Problem with periodic settlement rule

Hello everybody.
We are working with SAP ECC 6.0, in a poultry industry which produces egg for consumption. We have defined for address the production costs, a periodic Settlement Rule, considering the percentage of egg production by type (A, B, C, Jumbo, and so on), for each shed. The order is created with 18 weeks of life during the growing chickens phase, and 62 weeks during the production phase (eggs production). The process requires settling them on a daily basis to be able to update the cost of the product. Due to the own typical of the process, each bird produces a variable amount of eggs by type and day, therefore it is not possible to be established with exactitude the percentage of the daily production of each type of egg. Due to it, when we establish the percentage of the Settlement rule, these do not reflect the reality of the production of the day, because they are fixed by the system after the first settlement. We need to know if a possibility exists of being able to daily update the percentages of the Settlement rule before you settle each order daily maintaining the same order.
Waiting you could help,
Kind regards,
Elvis E. Henriquez A.

I am a hobby farmer and have 5 chickens as well. The closest thing to this which I have seen here in the security forum is an abstract discussion about the chicken-or-the-egg-first dilemma in general... and another about some users being "like a fox in a chicken house"...
Perhaps you want to take a look around the SDN site for a more appropriate forum and let me know which one you would like to have this thread moved into.
Also search the blog area for this, as I distinctly remember some blogs on the topic a few months ago.
Cheers,
Julius

Similar Messages

Problem with changing settlement rule

In a serviceorder when a user changes the wbs element in the additional data tab he or she also needs to change the settlement rule accordingly
further on their needs to be a check if the new wbs element is not TAFS and if the element is a wbs element (since also projects can be filled in here)
I have managed to programm the check in user exit EXIT_SAPLCOIH_009
there I can find out the new value entered by the user and check if it's correct
I only can't get the new filled in values before save from the settlement rule
when I use
 ASSIGN ('(SAPLKOBS)dkobr') TO <dkobr>.
 CHECK <dkobr> IS ASSIGNED.
the new values for the wbs element are not filled in dkobr when the user exit is running
is there any other way to find the new values for the settlement rule in memory in the user exit mentioned above ?
or is there a bapi or function to adapt the settlement rule automaticaly ?
I have looked at K_ORDER_SETTLEMENT_RULE but I don't see where you can enter the WBS element in this function ?
kind regards
arthur
Message was edited by:
 A. de Smidt

You can achieve this by using the BADI - CO_SRULE_CHECK. ( Use Transaction SE18).
You implement this BADI - in the method DISTRIBUTION_RULE_CHECK you will be getting the Settlement lines. ( returned by COBRB - this table stores the settlement rules by object numbers - Object number of the Order is stored in AUFK).
From the above mentioned method - DISTRIBUTION_RULE_CHECK , you call a FM - READ_NOTIFICATION_BUFFER. This will return all the buffered data for Notification/Order. You can check the ncessary conditions and raise exception message.
You can use these follwing FMs from your customer exit - EXIT_SAPLCOIH_010 for changing the Settlement rules ( if you want to go that way) -
K_SETTLEMENT_RULES_UPDATE
K_SETTLEMENT_RULE_COPY
or search with K_SETTLEMENT_RULE* to get the list of usefull FMs.
Hope it helps.

GR/IR expenses not affected with the settlement rule run process in the GL

Please neglect by previous post with the same title
There is a problem I face while running the settlement rule process related to internal orders on the GR/IR expenses.
According to the internal order settlement rule every expense associated to an Internal order no. whether its an account payable or manual journal accounts it should be settled (distributed) on the cost centers specified in each internal order after the monthly settlement run process is done through T.Code "KO8G", and this actually happens on the entries that are booked manually through T.Code "FB50", but the GR/IR entries is the biggest problem, it didn't reflect the settlement rule distributions in the GL it just gives me the original transaction once its was automatically created through T.Code "MIGO" they are only allocated to a one profit center with no cost center and without being distributed to a multiple cost centers according to the distribution strategy.
After a long search I found that the cost center distribution occurred only on a secondary none GL account named A&P Settlement (720010), all GR/IR expenses was settled correctly only on this account not through the ordinary GL accounts (e.g. Gifts, printed materials) and of course the correct distribution didn't appear in the GL,
So is there a transaction or any way to allocate the GR/IR expenses to there correct cost centers with the correct cost element in the GL?
Is there anything to do with the GR/IR calculation that depends on quantity base not value base?
The Process as follows:
(1) Creating Internal order with a settlement rule (E.g. Cost center 1 (50%) Cost center 2 (50%)
2) Creating a purchase order associated to an internal order
3) The Goods received and creating the GR transaction T.Code "MIGO"
Acc/DR Expenses accounts
Acc/CR GI/IR Account 400301
Profit enter ###### (eg. 111177)
Cost Center <blank>
Internal order no. ####### (e.g. 9810512)

4) Closing the GR/IR accounts when receiving the invoice T.Code "MIRO"
When we receive vendor invoice:
Acc/Dr GI/IR Account 400301
Acc/Cr Vendor Account
Profit enter ###### (eg. 111177)
Cost Center <blank>
Internal order no. ####### (e.g. 9810512)
5) Performing the Internal order settlement rule run process
(N.B. By entering the report of the cost center (Actual/Plan/ Variance) T.Code S_ALR_87013611
I found that GR/IR expenses was not charged on the concerned cost centers as shown in the GL )
Your Reply is highly appreciated

Thanks for your kind reply,
But is there a way solve this problem?
And what is the use of leaving a field in the account assignment tab for an internal order while creating a PO and it will not take advantage of the settlement rule????????
And as you know the internal order settlement is a way to create a multiple account assignment
Can we solve the problem by making an automatic fake transaction that reverse the value of the GR/IR and creating another transaction can apply on it the settlement rule??
You know that settlement rule process is one of the best features in the SAP system it save time and effort to make distributions manually

RSAU461, problem with activating update rules for cube 0csrv_c01

Hello,
I have added new fields to data source 0CRM_SRV_PROCESS_H, then changed transfer rules, added characteristics to ODS 0crm_proh, and reactivated update rules 80crm_proh. But now I have problem with second update rules for this cube named 80crm_cnfh. It is not active and all fields in it have red status, error RSAU461, and I cannot activate it.
What I should do? Should I change somehow that second source for data to my cube (change infosource, ods, rule?)
Regards
Radek

hi
As said by the Mti u have just changed the info objects in the ods and u need to map them with the specific info objects from the ods.
double click on the Update rules of the cube and go to the characteristic tab there map the newly added info objects with the IO in the ods.
Khaja

Problem to generete settlement rule automatcaly in the WBS

Hi people,
Could you help me about the subject below?
For some reason, when we create a new wbs, it was not created the settlement rule automatcally. ( For the other one it runs OK, only for one WBS it was not ok).
So we tried to execute the transaction CJB2 to generate the settlement rule.
We have analysed the Forun and find: http://scn.sap.com/thread/1407279. We try to apply the piece of the change program about the flag ex.: INVMA.
But when we execute the CJB2 and do the things there is in this forun, the system create the settlement rule with CTR (cost center) instead of FXA (Asset).
Do you have some suggestion how we can do to create the settlement rule with FXA by transaction CJB2?
Thanks,
RN
==============================

Hi RN,
Check the setting:
Project System - Costs - Automatic and Periodic Allocations - Settlement - Settlement Rule for Work Breakdown Structure Element - Determine Strategy for Settlement Rule
Hope it helps.
Best Regards,
Owen

Problem with period over two months

Hello all,
I have a problem on my report. When I select a period with two dates in the same month, all the data are displayed.
When I select a period from november to december, only the first and last date data are displayed.
Where is the problem ? How could I resolve it ?
I have also a problem if I select two dates which are not in the database, I have a constrained problem.
Thanks for your help.
Eric

The Query is : SELECT NON EMPTY { [Measures].[Formalized], [Measures].[Not Formalized] } ON COLUMNS FROM ( SELECT ( STRTOSET(@VariantName, CONSTRAINED) ) ON COLUMNS FROM ( SELECT ( STRTOSET(@REQTYPEName, CONSTRAINED) ) ON COLUMNS FROM ( SELECT ( STRTOSET(@PriorityPriority,
CONSTRAINED) ) ON COLUMNS FROM ( SELECT ( STRTOSET(@MODULERootName, CONSTRAINED) ) ON COLUMNS FROM ( SELECT ( STRTOSET(@ExtractExtractDate, CONSTRAINED) ) ON COLUMNS FROM [A330WV80_view]))))) WHERE ( IIF( STRTOSET(@ExtractExtractDate, CONSTRAINED).Count =
1, STRTOSET(@ExtractExtractDate, CONSTRAINED), [Extract].[Extract Date].currentmember ), IIF( STRTOSET(@MODULERootName, CONSTRAINED).Count = 1, STRTOSET(@MODULERootName, CONSTRAINED), [MODULE].[Root Name].currentmember ), IIF( STRTOSET(@PriorityPriority, CONSTRAINED).Count
= 1, STRTOSET(@PriorityPriority, CONSTRAINED), [Priority].[Priority].currentmember ), IIF( STRTOSET(@REQTYPEName, CONSTRAINED).Count = 1, STRTOSET(@REQTYPEName, CONSTRAINED), [REQTYPE].[Name].currentmember ), IIF( STRTOSET(@VariantName, CONSTRAINED).Count
= 1, STRTOSET(@VariantName, CONSTRAINED), [Variant].[Name].currentmember ) ) CELL PROPERTIES VALUE, BACK_COLOR, FORE_COLOR, FORMATTED_VALUE, FORMAT_STRING, FONT_NAME, FONT_SIZE, FONT_FLAGS

Problem with Periods' point of view on Financial Reporting Studio

Hy all,
i have a problem on some reports: i fix Periods' Point of View on Financial Reporting Studio signing in with Admin user. I do this to let other users see just a part of the dimension structure on workspace,but when i open workspace signing in with a generic user i can't see any changing: user can see all elements of the dimension. Otherwise If i sign on workspace with admin user i can see the Periods'POV i have fixed on reporting studio previously. So do you have any idea on what i can do to solve this problem?

Hi,
Could u plz clarify your problem bit more.
Are you facing a problem while running the reports through work space..? While running the reports, is affected generic user getting a POV window..? If you are concerning about hierarchy that you select through POV window then It might be possible that POV might have got corrupted for that generic user and in that case we can delete the POV and set up the new POV again for that user.

Problem with nat / access rule for webserver in inside network asa 5505 7.2

Hello,
i have trouble setting up nat and access rule for webserver located in inside network.
I have asa 5505 version 7.2 and it has to active interfaces, inside 192.168.123.0 and outside x.x.x.213
Webserver has ip 192.168.123.11 and it needs to be accessed from outside, ip x.x.x.213.
I have created an static nat rule with pat (as an appendix) and access rules from outside network to inside interface ip 192.168.123.11 (tcp 80) but no luck.
What am i doing wrong?

Command:
packet-tracer input outside tcp 188.x.x.213 www 192.168.123.11 www detailed
Phase: 1
Type: FLOW-LOOKUP
Subtype:
Result: ALLOW
Config:
Additional Information:
Found no matching flow, creating a new flow
Phase: 2
Type: ROUTE-LOOKUP
Subtype: input
Result: ALLOW
Config:
Additional Information:
in   192.168.123.0   255.255.255.0   inside
Phase: 3
Type: ACCESS-LIST
Subtype:
Result: DROP
Config:
Implicit Rule
Additional Information:
Forward Flow based lookup yields rule:
in id=0x35418d8, priority=500, domain=permit, deny=true
    hits=1, user_data=0x6, cs_id=0x0, reverse, flags=0x0, protocol=0
    src ip=188.x.x.213, mask=255.255.255.255, port=0
    dst ip=0.0.0.0, mask=0.0.0.0, port=0
Result:
input-interface: outside
input-status: up
input-line-status: up
output-interface: inside
output-status: up
output-line-status: up
Action: drop
Drop-reason: (acl-drop) Flow is denied by configured rule

Problem with Order settlement

When iam settling the order through - KO88, iam with the below error.
Error : You can not post to Asset in Company code XXXX fiscal year 2009
When I double clicked on the above error, the description is saying the below information.
You cannot post to asset in company code 0408 fiscal year 2009
     Message no. AA347
Diagnosis
     A fiscal year change has not yet been performed in Asset Accounting for
     company code 0408.
Procedure
     Check the asset value date.
How can i change the fiscal year for the company code in asset accounting? I mean to say what is Transaction code to change the Fiscal year for a particular Companycode?
Thanks in Advance for the help

You need to do the below two activities.
AJAB - for closing fiscal year in Asset Accounting
AJRW - for opening new year.

Problem with lead assignment rule

Hi,
I defined a new lead assignment rule group for my company. I defined two assignment rules according to the billing country value. I work on a demo version of Siebel on demand. The rule is active.
If the value is USA the owner is employee A, if the value is France the owner is employee B, if not employee C.
I tried to create manualy or by import new leads. The assignement rule doesn't work. Can you explain me why?

Hi !
If you want to have assignment rules working, you must check the box "Reassign owner" when you create a new record. When you perform a modification, if you check this box, the assignment rule will be lacunched again. After creating your record, wait for some seconds and refresh the page, you'll see the last modified by field filled with "OnDemand System" or something like that...
Hope this will help, feel free to ask more !
Max

Problem with project settlement

Hi,
I want to settle cost in project system by exclude some cost element for example
Cost was posted against WBS Y.001 with 2 lines item. cost element 10001 - 100 usd
20001 - 200 usd
Our requirement is only cost element in range 10000-19999 can settle to cost center, for other cost element cost remain in WBS.
But when i excecute project settlement system generate error message as u2018Cost element 20001cannot be assigned to a settlement cost assignment in allocation structure ZGu2019. For allocation sturture ZG i was maintain cost element in source form 10000 - 19999
So, Is it possible to settled by exclude some cost element even cost have posted to?
Thanks so much,
june.

Hi Pornat,
Please check Allocation Structure before cheking the Settlement Profile. In allocation structure the sender cost object and receiver cost object is there, pl check it. if u need any inputs then let me know.
raj

Problem with Period selection in PPOME transaction!

Dear All,
I have a very strange problem while selecting the time period in the PPOME transaction.
While selecting the "date and forecast period" option from the "settings" option in the menu bar, the time period in the preview the PPOME transaction must show as 3 months by default. But for my user ID when i select the preview period, the month field is displayed as blank and the end date is always defaulted to current date.
Is this time period coming from any configuration? I would like to know is there any way to by which we can change and save the time period settings.
Thanks,
sridharan

Goto PE03->ABKRS in Change mode. You will be able to uncheck or check the fields.

Problem with Editing a Rule

Hello-
One of my rules contains 20 conditions; however, after I’ve entered 21st, I can’t anymore because I can’t see any more of the fields -- I lose screen window real estate. To complicate matters, I also can’t close the window and have to force-quit mail just to close the window.
I have a PowerBook G4 and so I don’t know if I’m restricted to the # of rules of I can enter just because of this or not. Has anyone else had this problem. Strangely enough, I first encountered this problem when I viewed and began to edit the “News from Apple” rule that Apple automatically created as part of the Mail software.
Any ideas on how to troubleshoot this? Thanks much.

Hello Waves39.
This is a known problem other people have reported before. AFAIK, there is nothing you can do about it other than letting Apple know here:
http://www.apple.com/macosx/feedback/

Problem with period lock OKP1

Hi all,
I locked period in Tcode OKP1 for all transaction
However, transaction in 9KE0 is not locked yet
I don't know why. Can anybody help me?
Thanks and regards

Hi,
thathere is no possibility to lock periods / posting transactions in PCA (including distributions), because PCA should be always open for postings. It is designed to be the receiving application of data delivered by the preliminary applications like FI, MM and CO. Therefore period locks must be handled / maintained in those applications. In PCA, there are only two possibilities to prevent postings to profit centers:
1. is to completely lock profit centers in the master data via transaction KE52 (tab 'Indicators' -> activate 'Lock indicator'.
Please read also the F1-help here for the field 'Lock indicator')
2. to lock one complete fiscal year in the entire Profit-Center Accounting via transaction 1KEF.
There are two exceptions for that which are provided for transactions 1KEL and 9KE0 by SAP notes 836218 & 436384. As in these notes described, you can block periods via using FI-SL periode-block, but only for manual posting.
Regards,
Greta

Problem with a Business Rule

Hi
I am trying to set an account transformation BR.
Account A goes to Account B. I set the the same flow. nothing fancy...
When i have an amount in account B, and if account A is different than 0, then the amount is replicated to the account B. So far it seems normal...
When I have an amount in account B, and if account A is 0, then the 0 is not replicated to the account B.
Why is it doing that?
Nic
Edited by: Nicolas Argente on Apr 24, 2009 3:24 PM

Hi Petar!
Sorry, i forgot, but my version is 5
And what you are saying is EXACTLY what is happening to me....
BUT... i found out that
seperately the 2 logics work ok.
logic 1 erase an account.
logic 2 transfert the account to another one (throught a BR).
seperated they work. But when i put, thought the default logic, include logic 1, then include logic 2 , then It does not bring the amounts with a 0. Only the others!
I am still working on that...
Nic

Problem with periodic settlement rule

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for