item coverage group, demand, forecast, supply rules, warehouse config.

It looks at everything within the ruleset provided and defines the supply to fulfill the demand. Pegging is date based but the matching in part depends upon the coverage group configuration.

Hi,
If i reserve the qty in sales order updating the master scheduling ,pegging tab display the on hand record.If i unreserved the Qty of the sales order and again updating the master scheduling pegging tab shows the Purchase order record.Is it standard process.

That would imply by the logic employed in the Master Planning configuration you have that the on-hand stock is not valid from a planning perspective to fulfill the demand so a new supply would have to be created. Yes it is standard you can do this, but the fact you are asking the question implies you feel it is wrong, which means you need to look at your settings.

Hi,
Can you tell me,which setting can causes this scenario.

There are lots, plan settings on inventory, dimension settings to balance supply and demand, impact of elements like the coverage period and negative and positive days, customisations etc. Not to mention this changes in versions and CU’s. If your stock is being ignored your first question is why, it is available to reserve but why is not not considered at the time demand would be fulfilled.

Hi,
I am not familiar with this module.

If your stock is being ignored your first question is why, it is available to reserve but why is not not considered at the time demand would be fulfilled.
Can you explain me more.I using Ax 2012.

Not easily, you would need to show us the item coverage settings, the plan settings, the net requirements etc. just to illustrate the picture. Is there no partner you can ask who has access to the system and config?

Hi,

Please see the below screenshots for your reference.

This is the net reuirement form.If I reserve the qty five for the sales order(S205702) then update master scheduling it shows the on hand record(Pegging tab).If I unreserved the qty again updating the master scheduling then it showing the Purchase order record(Pegging tab).

pastedimage1516102513325v1.jpeg.

Please guide me the solution to get the On hand record after unreserved the sales order qty.

Update master planning by doing a FULL regeneration each time? If you run it from the net requirements this is a different run with different logic to increase performance (although it would still reference on hand).
You have not shown the item coverage - this is the one set against the item itself, you have them because I can see in the net requirements.
Why are your negative days set to 2?

I cannot read the net requirements screen, but it looks like the first line is the on hand stock

I can read it on the email and it is all in the past, so all things you should have done?

You start with 35 in stock you end with 19, it is using your stock. However you cannot look back, you need to plan forward. Is the PO from nearly 3 months ago due in any time soon? Why has the confirmed date not been updated?

Is this real and live or are you just testing things?

Yes…First line is the on hand stock with 35 in net requirement form.
In test environment having this things.

Well tht net requirements looks fine. If the stock is reserved unreserve the stock and re-run a full plan. Is your item batch controlled with an expiry date?

I am using serial number but which is not having the expiry date.
Are you saying that this scenario is expected behavior.

There is nothing wrong with what you have shown me that cannot be explained.
You have 35 in stock. A PO was placed for delivery on 29/11. The demand for this was subsequently removed otherwise it would not have been placed. You can check to see if the reference of the PO has a planned order to show planning suggested it, but the point is it suggested it it was then accepted as needed, when the demand was removed nothing was done to the PO. This gives you 83 in stock. We then have 10 being transferred out, another 4 being transferred out and finally a sale on 6/12 for 50 leaving you with 19 in stock.
It is using your stock.
Looking back you need to understand why the PO P045811 was raised, this could not be system generated without demand.
AX plans forward, if you are worried about AX ignoring stock load a sales order for 10 for this item in this system and run planning, it will not suggest you buy any as you have 19 on hand. Load one for 20 and it will tell you to order 1 (or more depending upon settings).

Hi,

Now currently having the net requirement form like this,

I feel while reserving qty (SO)it take the on hand and its showing in the pegging tab for transfer requirement,but while unreserved qty it showing the po in pegging of the transfer requirement.having enough qty in the on hand but why it is not taking from on hand and showing in the pegging tab instead of the po in transfer requirement. Can you explain me for the current net requirement form.

When you reserve to something specific it is marked, this is a higher priority than anything. When the AX logic kicks in it calculates the priority, I beleive On hand is de-prioritised because you will potentially use this on other orders before the one in the far future, and because you have supply (which planning could not have planned without demand) it will peg to that because the on hand should have been consumed.
Ultimately it does not matter, it is balancing supply and demand and you can fulfill it. AX needs to balance it for the pegging to work out demand, but it is not creating any additional supply.
To get the true answer you would need a developer to walk through the code, it has changed per release and within release.

Hi,

Thanks for reply.

As you said it is standard I accept that one but for reserve the item “SO” its taken from “On Hand” its correct. For transfer requirement why it taking from the “OnHand”,it should take qty from the “PO” because it is having the enough po(18.01.2018) before selling so(18.01.2018).

If I reserve the qty five for SO and updating the master scheduling.Pegging tab shows the On Hand for Sales Order,but transfer requirement showing On Hand instead of the PO.(see the Screenshots of “SalesOrderOnHand and TransferRequiremntOnHand”).Is it Standard process.

If I unreserved the sales order and updating the master scheduling net requirement form display the PO for both the transfer requirement and Sales order. Is it Standard process.(see the Screenshots of “UnreserveSalesOrderPO and UnreserveTransferrequirementPO”).

As you said before according to the date it will consider,If the date of the “SO” greater than “PO” then it will take qty from the “PO”.else if the date of the “SO” is less then the PO then it will take the qty from the “On Hand”.This thing i have under stood.Am I understanding correctly.

I am expecting to get the “PO” for the transfer requirement if reserve the qty for the “SO”.But getting the On Hand for the Transfer requirement.Is it Standard.

Can you guide me.For the long time Analyzing but still now not able to understand Is it standard one or not and how we are tell that it is standard.

The PO should never have been created, so that is issue one, issue two is the transfer is not needed. You have action messages you have configured that you are ignoring. Raising orders breaking the configured rules will always cause issues!
If you delete the PO you dont need it would peg to the stock.
As for what is standard I have said it changes per version and update. The only way you will know what your versions logic and priority is would be for a developer to step through the code.
The date question is one of debate, it depends upon the logic, I am inferring from your screen shot, but it is logical to plan to the demand coming in on the assumption the on hand will be consumed, otherwise why would you have a replenishment order?
Yes I would say the TO is standard, but again only a developer could tell you the priority logic, but in those instances it is internal, so the logic can be different.
How you tell if something is standard is to assume everything is standard, and ask a developer to explain the code in your version when you are not.

In my opinion the issue here is the not needed orders, I would also challenge the negative days which I am sure were set to 2, but you did not tell me why.