Validation rule in Funds management.

Dear Friends,
We use commitment items to monitor the budgets with overall budget for budget type Payment budget
In some cases, users are posting some adjustment entries to transfer the consumed budget values from one commitment item to another.
Ex:
Original Entry: Expenses incurred 1000, So entry booked with PK40, 123456 (expense GL), amt 1000, and commitment item ABC.
So at a later stage they came to know that they have used a wrong commitment item for the above document.(Correct CI would have been DEF)
So they are posting an adjustment entry like
PK40 GL123456 amt 1000 CI DEF
PK50 GL123456 amt 1000 CI ABC
So when i check the funds management doc for the above doc, FM uses VALUE TYPE 66 to do the transfer postings to commitment items, since these documents are giving wrong impact on my CI overall balances report FMRP_RFFMTO31X - Overall Budget -> Totals Records .
For the debit commitment item, it is not adding that amount in invoice column of above report, but it is comsuming the budget. So there is a mismatch in my total record for the debited commitment item.
For the credti commitment item, it is not deducting that amount in invoice column of above report, but it is increasing the budget. So there is a mismatch in my total record for the credited commitment item.
(Ex: Total budget-invoices-open items = Available budget) This is not happening at all
So i tried to restrict these kind of postings with a validation in FM like
Prerequisite: BPJA_VALID-FIKRS = 'AE69' (AE69 is my FM area)
Check: BPJA_VALID-WRTTP < > '66'
Message: Error message.
And activated the same in SPRO->PSM->FMG->Budgeting and Avl Control (Former Budgeting)->Budgeting (Former Budgeting)->Validation rules->Activate Funds Management Validation----
But still i am able to post those kind of documents.
Is there any other workaround for this restriction or can only be restricted by a validation?
Please corret me if i am wrong in validation condition expressions.
Thanks,
Srinu

Hi,
Actually we are using a Z program, which is copied from standard program as said earlier.
In the z program, we made some conditions to treat value type 66 also as like 54.
Now we are getting our report as expected.
Thanks,
Srinu...

Similar Messages

Derivation Rule For Fund Management

Dear All,
Where we can maintain derivation rule for fund management???
Mahendra
help.sap.com

Dear Mahendra,
Please follow following link for PSM-FM
http://help.sap.com/saphelp_pserv472/helpdata/EN/ba/43d43ab8029b66e10000000a114084/content.htm
and for FI-FM
http://help.sap.com/saphelp_pserv464/helpdata/EN/ba/43d43ab8029b66e10000000a114084/content.htm
Hope this solves your query
Regards
Saurabh
Edited by: Saurabh Khandelwal on Nov 23, 2011 3:05 PM

Funds management cube getting data from 4 ods, data not seen in cube

Hello all,
I am working on funds management cubes (0PU_C02 and 0PU_C03). These two cubes get data from like 7 or 8 ODS. Can someone tell me which are the ODS which feed to respective cubes. I have the mappings done but i am getting very confused.
In the ods 0PU_O44 there is RLDNR for Ledger and I can see that data in ODS but when i run load to cube I dont see the ledger data (its direct mapping there are no routines or rules).
Is there any sequence with wihic we have to load the data?
Thanks
Message was edited by: Raj M

Hi Raj,
I was going thru the forums who has knowledge in Public sector when i came accross ur forum.Can i get your email id..i have some questions to ask regarding student administration.
thanks.

ADF: showing error message on a validation rule programatically

Jdeveloper : 11.1.2.2.0
i m using ADF. i ve a form that contains input text that is binded to a managed bean property.
that input text value is inserted into an entity attribute.the attribute in the entity has a validation rule.
i submit the form and in my managed bean i call
am.getDBTransaction().commit();
i want when i submit the form and the when the commit is called and throws exception regarding the validation rule,i want to show an error note window same style like this http://oi50.tinypic.com/15fhnpt.jpg
how can i do that ?
thanks in advance :)

Hi,
i submit the form and in my managed bean i call
am.getDBTransaction().commit();A strict NO NO for doing this. You add the commit action to the binding and call the execute the commit operation binding programatically.
i m using ADF.ADF is vast. Be specific on the technologies you use (ADF BC and ADF Faces?)
that input text value is inserted into an entity attribute.the attribute in the entity has a validation rule.Are you doing something special with the binding you have in bean? If not, why don't you Drag and Drop the VO from the data control directly? (set the af:messages tag to have inline=true).
-Arun

Error while settlement of WBS - Funds Management

Hi,
We have maintain derivation rule as - WBS to Fund Center. This Fund center is DUMMY because we need not want to control WBS through Funds Management.
There is always one Cost center in each WBS. while settling this WBS we are getting error as -
Asset ABC 000127000000 0000: no subnumber with FM assignment DUMMY / /
Message no. AW851
ABC - Company code
000127000000 - asset number
DUMMY - Fund center
suggest.

alex ice wrote:
Hi, 1 change FC in AS02 to dummy if it applicable.
> 2 Check note 618269 it applicable.
> 3 remove FC from asset master data
Hi Alex, how are u!?
I've got the same issue than Harsh Vaidya in my system ...
Ive already read this notes: [618269|https://service.sap.com/sap/support/notes/618269] (no apply to me, because Joint Venture Accounting isn't active), [844262|https://service.sap.com/sap/support/notes/844262], [1473357|https://service.sap.com/sap/support/notes/1473357], [446029|https://service.sap.com/sap/support/notes/446029] and [440396|https://service.sap.com/sap/support/notes/440396]
All very interesting notes :P
But... I couldn't find the solution
I try to TRACE from FMDERIVE too, but when I go to KO88, FMDERIVE's trace doesn't track anything.
Any help to throw some more light on this thread, would be very useful.
Thanks a lot!
Regards from Argentine.

PSM-FM-Reversal of funds management document after change in acc.assignment

Good day we recently went live with a component of Funds Management i.e. Availability Control on Cost centers and cost elements. We update BCS with the plan values and actual/commitment items in Finance/CO. We do our planning in CO.
The solution is working reasonably well but we have encountered a problem for which we are unable to find a solution. The problem is best illustrated with an example;
1. Create purchase requisition with Account Assignment Category "K" = Cost Center with transaction ME51N
2. Account assignment = cost center and cost element. A funds management document is created upon saving of the transaction.
3. Purchase Req. is released with a release strategy (transaction ME54N)
4. After purchase requisition release the account assignment for the cost element is changed by the user. This occurs sometimes during the execution of the business process.
5. When a purchase order is created with reference to this purchase requisition with transaction ME59N the system references the original funds management document which means when the account assignment was changed the funds management document was not reversed and a new funds management document created for the changed account assignment.
6. The BUDCON report transaction FMRP_RW_BUDCON thus displays the commitment under the incorrect commitment item as the change in account assignment is not reflected in Funds Management. We have a one to one relationship between cost elements/commitment items and cost centers/funds centers as per the derivation strategy.
My question is;
Is this normal standard SAP standard behavior or are we missing some configuration that will enable the creation of a new funds management document and if so where do we configure such? I must mention our solution is completely SAP standard.
Thank you in advance.
Best Regards
Mike Olwagen
Manager SAP Solution Support
City Power (JHB) (Pty) Ltd

Hi Mike, nice to meet you.
I think u should do an entire test with TRACE on, and u will find the problem, and how to fix it (at FMDERIVE of course).
First: Have a look at note [666322|https://service.sap.com/sap/support/notes/666322], go to FMDERIVE and turn ON the trace.
Then, run all the process ... from ME51N to the end...
I agree with Eli, u must allow overwriting of existing values at FMDERIVE rule...
Regards,
Osvaldo.

Commitment Item in SD Billing document (Fund Managment) ECC6

Hi,
We are upgrading from 4.6C to ECC6 and have activated Fund Managment (EA-PS).
At the time of carrying out the Billing in SD we are getting a error that no commitment item available for gl account but if I use the same revenue account and create a FI invoice (FB70) then the CI is getting derived thru the derivation rules (Rule:CI from Cost Element).
I would like to know why the CI is not getting derived during Billing in SD module.
Thanks
SS

Hi,
Thanks for your message.
I have maintained a derivation Rule:CI from Cost Element, so that the CI will derive from this derivation rule.
As mentioned if I use same revenue account and create a FI invoice then the CI is derived as per the derivation rules but while carrying out the SD billing then the error comes.
Kindly clarify.
Regards
SS

How do you create custom validation rule in WS 9.2?!?!?!

Hello,
I am using Workshop 9.2. I created a page flow, and want to do some form validations.
I saw the simple 9.2 example, but it is only good for very basic validation, what if you have to validate the form field against a database, must you write a custom validation rule? HOW would you do this in 9.2 so that will still stay with the workshop/netui paradigm?
http://beehive.apache.org/docs/1.0.1/netui/validation.html
Keith

Hi Keith,
Staying within the declarative validation framework the answer is probably that you do need to write a custom validation rule and refer to it using the @Jpf.ValidateCustomRule annotation.
The NetUI Annotation Reference shows how the Struts validations are supported via the framework.
http://beehive.apache.org/docs/1.0.1/netui/annotations/pageflow_annotations.html
Specifically, if you look through the @Jpf.Validate* annotations, while most of these are "canned" common validations, there are a few that are more open-ended, such as @Jpf.ValidateMask and @Jpf.ValidateValidWhen.
Those two let you write the validation logic in the annotation while @Jpf.ValidateCustomeRule only refers to a custom rule in the struts validator file.
In any case, there is a validation rule editor which should help in authoring and managing the annotations. In the Page Flow Explorer or Page Flow Editor just right click on the action or form bean bean of interest and choose Validation Rules and the appropriate scope.
I hope that's of some use,
Troy

Validation rule for expense type

Hi,
I'd like to know if it's possible to create a validation rule for expense type and personnel number.
I need to lock some expense types for some personnel number.
Thanks in advance.
Osmar Tardivo.

Hello,
Sorry to say but I am not aware of any customization which restrict an expenses type based on personal number..
There is a setting which can restrict Travel Expense Types based on Employee Grouping. Please go through below path.
Travel Management-> Travel Expenses-> Control Parameters for Travel Expenses-> Control Parameters from Travel Privileges-> Define Employee Grouping for Travel Expense Types
Hope this help you!
Thanks,
Vaibhav

Fund Management - Issues in Upgrade from 4.6C to ECC6

Hello,
We are upgrading SAP Application for a client who is on 4.6C to ECC6. The client is currently using Funds Management in 4.6C. With ECC6 I understand that this functionality is moved into Public Sector and is available only on activation of IS-PS Extension Set.
The question I have is that does this activation impact any other business processes or is just a technical activation.
What I mean is that if I activate this extension set does the system start doing things differently and needs specific data related to Public Sector which the business users will be required to be entered while doing transactions OR the activation will not impact business processes as such and would work as earlier with Funds management active. (except where there was a change in the functionality between 4.6C to ECC6)
I would like to know the risks, if any involved in upgrading Funds Management from 4.6C to ECC6.
Please reply and let me know any question to get more clarity on the issue.
Best Regards
Kuldeep

Hi Kuldeep,
There are several main issues that have to be addresses when upgrading from 4.6 to ECC6. The main ones are:
1 - Derivations. The object are no longer connected through tables or master data entries (you may have a table that links Cost Centers to Funds Centers for example). These assignments are now maintained through a flexible derivation tool. These derivation rules have to be maintaind, or the posting addresses will have no FM values and you will not be able to post any documents.
2 - Inventory purchases. The inventory purchases scenarios are no longer maintained through the customization (you can no longer choose one of the 4 inventory scenarios, and there's no warehouse Funds Center). These are all maintained through derivations.
3 - BCS. There's a new budgeting and AVC tool called "Budget Control System" (BCS). You can either activate it, or keep working with the old budgeting (called "former" in the customization). The new BCS affords flexibility in budgeting and AVC, including several AVC ledgers.
More data regarding migrations can be found in documentation. If you want, I can send you the PDF document.
Best regards,
Shahaf Yaari
[email protected]

FI Validation rules in Travel

Hi to all.
I am working in a Travel Management implementation and we need to have validations for Cost Centers, Profit Centers and WBS elements...
The Travel and Accounting are in different systems but the client requires the Travel to have the same validations as those in the Accounting system (done in OB28).
All the Accounting Elements are transported by Idocs but the validations done in OB28 only work in the FI module.
Is there any BAPI or Function that can get the validations in OB28 and run it in the Travel system?
Best regards.
Marco Duarte

As of i knew there is no validation rule exist in SRM as exists in ECC.
if you require you may need to via RFC call only and validationd done by BBP_DOC_CHECK bADI.
there may not be any front end validation rule combination of GL account and account assignment. It allows to enter any availble GL accounts ( in the ECC) / cost center with any combination .

Funds Management related error while creating Purchase Requisition

Hi,
Am working in ECC6.0 system with Funds Management integration. While creating PR am getting below mentioned error
"At least one GL account was not derived by the budgetary ledger
Message no. FI_E034"
Diagnosis
You are using the Funds Management system integrated with the budgetary ledger (BL) active for FM area .
Postings into the budgetary ledger require a GL account for each of the budgetary ledger line items. However,
in this case, at least one of the line items in the BL interface table does not contain a GL account.
Use the link below to analyze the table contents before and after the account derivation process.
Budgetary ledger account derivation trace
System Response
The budgetary ledger cannot post this document. The BL document"
Can some body guide me how to fix this error.
Thanks in advance

hi
which component you are using?
FORMER BUDGETING OR BUDGET CONTROLSYSTEM( BCS)
CHECK YOUR DERIVATION STRATEGY BY USING FMDERIVE.
CHECK DERIVATION RULE FOR BUDGETERY LEDGER AND G/L ACCOUNT.
THANKS & REGARDS
MALA K VUNDELA

Runtime Error due to activating Fund Management

Hi,
I had activated Funds Management in SAP. I started getting Run Time Errors. I deactivated the Fund Management. But still the Run Time Error is there. I am attaching the file for your reference.
I enquired with the Basis consultant who is telling this is a Functional problem, hence I need to solve this. I checked all the configurations, but could not find the exact problem.
Can anybody tell me how this can be resolved.
Note: This error is showing in Quality Server. There was a copying from Production to Quality.

In the error I see the statement before the dump comes is PERFORM exit--entry_from_table | | 1039| IN PROGRAM (-callback_report)
That sounds like an user exit from a table that is not there.
You say you had a copy from production. It could be that a user exit which was not implemented yet in production and therefore not in the exit table. is now also not present anymore in your Q system after the copy. Were there any changes about to go to production ?
Also in the dump I read the comment:
| 1063|* version and guid are used by strategy -> further params for generated | | 1064|* routines. guid is only used for reference purposes and not returned at | | 1065|* the moment
That could possibly mean that this is a generated program. Maybe you need to regenerate it.
I also see: STEP--METHOD_DRULE
That could mean that these have something to do with rules that have not been maintained.
You could ask a programmer to debug the program and see where SAP tries to get the rules and exit information from (which table) .
Maybe that give you a clue what is going wrong.
If you have a table name start SM30 and click customizing. If it opens a customizing transaction then that is where you need to maintain entries.

Fund Management-Configuration guide step by step

< MODERATOR: Message locked. Please read the [Rules of Engagement|https://www.sdn.sap.com/irj/sdn/wiki?path=/display/home/rulesofEngagement] before posting next time. >
Dear Sap gurus,
Please send Fund management configuration guide step by step.
Its very urgent.
Thanks in Advance,
Sree

Hi
Funds management :
Funds Management allows management to set budgets for revenues and expenses within your company as well as track these to the area of responsibility.
http://ot.bloomu.edu/Documents/SAP/Word%20Docs/New/SAPReportsJan2006.pdf
http://help.sap.com/printdocu/core/Print46c/en/data/pdf/FIFM/FIFM.pdf
nagesh

Upgrade Business rules with Calc Manager

Hello Gurus,
Recently performed an upgrade from 11.1.1.3 to 11.1.2.2 by replicating the Database to a new database machine.
I had Business rules in 11.1.1.3 and did not perform any steps to migrate the rules to Calculation manager in 11.1.2.2
The doubt I have is,
1. Are the business rules automatically upgraded when performing upgrade by EPM system configurator (since the database is replicated)
2. If so, how do I see the business rules in 11.1.2.2 environment? How can I use migrate feature option.
Thanks
HyperionEPM.

From 11.1.2.2 documentation:
Upgrade Wizard
If your application used Oracle Hyperion Business Rules, the Upgrade Wizard automatically converts Business Rules business rules to Oracle Hyperion Calculation Manager business rules. Release 11.1.2.2 supports onlyBusiness Rules business rules as the calculation module.
Notes:
•Classic application administration is now called Oracle Hyperion Planning application administration (versus Oracle Hyperion EPM Architect application administration).
•The Upgrade Wizard automatically upgrades applications having Oracle Hyperion Business Rules business rules, converting them to Calculation Manager business rules. However, the Upgrade Wizard does not automatically convert Release 11.1.2.1 applications having Oracle Hyperion Calculation Manager business rules. For those upgrade instructions, see the Oracle Enterprise Performance Management System Installation and Configuration Guide.
Business Rules Maintenance Release and Upgrade Installation PrerequisitesIf you are using Business Rules, you must migrate to Calculation Manager rules in Release 11.1.2.2. Before migrating business rules, you must perform prerequisite tasks. Note that these tasks are required if you are applying the maintenance release or if you are upgrading.
To prepare to migrate Business Rules, perform the following tasks in your current Business Rules environment before installing Release 11.1.2.2:
1.in Business Rules, within the Rule Editor, remove the associated outline (that is, the design time location) from each business rule. After you do this, the Associated Outline drop-down list should display the text, Select Outline.
2.On the Locations tab of the Rule Editor, ensure that each business rule has a valid launch location, which must be an absolute location. Although “All Locations” is valid in Business Rules, when you migrate business rules, you must provide the details of a specific launch location (that is, the application type---Planning or Essbase, the server name, the application name, and the database or plan type). If you want a business rule to be valid for multiple launch locations, you must provide the details for each location. The locations must be in different applications; you cannot migrate the same business rule to different plan types in the same application within Calculation Manager.
If the rule is a part of a sequence, then the launch location of the rule within the sequence must be one of the launch locations listed in the Locations tab of the rule.
3.On the Access Privileges tab of the Rule Editor, ensure that each business rule has security defined for a specific location or locations and not “All Locations.” If multiple locations are defined for a business rule on its Locations tab, you must add security for each location individually.
4.Do not modify rules in Calculation Manager until migration is completed.
5.If you are using Business Rules with Planning, as a precaution, create a backup of the rules: Use Administration Services to export the rules to XML in Business Rules format. If you are upgrading from 11.1.1.3 or 11.1.1.4, also export the rules to Calculation Manager format. EPM System Configurator exports the rules during database configuration for use during application upgrade.
6.If you are an Essbase-only Business Rules user, you must export business rules. To export the Essbase rule from Business Rules:
a.From Administration Services Console, right-click the Business Rules node and select Export.
b.Export the rules in Business Rules format and then select all of the Essbase rules in the repository. If you are upgrading from 11.1.1.3 or 11.1.1.4, also export the rules to Calculation Manager format.
c.Specify the location to save the XML file, and then click OK. If you are upgrading, the location should be a shared drive that is accessible from the upgraded environment.
Make a note of the location. You import the file later in the process.
Migrating Business Rules to Calculation Manager for use with Planning
If you applied the maintenance release to move from Planning Release 11.1.2.0 or 11.1.2.1 to Release 11.1.2.2, and you were using Business Rules rules, you must migrate the rules to Calculation Manager rules.
Before you migrate, ensure that user directories and native users with the same SID are available when you upgrade Shared Services.
Ensure that the Planning applications are upgraded to the current release and are available in Calculation Manager under SYSTEM View.
To migrate Business Rules rules to Calculation Manager rules:
1.In Calculation Manager, select the migrated Planning application, and then select Migrate.
The data that was exported during database configuration with EPM System Configurator is imported to Calculation Manager.
2.Repeat for each Planning application.
3.Deploy the rules from Calculation Manager to Planning. See the Oracle Hyperion Calculation Manager Designer's Guide.
After migrating business rules and rules security, if any of the rules had multiple launch locations and you migrated to more than one location, Calculation Manager creates a rule for the first migration, and shortcuts for all subsequent migrations. If the rule had rule-level variables, for the shortcuts that are created in the application in the new environment , its variables are moved to the Plan level. In this scenario, test rules in your environment to ensure that they work as expected.
If you still have problems, raise an SR and we can get on a call to figure out why the rules are not coming over.
-Sree

Validation rule in Funds management.

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for