CTM is generating dependent demand on Phantom Assembly instead of components of Phantom Assembly

[ruchi_das2]

Hello Folks,

I am using CTM with Bucket-Oriented planning and SNP Orders along with SNP PDS. I have a FG with has components and a phantom assembly in the PDS. When CTM is executed, dependent demand is generated on the Phantom Assembly instead of the components of Phantom Assembly. Is this standard behavior, can this be prevented by using any planning parameter?

FG - A

Phantom - P - ( Phantom components P1,P2)

Component - X1

Component - X2

I also use PP/DS where there is dependent demand generated on the components of Phantom Assemblies but we run CTM prior to PP/DS for business benefits.

Regards

AK

[ruchi_das2]

All,

This issue was fixed using notes 1962601 and 1980588.

Regards

Abhishek

[Former Member]

Hi Abhishek,

See if the note 1918521 helps.

Thanks, Nikhil

[ruchi_das2]

Hi Nikhil.

This is the first note I came across, my guess is that it's applicable for iPPE master data but i anyways i gave it a shot by using the planning parameter but it did nothing different.

Regards

AK

[Former Member]

Abhishek,

See if note 1864170 helps.

Thanks, Nikhil

[ruchi_das2]

Thanks NIkhil,

It is already in the system. The note was issued as of SP8 and my system is in SP9.

Regards

AK

[Former Member]

Abhishek,

See if note 1981306 helps.

Thanks, Nikhil

[kenneth_snyder]

CTM will not create dependent demand for the phantom.  It will simpley "Skip" the phantom and create demand on the components of the phantom.  Are you sure the SNP PDS has the phantom indicator set for your phantom? 

Ken

[ruchi_das2]

Ken,

Yes. I do have the phantom indicator in SNP PDS. Attached is a screenshot. This is not an isolated issue since it's being observed for several business units which use different CTM profiles, each of them have their own location-products.

Regards

AK

[kenneth_snyder]

I don't understand why you say its a problem with CTM.

Did you click on the Phantom indicator?  Do you see the components under the Phantom in the PDS?

Does it work with SNP Heuristics. 

It is a master data issue, CTM will plan the PDS with phantoms same as any other engine.

Ken

[ruchi_das2]

Ken,

Expanding the Phantom indicator gives the components of the phantom assembly. When CTM is executed, FG creates SNP: Dependent Demand at Phantom assembly and corresponding SNP Planned Order. This Planned Order for the Phantom Assembly inturn creates SNP:Dependent Demand on Phantom Assembly components and corresponding Pur Reqs. This is a problem because we don't want SNP Planned orders sitting for Phantom Assemblies.

Location heuristics when run in 9ASNP94 works fine. It does not generate dependent demand on Phantom Assembly but it creates dependent demand on the components of Phantom assembly.

Maybe I should raise an OSS message.

Regards

AK

[kenneth_snyder]

Yes I have use CTM with phantoms and had no issues.

Remember the PDS Phantom should be CIF'd using BOM and not production version.

Ken

[Former Member]

Hi All,

I am not sure if you talking about following scenariosCTM had issue with Phantoms. We did characteristic based planning and use planning KMAT. Here are the issue we faced--

Case#1- Multiple Direct Components--Component A and component B are each present twice, with different dependency conditions. After the CTM run, all components are to be seen in the planned orders, even if not matching the selection conditions.

Case#2- Multiple Direct Components and Phantom Components- component A is a direct component of the PDS as well as a component of Phantom 2. Component D is a direct component of the PDS as well as a component of Phantom 1.Component A and D are thus each present twice, with different dependency conditions. After the CTM run, all components are to be seen in the planned orders, even if not matching the selection conditions.

Case#3- Multiple Components within Distinct Phantoms --component B is a component of Phantom 1 as well as of Phantom 2. Different dependency conditions exist for the two phantoms and, as a consequence, also for the two components B. After the CTM run, both components B are to be seen in the planned orders, even if not matching the selection conditions.

Case#4-  Multiple Phantoms-- Phantom 1 is present twice, its components - component B and C -are therefore also present twice. Different dependency conditions exist for the two occurrences of the phantom. After the CTM run, both components B and both components C are to be seen in the planned orders, even if not matching the selection conditions.

[ruchi_das2]

Hi Vikas,

The scenario that I have does not use repeat components in the PDS.

Finished Product at header is A which has components C1, C2, C3 and Phantom Assembly PA1.

Phantom Assembly PA1 has components PAC1, PAC2, PAC3.

FG	A
Component 1	C1
Component 2	C2
Component 3	C3
Phantom Assembly	PA1
Phantom Component 1	PAC1
Phantom Component 2	PAC2
Phantom Component 3	PAC3

Regards

AK