Recursive BOM because of ECM

[Former Member]

Hi Experts,

                 i have a BOM header A under which B & C are components, I deleted B using a change number & now i want to add header A as component under B. But since iam using ECM it is giving error as resive, but i dont want to use recursive tick. is it possible, please give me your valuable suggestions.

Regards,

Sadasivam.C

[Former Member]

Hi Rahul,

             Yes i tried the work around concept by using different ECM for removing recursive tick with diff validity date also but dat dosent works.

We dont want to  delete line items in table level.& recursive is affecting in MRp also.

thanks & regards,

sadasivam

[rupesh_brahmankar3]

Hello Sada,

Please refer OSS note  839879 - Trace 'BOM is recursive'

This note describes how to install a trace mode in the recursiveness check to be able to display the complete path of a recursive structure on request.

and 544489 - FAQ Recursiveness check / low-level code assignment

Best Regards,

R.Brahmankar

[Former Member]

Hi Rupesh,

     T hank you for your input, actually since we are using ECm for bom change, even after deleting component in bom, still dat component is available for the bom in table level with valid till date so we are not able add it as component to the lower level bom it is giving error as recursive.Waiting for guidance in this case.

Thanks & Regards,

Sadasivam.C

[rupesh_brahmankar3]

Hello Sada,

Did you check the OSS note?

SAP Note  42891 & 839879

It will  solve this problem.

Best Regards,

R.Brahmankar

[Former Member]

Hi Rupesh,

      yes i did check those notes but i dint find any solution  for my issue, maybe i dint get it,can you please brief me on dat.?

Regards,

Sadasivam.C

[rupesh_brahmankar3]

Hello,

Goto transaction CS02 and delete the affected BOM item from the involved BOM without engineering change number.

In transaction CS02 add the BOM item again, which has been deleted before.

Check if recursive activate again if yes then refer the

SAP note 839879 about tracing the recursivity.

activate the trace mode in transaction       as user-dependent

Transaction CSRC_TRACE allows you only to change the switch "Trace for Recursion Check in Bills of Material". The switch can only be set for users, for whom an entry has already been created in the user-specific settings for BOM maintenance (transaction OS29).

While BOM maintenance system issues the path table of the recursiveness check as a dialog box based on an ALV grid please take help from your basis team for trace.

Best Regards,

R.Brahmankar

[Former Member]

still my issue is not solved

waitin for experts inputs

Regards

sadasivam

[RahulHanda]

Hi Sada,

Did you try the work around?

Regards

Rahul

[RahulHanda]

Hi Sada,

So logically now you have BOM for A with component C. And another BOM for B which would consume A. Right?

If yes cross check are you putting A in B's BOM only but not in A's.

Regards

Rahul

[Former Member]

Hi Rahul,

         Yes what you mentioned is correct but since in table level BOM A contains B as component, it is giving error, is there any possibilities to over come this?

Regards,

Sadasivam.C

[RahulHanda]

Hi Sada,

In this case you need to make sure that B is not available in A in the database, that is removed completely. Are the effective dates overlapping? Try after that date.

Regards

Rahul

[Former Member]

Hi Rahul,

              I verified the valid dates also , dates are not overlapping, but even then iam facing problem. I am not sure what is the standard behavior.

Regards,

Sada

[RahulHanda]

Hi Sada,

The standard behavior is:

If A has B and then you try to put A in B's BOM this is recursive. On the other hand if we remove, basically delete the line from A (B will not part of A's BOM) and then you put A into B, this will not trigger recursiveness.

In you case as of now its not deleted from database that's why it's giving you an error. Try to understand this by doing same in your test environment.

As a work around solution:

put A in B's BOM when once line is deleted from database, or

put A in B as recursive and put another ECM to remove recursive indicator with this validity.

I hope this resolves your issue.

Regards

Rahul