This is the information extracted from e-mail conversations from Google Group “AFS-User-Network”. The group is meant for AFS Users for discussing and sharing knowledge related to SAP -Apparel and Footwear Solution and Scenarios. If you are associated with SAP-AFS Solution and willing to participate actively in the discussions, please write to afsusernetwork@googlegroups.com / mahesh.maradi@gmail.com for membership.
Showing posts with label AFS-User-Network. Show all posts
Showing posts with label AFS-User-Network. Show all posts
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
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
Source Allocation and quota arrangement
Hello,
Officially, quota arrangement is not fully supported by AFS as this is
a separate function, "the source allocation". I think this function
never evolved since the first releases of AFS and from what I know,
(unfortunately) no major changes (except maintenance) will be done in
future to this application. Hence, we have tow function that partially
work (quota splitting is not supported by AFS), and source allocation
is pretty...old...
I understand that new requirements went to APO, however the mid-market
still need function like this.
Mehdi
PIR Consumption
Hello,
In AFS, PIR are reduced after posting sales order goods issue. Like
most of SAP feature, PIR are plant dependent. Let's say you have two
plants (one DC and one production plant), PIR are created in the DC
and both plants have a shipping area. Then depending on the customer
ship to country, it could be interesting to ship the goods from the
production plant because you have there some available quantity. In
such a case, ATP/ARUN substitution could be used but PIR could be
never reduced due to a PGI that happens in the "wrong" plant (not the
DC).
Mehdi
AFS STO Rescheduling
Hello,
In release 6.5, AFS rescheduling was enhanced for STO, however I don't
see the benefit of getting ATP rescheduling if the MM ATP is not
redesigned, of course we don't need all SD features, but in my opinion
the current MM ATP is pretty poor and does not cover any customer
requirement in STO. Whatever you use STO for production or for central
external procurement (you receive the demand from several DC and
create one big PO on a central DC), ATP is something that all
customers require. Currently, if your PO or Prd.Order is too early or
too late in a plant then your sales order is never updated with
realistic dates.
Mehdi
MM ARUN
Hello,
Currently the MM ARUN (called during AFS background processing)
encapsulated in MJ3AVFDL_DELIVERY_POSSIBLE_MM is more technical than a
real AFS function. It would be good to make it more flexible than what
it is now. VL10B offers some functions but that's very limited, also
sometimes customers don't want to get STO & SO on the same plant for
the same sku with different rules. Customer and plant should or could
be part of the same ARUN.
I got several times this requirements and had to replace STO by PO-SO,
however this works depending on the SCM business processes and of
course if the volume is not too huge (not good to get to many IDOCs).
Mehdi
Stock/Requirement List API
Hello,
I guess we all faced the same issue. Sometimes you need to collect
data from stock/requirement list for reporting topics. A wrong
approach would be to try to select data from database and reproduce
standard calculation. This is almost impossible due to the complexity
of the current MRP design, moreover if you do that it will be more
complex to explain the calculation to the users and of course to fix
issues. The second option is to follow SAP strategy and use service/
API for this purpose.
In standard SAP, we have function module MD_*_API (sorry I don't
remember right now the exact name :-(, in AFS we have
J_3AM_DISPOSITION_DISPL. The standard one calls the AFS FM and then
performs a mapping between standard MRP element and AFS MRP element.
Standard and AFS stock/requirement list are based on those functions.
In release 6.0, view filter was added to AFS MD04, which is nice,
however from my opinion the best thing would have been to add
selection rules as this speed up a lot data processing. If you just
want to pick up supply elements (whatever the MRP status), SAP always
load everything such as demand & supply. In standard, selection rules
are filter before database selection.
Of course, I understand that this kind of changes would require an
effort in the AFS PP-MRP are.
Production time at sku group
Hello Guys,
In AFS, it's possible to define a RLT at sku group for in-house
production, this is used during ATP check. In release 6.4, an
GREAAATTTTT enhancement was done in PP, which is the support of
production version at sku group. Let's say you spend 1 day to produce
a finished goods for size XXS, and 1,5 for size XXL (maybe more true
for bags or underwear). XXL is longer to produce because you have more
components and more operations, therefore the production time also
depends on the sku group, I would have expect a field "production
time" at sku group too, currently there's only one field at material
level, which is not consistent based on all feature that exist in AFS.
Mehdi
Minimum Lot Size
Hello,
I'm back in this great group !
I'd like to talk about minimum lot size. Currently, this functionality
is supported at material and sku level which is pretty cool. Material
planning was also enhanced to support sku group, this function is very
helpfull for external procurement where multi sourcing is done at
dimension level. For instance, you have one material with two
dimensions (color & size) relevant for MRP application (see function
MRM) but you want to group PR per color because of multi-sourcing
(several vendors due to capacity, price etc...).
Here comes the issue, if you decide to run MRP at sku group level
then, there is no minimum lot size check...nor at sku, article or sku
group level...Officially, this function is not supported by SAP at sku
level, however this is not consistent from a MRP prospective,
especially with two AFS functions. It would be good to get some
enhancements in this area.
Mehdi
Sequence screen layout change in CM10, CM25, CM27 etc
I would like to change the fields displayed in the screen for adding
in sequence numbers in production orders via the planning table. Eg.
- Tcd: CM25 - Overall profile SAPCRPG002
-Mark production order and go to the Menu: Goto -> Order -> Sequence
number
Do anybody know if this can be done via customizing, programming??
Thanks in advance
Br
Linda
Stock Category Management
Greetings,
I'd like to introduce an new discussion for talking about stock
category management across SD/MM/PP/WM modules.
Mehdi
Mass update GR proccessing time in planned orders and prod Orders
Hello All.
I am facing one issue when we change in material amster the Gr
processing time and wnat it reflected in the existing planned and
production orders.
Do you know or have some tips how can we do this mass update to the
existing planned and production orders, using a standard transaction
from SAP?.
All suguestions are welcomme.
Thansk to you all.
Best Regards
Manuel Antonio
Automatic conversion from PR to PO for direct shipment
Hello AFS Gurus,
In stantard SAP, while using direct shipment in SD (item category
TAS), it's possible to get a PR automatically converted into PO by
assigning a fixed vendor to the right place. For some technical
reason, this is not supported. If my memory is not bad, conversion
from PR to PO is done through workflow task and I don't see any "huge
technical" reasons that could explain why this was never enhanced for
AFS. Of course it's not hard to schedule ME59N or to develop an in-
house add-on for this, I (customers) would prefer to get that part of
the AFS package.
PS: Mahesh asked me to make that group active, that's what I'm trying
even if I don't have the level of knowledge that most of you have !
Regards,
Mehdi LAHMER
Batch Management
Greetings,
Let's say you decide to use a "real" batch management (activating the
right checkbox in material master, AFS MRP views) then depending on
your business requirements, you could require to get the capability to
change batch number in outbound delivery. This being not supported by
SAP (and did not want to go with modifications), I had to define in a
previous project AFS finished goods as AFS materials and raw materials
as non AFS materials.
In another project I've seen a modification to the VL* delivery
programs to handle this scenario for finished goods. I understand why
the customer did that, it did not make sence to buy IS-AFS if you
cannot run the (great) ARUN/ARUN Optimizer !
Mehdi LAHMER
Long term planning
Hello,
Did anybody think about enhancing the long term planning for AFS (even
with custom development) ? I've seen that MPS will be supported in
release 6.5, however I never heard anything regarding this topic.
I've been working for the last ten years in AFS (from 2.5 to 6.4) and
to be honest, this kind of request is pretty limited, I mean, it's
mainly required for AFS companies doing production, for others where
they mainly use purchasing/subcontracting it's not that difficult to
find a workaround with custom reports.
Mehdi LAHMER
Over picking handling in STO
Greetings,
This is my first post, please be nice with me :-) I just want to make
that group active.
I'd like to discuss about an important topic that is not yet supported
by AFS (at least till 6.4), over picking in STO processing. In the
fashion/sportswear industry, in case a real production process is
involved it's is pretty obvious that when you cut some raw materials,
sometimes you could pick more than what was assigned by the ARUN.
Right now I had to find some workaround through MM ARUN to handle that
scenario, however that is not really "elegant". The thing is, some
customers found a way to bypass that restriction by changing some
settings in the IMG and perform picking through standard picking
processing (not done in the AFS tab), thus creating, from time to
time, data inconsistencies. This was initially done by consultants
that did not know AFS restrictions.
Mehdi LAHMER
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)