Has anyone found examples of "negative" balances for parts at the end of their MRP run ? Type of run = Regen

If they do/did , did they find out what caused it ?

What action did they take to rectify it ?

We are also facing the same problem while we go for a Regenerative MRP run. The only way we are able to take care of it at this moment is that we take the run again and it gets O.K.

We are getting another error i.e. error 100 duplicate value in table ticrp001 while running MPS/MRP planning engine. We are simply ata loss to know what are the reasons behind or these are usual bugs.

There is a field, tiitm001.stmr that holds the nettable amount of stock at the time MRP is run. I have seen negative amounts because of inventory adjustments or transfers to and from non-nettable warehouses after MRP is run. As for the ticrp001 table, I drop it and recreate it before a regen.

Thanks for replies

We have tried running MRP twice as suggested by Baan but results are not consistent
Sometimes we get a different set of part numbers with neg values , other times the list reduces considerably

If we run a net MRP on the item then this corrects it but in some cases if we have 180+ parts it is not practical

We will investigate , stock transfers

Have you recalaulated your BOM low level codes before running MRP? You may be calculating the requirements out of order.

You are correct

The case is with Baan support ( still ) and they have indicated that ( in our installation ) the low level codes do not appear to get reset through just running MRP , as is indicated they should be from the help screen
We are currently running the PRP/MRP sequence having
run tibom1213 and the tdinv250/tdilc250/tdinv252/tdinv253 etc

We will know results tomorrow morning

As stated in a previous posting , having checked back we have had instances of this problem since 1999 , so I guess there may be some others out there unaware of a potential problem

Confirming that running tibom1213m000 as pre process to MRP resolved the problem in our case.

The low level codes were not being set by MRP , reason still being investigated by Baan support

Hey guys,
may i suggest something: have u checked and found any negative allocation in your system? this may bring you the result of negative balance in your system too. the negative allocation normally happened when somebody in the shop floor try to "return materials" into the system with negative "Report Operation Completed" or negative "Report Production Order Completed".
to rectiy this problem u need to run session "Rebuild Planned Inventory Transaction" (tdinv0250m000) and "Rebuild Inventory Data (ILC)" (tdilc0250m000) under Baan Common -> Error Recovery.

hope this description helps.

regards,

We are getting another error i.e. error 100 duplicate value in table ticrp001 while running MPS/MRP planning engine. We are simply ata loss to know what are the reasons behind or these are usual bugs.


This is a known bug with MRP that has been fixed. Pls check the support site for a fix for your version. It has to do with running PRP as well as MPR. I think if you clear that table before running timrp1210m000 you are ok (it's a temporary table anyway, the fix was to clear the table properly.) Also, I think the other work around (non-General Table Maintenance) is to choose 'no' to 'Plan Capacity Requirements for MRP/MPS Orders On-Line' question during MRP, if that is possible for you. I think you can run it separate.

Cameron

Thanks for your advice

We do in fact run tdinv250 and tdilc 250 as pre MRP sessions

Incidentally Baan have put forward the view that this should only be necessary if you are on a 4c3 or earlier versions

We are on 4c4 and still get errors !

We have therefore raised a case and will see what transpires

As regards the reasons you stated for the negative allocations
have you verified this or is it a theory you have ?

If you have proved it then it makes Baan's advice even more questionable. I have seen postings from people using Baan 5 who also run these correction programmes

Thanks

Frank

We are are on 4c4 with sch1 and service pack 9 but still need to run the rebuild sessions. But there doesn`t seem to be so many errors since I installed sp8.

Hi Frank Rogers,
my statement about the negative allocation is not simply a "theory" but rather tested out in a client's system (or in other word: "verified"). at the moment the client is still pending Baan's advise to verify if this is normal, or the way they pull back the consumed (backflushed) materials via negative report operation completed/report production orders completed is not correct.

regards,

Hi Cameron

Many thanks , I will cross check our output for similar actions by users

I would be interested in what Baan come back and say if you are able to relay this at some point

Hi Frank,
no problem ;)