HI Alberto,

I’m confused with the explanation given by support personal. I guess it might be a typing mistake DTF over PTF.

And the Explanation given by you in the Bottom is correct.

Basically, 

- DTF -> corresponds to a frozen zone, no change in demand and supply - Correct!

- PTF -> planning period, here supplies are created for the forecast recorded in the period in the form of shop order requisition, with certain parameters also over the entire forecast period - Correct!

- Outside PTF -> Planning proposals - Correct! You will get unconsumed forecasts for this period.

However, If in Master schedule Level 1 part; ‘Create S/P Req.’ column also has an effect on this.

The available options are;

• Create S/P Req: Fixed MS proposals within the planning time fence (PTF) create supplies.
• Do Not Create S/P Req: MS proposals do not create supplies. The supplies are based on the customer order or parent shop order, or must be entered manually. This means that the planner intends to manually control supply inside the planning time fence.
• Create S/P Req Entire Horizon: MS proposals create supplies for the entire horizon, inside and outside the PTF. Only proposals inside the PTF will be fixed.
• Create S/P from MRP: MS proposals do not create supplies. For actual demands of MS-handled parts, supplies will be generated by MRP/PMRP. However, the component demands will not be exploded for these parent MRP/PMRP requisitions. Instead, the component demands are generated from the parent MS proposals.

Thanks!

Best Regards,

Lakshan

Hi,

Is this a misunderstanding?

What support answered is this scenario:

Setup:

Initial state of MS Level 1 Calculation:

We have a safety stock of 100 pcs and a starting balance of 26. As we can system does not change the MPS within PTF because of we are below safety stock. That happens outside PTF. Let us now for fun increase the forecast inside PTF. We throw in a market campaign at the end of the year, at a very short notice indeed… You will see the result after the forecast increase and the following MS Level Calculation:

The level 1 calculation does not add/modify the MPS within PTF. That is what support answered and that is how it has been working since 1996 when I started to develop IFS Master Scheduling with mr Bill Leedale and mr Mahesh Kurpad in Tucson. I think that is was support was trying to communicate… but again there might be some misunderstanding in questions and answers and that happens from time to time.

If I run this calculation tomorrow, the proposed MS receipt at the 9th of January will be aged within PTF, then it will be Fixed and a few milliseconds later we will have a shop order req for it. Proposed MS receipts are “aged” within PTF and then they will become fixed. And then it continues day by day, if MS Level 1 is executed daily. If we wait, let say a few days between the MS Level Calculations, more days will be aged in, and hence more proposed Master Production Schedule Receipt will be aged within PTF and become fixed => new SO Reqs gets creatred.

There is a small exception to the rules and that is if you have a safety time defined, then it can go inside PTF… can’t remember the details now on top of my head

Cheers,

Mats at RnD

Hi Mats,

what do you mean with MPS?

Tell me please what will MS1 do with following szenario

• Part is manufactered
• No safety stock is defined
• No stock is given
• No previous shop orders exist
• Not previous shop order requisition exist
• Manufacturing lead time is 7 days
• In MS1 DTF 7 / PTF 140 
• Create S/P Req is defined
• Forecast 15.2.24 - 100 pcs
• Forecast 15.3.24 - 100 pcs
• Forecast 15.4.24 - 100 pcs
• Forecast 15.5.25 - 100 pcs
•  
• After calculation MS 1
• Calendar is defined with 365 days working day

be honest i expect 

• Shop order requisition 7.2.24 → supply for forecast 15.2.24 → inside ptf
• Shop order requisition 7.3.24 → supply for forecast 15.3.24 → inside ptf
• Shop order requisition 7.4.24 → supply for forecast 15.4.24 → inside ptf
• MS Supply 7.5.24 → supply for forecast 15.5.24 → outside ptf

What is the correct result?

From my point of view it must be considering the lead time and create corresponding
shop order req otherwise it isnt posssible to supply the demand of defined forecast.

Cheers

Alberto

Hi Mats,

and this is what i reported as an issue with Case CS0186046

1. Define a Manufactured Part as a MS Level 1 Part

Part 475.3838

This behavior is ok.

2. Define a Master Schedule by Part

This behavior is ok

3. Enter Forecast with Distribute Cumulative Forecast

This behavior is ok

4. Calculate with “Run MS – One Part

But the reality is

That is wrong.

Hi Alberto, 

MPS is ‘Manufacturing Planning and Scheduling’

As it seems the full scenario that you are trying to achieve here is vague from the original question on  the Top.  

Yes, as Mats described above, there could be scenarios where Master Scheduling does not create Shop Order Requisitions between inside PTF. 

@majose is on the Top of this topic. He will describe this further.

Thanks! 

Best regards,

Lakshan

Hi,

With MPS as I wrote above (in this context) according to APICS:

Master Production Schedule: The anticipated build schedule for the part. In IFS it is the Master Production Schedule Receipt column (well in a way the Total Supply column is perhaps spot on)

IFS does not automatically create Shop Order Requisitions inside PTF. The master scheduler is king/queen in the DTF => PTF slushy zone. The master scheduler makes the decisions here. There is of course a tradeoff between stability and flexibility. The more flexibility you allow the lower PTF you set.

When a customer starts up IFS Master Scheduling there is probably a good idea to set PTF to a low value and then run MS Level 1 calculation. Next step is to increase PTF to desired value. Then run MS Level 1 calculation. Now in this run a lot of proposed MS receipts have been aged within PTF and they are set to fixed. In the same execution they will be converted to Shop Order Requisitions.

Anyway your case is not a bug, like it or not.

***

( In IFS Planning and Manufacturing we have always tried to follow APICS definitions as much as possible )

Thanks,

Mats Johansson, Program Manager at IFS RnD Manufacturing

​​​​​​​