Alternative unit of meassure for FU/Package Builder/Load Planning

[Former Member]

Hello, colleagues!

I stuck with following problem. According customer request for generation pallets I activated a new functionality of SAP TM9.3 Package Builder. Made all required settings for PB. This step works correctly. Problem appears during Load planning of these FUs.

For example: I have cases, when FUBR+PB could give me 33 FUs:

• 28 FUs are completed (1 pl1);
• 4 FUs have volume 0,8-0,9 pl1;
• and 1 is 0,2 pl1.

For vehicle capacity I used three constraints: KG, M3 and BUoM of package -- pl1.Optimizer loads my vehicle with all satisfied constraints: less then 20 tonn, less then 52 m3, and no more then 32 pl1. But actually during loading process I can get 33 cargo places, that is more than vehicle capacity. Here is a problem..

How do set constraint for number of FUs for vehicle resource?

or could you explain correct proccess of alternative unit maintenance?

I tried to use alternative unit of meassure for my package and for vehicle capacity consumption, but I didn't get success. Explanation tool is showing me that my alternative unit of meassure for FU is equal to 0.

[Former Member · Accepted solution]

Hi Pavel,

Have you checked your resources Additional Capacities?

My best,

Michel.

[Former Member · Accepted solution]

Hi Michel,

Yes, I did it. I tried to set capacity for my vehicle. But without results..

I can say more.

I found out that my FUs do not contain such alternative unit of meassure ( except 1 !)

now I will try to explain.

during system setting I found that FUBR and Package Builder work sequentially.. (but do not collaborate with each other) At first FUBR splits the whole order volume on FUs and assigns AUoM (if you set such). Then PB starts optimization (pallet generation) separately for each generated FUS. If taken FU more than package capasity the PB split this FU on a few newFUs. Thus PB process all FUs generated after FUBR. In result it release a set of newFUs which is not consolidated among each other, just summs optimal solutions as soon as PB finished pallet generation.

I worked with a long list of items in OTR. And i wasn't satisfied with results.

After that, I decided to set split criteria in the FUBR as much as possible, to get after FUBR one big FU (i know, it's no so good idea.. and we shouldn't work with FUBR in such manner, but it gives better optimal solution). On the next step, the PB started optimization on shape of one FU, and as a result I got a better solution. PB had  packaged on 15-20% better, and released less pallets. These pallets were packaged complete.
BUT! my alternative unit of measure during pallet splitting process stayed hold the same and only for one FU. for FU that was generated during FUBR process.

We tired to fight with this engine behavior, we are going to make a development and use adjusting method for FUs after PB processing.

[former_member186731 · Accepted solution]

Hi,

a few comments:

First of all it is my expectation that when somebody uses the Package Builder function that no FUB split crtieria beyond the absolutely required mandatory split crtieria are applied. So no split based on weight, volume or whatever. Your analysis is right, that this gives the PB the most power to consolidate. Within the FUB rule there is then the chance to split your FUs based on the pallet count.

Secondly, the PB determines the quantity of the package item based on the used vs. available height ratio. Challenge, as you have experienced, is now that such lowly utilized packages consume during the VSR planning only this quantity (because in reality such incomplete packages/pallets could still be stacked and would then fit). So I assume you are in a scenario where you would not stack?

One solution for this would be to adjust the quantity of the lowly utilized packages and set them to 1. You could do this in the PB BAdI method /SCMB/IF_EX_PACKAGE_BUILDER~ADJUST_ITEMS.

There is currently a lot going on preparing best practices for the aligned usage of the FUB&PB and VSR and LP. For sure this will result is feasible solutions.

Hope this helps.

Marcus

[Former Member · Accepted solution]

Hi guys,

We have such similar scenario on my current project. As we don’t have PB in 9.2, we adopted a different solution. Please check if meets your requirements.

We have set OTR, DTR, FU and FO with TO (Tons) as Mass UoM, M3 (Cubic meter) as Volume UoM. We will use PAL (Pallet) as a Quantity UoM. All involved UoM must be configured with 3(or more) decimal places rouding.

On TM Material Master Data, define all conversion rules considering pallets dimensions (Length, Width and Height).

Define your FUBR to split your requirements in 1 PAL.

The result are FU´s representing one Pallet.

Now the Load Planning tool can do its job.

Note that we have some side effects which in our case are smaller than the benefits and we decided to treat internally.

My best!

Michel.

[former_member186731 · Accepted solution]

Hi,

it might help if you could explain quickly where you have placed your conversion from the product quantity to the PAL quantity.

By the way: Technically you could already use the standard package builder for this purpose as it is an SCMB component. What is missing is the standard TM integration into the FUB.

Marcus

[Former Member · Accepted solution]

Hi Marcus,

As above, the conversion is placed on Material Master Data at TM side. (/SAPAPO/MAT1):

Thanks!

[former_member186731 · Accepted solution]

No, I meant where in the process you do the conversion from product quantity to PAL.

[Former Member · Accepted solution]

Sorry, I didnt get the point.

You mean at the real process, not in system?

If yes, we have a MTO scenario, and at the end of the production process, they are packaged or palletized, and go to a pre-picking area.

I hope it is clear.

My best,

Michel.

[former_member186731 · Accepted solution]

No, I meant where in the TM process you are doing this. You receive orders based on product and need to transfer this to PAL. Are you doing this on the forwarding order? Within the FUB? Afterwards?

So technically: When do you use the conversion data you maintained for the product displayed in the provided screenshot?

[Former Member · Accepted solution]

Hi Marcus,

It is automatically during the FU creation. My FUBR is set to split the OTR in 1 PAL pieces.

The FUBR respects the conversion rules in material master data.

My best,

Michel.

[Former Member]

Hi, Marcus.

Your comments are absolutely relevant for our business case. As you noted we consider pallet loading without stacking.

Saying about proposed solution, we've already implemented available BAdI and utilized propper method (/SCMB/IF_EX_PACKAGE_BUILDER~ADJUST_ITEMS). Now it works in anticipated way. We can perform vehicle loading process are not being affraid that overlaps can occur.

But at the same time we lost ability to correct our Freight Order load on-the-fly. We can not define unful pallets and complete up with some goods for full pallet (just to get full vehicle utilization). But such kind of case is rare enough, and decision making according this we leave on later time.

@Michel, Thank you for your idea. I found it interesting.

Anyway, thank you colleagues for support.

[former_member186731]

Well, for the requirement to keep the relative pallet quantity but have the optimizer still consider that such a pallet also consumes a full space, you could introduce another let's call it footprint quantity and let the optimizer plan on this. Kind of like ZPL. Your truck would have 32 ZPL instead of PAL / PL1, you would keep this, but enrich the FU items with a QUA2 holding a 1 for any pallet item.