Hello All: My company is working towards an Attain 3.7B implementation. Lately we have been having issues with the Req. Worksheet and have worked with Microsoft to get some of the issues repaired. Currently we are running a 3.7B database with the req. worksheet running 4.0 SP1 modified executables (from Microsoft). In our system we will be using a reorder policy of Maximum qty. During our testing our purchasing manager has come up with the following issue (below). I’m hoping someone may have had similar experience and can suggest how we can work around the Req. Worksheets planning parameters. Let’s say that I have item ABC with a minimum order qty of 500,000 and a max qty of 800,000. I have 200,856 on hand and an order for 150,000 pcs to ship on 11/4. When we run the req. worksheet, it suggests that we order 602,094 pcs. Our buyers would carry out the action message to create a PO. Let’s say that they decide to bring in 300,000 pieces on 11/30/05 and the balance on 12/12/05 (due to long production lead times). Typically we would go into that PO and manually split the PO so that we have two lines with two different expected receipt dates. After splitting the PO running the Req. Worksheet tells us to cancel the second shipment because the first shipment gets us back into the “min/max” level of the item. We had thought that setting “planning flexibility” to none would help alleviate this problem, but using this in turn exposes more problems. It seems that the Planning Flexibility, when set to none, completely ignores the PO. For instance, if a new Sales Order is entered to ship between our PO expected receipt dates & this new Sales Order drives us below our min level, the req worksheet suggests we place another PO for the amount required “Plus” the needed amount to get us back to the max level. This can end up over inflating our inventory by large amounts. Due to this we have basically ruled out setting the planning flexibility to none. It would be greatly appreciated if anyone can provide us with suggestions or comments that can help us out. Thanks. Jerry
Hi Jerry Nice to see with all the obstacles you have been hitting with the maximum quantity you are still persevering! Lars posted something similar at http://www.mbsonline.org/forum/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=15391 and has a code fix but I am not sure from your description if it actually helps. As for comments - you are probably running a set-up few others are around the world, and it is an area as you will know from the “numerous” 3.70 issues and the reworking of them in 4.0, that Microsoft have yet to resolve. You’ll have to think of yourselves as trail blazers and resolve the issues as you hit them - horrible I know but I get the impression this is the position you are in as no one else (except Lars) has actually reported these to Microsoft as they are using them in anger. As you have also found out setting the planning flexibility to none means everything is fixed and you cannot replan and therefore the movement of outgoing orders is seen as new demand and planned for accordingly - you are correct in stating this will only inflate your inventory. All I can offer is to have a go at replicating and verifying your issues as you hit them, as a secondary source before reporting to Microsoft, but ultimately I feel you will be reporting a lot to Microsoft - sorry [V]
Steven: Once again, Thank you for all the help. Your comments and suggestions are greatly appreciated. In searching the forum I got the impression that there was a high probability that few companies were using the system as we are. I did read some posts by Lars and one of them actually helped us get a “fix” from Microsoft US rather quickly (we copied them directly on his post). Even if we end up being trail blazers, it’s wonderful to know we have this forum to come to for additional support, help, etc… Once again, thanks. Cheers. Jerry
Hi Jerry. If You only implemented the fix in my previous post it won’t be enough. You must take the complete codeunit “Inventory Profile Offsetting” from 4.01SP1 and import it to Your 3.70-database. Add some new keyes in some tables that is used in the new version of the codeunit and comment out the stuff about planning resilency that is used in req. line in 4.0SP1. After we did the above at a customers site all issues regarding purchase planning was resolved. //Lars