cancel
Showing results for 
Search instead for 
Did you mean: 

Scheduling agreements / Cum.Qty.

Former Member
0 Kudos

Hello

We are working on doing EDI scheduling agreements with a customer.

The thing is that they can not send us a Cum.Qty.received in the EDI message.

What they do send is the "last delivery" received and the last despatch qty and my question is if SAP based on that information can calculate the correct open qty ?

Thanks in advance.

Alex

Accepted Solutions (0)

Answers (1)

Answers (1)

Former Member
0 Kudos

Hi Alex,

Whenever customer sends an inbound EDI 830 IDOC it will update the Scheduling agreement with relevant details.

"Cum Qty Received" by customer will be sent in Segment: E1EDP10 and Field: AKUEM

"Last Dely" details will be sent in Segment: E1EDP10 and Field: BELNR

Coming to point 1: "Cum Qty Received" is always sent by the customer. If they dont send this info then system will show up huge quantities piled up in the "Qty in Transit" field. This again will block your Open Qty.

Point no 2: Last Dely always refers to the delivery no that is received by the customer. This need not necessarily be the one in SAP. It can be customer's own last delivery no. This field is not mandatory. Being optional, system will even then calculate the Open Qty without any issues.

Hope this will help you out !

Regards,

Syed Nasir

Former Member
0 Kudos

Hello Syed

Thank you for your reply.

Yes that is normally also how it works with our customers but the thing is that we

have this one European customer that does not send us a Cum.Qty.Received.

They only send the "last delv." which is our delivery number and the "last qty".

So I was wondering whether it would be possible to operate the scheduling agreements based on that information only. My thought was that if we have delivered delivery 1, 2 and 3 and they

tell us that the last delv. received was 2 then 3 must be in transit and 1 + 2 must be the Cum.Qty.Received. I have been playing around with it in our test system and it looks like it might be working.

Do you think that would work ?

Thank you for your input I appreciate it.

Regards

Alex