S.Loc and Warehouse assignment.. 1-warehouse or multiple-warehouses

[Former Member]

Hello,

I am working on SAP EWM and during blueprinting have come across the following case.

1.                                       

PLNT - SLOC1 - WH1

PLNT - SLOC2 - WH1

PLNT - SLOC3 - WH1

2.

PLNT - SLOC1 - WH1

PLNT - SLOC2 - WH2

PLNT - SLOC3 - WH3

I am trying to figure out which config would be better (wrt overall system configurations and the final operational effectiveness).

Looking forward to some help.

Regards,

Amit

[Former Member]

In our case, there are three physically different sto.locations.

The requirement is to use only 1 warehouse for the 3 sto.locations.

Should the 3 sto.locations should have different names for the same process type - example inbound -  INB1 for sto1, INB2 for sto2, INB3 for sto3.

(doesnt seem possible in the system)

Or should they have same process types but different storage types. example for inbound - INBP - st.type1 for sto.loc1, sto.type2 for sto.loc.2 sto.type3 for sto.loc3.

(again, this also doesnt seem possible in the system)

We are unable to understand how to design this. Looking forward to some directions .

Thanks in advance.

[JuergenPitz]

Hi,

"In our case, there are three physically different sto.locations.

The requirement is to use only 1 warehouse for the 3 sto.locations."

Who came up with this "requirement"? IMHO: Bad idea.

"We are unable to understand how to design this. Looking forward to some directions ."

Don't build it like this. Because one day it is going to bite you in the...

Brgds

Juergen

[Former Member]

Thanks Csaba and Jinoy,

If we go by the 1st option, we would have to create multiple availability groups and stock types.

I am not clear with the usage of multiple stock types and avail.groups.

Can you provide some information on the role of multiple stock types and avail.groups during the transactions.. and if this would cause operational problems.

Regards,

Amit

[JuergenPitz]

Hi,

"Can you provide some information on the role of multiple stock types and avail.groups during the transactions.."

Well, you need availability groups and stock types to distinguish the different owners (=storage locations) if they share one warehouse. You need to know whom each quant belongs to. Even if you have just one storage location in one warehouse, you need one availability group and different stock tpyes. But with option 2 all warehouses can use the same.

What Csaba and Jinoy wrote is not really to be seen as recommendation. Do the storage location share the same physical warehouse? Then option 1 is the right one, everything else is just addtional work. Do they not share the same physical warehouse? The go with option 2, everything else is just messing it up.

Best regards

Juergen

[csaba_szommer]

Juergen Pitz wrote:
Hi,
"Can you provide some information on the role of multiple stock types and avail.groups during the transactions.."
Well, you need availability groups and stock types to distinguish the different owners (=storage locations) if they share one warehouse. You need to know whom each quant belongs to. Even if you have just one storage location in one warehouse, you need one availability group and different stock tpyes. But with option 2 all warehouses can use the same.
What Csaba and Jinoy wrote is not really to be seen as recommendation. Do the storage location share the same physical warehouse? Then option 1 is the right one, everything else is just addtional work. Do they not share the same physical warehouse? The go with option 2, everything else is just messing it up.
Best regards
Juergen

I cannot see the real difference between what you said and I said, that's why I'm not sure what you think of exactly. Your term ("physical warehouse") is more accurate (than my "physical location") but I think that's all.

[JuergenPitz]

Hi Csaba,

guess I wrote this in a bad way.

I didn't wanted to express that what you wrote or what Jinoy wrote is wrong - sorry if my remark looks like that. I would only not write "would consider", or as Jinoy wrote "think it is better to go", as it is a very important decision how to set up the warehouse connection and one which is very, very difficult to correct afterwards. So I just wanted to emphasize it, but exactly what you said. Again, sorry if my wording came over as negative reply to your answer, that was not intended.

Best regards

Juergen

[csaba_szommer]

Hello Juergen, thanks for clarifying it...and sorry from my part also because my English is sorrowfully not the best and reading again your reply it seems I just may have interpreted it in a wrong way. Cs.

[Former Member]

Dear Amit ,

if your physical structure is the same i think its better to go with first option , for separate structure you could go with second one.

Volume of materials in each premises also plays important part with decision making.

Hope it helps.

Thanks

Jinoy

[csaba_szommer]

One important thing to make the decision is - in my opinion - whether the storage locations are in the same physical (geographical) location or not.

If they are in the same physical location (especially if they / some of them are "logical" / "virtual" storage locations), normally I would consider to assign them to the same warehouse (your 1st option).

If they are in different geographical locations, I would consider creating separate warehouse for each (your 2nd option).

Similar questions have been discussed here on LE forum, you can search and see more arguments for the different options.