cancel
Showing results for 
Search instead for 
Did you mean: 

Transportation and Shipment Scheduling during Backorder Processing

Former Member
0 Kudos

Hi,

We are currently using Condition Table for Scheduling during ATP check for ''Pick Pack Time''. Based on the Order Type, we assign a different GI time.

This is working fine during the ATP check from ECC to SCM. During BOP, this GI time is not considered at all.

Any idea anyone???

Please let me know.

David

Accepted Solutions (0)

Answers (1)

Answers (1)

michael_thinschmidt
Contributor
0 Kudos

Hi David,

You have to make sure that the characteristics are known by BOP too. Please check note 385039 and add the AUART to the field catalogue in the mentioned userexit and KOMGOZ structure.

Afterwards the BOP should consider the AUART for the scheduling.

best regards,

Michael 

Former Member
0 Kudos

Hello Michael,

AUART was already in the structure and BOP is still not considering Goods Issue Time. Any order idea why this is happening?

Let me know

David

michael_thinschmidt
Contributor
0 Kudos

Hi David,

Goto the BOP result screen and check a sales order. Doubleclick on the new MBDAT. A new Popup should appear with some scheduling data. Click on the button for scheduling log...you should see the explanation screen where you can recheck the conditions (use button for condition analysis). This should help you to identify the reason for wrong scheduling. Check if the AUART condition was found or not.

But this works only for sales order documents !

Hope it helps,

Michael

Former Member
0 Kudos

Michael,

I'm getting: 002 Access not made (initialized field) ... Any idea what this mean?

Regards

David

michael_thinschmidt
Contributor
0 Kudos

Hi David,

no, where do you get this exactly ? Maybe its easier to raise a message at SAP support for checking this directly on your system.

regards,

Michael

Former Member
0 Kudos

Michael,

The field AUART was not in the structure /SAPAPO/KOMGU.

I though this was standard SAP!

Can you confirm?

David

0 Kudos

Hi Michael

I proposed the note - 1010469, it solved the issue.

sundar