Two consignment vendors during stock determination

[Former Member]

Hi all.

Under customizing related to stock determination I included to have prirority own stock over consignment (for both MM and WM).

My question is how is the stock determination performed in consigment when there is stock of two different vendors for the same part?

I read in Help-SAP that stock determination is applied first in MM and then the system forwards this data to WM (WM stock determination int his case is not possible). There is no sort for prices, nor quantity.

In my particular case, I have two steps for production process (REM); in this case no own stocks exists but consingment for two vendors:

1. In MF60 (movment 319) TRs are created (and then TOs) to move materials into 100 storage type. When 2 different vendors are managed I thought that the system would transfer the older quant but when both stocks are in the same storage bin with the same GR date I don´t understand exactly the stock determination made.

2. MFBF is performed to consume all components (movement 261K); here stock determination is executed again first in MM but I don´t know exactly how the system chooses the vendor

Could it be the criteria different in the first step rather than the second one, so I move physically stock from one vendor but informatically consumed the other one? is there a way to avoid this?

Any clarification will be wellcomed!!!

[csaba_szommer]

1) Please read OSS note 365570.

For instance:

- WM dominates
Warehouse Management System WMS picks the necessary quantities independently of the stock category of the materials and only takes the picking strategy into account that is defined in the WMS here (for example, FIFO). 

2)

In the stock determination header table you define the priorities of:

- item table (V_T434K-RAPOS)

- price (V_T434K-RAVAL)

- quantity (V_T434K-RAQUA)

Based on these priorities the system will determine a number for each relevant stock item and then sort the internal table (check include: LMDBFFS0).

Additionally you can use user exit EXIT_SAPLMDBF_002 (XMBF0001) to influence the sort sequence.

So, the vendor id itself has no importence in standrard system from stock determination point of view.

Edited by: Csaba Szommer on May 10, 2011 2:44 PM

[Former Member]

Thanks for the answer, very useful!!

In my case it is important the vendor from which it is going to be consumed. As I explained, material staging is made ONLY in WM to move materials from shelves into production area absed on REM, and the goods issue is made in MM (and then in WM). I am not sure if both processes are connected someway for the stock determination but I am afraid not.

If in WM system is suggesting to move the older quant (from one vendor) this is the vendor that should be consumed during backfklush.

I think the best way to accomplish this flow in order to avoid errors is to peform the first step and then execute the standard program rllq0200 with movement 411K in storage type 100 before backflushing, so it will be always consumed own stock during backflushing. The only problem now is how to launch the program and when.

Any suggestion will be wellomed again!!

Thanks!!!

[csaba_szommer]

In the note it is explained properly that in case of stock determination with WM your search strategy has an important role. So, this "older quant" statement in your description is not true in itself, it only might be true depending on your WM and stock determination settings.

In case of material staging there will be WM movements only and at the time of backflushing, when the IM movement is posted the quants will be consumed from interim storage type (production storage type which is 100 in standard system).

As you said, before backflushing you should run program RLLQ0200 since when posting mvt 261 system will consume only own stock. Whether you trigger the run of this program when material staging related TOs are confirmed (it would be development) or you set it as a job (to run e.g. every 10 minutes), etc it's your decision.

[Former Member]

Thanks again.

I asked development team and we will try to launch report RLLQ0200 after TO confirmation.

I am going to close the issue but before just one commnet. I agree with you when you point "this "older quant" statement in your description is not true in itself, it only might be true depending on your WM and stock determination settings" but the I found a mistake because for the same storage bin in the same storage type, two different quants for differents vendors with different GR date, it was determined the newest quant to be moved into production area. The priority was included with value "2" but changing into "3" it didn´t determined either the older quant.

Best regards.