Shipment issue-SAP Error: VW-696

[venu_ch8]

Hi Experts,

After checking in google, I have posted this question in this forum.

In T.code VT02N Cant be executed properly by shipment no.

Error displays below given

shipment is neither in database nor archive.

Shall we do any changes from variant layout ?

SAP Error: VW-696

Could you please guide me

[JL23 · Accepted solution]

I tested this change and I can open the shipment per double click from VL06O

So still the question remains, do you have the number in VTTK table

Your screenshot looks slightly different than mine. When I reduce the visible field length then I get dots behind the shown part of the number e.g. 4200...

Your screenshot does not have those dots. Maybe you are on a older release and you can only have this behavior after an upgrade.

So it could technically be that the (old) program only takes 5 digits to the screen field according to your layout definition, and by double clicking a 5 digit number those five digits are carried over to the VT02N screen, which is then insufficient as the data in the database has a longer number.

Also I see no sense in showing an incomplete number at all.

[venu_ch8]

Hi Lakshmipathi Sir,

You misunderstood me..

In VL06O T.code -inserting delivery document --execute--clicking on list of delivery documents Last one.

Now, we use to get delivery no, shipment no details.

Now, if we double click on shipment no, system will take us shipment document transaction ...

Now, I Changed the layout details from 7 to 4, here I am not able to enter inside the shipment document (VT03N )

Getting the error --shipment is neither in database nor archive. (Here length of nors changed to 3)

I Shown to developer what is the logic behind this, I will update here once completed.

[Lakshmipathi]

In VL06O, which particular option you were choosing? Also, as already asked by Jurgen, in your first post, you said VT02N and now VL06O. Unless you explain clearly what is the Business process and what exactly you were trying to achieve, it will be very difficult for the forum members to assist you. If I am correct, in VL06O, for none of the options like For Checking, For Goods Issue, standard has provided a layout with Shipment number.

[venu_ch8]

Hi Jurgen sir,

I am talking about VL06O Transaction - List of outbound deliveries.

Here business is changing the layout which is created already.

Now double clicking on shipment no then it normally should take to shipment doc screen ( Ex : if we click on deli - it goes to vL03n)

Now business not able to go VT02N inside, only stops in the main screen of VT02N.

Now, I did changes in variant layout 7 from 6 then works fine.

But my question is why it is not allowing for 6

I Am changing in VL06O -

[JL23]

why do you need to change the field length there, if needed then it is certainly at the end if everything work well with the standard settings.

I am also confused in which transaction you are when changing this field layout and what this actually proofs.

Initially you were talking about VT02N, and VT02N is checking against VTTK

Further if you want check values as they are stored in tables then please remove the activation of "use conversion exit" in the user settings of SE16

[venu_ch8]

Hi Jurgen Sir,

Directly shipment document no I can see from VL06O transaction by putting delivery no.

Below screen

If I click directly, shipment no is getting opened.

Now, I am changing the screen lay out

If 4 Is maintained in the Shipment number system is taking VT01 T.Code and giving the error ( Here system fetching only 3 digits no )

Actual no is : 25410

But 254 is coming

But when i change to 7, it works fine.

Please tell me any OSS nots to be applied ?

[venu_ch8]

Hi Jurgen,

Thank you so much for your update on this.

I will post 2 screen shots once I reached to desktop.

[Former Member]

Hi,

is this the first time your creating the Shipment document

check the number ranges for the shipment documents if they are exhausted.

[JL23]

the first thing you should do is to post your selection screen and a screenshot from SE16 as evidence that the number is there.