cancel
Showing results for 
Search instead for 
Did you mean: 

New warehousenumber or add a storage location to existing warehousenr?

Former Member
0 Kudos

Hi all,

we are planning to create a new physical warehouse in another city then were the existing warehouse is located.

In the past we had two storage locations under one warehousenumber and i would like to add the new storage location as well.

Then we want to add MRP areas to split the availability check for these storage locations.

When we choose for this solution we can keep using the existing storage types which we move from the existing to the new storage location (we have certain materialnr's which we want to move to the new storagelocation and have their own storage types, next to that some materials will be stored in both storage locations but are only available for separate groups of customers (devided over the two storage locations).

Do you think this is a wise decision or are there strong arguments to create a new warehousenumber?

Appreciate your help.

Accepted Solutions (1)

Accepted Solutions (1)

JL23
Active Contributor
0 Kudos

I had used a single warehouse for 2 physical locations (just separated by the river Rhine, people can cross the river by boat, trucks have to drive 30 km)

I separated them with storage locations and by storage type.

This saved certainly some effort for customizing and some master data, however, people always have to add the storage location when creating manual TO's

I never loved this way since I prefer to setup locations and warehouses according to their physical realities.

While consultants are able to set it up this way, normal warehouse users have a hard time to understand such setup.

But there was a strong demand and some history to do it that way and it was not possible to convince them with pros and cons as they had no experience. They quickly encountered the pain after go-live. They got confused about where the stock physically was. Had a lot confusion with stock transfers between the 2 locations.

All in all the time needed to clear all doubts was many times more than the time saved for the customizing and master data creation.

People got used to the setup but all agreed that they would do it differently if they had to do it again.

Former Member
0 Kudos

HI Juergen,

i've encoutered the same issue. For this warehouse we've had two separte storage locations in the past (Different cities). Not anymore, but for specific materials the want to setup a new phsyical warehouse again. 90% of the materials are not used in both storage locations and for the 10% left we want to setup MRP areas to be able to control the material requirement per customer (customers for city 1 only should receive material stock from storage location A and for city 2 they should receive the same material from storage location B).

Let's say i would go for 2 storage locations in 1 warehousenr, is it wise then to keep using the current storage types (since all the stock (within the 90%) is stored in these storage types and no other, this saves me some work, but i am not sure if i will encouter any problems..... The storage types are assigned to the warehousenr and therefor i thought it would be a possibility to just start using them in the new storage location. Or is this a ridiculous idea and should i setup new storage types? For the 10% is will do that anyway since they will be used in both storage locations and therefor require a new storage type in the new storage location, in my opinion.....Would like to hear your opinion.

JL23
Active Contributor
0 Kudos

In short I would confirm that it is a not a good idea, it has even more potential to confuse the users.

Beneath a single storage you have the storage bins of 2 physical warehouses then.

Many settings like putaway and picking strategy as well as for physical inventory are at storage type level.

In many reports and selections the people would need to do their delimitation based on bin numbers.(and create their own variants to save some entry steps ) .As said before many things can be done, there is not really a criterion for exclusion, but there are numerous examples where life becomes more tough for the users. 

Take the burden and do the customizing, it is usually a one-time activity, and you will relief the pain that users have every day, it  has long term certainly a higher cost effectiveness

Former Member
0 Kudos

I am only a bit concerned about the custom Z stuff which is currently in de system and which probably has to be adjusted when using another warehousenr (maybe not because of the whnr itself) but more the new storage types to be used in the new storage location..... Is it easy to do a stocktransfter between warehousenrs during the pre go live stage?

JL23
Active Contributor
0 Kudos

Stock transfers are initiated in MM.  The easiest form of a stock transfer is the movement 311, but you wont get any paperwork to transport the material over public roads.

Looking at all the discussions about stock transfer orders with delivery certainly confirms that it is not an easy task for everyone to set this up.

I would consider this (PO and delivery) as a disproportionate effort for one time movements.

Answers (2)

Answers (2)

Former Member
0 Kudos

I agree. Would recommend new Storage Location assigned to a new warehouse.

Cheers

Former Member
0 Kudos

I understand guys and if i would have to implement it all over again from scratch i suppose i would do it as you mentioned but please see my reply to Juergen.... What would you do in such a situation?

Former Member
0 Kudos

yes if physical location is different it is advisable to make a separate warehouse. because you can control better from this.