Rule based ATP Check - User Exit to modify the item

Hi all,
We are working with standard rule based ATP check to change the plant in the Sales Order item.
That creates a new subitem with the new plant determination, and changes the Item Category of the original item.
My doubt is: Is there any User Exit in this process to do the system change something else in the Sales Order items?
<< Moderator message - Please do not offer points >>
Thanks!!
Edited by: Rob Burbank on Oct 8, 2010 2:20 PM

Hi Roger,
Please clarify more what do want to change exactly example any Z field to be copied from main item to sub item.
You can use exit USEREXIT_MOVE_FIELD_TO_VBAP ,  USEREXIT_MOVE_FIELD_TO_VBAK 
Thanks,
Pavan Verma

Similar Messages

  • Rule based ATP check

    Hello,
    We are implementening rule based ATP check for Sales order scnerio. Our Business process is
    1.Customer will cretate order for product P1 & Location L1.
    If stock is available, system will confirm the order else it should search for alternate product & location in following swquence
    2. Product P2, Location L1
    3. Product P1, Location L2
    4. Product P2, Location L2
    We have maintained all the configuration as per SAP bulding block for Rule based ATP check in SAP & APO server.
    Problem : If stock for requested Product location is not available, syetem does not propose the stock of alternate product & location as maintained in rule sequence. It gives error as :
    "No product found" "Internal error: Item /000000"
    Would appreciate if anyone can share information on fixing ths issue?
    With Regards
    Mangesh A. Kulkarni

    hello
    We have resolved the issue at our end..
    It was due to activation of unwanted exit in APO..
    Regards
    Mangesh A. Kulkarni

  • Rule based ATP check with SOA

    Hello,
    We wish to implement ATP check using Ent Services.
    Details:
    Environment : SAP ECC 6.o with Enhancement Package 3/ SCM 5.0
    Ent service used: /SAPAPO/SDM_PARCRTRC :  ProductAvailabilityRequirementCreateRequestConfirmation
    We were able to carry out Product check using the service. However we are unable to carry out rule based ATP check using the same service.
    We have carried out the entire configuration as per SAP's building block configuration guide for Global ATP & SAP Note 1127895.
    For RBA <Rule based ATP check>, we are getting the results as expected when we create Sales order from SAP R/3 (Transaction VA01), however ATP simulation in APO & Ent service does not give the results as expected. When we carry out ATP simulation in APO / Ent service, results are same as Product check & not as RBA i.e. they respect only requested Product location stock & does not propose alternate Product or Location in case of shortages
    Plz share the experience to fix the issue
    Mangesh A. Kulkarni

    Hi mangesh
    Check this links , not very sure , but may help you...
    https://www.sdn.sap.com/irj/scn/wiki?path=/display/erplo/availability%252bchecking%252bin%252bsap
    Re: ATP confirmation in CRM
    https://www.sdn.sap.com/irj/scn/wiki?path=/display/scm/rba
    Regards
    Abhishek

  • User Exit to Modify SD Item Category

    Dear Experts:
    I would like to make use of a SD user exit to modify the default item category determined in a sales document. What is the best user exit to use? Would that be form USEREXIT_MOVE_FIELD_TO_VBAPKOM in include MV45AFZB?
    Thanks,
    Dan

    Hi Brad:
    Thanks for the response. Looking at the comment from SAP, I would even think this is the official one to use.
    Cheers,
    Dan

  • Delivery & Invoice for Rules based ATP check materials

    Hi All,
    We have an query regarding rules based ATP , delivery & Invoicing . When we create a SO ( say we have only one line item 10 , with quantity 100 created at Plant P1 , item category TAN ) , ATP confirmation happens   ,based on the stock & receipts ( say we have confirmation of 60 units at Plant P1  ) . Since we are using RBATP , the remaining 40 quantity is being confirmed at Plant P2.  Now the order will have multiple line items 10 the original line item but with different item category TAPA and also two more line items  for quantity of 60 & 40  for plants P1 & Plants P2 respectively with item category TAN. This is the standard functionality.
    My question is , Will there be any issues with respect to delivery & Invoicing  as there are multiple plants and different item categories.
    Thanks & Regards
    Surendra

    Hi,
    With respect  to delivery you will have differnt delivey document because your shipping point is going to be different.
    Regarding Billing you can combine the differnet delivey document if the delivery document created using the sales order contains the same payer,payment terms, billing date,material group and Incoterms.
    Apart from the above you will not face anyproblem by having 2 diiferent item category for the above said scenario..
    Regards,
    V.Devaselvam.

  • Need a user exit to modify the quantity schedules in a sales contract

    Hi,
      I am using ECC 6.0 with IS OIL. Need a user-exit to update the quantity schedule(table OIA05) in the sales contract VA42.
    I have a new field called timestamp in the table OIA05 which needs to be updated with the timestamp value.
    I tried the user exit MV45AFZZ in USEREXIT_SAVE_DOCUMENT_PREPARE and USEREXIT_SAVE_DOCUMENT to update the values. But the new values are not being reflected. Can you please help me in this regard.
    Thanks,
    Best regards,
    Ajith

    that will allow me to append an initial line with <accit> pointing to the line. Therefore I just have to modify <accit> and the new line will then have my changes?
    Yep, that is exactly it.    So after the APPEND statement, simply fill the fields of the <accit>.
    append initial line to im_document-item ASSIGNING <accit>.
    <accit>-field1 = 'Blah'.
    <accit>-field2 = 'Blah'.
    Regards,
    Rich Heilman

  • User exit to modify the segment E1IDB02 data

    Hi SAP Experts,
    I have a requirement to change the data in the segment E1IDB02  field FIIKONTO before generating the IDOC.
    I'm using the transaction code F110 for payment and the program in payment run transaction is RFF0EDI1,  message type PAYEXT and the Basic Idoc type PEXR2002.
    I have tried the user exit 'EXIT_SAPLIEDP_002' to modify the data, but it is not triggering that user exit I guess, even tried by putting 'BREAK-POINT' as well but still it is not stopping the control at that particular point.
    This is for outbound idoc creation.
    note : I have activated everything like project, function module etc.
    Please kindly let me know whether I am using the correct user exit or not and if not please kindly provide me the correct user exit.
    Thanks in advance.
    kalikonda.

    Hi Pawan,
    Thanks for your prompt reply.
    I tried all ways as you told but still it is not stopping.
    Also implemented the sap note 937966 (RFFOEDI1: User exits EXIT_SAPLIEDP_002 and PEXR2002)
    but still no result.
    Is there any other way where I can modify the data in the segment  E1IDB02?
    Thanks,
    kalikonda.

  • BADI or User Exit to Change the Item Details in AFAB Transaction(Depreciation)

    Hi Experts,
    I have a requirement of changing the Item details in AFAB Transaction (Internal Order Number). Is there any BADI or User exit available for that.
    Thanks in advance.

    Hi Sivag,
    You can find BADI for transaction in different ways. Try with below methods
    1. To find New BADI(Karnel), Run the transaction with debug mode(/h), keep break point at statement
        CALL BADI
    2. To find old BADI (Classic), Keep break point at exit handler CL_EXITHANDLER=>GET_INSTANCE and         run the transaction
    3.  Check in SPRO transaction  - Check with functional consultant in which business process this transaction    comes and any customization  details available
    4. Get pakage name of transaction and go to to tcode se84 enhancement browser . Try to find with package name,  any enhancement available
    Thanks & Regards,
    aRun

  • VA01 user-exit to modify net price of line item...

    Hello Experts,
    Is there a user-exit to modify the net price value of a line item upon 'ENTERING' in
    VA01 transaction?
    Hope you can help me guys. Thank you and take care!

    Hi,
    The user exits and badis for va01 tcode:
    Enhancement/ Business Add-in Description
    Enhancement
    V45L0001
    SD component supplier processing (customer enhancements)
    V45E0002
    Data transfer in procurement elements (PRreq., assembly)
    V45E0001
    Update the purchase order from the sales order
    V45A0004
    Copy packing proposal
    V45A0003
    Collector for customer function modulpool MV45A
    V45A0002
    Predefine sold-to party in sales document
    V45A0001
    Determine alternative articles for product selection
    SDTRM001
    Reschedule schedule lines without a new ATP check
    V60F0001
    SD Billing plan (customer enhancement) diff. to billing plan
    V46H0001
    SD Customer functions for resource-related billing
    V45W0001
    SD Service Management: Forward Contract Data to Item
    V45S0004
    Effectivity type in sales order
    V45S0003
    RP-relevance for incomplete configuration
    V45S0001
    Update sales document from configuration
    V45P0001
    SD customer function for cross-company code sales
    Business Add-in
    BADI_SD_SCH_GETWAGFZ
    Scheduling Agreement: Read WAGFZ from S073
    BADI_SD_V46H0001
    SD Customer functions for resource-related billing
    Pls. reward if useful...

  • Rule based GATP Check

    Hello experts,
    Our team has configured rule based gatp check parameters and maintained condition technique, relevant rules with product substitution, location substitution, profile parameters and rule determination.
    We are having four condition tables i.e. most specific to most generic and condition records are maintained for all the key combinations, whereas system is picking up the record, which is most generic.
    Please let me know how the system picks up the condition record in rule based atp check.
    Thanks and Regards,
    Sai Dacha
    9849030809

    Hi Anupam,
    Please find the comments.
    Can you also check your check instruction and see if it has
    --> "Activate RBA" and "Start immediately" check box checked for the check mode you guys are using and business event A
    Comment:
    Both the check boxes are checked for the relevant combination.
    If you have this setting then I would like you to check in master data where you have created Integrated Rules:
    Comment:
    I've maintained only one rule, which is in valid periods.
    Make sure you have maintained integrated rules correctly and assigned the correct location determination procedure.
    Comment:
    Checked both Production Substitution and Location determination procedures and their assignments.
    --> Very basic point but no harm in checking, sometimes we miss very basic things: Do you have all the locations in APO and also products at those location which you want to populate in the sales order.
    Comments:
    All the combinations of products and locations are in APO.
    Thanks,
    Sai Dacha

  • User exit to change the value of ltbp-wempf

    Hi,
    Is there any user exit to modify the value of ltbp-wempf during Transfer requirement creation ?

    It is also ok, if i can get a way to modify MSEG-wempf during production declaration. (MFBF)

  • Rules based ATP to Consider Checking Horizon

    Hello SAP Experts,
    I am a novice to GATP functionality. I have one scenario tried to work on it and Standard SAP system doesn't seem to work this way.
    Rules based ATP for location Determination is used for order confirmation.
    Loc A   Mat 1  500 Pcs
    Loc B   Mat 1  200 Pcs
    Rule 1 LocA --> Loc B
    Order comes in for Mat 1 at location A for 1000 Pcs and confirmation was given for 700 Pcs out of which 200 Pcs will be sourced from Loc B. I'm trying to confirm remaining 300 at the end of Checking horizon as per Customer requirement. Please suggest a way to acheive this.
    Regards,
    Priyanka

    Hi,
    You will start from ECC, Material master MRP3 view   MARC-WZEIT   Total replenishment lead time (in workdays).
    In APO , SPRO--GATP-Maintain check control - make sure that ATP group and business event example 01 and A should have "consider Checking horizon" .
    RLT from R3 will become Checking horizon in product master in APO. In APO product master ATP tab CHKHOR is the field name.
    Make sure that in the rules -- calculation profile -allowed delay is not maintained or should not be less than RLT /Checking horizon.
    Thanks,
    Pavan Verma

  • Questions on Rules-Based ATP and Purchase Requisitions for STOs

    Hello experts,
    We are working on rules-based ATP configuration and have several questions about the functionality.  Iu2019m hoping that some of you are using this functionality and can help give us direction.
    In our environment we have multiple distribution centers and multiple manufacturing plants.  We want to confirm sales orders against stock and production orders in any of those plants, depending on the locations that have stock or planned production.  For example, we will place a sales order against plant A.  If there is not enough stock in plant A then rules-based ATP will use location determination to check in plant B, then C.  The scope of check on the ATP check will include stock and released production orders.  We will configure plant A as the u201Cconsolidation locationu201D so if stock is found in plants B or C then stock transport orders will automatically be created to move the stock to plant A before shipping to the customer.
    We have configured rules-based ATP and this functionality is working well in our Development system.  The ATP check is executed and uses the rules-based ATP to find eligible stock in other plants.  The system is also creating purchase requisitions to move the stock to the consolidation plant. 
    Our first concern is that there doesnu2019t appear to be any firm linkage between the sales order and the resulting purchase requisition.  For example, if we create sales order 123 for plant A and the rules-based ATP finds stock in plant B it automatically creates a purchase requisition 987 to move the stock from plant B to plant A.  However, there doesnu2019t appear to be a linkage between sales order 123 and purchase requisition 987.  For instance, if we delete sales order 123 the purchase requisition doesnu2019t get deleted. 
    Our second concern is that the quantity on the purchase requisition can still be confirmed against later sales orders.  For example, say the above scenario resulted in a purchase requisition 987 that consumed all the stock available in plant B.  We then create a second sales order 456 for the same product.  Plant A is out of stock so the rules-based ATP looks in plant B.  We would expect that plant B would also not have any stock because itu2019s all been consumed by the purchase requisition.  Instead, the system creates a second purchase requisition to move quantity from plant B to plant A.  Itu2019s as if the system doesnu2019t realize that the purchase requisition 987 is already planning to move stock out of plant B.
    Does anyone have any thoughts or suggestions on these two scenarios?  Is there a way to configure the system so there is a hard linkage between the sales order and the purchase requisition so that if the sales order is deleted then the purchase requisition is also deleted?  Should ATP realize that purchase orders are consuming inventory and not allow later sales orders to confirm against that same inventory?  Any advice or experience would be greatly appreciated.
    Thanks,
    David Eady
    Application Delivery Team Lead
    Propex, Inc.

    Hi,
    The scheduling is done in SCM, and from there, whenever the RBA is triggered, the calculation is done always with the old route in SCM. Until you get back to R/3 this is when your route is determined. But the ATP check is always with the original route. So the idea would be that you change the values of the route while still in APO, this is possible via the user exit. Should be done in scheduling in APO.  
    Hope this information is helpful.
    Regards,
    Tibor

  • Switch "ON" Rules based ATP

    Hi,
    How can we switch on or switch off "Rules based ATP".
    Is it possible to do it at material level or is it done at some group level or system level.
    Thanks and regards,
    Ashok

    Hi,
    The scheduling is done in SCM, and from there, whenever the RBA is triggered, the calculation is done always with the old route in SCM. Until you get back to R/3 this is when your route is determined. But the ATP check is always with the original route. So the idea would be that you change the values of the route while still in APO, this is possible via the user exit. Should be done in scheduling in APO.  
    Hope this information is helpful.
    Regards,
    Tibor

  • Rule based ATP is not working for Components

    Hi All,
    Our requirement is to do availability check through APO for Sales order created in ECC,so we are using gATP.
    Requirement: We are creating salesorder for BOM header (Sales BOM) and avaialbility check should happen for components i.e. Product avalaibility & Rule based substitution.
    Issue: Product availiabilty is working for components but rules based substituion is working,  mean Rules are not getting determind for components.
    Settings:
    - Header doesnot exist in APO and compnents do exist in APO
    - Availability check is not enabled for header item category and enabled for Item category for components
    - Rules have been created for Components in APO
    - Rule base ATP is activated in Check instructions
    We have also tried MATP for this i.e. PPM created in APO but still didn't get the desired result.
    If we create salesorder for the component material directly then Rule based ATP is happening, so for components Rule based ATP is not working.
    How do we enable enable Rulesbased ATP for components, i mean is there any different way to do the same.
    Thanks for help.
    Regards,
    Jagadeesh

    Hi Jagdeesh,
    If you are creating BOM in ECC and CIFing PPM of FG/Header material to APO, I think you need to CIF Header material, too, with material integration model.
    Please include header material in you integration models for material, SO and ATP check as well.
    For component availability check, you can use MATP; but for MATP, FG should be in APO. You need not to CIF any receipts of FG (stock, planned orders, POs etc), so that MATP will be triggered directly. Then maintaining Rules for RMs will enable to select available RMs according to the rule created.
    Regards,
    Bipin

Maybe you are looking for