F.54 is not match with MB51

Hello Guru's,
i am trying to check the RM consumption GL accounts in F.54 with the stock consumption report t.code MB51 by using movement type 201 & 202. but these two repots are not matching.
can anybody help that what other GL accounts needs to consider for comparisin with MB51.
appreciate your quick reply.
thanks

I have check in my system and it shows the exact value .
MB51
MC45
Every thing is matching .
Please check the dates whether you have given exact dates in MB51 and MC45 .As per your screenshot it shows 01.01.2014 to 01.04.2014 .
Please check once again and revert me back .

Similar Messages

Production order confirmation date & time not matching with MB51.

Hi All,
We are facing a problem when we confirm production order in a local time zone but when we go and check the material document MB51 , we find the posting date and time is showing System date and time and not the local date and time - in the month end we are facing the problems in reports preperation.
Please find the example as below-
Step-1
I do confirmation of Production order 101939015 for the Plant 2041
on 03/12/2007 at 11:39:33 ( USER TIME ZONE),
Step-2
Now go to the MB51 (Material document list)and check the posting time
- here the posting date and time is 03/11/2007 & 23:39:37. ( SYSTEM TIME ZONE.)
Material Document Number : 4909412794
From the above example we can see that the production order was confirmed in USER TIME ZONE ,but the document was posted in SYSTEM TIME ZONE, which is not acceptable to the USER, as in the month-end he is not getting the correct Reports. User wants a harmonized date & time.
Can anybody give some solution its very urgent.
Nitin.

Hi Nitin,
Can you check the confirmation time in the system by displaying confirmation and then there look for "Admin" data.
Also let us know whether Confirmation/Goods Movment is online update or run in background as job?
Please let us know your findings,
Regards,
Prasobh

CO-PA Cost Component do not match with Standard Cost Component Values

Dear Members,
The CO-PA Cost Components (as mapped through KE4R), do not match with Standard Cost Component values for the Group Currency. In local currency the values match.
System is correctly picking up VPRS value, both in local currency and Group Currency, which is equal to the total of Standard Cost Components however, it is the Value Fields linked to the Standard Cost Components in Group Currency that do not match.
In KE40, the Indicator is 4:Released Standard Cost Estimate matching Goods issue Date.
I have verified KEPH/CKMLPKEPH tables. The values are same as that of VPRS.
Any help/clues?
Regards
Satya

Hi,
In case of billing documents the group valuation approach is managed in the data structures of the legal valuation in additional value fields. To control costs and revenues in the different views separately, you must create additional value fields and assign them to the data structures.
The field contents must be filled via the CO-PA user exit, they cannot be entered by assigning conditions to value fields. The profit center valuation is updated in a separate ledger. No separate value fields are necessary.
The exit to be used is function module 'EXIT_SAPLKEII_002' ( enhancement COPA0005 ). Within the exit you have the complete SD data avaialble in the tables 'T_ACCIT' and 'T_ACCCR'. The conditions can be found in T_ACCIT and the corresponding values ( linked via 'POSNR' ) in table T_ACCCR. The PA line item and the corresponding SD item in table ACCIT
can be mapped via the line item field 'RPOSN' and the field 'POSNR_SD' in table ACCIT.
regards
Waman

Receipt Qty in AP invoice does not match with actual receipt qty.

Hello everyone,
I am facing an issue in oracle Payables module. When we match invoice with receipt while preparing invoices, Quantity received shown in the Receipt quantity block in invoice window does not match with actual receipt quantity of that item. Due to this difference user is not able to book the invoice. Please help me to resolve this issue.
Thanks,
Himanshu Gupta

Exactly. What i mean is in the invoice window, There is a block called reciept quantity shown in the lower part. The received quantity displayed in that block is more the actual quantity being recieved. (when we see the recieving transactions). is this a bug?
thanks for your reply, awaiting your response......
Himanshu Gupta

0FC_OP_01 extractor issues- DFFKKOPBW data not matching with

Hi All
We have an issue with the extractor 0FC_OP_01. Our business is comparing the values in
R/3 report u2013 G/L Account Balance Display (t-code S_ALR_87012277) with the
Open Items by GL Account report in BW .(actually these values in the BW report are coming from DFKKOPBW table in R/3) .
But since august, the R/3 G/L account balance report is not matching with the DFKKOPBW table balances. So bottom line the extractor 0FC_OP_01 is doing something wrong when populating the DFKKOPBW table which is causing these two reports to be out of balance
Did anybody face this kind of issue before? Please Advise.
FYI : We are following the same procedure to populate the DFKKOPBW table as in the below article.
http://www.sdn.sap.com/irj/sdn/go/portal/prtroot/docs/library/uuid/a9996115-0b01-0010-b2b2-d9de0170a425;jsessionid=%28J2EE3417800%29ID0001499250DB01896329908162586522End
Thanks
KPK

In my case the Cube/PSA data itself is not matching with the R/3 report data.
Basically we run a job in R/3 in t-code FPBW with a Date id and Indentification. This job will pull the entries from base table DFKKOP into DFKKOPBW table .Then FRom this DFKKOPBW table data is loaded into PSA/Cube.
Here in my case the data in table DFKKOPBW itself is not matching with the R/3 report - G/L Account Balance Display (t-code S_ALR_87012277)) .
I am following the same procedure to run the JOb in T-code FPBW to populate the DFKKOPBW table as listed in the document at the above link. Moreover this difference in balances is occuring only starting from August ..Till July the balances in DFKKOPBW tally with the R/3report.
Please advise ..
Thanks
KPK

Inventory data not matching with R/3

Hi,
In R/3 production we have the data from 1999-Till date.From 1999-2004 Data was archieved in R/3 system.So we have two years live data in the R/3 production.
We have filled the setup tables and extracted the Inventory data then loaded into 0IC_C03 Cube.
But the values in BW report from 0IC_C03 is not matching with the values in R/3 report.
1.What could be the reason?
2.If we need to extract the archieved data from R/3 what are the steps we need to do?.
Pls help us with your suggestions.

We have followed as per the How to handle inventory managment document.
The quanity value is matching between R/3 and BW.But the Valuated Stock Value is not matching for some of the materials.For the current period it showing the right value(for ex.if we check for 12th Month).
But If we check the material for old months like October,Aug the value of valuated stock value is not matching with R/3 for some of the materials.
In RSDV validity table date maintained from 1999-Dec'200.
We are using the standard business content cubes and update rules.Is there any change needs to be done in update rules for 0IC_C03 cube to get the right values for all the materials?..
Pls help with your inputs.
Thanks
Soujanya

Planning area data not matching with backup cube / PSA

Hi friends,
while loading data from planning area to backup cube , for the key figure ( result of a macro),the data in planning area is not matching with PSA as well as with cube.
At the same time Data is matching at total level but not at disagregated level. And many times it disagregate in equal Proportion in cube/psa.
Pls its urgent.
Pts for sure.
Vishal.
9326179903

make sure you have replicated the extraction of the data source. This is needed to ensure your backup cube gets the current data as in the planning area
if you got to /SAPAPO/SDP_EXTR then you can see this button
you can set this up as a program scheduled to run before the updation of your cube
As for the disaggregation, test at what level you are choosing your characteristic? ( i suppose you can choose the level)
Are you extracting at a detailed level or at the aggregated level
Is your macro saving the data into a Keyfigure or is it an auxilliary KF or something?

Vendor aging unreconciled bal. does not match with TB Acct. Payable balance

Dear all,
When i take unreconciled vendor aging report with selection creteria all vendor codes selected,aging date as 31/03/09 and posting date from 01/04/08 to date 31/03/09,Interval - 30 Days,By Journal postings
Deticked all check boxes in it.
Aging report total balance of all vendor does not match with account payable balance in Trial balance ?
But for reconciled aging totals and trial balance total are same.
How to solve it ? or i need to do any settings ?
Jeyakanthan

Hai!
What version of SAP B1 u r using.
I do got the same problem for my customer. I did this..
1. Run Aging Report for all Vendors. Donot check Recon Transaction.
2. Export to Excel
3. Run TB for BP selecting Vendors alone.
4. Export TB to Excel.
5. Find vendors who is having mismatch in their balance. (use V-Lookup in Excel)
6. Run Detail G/L Transaction report for those Vendors one by one.
*Selection from date: Age from date To date: Age To date *
*Selection Reconcilled Transaction only
7. Report Balance should be Zero. If not this problem is because of Internal Reconcillation.
8. Open *Check and Restore Previous reconcillation * select the vendor, internal
9. see the reconcillation details.
10. see the posting dates. All should be in previous fiscal year. (I mean the reconcilled set should have same fiscal year ex: Recon -2 trans should be in same fiscal year)
11. If, that is corrected and still difference exist means.
12.Go to Manage Previous Reconcillation
13. Select BP and Internal (Donot check system reconcill Trans)
14. Check the Reconcillation wheather all in same fiscal year.
Regards,
Thanga Raj.K
+91 9710445987

GL - Balances do not match with sum of Items

Hi,
I have a requirement in which I am pulling opening, closing balance and a list of all transactions (or items ) on a daily basis from GL to a flat file, and then loading in a third-party tool . Now, the issue is sum of all items (gl_je_lines ) should match with the diference of closing and opening balances.
I reconcilied the items with Oracle's Journal Report. Items are matching.
I also confirmed that closing balance of previous day matches with the opening balance of current date.
But, ( closing balance ) - (opening balance) does not match with sum(items)
I am using gl_daily _balances for opening and closing balance.
Waiting for your inputs/suggestions..
Yogini

Hi,
Thanks for the reply.
I am not using GL_INTERFACE. The tables I am using for Daily balances are:
gl_daily_balances
gl_code_combinations
chart_of_accounts
And for the items, I am using gl_je_lines, gl_je_headers.
Also, I am interested in Entered Amount in GBP as the Functional Currency is GBP and there are many transacitons in different foreign currencies.
More updates : I found that I have calculate the Entered Amount in GBP from all Converted/Transferred/Entered amounts in different currencies.
So, I tried the following :
(Select Sum(end_of_date_balance)
from gl_daily_balances
where Currency_code = 'GBP'
and currency_type = 'U'
and accounting_date = sysdate -1 --Opening balance
MINUS
( Select Sum(end_of_date_balance)
from gl_daily_balances
where Currency_code = 'GBP'
and currency_type = 'C'
and accounting_date = sysdate -1 --Opening balance
This way, I got opening and closing balance, but still the differernce between opening and closing balance is not matching with the sum of Items.
Any suggestions / inputs are highly appreciated.
Yogini

Sales orders Dispatch Actual No of pipes do not match with R3 report

Dear Gurus,
Looking Ur assistance for an issue.
Issue: For some of the sales orders Dispatch Actual No of pipes do not match with R3 report. Actual No of Pipes matches with LIKP table values in R3. Query needs to be modified to restrict records as per logic in WGSRLDES report/program.
Can U help me in this Regard.
Ur Responses are most appreciated.

Hey Pathak,
The problem is, BI report is matching with the datails with R/3 LIKP table. But the business user is using Report WGSRLDES report/program, where the data is missmatching.
Hope U got my Point.

GR/IR account G/L balance does not match with BSIS table

Hi,
I am preparing a report which uses table BSIS.But the total in the table does not match with the GR/IR G/L balance account.When I click on balance item display in FS10N the entries match with that of BSIS but the total is different.Also how to factor the year opening balance entries in the report.
Thanks
Arun

But that will slow down the system considerabley, because BSEG contains a huge data

GR Value is not matching with PO Value while posting good receipt.

Hi Experts,
My client has raised the PO with accounts assignment category K (COST CENTRE) with material description.
but he has received invoice receipt before good receipt.while invoice receipt he has entered wrong value for some qty as per PO intially and cancelled that wrong entry.
I have gone through original & cancelled invoice document accounting entries. below is entries:
Original invoice document accounting entries:
GR/IR Clearing account: Debited
Vendor account: Credited
during cancelling the above document it should be vendor acc is debited and GR/IR account is credited but in the system below entries taken place
Cancelled invoice document accounting entries:
Vendor account : Debited
GR/IR Account : Credited
Consumption Account : Credited
Why consumption acc taken place here. pls help what are the possibilitis....
these entries affecting good receipt value means while taking goods receipt for some qty out of full qty value is not matching with PO value.
but while cancelling the GR documents system taking correct values as per PO. Please help.
Kindly help in this regards
Regards
Mohan

Hi,
Check the Credit Memo document whether G/L tab is there & whether any G/L account is entered ?
I think instead of cancelling the MIRO document they might have posted a vendor credit memo manually by specifying a consumption GL.
Thanks & Regards,

AW01N- Total of write up not matching with total of indivudual transaction

Hi,
While viewing any Asset via AW01N, the total of Write up transaction is not matching with the total of individual transactions displayed in same screen.(It displays only last transaction value in total of write up transcation)
We applied OSS note No. 762128 still the problem exists.
Please inform me if anybody has resolved this before.
Thanks
Prasad

Hi,
Please note that the determination of the costs behaves differently in
the itemization and in the cost component split.
In the itemization, each item is rounded separately, while in the cost
component split first the individual items will be added up and then the
value will be rounded. The differences can be avoided by increasing the
lot sizes.
Please review sap note 168238, which explains the systems behaviour
and check the solution.
To avoid the occurrance of this problem you should
- always cost the header material again if an ingoing component with
changed values is being costed.
- also cost all materials again following a price calculation for a
particular period.
Please do not forget:
The itemization view only displayed the itemization on that level,
while the cost component view will display the cost component split
from all levels.
Please review sap note 889474. Sap note 66900 also explain why
small differences arise between the itemization and the cost component
split.
I hope helps,
Regards,
MLM

Inventory Valuated Stock Value is not matching with R/3

Dear Friends,
we are in a big mess.Needed your help urgently
We are in sap netweaver 2004s.We are implementing the standard business content only for one of our client.We have loaded the Inventory data into BW by following "How to handle the Inventory Management" document.
We have loaded the inventory data into 0IC_C03 using standard transferrules and update rules.
The sequence we followed as:
IN R/3
Filled the setup tables for during the posting free time(non-business hours)
Stock intialization
Material Movements
Evaluations
IN BW
We had loaded the data into only 0IC_C03 cube using standard update rules(no changes done)
2LIS_03_BX-Generate intial stock with no marker update unchecked
2LIS_03_BF-Full update with no marker update checked
2LIS_03_UM-Full update with no marker update checked
When we compared the data between R/3 and BW they are many materials "Valuated Stock Value" is not matching with R/3.For some materials value is matching with R/3 but for some other materials its not matching with R/3.Some materials are showing the negative figures for Valuated Stock Value.
But the valuated quantity value is exactly matching with R/3 for all the materials.
We have tryed to many ways in the past 10 days to find out the solution.We have followd the notes 589024 and implemented the formula.But no luck so far.
Needed your help..Any suggestions would be highly appreciated.
Please help us with your inputs.
Thanks in advance.
Regards
Soujanya

Hi Sudheer,
No We haven't implemented this note.
In start routine we already have the first start routine in the note.
INSERT BEGIN
loop at DATA_PACKAGE.
    if DATA_PACKAGE-stockcat eq 'V' or
       DATA_PACKAGE-stocktype eq 'V'.
      delete DATA_PACKAGE.
    endif.
endloop.
if abort is not equal zero, the update process will be canceled
ABORT = 0.
INSERT END
We should comment the above start routine and follow the remaining section as below?
==========================================================
Notes:
However, if you want a report of these consumption values, proceed as follows:
1. Do not use the start routine listed above.
2. Create two new key figures (cumulative values):
   1. Material consumption value (ZVERWERT, for example) with unit 0BASE_UOM
   2. Material consumption quantity (ZVERMENGE, for example) with unit 0LOC_CURRCY
3. Include these in the InfoCube definition.
4. Update these key figures from 2LIS_03_BF as follows:
-> material consumption value:
IF ( COMM_STRUCTURE-processkey EQ '100'   "Other Issues
    OR COMM_STRUCTURE-processkey EQ '101'   "Returns / Vendor
    OR COMM_STRUCTURE-processkey EQ '104'   "Material Transfer
    OR COMM_STRUCTURE-processkey EQ '105'   "Stock Adjustment InvD
    OR COMM_STRUCTURE-processkey EQ '106'   "Stock Adjustment Other
    OR COMM_STRUCTURE-processkey EQ '110' ) "Issues from Stock
                                            "Transfers
   AND COMM_STRUCTURE-bwapplnm EQ 'MM'
only movements which are relevant for stock control
   AND COMM_STRUCTURE-cppvlc <> 0
   AND COMM_STRUCTURE-stockcat EQ 'V'
   AND COMM_STRUCUTRE-stocktype EQ 'V'.
result value of the routine
    RESULT = -1 * COMM_STRUCTURE-cppvlc.
if the returncode is zero, the result will be updated
    RETURNCODE = 0.
ELSEIF ( COMM_STRUCTURE-processkey EQ '000'   "Other Receipts
    OR COMM_STRUCTURE-processkey EQ '001'   "Goods Receipt/Vendor
    OR COMM_STRUCTURE-processkey EQ '004'   "Material Transfer/"Receipt
    OR COMM_STRUCTURE-processkey EQ '005'   "Stock Adjustment InvD
    OR COMM_STRUCTURE-processkey EQ '006'   "Stock Adjustment Other
    OR COMM_STRUCTURE-processkey EQ '010' ) "Receipt from Stock
                                            "Transfer
only movements which are relevant for stock control
   AND COMM_STRUCTURE-cppvlc <> 0
   AND COMM_STRUCTURE-stockcat EQ 'V'
   AND COMM_STRUCUTRE-stocktype EQ 'V'.
result value of the routine
    RESULT = COMM_STRUCTURE-cppvlc.
if the returncode is zero, the result will be updated
    RETURNCODE = 0.
ELSE.
if the returncode is not equal zero, the result will not be updated
    RETURNCODE = 4.
ENDIF.
if abort is not equal zero, the update process will be canceled
ABORT = 0..
-> material consumption quantity:
The code is the same, but COMM_STRUCTURE-cpquabu replaces COMM_STRUCTURE-cppvlc.
-> The characteristic value calculation is the same for the other key figures.
5. Update these key figures from the 2LIS_03_UM in the same way.
=======================================================

The value in flexfield context reference web bean does not match with the value in the context of the Descriptive flexfield web bean BranchDescFlex. If this in not intended, please go back to correct the data or contact your Systems Administrator for assi

Hi ,
We have enabled context sensitive DFF in Bank Branch Page for HZ_PARTIES DFF , We have created Flex Map so that only bank branch context fields are only displayed in the bank branch page and as we know party information DFF is shared by supplier and Customer Page so we dint want to see any Bank Branch fields or context information in those pages.
We have achieved the requirement but when open existing branches bank branch update is throwing below error message :
"The value in flexfield context reference web bean does not match with the value in the context of the Descriptive flexfield web bean BranchDescFlex. If this in not intended, please go back to correct the data or contact your Systems Administrator for assistance."
this error is thrown only when we open existing branches, if we save existing branch and open then it is not throwing any error message.
Please let us know reason behind this error message.
Thanks,
Mruduala

You are kidding? It took me about 3 minutes to scroll down on my tab to get to the triplex button!
Habe you read the error message?
Quote:
java.sql.SQLSyntaxErrorException: ORA-04098: trigger 'PMS.PROJECT_SEQ' is invalid and failed re-validation
Check the trigger and it should work again.
Timo

F.54 is not match with MB51

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for