on 12-14-2015 12:24 PM
Hi,
I have the following scenario:
In order to fulfil the enhancement, I created a source structure with 2 source assignments, let’s call them AAA (cost elements from 900000 to 999999) and BBB (cost elements from 400000 to 499999).
Here’s how I fulfilled the requirement:
WBS ELEMENT: X
Distribution rule:
Cat | settlement receiver | % | sett. type | source assignment |
WBS | Y | 100 | FUL | AAA |
2.Cost elements linked to assignment BBB settle on the sender (error message kd 118 removed through message handling)
WBS ELEMENT: X
Distribution rule:
Cat | settlement receiver | % | sett. type | source assignment |
WBS | Y | 100 | FUL | AAA |
The solution seems to work, but the disadvantages are the superfluous line items generated by the system when performing the settlement in point 2.
Does any one of you could suggest a cleaner and better solution? Will it be possible, someway, by means of a standard solution, to avoid the settlement of elements with source assignment AAA?
Thanks in Advance for your help!
Hi Carlo,
I feel this can be done in CO allocations.
Thank you.
You must be a registered user to add a comment. If you've already registered, sign in. Otherwise, register and sign in.
Carlo,
Adding what Sandeep said, yes allocations can be an option, but instead of the settlement rules you will have to deal with a large number of sender/receiver relationship which can be different for every period. i wouldn't recommend assessment/distributions, but I would recommend KB15N that is manual allocation and can be uploaded through a BAPI from an excel sheet form.
Regards,
Dave
I'll add to what Dave said.
When you use Results Analysis only the WBS with the RA Key is settled. That is because only the calculations from RA are settled and not the original postings. RA aggregates the postings from all lower level objects during the RA run and then the results from the RA run are settled according to the settlement rule.
What is the requirement for settling up the structure?
It sounds like you want to move time from one WBS to another, which can be done via reposting rather than settlement.
You must be a registered user to add a comment. If you've already registered, sign in. Otherwise, register and sign in.
Hi Dave, Hi Ken,
first of all thanks a lot for your attention!
then, back to the issue, hours that we book on Wbs X (referring to my example), have to be collected , from a quantity point of view (cats_da) there where they are booked (on X). They are then sent to ppm for reporting purposes (hours consumption). Controlling values (value) have to be written on Y levels, because for this kind of hours, the planning (value) is done on these levels (Y levels) .
Regarding to the reposting proposal, I preferred to use settlement, because the X levels are more than 400 for each project and I managed to use an oss note together with a user exit in order to automatically genrate the 400+settlement rules.
The problem is that on the X levels, I can have not only hours but also material costs.
From a conceptual point of view, hours (as a value -ass. AAA in my example) should be allocated on Y levels and converge from there into the PA transfer structure of the firs level , while material costs (assignment BBB in my example) have to converge from that element (X) directly in the PA -
The only reason for which I put a settlement sender= receiver is because trying to settle only AAA ( hours) , system gave an error message. My workaround was converting the kd 118 into warning and settle BBB from X to X.
I know that it can sound intricated , but the question of my post was, if there is a better way to manage the cost elements assigned to BBB , material costs; if there is a way not to settle them >sender=receiver, while performing at the same time the settlement of AAA (hours).
Best Regards,Carlo
Hi Carlo,
If I right assume your query then you want to do some posting through CAT2 which should settle also and you have created source structure which carry cost as sender to receiver but you want to settlement program could avoid the source? so for this you have to remove CE(which were for CAT2) from source structure.
Regards,
Sanjeev
You must be a registered user to add a comment. If you've already registered, sign in. Otherwise, register and sign in.
Hi Sanjeev,
i saw it now, there is a mistake in my post, this is the correct point 2:
Cat | settlement receiver | % | sett. type | source assignment |
WBS | X | 100 | FUL | BBB |
i want to post only hours. I cannot remove the other elements from the source assignment otherwise the system would try - since there is a settlement profile on the level- to settle all the cost elements even the ones included in my assignement BBB.
I hope I was more clear.
Regards,Carlo
Hi Carlo,
When a project is run by Results Analysis, I always do the following settings:
1) RA Key only in the top WBS element (L1)
2) Settlement Profile on L1: "Must be settled"
3) Settlement Profile on L2 through Lx (all lower levels): "Not for Settlement"
This will take care unnecessary settlements on this hierarchy. You can do the auto settlement rules through settlement strategy configuration or with a user exit substitution.
Regards,
Dave
User | Count |
---|---|
86 | |
7 | |
6 | |
4 | |
3 | |
3 | |
3 | |
3 | |
3 | |
2 |
You must be a registered user to add a comment. If you've already registered, sign in. Otherwise, register and sign in.