cancel
Showing results for 
Search instead for 
Did you mean: 

GATP- product availbility check question

Former Member
0 Kudos

Hi all

This is a scenario where the client has sales orders partially or fully confirmed on different dates. (Pre-Go live)

At Go Live you activate the Product Availability Check and CIF sales orders.

How do you ensure that you keep the confimations aligned with what has already been committed to customers?

What is the methodology,tools or reports if any used in this scenario based on experience?

Thanks in advance

Accepted Solutions (1)

Accepted Solutions (1)

Former Member
0 Kudos

Anton,

On day 1, when you CIF across all of your sales orders, the existing confirmed dates/qtys will go with them. No problem.

On day 2, though, when users perform their first ATPs on existing orders, or during Backorder processing, they will then begin to get confirmations from SCM/GATP, and not from R/3.

There are so many flavors of SCM availability checking, I can't possibly comment on all of the things you could do to minimize the probable changes you will get on your existing sales orders. However you will get changes. This is why you implemented GATP in the first place.

If you intend to run BOP (just about everyone does), then you might want to consider excluding existing confirmed orders from processing. At least you won't be getting thousands of re-schedules or de-confirmations. The BOP logs will identify every schedule that has a worse date, or a de-commit. Transaction /SAPAPO/BOP_RESULT

Your best bet is always to perform your entire go-live process in your Qual system first, and then have the users test and evaluate the functionality.

You might want to consider setting a policy that no 'pre-SCM' orders should be re-ATP'd.

Rgds,

DB49

Former Member
0 Kudos

Hi Dogboy49

If I understood you right the key point in your suggestion is NOT to turn on the product availability check on day 1 and THEN CIF the confirmed sales orders?

If I do this then the new incomming sales orders AFTER TURNING ON the availability check, will understand the cumulation and will not overcomit?

Example and expected result

Sales orders and deliveries = 100

Supplies within Check Horizon = 110

Day 1

Availability check is turned off

Sales orders CIFed

Day 2

Availability check turned on

New sales orders, requested date within check horizon, qty = 30.

Promised within CH = 10, at CH = 20

Is this what will happen? If it does then this is what is required. Please confirm.

Thanks

Former Member
0 Kudos

Anton,

If I understood you right the key point in your suggestion is NOT to turn on the product availability check on day 1 and THEN CIF the confirmed sales orders?

No, this was not my suggestion. CIFing the sales orders across does not change the availability. It merely copies the existing data from R/3 to SCM, including the existing confirmations. You do not need to turn off any ATP functionality, since it is not invoked during the SO CIF. Likewise, turning on the ATP CIF in and of itself will not automatically cause any changes to your existing confirmations.

Newly created orders will recognize the existing orders' confirmations, and will apply your new GATP rules for the new order. Assuming that all you are doing is a product check, and further assuming that the SCM scope of check is identical to the R/3 scope, then the next order entered as new will be confirmed almost exactly the same as it would have been had you done the ATP in R/3. (there are some subtle differences due to the difference in the way SCM handles ATP time buckets, but you will probably never notice them. There are also subtle differences in the way SCM handles shipment scheduling, but again, with proper thought these differences can be minimized enough so as to be trivial).

Usually, though, the reason that people use GATP is because they want to change the ATP. Again, new orders will still respect the existing confirmations, and will be confirmed according the new SCM ATP check. However, if an ATP is performed upon existing confirmed orders, either manually or via BOP, then those orders could lose their original confirmation date. Which was your original issue, no?

Rgds,

DB49

Former Member
0 Kudos

Hi Dogboy49 and Mohan:

I believe you both have answered my question , thank you both and as such I will be crediting you both with "solved problem" when I close this issue (Hopefully the forum system allows me to credit more than one person - not tried that before)

In the meantime :

To Dogboy49

No, my issue was not running ATP check once again or running BOP on already CIFed ordes. The basic misunderstanding I had was that if R/3 ATP checked/confirmed sales orders were CIFed to APO with ATP check on, I thought that they would automatically go through APO ATP check. If this happenned then the CIF sequence not necessarily being the same as how the orders entered R/3, the reconfirmations could yield different result.

You and Mohan have confirmed that this does not happen and R/3 confirmed orders do not execute ATP check at the time of CIFing even if APO ATP check is on.

To Mohan

Prior to GATP go-live the Orders are ATP-checked in R/3.

What is "generate and recover the Sales Order requirements using report SDRQCR21" and to what end?

Best regards,

Anton

Former Member
0 Kudos

Anton,

I only wish the cutover was as easy as I made it sound. You will run into many difficult-to-understand issues on existing orders. This is something that you would be well advised to create in a test environment, and excercise extensively. If you can't get the business community to help you with testing, then test it yourself - LOTS. You will head off lotsa questions and prevent many unreasonable expectations from your end users post-go-live.

Here are a couple of docs that are easily readable, which will help you in the ongoing support.

http://service.sap.com/~sapidb/011000358700007382482002E

http://service.sap.com/~sapidb/011000358700000715082008E

There are more like this on

http://service.sap.com/~sapidb/011000358700005273182001E

Good luck & Rgds,

DB49

Former Member
0 Kudos

Hi Anton,

The report sdrqcr21 is available both in ECC and SCM. This is to recover the lost Sales Order and delivery requirements or the requirements that system missed in transfer of requirements to MRP. Some times these inconsistencies occur, according to SAP, because of operating error.

This is a standard report to recover such missing requirements. It's available in SCM by name /sapapo/sdrqcr21. It's advised that you run this in ECC before you sync up your data with SCM.

For more information on this refer to Notes 25444.

Regards,

Mohan

Former Member
0 Kudos

Hi Dogboy49 and Mohan

Thank you both.

I could not assign "solved problem/10" to both at the same time. I have therefore credited Dogboy49 with solved problem/10 and Mohan twice with "very helpful answer/6x2

Anton

Answers (1)

Answers (1)

Former Member
0 Kudos

Hi,

Are you implementing SAP R3 or ECC along with GATP or you're already running on R3/ECC and implementing GATP to go with it?

If you're migrating from some legacy system to SAP ERP and SCM, you have to deactivate the ATP check by chosing a schedule line not relevant to ATP check, standard or a copy of CN and load the open sales orders. This is to ensure that the open confirmed sales orders not lose the confirmations.

If you're already using SAP ERP, you will need not do anything when sending the Sales orders over to SCM, because transfer of Sales Orders to SCM will not trigger ATP Check, so you will not have the problem of confirmed orders losing the confirmation. But it's better to have all the receipt elements and stock in SCM before you CIF the Sales orders and start ATP on them. Use CCR report to make sure all the receipt elements are consistent across ECC and SCM, and also generate and recover the Sales Order requirements using report SDRQCR21.

Hope this helps.

Regards,

Mohan