Material Ledger - confirmation in different months

Hi Gurus,
I have a problem as follows:
We are using material ledger for actual costing. When we post partial confirmation for a production order in period t, goods receipt and goods issue is posted for period t. However, in some cases, confirmation is posted although one material has not arrived at the factory yet and that material is not assembled on the finished product in period t, but it is assembled in period t+1. In this case, when we close material ledger, we receive an error as "there are nondistributed rows" in transaction CKM3. How can I solve this problem either in logistics side or financial side?
Thanks and cheers,
Fatih Zenginer

Hi Faith,
Are you familiar with transaction CKMVFM - Value Flow Monitor? You can analyze Not Distributed differences with this transaction. The price limiter is the key.
Thanks,
Greg

Similar Messages

Material ledger Clarification.

Hi Gurus,
I need clarification regardign material ledger.
We activated material ledger.
In the Month of Dec we did the intital stock upload for FG and SFG items. In the month of Jan 2012 we did the costing and those are stocks the system generates the revalaution based on the new price + or -. In the month of Jan i did Ml closing for the month of Dec 2011, the system posting the accountign documetn to Price differe to Revaluation account in the month of Jan 2012.
Now all revalaution values is transferred to Price Difference account.
Kindly adivise this process is correct.
Thanks.
S.Siva

Hi,
Depending on the post closing options the post closing may use the business transaction
BSX or LKW in CKMLCP:
Revaluation of Ending Inventory (flag 'Revaluate material'set):
     Price/exchange rate differences are posted to Inventory Account
     BSX. Price control is changed from 'S' to 'V' because inventory
     is now valuated at actual price.
    PRY   PRV   KDM   KDV   ->    BSX
No revaluation of Ending Inventory (flag 'Revaluate material not
     set): Price/exchange rate differences are posted to stastistical
     account LKW. Price control is not changed, because inventory
     remains valuated at standard price.
    PRY   PRV   KDM   KDV   ->    LKW
Please take a look at the note 908737 which explainsthe post closing in detail.
I hope it helps.
BR,
MLM

What are the Advantages & Disadvantages in Material Ledger?

Hi Experts,
What are the Advantages & Disadvantages in Material Ledger?
Is it there any problem if you run CKMLCP next period 10th day?
What is the criticality in ML as well as why all are very fearful to implement it?
Thanks
Bhagirath

Hi,
One cannot speak of 'disadvantage' in this case... If you activate material ledger, you acieve different valuation logic of the prices in the procurement process. Please, consult composite note 532932 for further info. The intimidation of activation is a result of numerous 'bugs' in previous SAP releases regarding the material ledger documents. Most of these 'bugs' are fixed, but the fear remains
Regards,
Eli

3 valuations in Material ledger

Hi,
My client's requirement is as follows:
1) Legal valuation has to be in Local currency but on Actual Costing
2) Profit Center Valuation in Local currency but on standard costing - same as Group valuation
3) Group Valuation in Group currency in standard costing - Group valuation
Is this possible when, Actual costing Material ledger implemented?
I imagin, Legal valuation field in Material Master will be updated by periodic unit price when we run CKMLCP. Then Profit center valuation field in the Material Master will be updated when we run CK40N in standard costing PC valuation costing run. Then again we will run ck40n in standard costing for Group valuation to update Group valuation in Material Master.
If my client opts to run ck40n for legal valuation, then he should also be able to mark and release standard cost new price, in Legal valuation field of material master and actual costing will not release standard price for new period.
The requirement is typically complicated, as my client wants to maintain his Global template, though one country comes under actual costing requirement.
I would like to dig out answers from real time experience please.
Cheers,
Ashok

I can give you some information but not everything. I have gone through the deployment of material ledger using 3 valuations, but not the ones you are using. We used Local, Group and Group at Group. All 3 are at actual costing. What this means is that the local currency is the currency in the country where the plant exists. The group valuation is a straight conversion to US dollars from the local currency based on the currency conversion tables M and P rates. Note that both of these first two currencies can include intercompany profit if reflected on the transferring sales order between companies. The Group at Group is the US dollar conversion without the intercompany profit. We find this works for our business.
The other thing about material ledger is that you need to have a standard cost estimate so that material ledger can keep track of the cos component structure. The way it works is as follows:
Say the standard estimate shows labor=$100, materials=$200 and overhead=$300 for a total cost of $600. All transactions in the month using this material use the $600 standard. Now, when material ledger is run at month end, the PUP (periodc unit price) is calculated and let us assume the PUP values are labor=$150, materials=$250, overhead=$350 for a total PUP of $750. Material ledger already has tables with the details of the standard components against every transaction. Now it will apply the remaining adjustments totalling $150 to the proper cost components for COPA purposes. This is pushed to COPA using transaction KE27. Think of it like this...Actual cost is equal to standard ($600) plus/minus variances ($150).
Therefore, you always should have a standard cost estimate when using material ledger. At least that is my usage and understanding. I hope I provided useful information for you in some way.
David

Material Ledger : Cost component split different in CO PC and ML

Hello SAP People,
In ML cost component split I don't have the same split that in CK13N COPC.
History
We changed the cost component structure in OKTZ, because we wanted to split on two different cost component the cost of Copper :
-     Copper
-     Primes :Premium cost (transformation cost for producer) on copper.
In CK11N the split is OK and we can read the new cost element corresponding to premium cost.
To split the costing tool goes on the purchase info records to read condition type that are different for copper and premium.
The problem we have is that when we run Material ledger we are not able to see after a good receipt a similar split in the cost component view.
We already run MLCCS_RESET and MLCCS_Startup programs this month and created new Raw material after. But it seems the ML do not take care of this and all the actual cost (I stop to single level) are on the copper cost component and there is nothing on Premium cost component.
We just run single level on ML for current month.
Could you please help me to explain why we are not able to obtain the correct split between Copper and u201CPrimesu201D

Hi Marco,
yes, these both are independent from each other. You will have no issue when these are different.
It is very typical that you want to report different kind of information for activities as for materials.
A typical setup might be
Activity                                   Material
Asset depreciation                   Raw Material Cost
Room cost                               Energy
Labour                                     Production Cost
labour overhead                      Production Overhead
Electricity                                 Packaging
When you use the activity for the production of a material (confirmation CO15) the assignment goes normally to a single cost component in the material, above for example into production cost. This is controlled by the cost element. Only when the primary cost component split is activated and a transfer structure betweeen both is maintained you could achieve
Asset depeciation, Room Cost, Labour overhead -> Production overhead
Labour -> Production Cost
Electricity -> Energy
Best regards, Udo

Material Ledger Close (CKMLCP) -problem executing during the month

Due to our tight closing schedule, we are attempting to pre-run the Material Ledger close (CKMLCP) process and Value Flow Monitor (CKMVFM) on the last 2 days of the month in order to catch any issues before the first workday of the close, when it is too late to do many of the normal processes that would correct the problems in our system. The issue we are having is that some of our production plants are 24/7 and we are not getting good results in our test run due to new transactions that get posted while we are running the CKMLCP steps, resetting the material statuses. For example between the Single level and multi level calculations for a given material, a goods movement might get posted that resets the material status from "single level calculated" back to "quantities and values entered", which leads to errors when the multilevel calculation tries to roll up the WAC variances.
Has anyone encountered this issue, and how did you get around it? Currently, we can only think of locking people out of the system while we are running the pre-checks, but we know the users will balk at that suggestion.
Thanks,
Burns Thomas

Hi Thomas,
you might try to use the alternative valuation run as a simulation environment.
[http://help.sap.com/saphelp_erp60/helpdata/en/d2/cb532d455611d189710000e8322d00/frameset.htm]
an alterantive valuation run for just one month will create a copy of the ML data in which you will have no problem with material status. the calculation logic for closing is the same, also the reporting, like CKMVFM. Therefore, If you are successfull in closing the AVR that is a good indcator for not having further problems for your real data.
best regards,
Udo

Material Ledger Unit Of Measurement different from Material Master

Dear Team,
In my client, there is a difference between unit visible in CKM3N and MM03. The base unit of measurement in MM03 is MT. Other than that, there are some other units maintained (not M3) in additional data tab in material master. In CKM3N, the visible unit is M3. M3 is not present anywhere in MM03.
Why would such unit flow in material ledger table? (CKMLPP has unit M3). Please advise.
One more observation is that when there is some price change document in Material Ledger, the proper UoM (MT) is being captured. Only in the basic price determination structure visible unit for each head is M3. Please check the attached screen shot.
Any help would be appreciated.
Thanks.
Jay Shah.

Hi..
Refer to Data Inconsistency of BUOM in Material Ledger Tables

Material Ledger for Stock Transfer Postings

Hi All,
I have a question about the way material ledger is calculated for stock transfer postings (movement type 641). I will give an example to illustrate this issue:
Material A has a Standard cost of $10
Material B has a Standard cost of $8
During the month 100 units were transferred from material A to Material B. This created a financial posting as follows:
Credit Material A -          $1000
Debit Material B -           $800
Debit Price Difference    $200
This price difference of $200 was used in the calculation of Actual cost for material B
However, the Actual Cost for Material A was $9. I would have expected the system to use this actual cost to calculate the difference to be posted to material B. Hence the difference used in Material B should have been $100 {(9 8) X 100} and not $200.
Has anyone had a similar issue, or know how the system resolves this (if at all)?
Points will be rewarded for relevance.
Thanks

Dave, I see that your process is slightly different to mine. We do not revalue inventory at month end, instead the material ledger program posts the revalued amount to a reserve account and the actual cost is only a statistical entry. The material ledger calculation is reversed automatically in the new month and the standard price is used for valuation.
I think this might make it difficult for the system to value STO's at actual. I may need to check with SAP.
Thanks

Material ledger - BRAZIL

Hi gurus,
my brazilian client wants recalculate, at the end of every month, the stocks and sales using the real prices of the material. he wants revaluate sales and stocks using monthly purchasing price instead of standard price.
Further more, he wants revaluate production orders (WIP), stocks and cost of sales using re-calculation of labor rate.
1) Can I use material ledger for this needs?
2) Is there every one with experience about brazilian client that help about this issue?
Thanks in advance
Regards

Hi Patricia,
did you finally implement a working solution? What did you use?
Could you succesfully run the material ledger/actual costing for the calendar months? I assume that you had to run the company code in a different controlling area than the one you are using for corporate from 27 to 26...
we are facing a similar issue and I would appreciate any experience you can provide.
thanks,
Luis

Material Ledger Closing

Dear Gurus,
While material ledger closing using CMKLCP,i need clarification for the following process.
1. Single/level
2. Multilevel.
3. Revaluation of Consumption
4. WIP Calculation
5.Post closing
6. Price update.
can anyone explain about the above process outcome, what is the difference between material ledger WIP Calculation and Production order WIP Calculation.
While price update for price control material S, we need to re run cost estimate or it will update the new prices.
Appriciated for valuable inputs.
Ramesh.

Hi Ramesh .
Hope you understand clearly the purpose of standard costing and why we use Material Ledger .
Standard Costing is based on a pre-determined /derived prices for a period/year and all costs are caputed on the basis of the standard Cost . Goods Issues/Receipt , consumption all are at standard cost.
COGS GL Account is at standard and all the inventories are at standard ..
Difference between standard and actual costs are captured as variances in different GL Account . Mainly we have two variances... price variances ( at the time of purchases ) and usage variances at the time of production ..
Material Ledger is a seperate module.. where it calculates the actual costs . Variances are rolled back to the consumption accounts ( which is at standard ) to derive the actual cost . Actual Cost = Standard Cost + Variances .
1. Now Finished Material is made of Raw Material and Semi-Finished Goods . ...When we calculate the actual costs of finished product .. we can find out the actual costs of raw materials and semi-finished goods. ML will find out the actual cost of raw material , semi-finished goods and finished goods. This concept is know as multi-level determination ... In Single level.. only one level of material cost is computed as actual.. not rolled back to the lowest level.
2. Revaluation of consumption during ML run means .. the COGS ( which was at standard earlier) is now being revaluted and becomes actual..
3. WIP Calculation calculates the WIP costs on actual.
4. Post Closing Step will put the new GL entries.. where variances will be nullified and COGS and inventory will become actual.
5. Price Update is optional.. you can make the actual costs computed as standard cost for the next month..
Production Order WIp Calculation = Actual Qty X Standard Rate
ML WIP Calculation = Actual Qty x Actual Rate
Please revert back for any further clarifications
Regards
Sarada

Material ledger and cost estmate

Hi all
Can any body tell me the impact on material ledger of deleting the current standard cost estimate from material master? The requirement has come for change the current standard cost from material master whom we have released on 01.01.2008 and now today at 07.01.2008 we want to change this. All the transactions for material in current period I have got the reverse. Now I will delete the cost estimate from T_code CKR1 and than the new standard cost will releases from today in same period. At month end we are going to run the actual costing. Would be any problem in actual costing?
Thanks and Reagrds
Vinay Thakre

thanks Pascal for prompt response,would you please advise my below understanding to ML and actual cost
1)CKMLCP - Edit Costing Run to create costing run to calculated periodic unit price
2)Because there are some activities in CKMLCP,we have to respectively execute CKMF / CKMG/CKMJ / CKMH / CKMI for each activity of costing run
3)after costing run with CIMLCP,SAP will use calculated periodic unit price to revaluate inventory for previous period,and the price indicator S automatically changed to V for previous as well.
4)SAP will generate FI cocument to adj inventory and consumption cost after "post closing"
5)there is different periodic unit price for each closed period
5)the price indicator for closed period is always V,the price indicator in current period is S

Material Ledger Startup at year end

Can someone confirm if all the balance carry forwards have to be run before turning on material ledger for the new year or can I just run the GL balance carry forward piece?

Hi,
There is no time constraint for activation of Material Ledger. Before activation of ML, specifically for ML you need not to check any period-end activities. You can continue with your usual FICO closing process. As per process, if you activated the ML for your Valuation Areas, initial preliminary Valuation/Price Control Type for all materials will be u201CStandardu201D. During the period ML will record all Goods Movements Price/FOREX differences posted through different MM related transactions i.e., Goods Issue, GR and Invoice in Price/FOREX differences categories. If you have activated ML on Dec., 28th, price/FOREX differences will be recorded from that date. You need to complete ML period-end activities through T-code-CKMLCP-Costing Cockpit, system will automatically take the average of Price/FOREX differences from different transactions and calculate Periodic Unit Price for Material per Plant. Based on this price, we can get the Actual Product Costing of that material and Inventory Valuations for future period.
Regards
appalas

Material Ledger activation (COML) - multiple plants in single company code.

Hi -
Material Ledger activation (COML)- multiple plants in single company code.
In large mfg plant - process industry (proposed to dived into number of production plants), Matrial 'a' is produced in plant 'a'.Material 'a' is input to procude matl 'B' in plant 'B"..so on and so forth.
We are activating Material Ledger (COML) for actual costing purpose. Question -During multi level price determination, will the variance of lower level materials ( produced in lowerlevel /other plants in our case) be rolled up to higher level materials (in a different plant). please let me know if it really works, if yes what are the guidelines (if any) .
Please advise ASAP.
Thanks
Chris
Edited by: Chris Farr on Oct 23, 2008 11:12 AM

Hi Chris,
from a business point of view there is a difference that you might take into consideration: The valauation level will always be on material and plant combination. That means, the division into several virtual plants will usually lead to different actual prices for the same material in each plant. That might happen for example when you carry over stocks from last month into the current month in one plant, while the other plant has only receipts from the current month.
That might me desired, but often it is not. If the mutiple plants are in reality only one location it might be hard to explain why the prices differ between plants.
best regards, Udo

UMB and GBB-BSA after run material ledger

Hi guys,
Last month the user changes in some materials standard-price by MR21. So the user had a debit balance in the 501002002 account (because MR21 uses UMB key of OBYC).
After that the user run CKMLCP process and so he checked the balance in the 501002002. Aftel material ledger process the account balance was changed for zero.
Its occured because the GBB-BSA key used the same account determination of UMB key and GBB-BSA did a credit with the same amount in 501002002.
My question is: Is it correct UMB and GBB-BSA key uses the same account?
Many thanks,
Ricardo Sanerip

Absolutely agree with Ajay .. we use different GL account for BSA and lock the GL account for further postings after implementation is completed ..
Please change the GL account as suggested by Ajay also
Regards
Sarada

Material Ledger x IFRS x Depreciation

Hi All
In South America companies are used to run actual costing run (CKMLCP) to valuate the stock with actual price. This actual price uses local depreciation method in their depreciation activity.
Due consolidation purposes and IFRS requirements companies also must report the stock of materials using other depreciation methods.
In few words, we have to maintain the actual cost but change the "local" depreciation cost to "IFRS" depreciation. It´s an additional material ledger.
So far I know you can do it using the following scenarios:
1) Develop a custom report that recalculates your material ledger (CKM3 massive).
2) Use IFRS as local depreciation, calculates a difference from local depreciation, make a posting, run CKMLCP and reverse.
3) Use Alternative Valuation Run (CKMLCPAVR) besides regular CKMLCP to have an additional actual price for materials using different stock valuation method or parallel valuation ledgers.
I´m very interested in the third scenario but until now nobody has implemented it.
Pls let me know your opinion and thanks for your cooperation
Frederick Ramos
SAP CO Consultant
Brazil

Hi,
We had a similar requirement. And we decided to use Delta version (with a bit of a twick ;-).
It's based on the principle that we want to calculate different activity prices in different versions (0 and delta) using different splitting structures. We want to use the same data posted only once in version 0 (primary, secondary and production confirmations). However in one version you include depraciation CE from main dep. area and in delta version you include depraciation CE from IFRS (I presume you can post both depreciations into CO with different cost elements).
Then we use AVR which references delta version for activity prices.
I only prototyped it and this solution was not fully tested yet. So let me know if you encounter any problems.
Step by step description of the solution below:
1. Transaction OKEQN
    a) Create a delta version referencing version 0. Make it valid for actuals, plan and variance.
    b) Under Controlling Area Settings -> Settings for Each Fiscal Year -> Price calculation Tab set revaluation to 0 u2013 u201CDo not
         revalueu201D. Otherwise in CKMLCPAVR price cal we get error KP291.
        Please see SAP note 420366. Note 420366 - Error in cumulation actual price in ML delta versions
    c) Under Controlling Area Settings -> Delta Version: Transfer Business Trans. from Ref. Version thick all the boxes for actual.
         This setting defines which transactions are REFERENCED from version 0. Transactions are grouped per check box. If a
         box is checked a group of CO business transactions is treated as to be referenced from version 0.
         If a box is not checked a group of CO business transactions is not referenced from version 0 but can be executed
         explicitly for delta version.
         The logic here is that table TKA09V contains CO business transactions which can be explicitly executed for delta version.
         CO business transactions which are not in TKA09V are referenced from version 0 and must NOT be executed explicitly
         for delta version.
         Check box u201CActivity allocationu201D controls several CO business transactions which are related to activities, amongst them
         RKL - Actual activity allocation.
         So if we want to use in delta version the same activity quantities confirmed in version 0 we need to tick this box.
         However ticking this box also controls CO business transaction KSII - Actual price calculation.
         In other words if we tick for actuals box u201CActivity allocationu201D neither activity RKL nor KSII can be executed explicitly in
         delta version. Both transactions are referenced form version 0.
         So now if we try to execute Actual activity price calculation for delta version we get an error:
         "Message no. KI506
         Transaction KSII for version YYY is not permitted"
However what we want is to reference activity quantities from version 0 AND to execute activity price calculation explicitly for delta version (using dedicated splitting structure with IFRS depreciation cost elements included).
In order to achieve the above (and avoid KI506 in KSII) I had to u201Cmanuallyu201D maintain table TKA09V. I just manually entered entry KSII - Actual price calculation for delta version. This way I can calculate actual activity prices separately for delta version using quantities (and costs) already posted in version 0 and dedicated splitting structure.
d) Create additional splitting structure as per your alternative valuation needs (transaction OKES).
    For delta version assign your cost centres to this new splitting structure (transaction OKEW).
   So now we are ready to execute actual activity price calculation for delta version in transaction KSII.
In my testing everything went as expected. Actual activity prices for delta version were calculated according to new splitting structure and saved in table COST.
e) Create AVR and specify delta version as u201CVersion for Price for Cumulation in Legal Valuationu201D. Specify 7 u2013 Actual price for the period.
In my testing system used the correct price from delta version.
NOTE: Do not use "Determine Actual Prices" activity in CKMLCPAVR but calculated activity pricers for Delta verrsion in KSII.
Good luck,
Szymon

Material Ledger - confirmation in different months

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for