budget column includes the assigned values in 558 report

[former_member412338]

Hello Experts,

Again I am back with a query, for a perticular project S_ALR_87013558 report shows the budget values different than CJ31.

When i did analysis found budget column sum up the KBUD & KBFC values and display the figures in 558 report or in other words The system is adding the actuals (or assigned, both are same as we have commitment as zero) to the budget  column in the display of the 558 report.

Please help me out of this dilemma, why system calculates the wrong values in 558 whereas CJ31 has the correct values.

Thanks,

Vindhesh

[former_member412338 · Accepted solution]

Simple CJEQ solved it

Thank you everyone for your help..

[sanjeevc]

Hi,

if this is due to project data consistency then reconstruct project database then run the report and comparison.

and check below thread if help you.

http://scn.sap.com/thread/1555500

Regards,

Sanjeev

[former_member412338]

Hi,

report formula is correct.

Please see the detail screenshots of 558 report, CJ31 too -

[sunil_yadav2]

Hi Vindhesh,

Please check line item -49 in 58 report.

from where does this value comes?

please check.

thanks

Sunil

[former_member412338]

Hi Sunil,

With due respect if you are not able to understand the issue precisely then just dont reply anything.

But let me tell you again, we have -50 as actual and budget for that wbs is 1, that is the reason we get 558 as -49, and that is my question, in 558 we should have only 1 in 3137A84_10_03 budget similar to CJ31 NOT -49, similarly in other WBS too

Thanks,

Vindhesh

[MTerence]

Hi Vindhesh,

Did you compare the CJ31 with CJI1, hopefully it should match.

If thats the case, run the reconstruct report as instructed by others. I suggest you to validate at table level also, to confirm this is an issue with 558 alone.

Regards

Terence

[sunil_yadav2]

Hi Vindhesh,

you are taking me wrong, my question is "if budget is 1 at 3137A84_10_03 so why system shows -49, -49 should be in available column"

if cj31 shows 201 as budget and *58 report shows 241 so this means something going wrong in entries or database.

so you need to check line item report for budget or database reconstruct.

all members are here to help others as per there knowledge after reading your problems.

it happens that you are not able to explain or somebody is not getting your point. have patience and check according to commented by member.

thanks

Sunil

[former_member412338]

Hi Terence,

CJI3 & CJI1 matches.

i tried the CJEN, CJBN but it couldnt fix the issue , please see the table too.

[MTerence]

Hi Vindhesh,

There is a posting in KBFC, this is assigned budget. So this reports adds up the Budget and Assigned Budget.

I am not sure whether this works, but this was Actual + Commitment correction, may be if the Actual corrected, it give an output. Just a hunch.

1. Please run report RKANBU01 for the incorrect projects in question, this will update any incorrect commitments. Further details can be found in note 152571.
2. After running the reports above, please run report RKACOR04 as this will correct any problems between the line item tables and the total record tables.
3. After running the above reports, please run transaction code CJEN for all the projects as this is very important so that the database gets updated.
4. Finally run report CJBN which rebuilds the availability control for each project.

Regards

Terence

[former_member412338]

I tried all this earlier and even once again afater your replu but no luck..

Any other suggestion.

[MTerence]

Hi Vindhesh,

Check for some other projects or it just happens for one project.

Secondly try to replicate similar scenario in any other, then you can raise this to SAP via OSS.

Below are some of the notes, i found out, check whether this is relevant to your case

1414563 - Different assigned values in availability ctrl and reporting

2049893 - Transaction CN41N shows different value for residual order plan than transaction S_ALR_870...

178837 - Availability control: Incorrect assigned value?

1888213 - Values with "Object currency" are displayed incorrectly in PS reports

Regards

Terence

[sunil_yadav2]

Hi Vindhesh,

Budget is what you assign in CJ30

actual is what ever you post like- GR/GI, financial postings etc

assigned is Actual +Commitment

commitment is PR/PO values.

if you found any inconsistency in data (wrt reports) so you can rebuild database so these type of inconsistency will be corrected.

thanks

Sunil

[former_member195427]

Please check in CJE2 for 12KST1A and check which formula is used for calculating these values in erroneous column.

Regards
saurabh

[former_member412338]

Hi Saurabh,

Please let me know the steps to see the formula.

But another doubt is why system shows correct values for the other projects.

Thanks,

Vindhesh

[sunil_yadav2]

please check below screen

this formula is used for extracting Budget amount.

[former_member195427]

Once you go to report 12KST1A-> Click Display->Here, in the R.H.S of the form double click on any Header (tile) of a clumn , Let's say if you click 'Assigned' then you will get the formula table.

For other issue, please rebuild project info database and cross verify the value figures which differs and identify the origin of those values and let us know.

Thanks

Saurabh

[former_member313915]

Hi Sunil,

Could you please tell me  the steps  where do i get the above  selected characterstics value..?

Thanks in advance for your help.

Br,

Amar

[sunil_yadav2]

check tcode CJE6 and go to report 12KST1A ->Here, in the Right Side of the form double click on any Header (title) of a clumn and you will get details

[former_member313915]

Hi Sunil,

Thanks for your quick reply.

I had one doubt , there is no entry for value type(WRTTP) - 42 in BPJA table for budget.So how can i make an  entry for value type - 42 in BPJA table.Could you please guide me with all required steps.

Thanks in advance for your help.

Br,

Amar

[sunil_yadav2]

Hi Amar,

its better to create new thread for this issue as this is against Rules of SCN.

thanks

Sunil