Transfering Cost from one WBS to Other while retaining CE

[Former Member]

Dear Gurus,

My client requires to transfer cost from 1WBS of a project to several WBS's. We maintain different CoCd's for all the projects. Client also wants Fi document to keep track of the transaction, hence he has reject option of Manual reposting.

My requirement is as under, (for eg.)

WBSA CE(111) to WBS1 (CE111) amt 123

WBSA CE(222) to WBS2 (CE222) amt 655

WBSA CE(333) to WBS3 (CE333) amt 998

WBSA CE(444) to WBS4 (CE444) amt 456

WBSA CE(555) to WBS5 (CE555) amt 124

WBSA CE(666) to WBS6 (CE666) amt 564

WBS's 1-6 may or may not be from same project.

but in reality when I test settlement rule for 1st transaction, I realized a behavior of settlement rule as belows,

Cost 123 in WBSA CE(111) went to WBS1 but proportionally splitted to various CE's i.e. CE111= 5.2,CE111= 27.6,CE111= 42,CE111= 19.2,CE111= 5.2,CE111= 23.8.

Please assist.

Manish

[panagiotis_papaspyridakos · Accepted solution]

Hi once more ...

i will try to elaborate based on your example...

please use transaction OKEU to create source structure.

Create (for example) 1 source structure (ex ZZ) with

6 different assignments

(ex assignment 1 for cost element 111

assignment 2 for cost element 222

assignment 3 for cost element 333

assignment 4 for cost element 444

assignment 5 for cost element 555

assignment 6 for cost element 666)

Then you have to maintain the settlement rule of your sender wbs element WBSA and create 6 different segments as you may probably have done already.

Be careful when entering the settlement rule use F8 button to go to Settlement parameters and insert the source structure ZZ that you have created.

Then in each of the the assignments fill in the appropriate Source assignment field: in the example it will be

WBS1 assignment 1 for cost element 111 ->Source Assignment 1

WBS2 assignment 2 for cost element 222 ->Source Assignment 2

WBS3 assignment 3 for cost element 333 ->Source Assignment 3

WBS4 assignment 4 for cost element 444 ->Source Assignment 4

WBS5 assignment 5 for cost element 555 ->Source Assignment 5

WBS6 assignment 6 for cost element 666 ->Source Assignment 6...

This way the system will not take proportionally from each cost element the amount but will only look for the cost elements

you have specified.

If you have more cost elements in your wbs WBSA (sender) that you don't want to settle then create an assignment 7 with the rest of the cost elements that will not be settled.

Run the settlement to see the results (CJ88,CJ8G)

Try it and let me know for your findings....

Pan

Edited by: Panagiotis Papaspyridakos on Apr 7, 2010 4:50 PM

[Former Member · Accepted solution]

Dear Pan,

Thanks a ton for the reply and detailed explanation. I applied this for 2 entries and it works as I am no more getting this problem of distribution of cost during test run.

However I wanted to try this for some more entries hence I created a PO, did GR and IV. Now when I tried to settle this cost(test run) that appeared in the WBS, I don't see any effect during actual settlement(CJ88). I could only see the previous settlements I tried during my last test run.

I am confused that in spite of running the procurement cycle correctly, the cost also being appearing in CJI3 and also I applied proper settlement rule; the settlement is not happening for the latest cost.

Please advise.

Thanks and Regards,

Manish

[former_member203108 · Accepted solution]

make sure that the settlement period and the cost posting period are same. If the cost is posted to previous period and you execute settlement for current period then settlement wont happen.

[Former Member · Accepted solution]

Dear Ahmed,

I am doing full settlement, so I don't think this is the reason.

Regards,

Manish

[former_member203108 · Accepted solution]

does It give any messages???.....try deselecting the test run and then see....or else you can reverse your previous settlement and settle once again...see what happens...whether it settles only previous values or it includes current values also...

[Former Member · Accepted solution]

Dear Gurus,

Thanks for the responses, my basic requirement is fulfilled but gradually I am getting more and more errors. I am posting in the same thread as I feel you gurus who are watching this thread would help.

Further to the last response,

It never gave me any msg. it seems there was something wrong with the PO itself. I created new project, new PO and tried the settlement it worked, now my further error is that when I create project in a different company(say1001) and try to settle the PO related cost from original company(say 1008), it asks me that some vendor(5000018) is not created in company 1001. I don't remember to have used any such vendor during PO.

I tried to create this vendor using XK01, but realized that the number range for this vendor account group is already used with internal numbering system and this vendor 5000018 does not exist in any of the companies so that I can extend.

Please advise.

Regards,

Manish

[nitin_patoliya]

There are mailny Two transactio wthich can help you in thi regards based on type of Cost posted.

KB61 : For FI Posting costs

KB65 : For CO Posting Costs few types.

Chekc out.... Take help of FI / C)O consultant if requried, If you on R/3 4.7 onwards in that case there is not other currncy related issue in reposting doucmetns with these transactions.

WIth Regards

Nitin P.

[panagiotis_papaspyridakos]

Hi...

have you tried KB61 ?

Alternativelly in settlement you may use the source structure in order to isolate specific cost elements you want to transfer to the other wbs elements...Have you tried something like that?

I hope it helps

Pan

[Former Member]

Dear Panagiotis Papa,

Can you please elaborate your second point please?

Thanks,

Manish

[virendra_pal]

if manual reposting is not an option why can't you just post an FI journal?

[Former Member]

Is there any other way as there are many entries that needs to be posted. Any settings in settlement rule configuration that can help.

[nitin_patoliya]

By mistke It posted twice. So removed.

Edited by: Nitin Patoliya on Apr 7, 2010 2:08 PM