At Corus in Holland (Ijmuiden), we have successfully implemented the CRP (Capacity Requirements Planning) functionality for our maintenance department. However, during the regression test conducted before the official launch, we encountered two issues that need to be addressed. The first issue involves the incorrect consideration of available capacity in transaction CM33 when using the filter. The second issue pertains to the incorrect assignment of sort criteria to the charts in the Graphical Planning board created for the Corus maintenance department. The screen is divided into three separate sections: 1. Workcenter load by Workcenter (Dispatched) 2. Workcenter Load by operation (Dispatched) 3. Operation pool (Not Dispatched) Starting with the Sort issue, there are two Sort criteria assigned to the second chart and three to the third chart. However, there seems to be a cross-linking issue between the assignments, as selecting one chart may display the sort criteria of the other. Additionally, the operations are not sorting consecutively as expected. The more crucial problem lies in the filter and its impact on the correct consideration of available capacity. The standard SAP Filter (5KFIL4) assigned in the selection profile is causing dispatched operations to overlook the actual available capacity when the filter is activated. This issue became apparent when the workcenter became overloaded with dispatched orders, which is unacceptable. To resolve these issues, we seek assistance from anyone who may have a solution. Your prompt response is highly appreciated. Thank you, Frits.
In SAP, the planning board operates as intended, taking into account specific work orders or a list of orders specified in the filter. When accessing the planning board from the IW32 transaction, SAP considers all orders with requirements for the work centers used by the initial order. This allows for a targeted evaluation of requirements and available capacity, aligning with your desired outcome.
Hi Frits, thanks for the thorough breakdown of the issues you're facing. For the first problem concerning sort criteria in the Graphical Planning board, the issue might be related to incorrectly assigned criteria tags or faulty assignment code. I'd suggest revisiting them, seeing if there's an obvious mix-up. If not, a workaround could be assigning unique sort criteria to each chart to avoid overlaps. As for the second issue, regarding the SAP filter, the crux of the problem might be in how the filter is interacting with dispatched operations. A potential solution could be to further customize the SAP Filter or to create a new filter that considers available capacity before dispatching orders. However, without a deeper understanding of your system's underlying architecture, this is a shot in the dark. It would be worth involving someone who's worked extensively with your specific setup.
Hi Frits, I've encountered similar issues in the past and might be able to provide some useful insights. The filter problem you mentioned speaks to a possible bug within the 5KFIL4 filter programming or an incompatibility with your current system setup. It would be helpful to check for an updated version or consider getting a customized filter developed. As for the sort issue, it might stem from a misconfiguration in the linkages. You might need to manually recode the sort criteria or consider resetting these linkages. Make sure to also recheck the priority settings in your planning board - this could be part of the reason why operations aren't sorting sequentially as expected. Do keep us updated on your progress, I'd be keen on seeing how you manage to resolve these issues.
Hi Frits, firstly, kudos to your team for successfully implementing CRP functionality for the maintenance department. Regarding the issue related to the sort criteria, it could be due to incorrect configuration between charts. You might want to double-check the assignments to make sure a cross-linking mishap hasn't happened. It's also possible there might be an underlying bug causing this issue—reaching out to SAP support may be beneficial. Concerning the capacity filter issue, it sounds like dispatched operations aren't properly factoring in current capacity. A custom filter might be useful to help toggle between dispatched and non-dispatched operations. Also, consider whether the overload could be attributed to data miscommunication between the maintenance department and CRP system—ensuring both systems are accurately synced and updated in real time could mitigate this problem. OBviously, these are just guesses without having a deeper look into your system. I hope you find the solution soon, and do keep us posted on your progress!
Hey Frits, it sounds like you’ve encountered some pretty tricky issues with the CRP implementation. For the sort criteria confusion, it might help to double-check the configuration settings in the planning board and ensure there’s no overlap in the data references between those charts. As for the capacity issues with the SAP filter, have you considered creating a custom filter that better aligns with your specific requirements? It could help eliminate any discrepancies with the dispatched operations and available capacity. Good luck, and I hope you find a quick resolution!
✅ Work Order Management
✅ Asset Tracking
✅ Preventive Maintenance
✅ Inspection Report
We have received your information. We will share Schedule Demo details on your Mail Id.
Answer: Answer: The main issues identified are related to incorrect consideration of available capacity when using filters in transaction CM33 and incorrect sort criteria assignment in the graphical planning board.
Answer: Answer: There are issues with cross-linking between sort criteria assignments in different charts, leading to unexpected display of criteria and non-consecutive sorting of operations.
Answer: Answer: The standard SAP Filter (5KFIL4) assigned in the selection profile is causing dispatched operations to overlook the actual available capacity when activated, leading to workcenters being overloaded with dispatched orders.
Join hundreds of satisfied customers who have transformed their maintenance processes.
Sign up today and start optimizing your workflow.