Thursday 4 August 2011
APO and AFS Options
Hello,
I'm a traditional AFS consultant working exclusively in the ECC/R3
system. I've been involved several times in different discussion for
using both APO and AFS.
Stock category management is an important/major feature within the AFS
solution, as it is potentially strongly used in modules SD/MM/PP/WM/QM/
WM. When I first looked at APO, to my surprise, I discovered that such
a function was not supported by APO SNP ! With a couple of
enhancements it's possible to plug APO DP and to handle categories,
however, it was much more complex/costly in regards to SNP. Actually
SAP recommends to not use AFS categories with APO SNP.
Mehdi
I'm a traditional AFS consultant working exclusively in the ECC/R3
system. I've been involved several times in different discussion for
using both APO and AFS.
Stock category management is an important/major feature within the AFS
solution, as it is potentially strongly used in modules SD/MM/PP/WM/QM/
WM. When I first looked at APO, to my surprise, I discovered that such
a function was not supported by APO SNP ! With a couple of
enhancements it's possible to plug APO DP and to handle categories,
however, it was much more complex/costly in regards to SNP. Actually
SAP recommends to not use AFS categories with APO SNP.
Mehdi
Urgent query about AFS MRP run (PR: pur.group) Options
Hello all,
Perhaps, you have faced or still face the same problems as described
below and can tell me how you resolved it:
Our distribution center can be used by multiple purchasing depts.
working with the same materials, but different stock categories.
Hereby, the purchasing org. is (normally) the same, but they use
different purchasing groups.
MRP does generate individually pur.requisitions for each stock
category. However, the pur.group gets defaulted from the material
master (see LJ3AMF8M, FORM versorgen_eban) and is therefore the same
for all PRs per plant/material combination.
Consequently, we face difficulties to control access and daily
operation (e.g. selection) with these PRs as we have to give all
pur.depts. authorization for the pur.group of the material master.
Hereby, we can not prevent that a pur.dept. does process PRs they are
not responsible for.
As far as I know there is neither a BADI at MRP nor at PR creation
available to change the pur.group or control authorization on stock
category level.
Right now, I am thinking about a modification of the FORM-routine
above.
It would be great if I can get feedback from the group
1) if you have faced the same problem and how you have resolved it or
2) if you still face this problem so that we can address this to the
AFS team for a cont. improvement.
Many thanks in advance!
Kind regards,
Klaus Leisgang
Perhaps, you have faced or still face the same problems as described
below and can tell me how you resolved it:
Our distribution center can be used by multiple purchasing depts.
working with the same materials, but different stock categories.
Hereby, the purchasing org. is (normally) the same, but they use
different purchasing groups.
MRP does generate individually pur.requisitions for each stock
category. However, the pur.group gets defaulted from the material
master (see LJ3AMF8M, FORM versorgen_eban) and is therefore the same
for all PRs per plant/material combination.
Consequently, we face difficulties to control access and daily
operation (e.g. selection) with these PRs as we have to give all
pur.depts. authorization for the pur.group of the material master.
Hereby, we can not prevent that a pur.dept. does process PRs they are
not responsible for.
As far as I know there is neither a BADI at MRP nor at PR creation
available to change the pur.group or control authorization on stock
category level.
Right now, I am thinking about a modification of the FORM-routine
above.
It would be great if I can get feedback from the group
1) if you have faced the same problem and how you have resolved it or
2) if you still face this problem so that we can address this to the
AFS team for a cont. improvement.
Many thanks in advance!
Kind regards,
Klaus Leisgang
VAS handling in MM (AFS 6.3 functionality) - knowledge sharing
Hello All,
Being on ASF 6.4 since end of last year we plan to use VAS handling in MM
later this year. During the implementation project we are facing a
significant no. of challenges.
Well, I know that some addition features will come with AFS 6.5.
Despite of, I would like to know if there is any other AFS customer out
there who has looked into this topic or even is using it already today.
It would we great if we could share our experience in this group. Ideally,
we can consolidate our lesson learned and provide constructive feedback to
AFS to further improve this function to better meet common business
requirements.
Remark: Please find below some ideas for improvements we have identified so
far.
• Mass data maintenance for vendor master is missing VAS fields
• IDoc for vendor master creation is missing VAS fields (See screen
shot below for the VAS fields in vendor master)
• VAS data long text is not supported in sales order Idoc
• Customer master mass change function does not support VAS fields
• In Purchase order transactions ME21n, ME22n easy manual
maintenance screens for VAS codes similar to sales order (3 Tabs) is missing
(covered by AFS 6.5 in a different way)
• IDoc for customer master does not have the VAS fields (similar to
the vendor master Idoc)
• Currently, if the VAS data in PO is not from condition records,
then a PO change triggers an update termination
• Ideally, VAS data in PO should not be considered as master data.
It should be considered as transactional data, and allow for changes in PO
(for stand alone POs only)
Many thanks in advance,
Klaus
Being on ASF 6.4 since end of last year we plan to use VAS handling in MM
later this year. During the implementation project we are facing a
significant no. of challenges.
Well, I know that some addition features will come with AFS 6.5.
Despite of, I would like to know if there is any other AFS customer out
there who has looked into this topic or even is using it already today.
It would we great if we could share our experience in this group. Ideally,
we can consolidate our lesson learned and provide constructive feedback to
AFS to further improve this function to better meet common business
requirements.
Remark: Please find below some ideas for improvements we have identified so
far.
• Mass data maintenance for vendor master is missing VAS fields
• IDoc for vendor master creation is missing VAS fields (See screen
shot below for the VAS fields in vendor master)
• VAS data long text is not supported in sales order Idoc
• Customer master mass change function does not support VAS fields
• In Purchase order transactions ME21n, ME22n easy manual
maintenance screens for VAS codes similar to sales order (3 Tabs) is missing
(covered by AFS 6.5 in a different way)
• IDoc for customer master does not have the VAS fields (similar to
the vendor master Idoc)
• Currently, if the VAS data in PO is not from condition records,
then a PO change triggers an update termination
• Ideally, VAS data in PO should not be considered as master data.
It should be considered as transactional data, and allow for changes in PO
(for stand alone POs only)
• For TPO and PTO processes, the VAS changes made in SO should be
updated/copied to the account assigned PO without the use of texts (if PO
exists). The use of texts should be avoided (the copy function should be, if
possible , with configurable rules)
updated/copied to the account assigned PO without the use of texts (if PO
exists). The use of texts should be avoided (the copy function should be, if
possible , with configurable rules)
Klaus
PIR consumption by STO
Hello,
I know it's not planned but it would be very cool to get the function
of PIR consumption (and reduction :-) by dependent requirement such as
STO.
Mehdi
AFS and WM/EWM
Hello,
Is there any chance to see EWM enhanced in future for AFS ? (I looove
WM, but EWM looks much more funny)
Mehdi
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)