Skip to Content

Problems related to the BOM explosion are very common during the MRP run and the most common is the exception message 52, which is triggered when MRP cannot explode a valid BOM or when there are no valid component under the selected BOM.

This blog tries to explain the most frequent issues related to the BOM explosion and the solution for each one of them:


1 – The BOM is not exploded after an upgrade to S/4 HANA:

The system design was changed on S/4 HANA and now it is mandatory to have a valid production version for each material, in order to have the alternative BOM selected.

2 – An alternative BOM cannot be exploded:

Two very common issues involving the BOM explosion on planned orders have been related by many customers, specially, after the upgrade to EHP6.

Generally, exception message ‘52 – No BOM selected‘ is displayed on MD04 after the MRP run and error message ‘61027 – material components were determined‘ can be observed when you try to explode the BOM on transaction MD11, even when there is a valid BOM alternative.

The problem is generally observed when MRP tries to explode a different alternative of the BOM. The following notes should be implemented, in order to correct program errors that may lead to this issue:

1791009 – No BOM explosion after changing production version

1781324 – MD11: Valid BOM alternative is not found


3 – A BOM changed with a change number cannot be exploded:

In some very special cases, if the BOM was changed with a change number involved, the information from the following note should also be checked:

1808396 – BOM changes not considered by MRP

4 – The above points were already checked but the BOM still cannot be exploded:

If both notes are implemented on your system and you are still facing problems during the BOM explosion, the following note describes the most common standard causes for BOM explosion issues on MRP:

13023 – Why was a BOM not exploded?

5 – For a configurable BOM, exception message 53 is triggered

If you are using a configurable material, and the exception message ’53: No BOM explosion due to missing configuration’ is observed, you should read carefully the following note and document:

1987762 – Error 61 263: Missing configuration in planned order

Configurable planned order for material variants: Exception “53: No BOM explosion due to missing configuration”

6 – Missing components for a material integrated with APO

At last, if this material or the components are integrated to APO, the BOM explosion may be affected for problems on the integration model. See the following notes with the most frequent BOM explosion issues related to APO:

717826  – APO->R/3 components are missing in R/3

1576703 – Components missing from R/3 planned order

7 – The MRP run spends a long time on the BOM explosion

If MRP is taking a long time during the BOM explosion, parameters such as planning mode 2 or 3 should not be used. The document MRP: Why shouldn’t I use planning mode 3 on a productive system? explains in detail why this should be avoided.

Besides that, the KBA below suggest a setting that may improve the BOM explosion performance during the MRP run:

2178789 MRP: Performance during BOM explosion

To report this post you need to login first.

3 Comments

You must be Logged on to comment or reply to a post.

    1. Caetano Almeida Post author

      Hi Jelena

      Thanks for your feedback.

      I usually wrote Wikis for consulting issues, which are release independent. Since this is mainly focused on recent correction notes, I decided to wrote it as a blog.,

      BR

      Caetano

      (0) 

Leave a Reply