[Shelby Wright]

For an Item 123 , the demand and planned PO’s are showing no warehouse in Net requirements and on planned orders, and I cannot figure out why. Maybe I am getting rusty working in mgmt. and not directly in planning. 🙂

Forecast demand is exploding through to this item and planned orders are correctly generated: just with blank WHS. 

Storage dimension is SWLoc. Warehouse is not mandatory. No tracking dim.

Planned production order for parent item has warehouse XYZ
Planned order type for item 123 is Purchase order. 
Item 123 has default and site specific order settings and warehouse XYZ set for purchase and inventory
Vendor has same site, Purchase order warehouse XYX
Parent BOM shows XYZ warehouse on that line for this item
Forecast Demand for parent item is for warehouse XYX 
Route group on the route for parent item has input WHS XYZ
Other purchase items on same BOM show demand and planned PO’s in WHS XYZ

What am I missing? 

Thanks!
Shelby

——————————
Shelby Wright
Applications Manager
Leatherman Tool Group
OR
——————————

[Dan Perko]

Shelby – 
The first thing I would look at is the Storage Dimension Group. It sounds like Coverage Planning isn’t checked for the warehouse field.

——————————
Dan Perko
Senior Consultant
New Dawn Solutions, LLC
Southport, NC
——————————
——————————————-

[Shelby Wright]

Dan, thanks for replying. I  should have mentioned that. It is checked (and this is only item currently experiencing this issue among SiteWhs Loc dimension group). 
Warehouse setup is not mandatory, but it is checked in the list.

——————————
Shelby Wright
Applications Manager
Leatherman Tool Group
Portland OR
——————————
——————————————-

[Andrew Lencsak]

Have you tried running BOM recalculation or running a delete plan that rerunning forecast/master plans to see if it’s a data caching issue from perhaps a bad BOM import, many BOM changes, etc.?

——————————
Andrew Lencsak
Solution Delivery Manager
Arbela Technologies
Irvine CA
——————————
——————————————-

[Shelby Wright]

Andrew, thanks.  We do a full regen nightly, so this has persisted through multiple delete plan/replan, but worth a try on BOM level recalc.

——————————
Shelby Wright
Applications Manager
Leatherman Tool Group
Portland OR
——————————
——————————————-

[Andrew Lencsak]

On rare occasions, I have had to run an ad hoc delete plan because the nightly batch had a data caching issue and had to be deleted and recreated from scratch also

——————————
Andrew Lencsak
Solution Delivery Manager
Arbela Technologies
Irvine CA
——————————
——————————————-

[Glenn Linaa]

Hi Shelby.
Sometimes I have seen it caused by demands without warehouse specified.

——————————
Glenn Linaa
Tasklet Factory Mobile WMS
aalborg, Denmark
——————————
——————————————-

[Shelby Wright]

Good consideration, thanks.

——————————
Shelby Wright
Applications Manager
Leatherman Tool Group
Portland OR
——————————
——————————————-

[Kevin McLean]

?Concurring with Glenn, if you have a production BOM line or a sales line without a warehouse, you will generate planning for the blank warehouse.  Usually, you will see that demand line listed in the requirements plan next to the planned order. 

There’s  another possibility that is wild speculation on my part, but worth checking if you can’t find anything else.  If you checked the coverage by warehouse flag after you set up item coverage settings with a minimum, AX will no longer display the existing item coverage settings record, but it’s still in the table.  That might be triggering demand to meet the minimum in the blank warehouse.  You should be able to see that on the net requirements display.  If you turn on the filter by grid in the lower part of the display, you will see that it’s excluding the safety stock demand.  Remove that filter and you should see it, if it’s there.  It wouldn’t be the first thing I’d check, but if you’ve exhausted all the other possibilities, it’s one more thing to look at. 

It would be very nice if you posted what you do find, especially if it’s something that none of us have considered.

——————————
Kevin McLean
Strategic Solutions NW, LLC
Beaverton OR
——————————
——————————————-

[Shelby Wright]

Ah, good thought. I will take a look. That would account for why it is only this item when parameters are identical for other items planning correctly to whs.  WIll look at that and Andrew’s suggestions and post my outcome.

——————————
Shelby Wright
Applications Manager
Leatherman Tool Group
Portland OR
——————————
——————————————-

[Shelby Wright]

Ok, it was BOM line.  A basic.  User added WHS to BOM before I reviewed but I think they didn’t run the parent item planning before the component update when testing one item at a time, so didn’t see the change. When I reran full master planning in test, it showed the WHS. So, not a stumper after all, just miss in testing process. 

I filtered planned orders for orders with blank WHS and got a much longer list than one item… checked, and we introduced a new config, and those BOMs are all missing WHS for packaging items.

Thanks for chiming in, Tribe MRP!

——————————
Shelby Wright
Applications Manager
Leatherman Tool Group
Portland OR
——————————
——————————————-