Constrained Planning Question

Question

Hi All,
We are running Unconstrained Planning right now. We need to run the ASCP EDD plan with following MUST Constraints -
Lead Time for ONLY Purchased Items
Aggregated Supplier Capacity.
To provide more details on this, assume following -
END_ITEM -
                    Mfg LT = 4 Days
PURCHASED_ITEM
                       Processing LT = 15 days
Now if the Sales Order comes on 16th Day then ASCP should compress the Mfg LT of END_ITEM and fulfill the order. But a Sales Order comes on 12th day the the order should be fulfilled on 16th day respecting the Purchased Item Lead Time. ( Assuming : - Purchased Item is not available and it needs to be purchased for this sales order) but violating the Mfg LT of END_ITEM.
As per my understanding this is not possible to achieve in EDD plan. Currently we have PTF = Total LT for Purchased Item and that helps us in Unconstrained Plan.
But In EDD plan, I need to setup MSO:Lead Time Control = Do Not Violate .... so that it respects the PTF.  But with this setup the Mfg LT will also be respected and the SO will be pushed out.
If I set MSO:Lead Time Control = Violate Min Processing LT, then both Purchasing LT and Mfg LT are subject to compression.
Note: - it is not viable to remove Mfg LT of the END_ITEM as it is important to align the requirement of PURCHASED_ITEM in future. Without Mfg LT of 4 days we are putting all the purchased item receiving at risk which is totally unacceptable.
Please confirm on this. Also please let me know any workaround to this.
Second issue is about the Supplier Capacity. We have an agreement with supplier at aggregate level. For example, 800 units a day and supplier is supplying us almost 30 different active parts. Current there is no way we can specify aggregate level Supplier Capacity in ASCP so that it restrict the total supply of these 30 parts to 800 per day.
I had to calculate the consumption % for each part and setup at Supplier - Item level. With the supplier capacity accumulation, eventually this will be achieved. But we have to setup capacity at Supplier - Item level.
Can someone please confirm my understanding? Also please let me know any workaround.
Thanks for input.

Answer 1

I'm no Swing expert, but here is what I think.
Most of the methods of PropertyChangeSupport, like the one you invoke:
fireIndexedPropertyChange(String propertyName, int index,
    Object oldValue,  Object newValue)Are, according to the documentation:
+...merely a convenience wrapper around the more general firePropertyChange method that takes PropertyChangeEvent value.+
So instead of invoking the previous method you could have invoked:
firePropertyChange(new IndexedPropertyChangeEvent(...))In the same way, it would be nice if VetoableChangeSupport had a method:
fireIndexedVetoableChange(String propertyName, int index,
    Object oldValue, Object newValue) throws PropertyVetoExceptionbut it doesn't. So why not just fill in the pattern and invoke:
fireVetoableChange(new IndexedPropertyChangeEvent(...))