Skip to Content
Author's profile photo Caetano Almeida

Indicator ‘Create Purchase Requisitions’ is not considered by MRP

You are running MRP for a material and you have defined a value for for the field “Create purchase requisition” on your variant. However, the value defined on the variant is not considered when you run MRP in background or in transaction MD01.

For example, you have defined the value “1 – Purchase requisitions” on your variant and you expect to have purchase requisitions created by MRP. However, after the MRP run, you observe that only planned orders are created. When you try to plan your material using MD02 or MD03, system correctly creates the correct replenishment proposals, according to the value defined for this parameter.


Why this is happening?

Besides the parameter defined on the MRP variant, it’s possible to define a different value for the MRP Group. Therefore, if this is happening on your system, you should check the following points:

1 – Check if there is an MRP group assigned to your material on tab MRP1 of the material master (tab MRP2).

2 – On the customizing transaction OPPR, click the button “Creation indicator”

3 – Here, check if there is a value defined for the field “Create purchase requisitions”

Creation indicator.PNG

There are some important remarks related to this issue:

1 – Even if there is no MRP Group assigned on the material master, when there is an MRP group with the key equal to the material type key, this MRP group is considered by MRP. For example, if you have created the MRP group FERT, it will be considered for all the FERT materials where an MRP group has not been defined. This system behavior is defined on the following note:

34013 – MD04, MD05: Material type as MRP group

2 – The values defined on the creation indicator customizing are not considered when running single-level MRP on transactions like MD02, MD03, MD41, MD42, etc. You can find more information about the system behavior on the following note:

23922 – MRP: Creation indicators, PReq. or planned order

3 – The same logic is valid for the indicator “Schedule lines”. However, it is also possible to define a value for the creation of schedule lines at plant level on the customizing transaction OPPQ. You can find on the section “external procurement”

schedule lines.PNG

In addition, for an opening period of 0 days, a planned order may be generated when running MRP on a non-working day, if the creation indicator is set to create planned orders within the opening period. The following note provides more details about this scenario:

23922 – MRP: Creation indicators, PReq. or planned order

At last, if planned orders were created outside the opening period and if there is no other MRP relevant change for this material, this material will not be considered again by MRP (when using keys NETCH or NETPL) and the planned orders will not be converted to purchase requisitions. See the note below for details:

53235 – MD01: Planned orders remain in opening period

Assigned Tags

      You must be Logged on to comment or reply to a post.
      Author's profile photo Sankar AK
      Sankar AK

      Hi Caetano Almeida,

            It's really a trick information, it's too hard to find the root cause without understanding this logic.I checked in 'Parameters for DS' but,I couldn't find the option to control the 'Delivery schedules' parameter in OPPQ. Could you please point out, where we need to assign this value in OPPQ to control 'schedule line' in MRP?


      Author's profile photo Caetano Almeida
      Caetano Almeida
      Blog Post Author

      Hello AKS

      Thanks for the feedback. Document has been updated with this information.


      Author's profile photo Sumit Bali
      Sumit Bali

      Very understandable document.

      Author's profile photo Beyhan MEYRALI
      Beyhan MEYRALI

      Hi Caetano, I have learnt a lot from you.

      So far I have not seen anybody, who has that much deep MRP & PP knowledge.

      Thanks for sharing. Respect.


      Author's profile photo Caetano Almeida
      Caetano Almeida
      Blog Post Author

      Thank you very much for the feedback!