AVC not showing desired result

[Former Member]

Hi ATP/AVC gurus

it seems that the indicator T441V-OLGPR (ignore storage locations during availability check) doesn't seem to work correct in my situation. Anyone else with that problem?

i have setup following scenario for a customer of mine.

• They receive stocks into a storage location "RCV, their goods receipt stor loc for temporary GR processing until ready to move into proper warehouse.
• They deliver from storage location "0001" which is their central warehouse
• I am using order stocks (special stock E) where the contract creates demand and pushes MRP to create the PR/PO
• purchasing received shipping notifications from the vendor
• Sales orders creates call offs with reference to the contract, using the contract number/item as the special stock segment
• I am using the same fixed batch 00005 in both purchase order and sales order
• scope of check is set to ignore storage locations since receipts and issues are in different storage locations, field T441-OLGPR = X, i.e., availability check is supposed to be on plant level and batch level, but not storage location.
• I have no MRP area or setting on MRP4 to separate out the RCV storage location for any purposes.

Stock/requirement situation is

• nothing in stock yet.
• Contract visible in MRP
• I got two "AB" confirmation in the purchase order, i.e., ship notifications from the vendor.

Expectation

• therefore i would expect that AVC confirms my call off sales order with the delivery dates of the vendor shipping notifications (plus any processing time) .... BUT IT DOESN'T?
• Instead it confirms according to replenishment lead time (which is active in my scope of check)

See screenshots in attachment for details.

appreciate any help/feedback.

Looks like a SAP bug to me?

Bjorn

[Former Member · Accepted solution]

Bjorn,

I am guessing here, but it looks like you have some negative quantities in the cumulative column.  This would imply that you are already overcommitted for this material.

Your availability screenshot cuts off some of the most important information.  Please repost, showing the header and the entire plant segment, including any minus quantities in the cumulative column.

Also, please post the entire relevant Batch segment.

Best Regards,

DB49

[Former Member · Accepted solution]

Hi DB49

thanks so far. I already fixed one issue - which was around the negative cumATP quantities. The contract itself was relevant for AVC still and i turned that off. That allowed me to get a step further.

So, i got a slightly new situation in my screenshot

sales stock suffices for sales orders 5003825319 + 21.

expected outcome for sales order 5003825320 is to confirm dates as per PO shipping notifications now.

The funny thing is it works correctly as long as i have no PO confirmation. In this case AVC confirms sales order 5003825320 with delivery date in the PO + <processing time (1day)>

But once i create the shipping notifications AVC doesn't "see" them and confirms end of lead time.

Bjorn

[Former Member · Accepted solution]

and here the situation where the PO has no confirmation whatsoever. In this case we can clearly see the PO in the batch segment in ATP which means i get a correct ATP date for the sales order ... Why doesn't that work for the PO confirmations?

[Former Member · Accepted solution]

Bjoern,

I am guessing that neither your confirmation nor your inbound delivery contains the Batch.

Anyhow, I believe the original question has been answered.  Turning on 'No stor.loc Inspectn' is not a factor in your problem, it appears to work as designed.

If you want more info about Purchase orders, Purchase Order Confirmations, and Inbound Deliveries, I suggest you repost that question in the MM forum.

Best Regards,

DB49

[Former Member · Accepted solution]

Hi DB49,

Got closer to a resolution.

Actually when creating an inbound delivery (LA) via VL31N the batch is inherited and AVC behaves correctly. It is only when i create an order confirmation (AB) in ME22N directly that the batch in the confirmation (EKES-CHARG) isn't automatically populated in the customer's system - as you suggested...

I replicated the scenario into on of my own demo/test systems and it works 100% fine there for both situations.

So, this seems to be either a SAP bug which was fixed in my demo/test system already (being on a higher Ehp/SP) - or - the customer has activated a userexit/Badi somewhere which negatively interferes for the order confirmation process...

But thanks for your moral support it did help...

Bjorn