GATP and BOM explosion with material and/or location substitution

[Clemenss]

Hi,

I'm a developer and not too familiar with GATP process.

In our retail project we have BOMs for drinks with deposit bottles. Now we have to handle the product and/or location substitution in GATP.

Consultants told me that the deposit bottles are not marked as ATP-relevant because they come with the drink anyway. In SAP standard a substitution will create a new sub-item and change the item type of the original header item as not relevant for anything (pricing etc.).

As mentioned in SAP notes, the required BOM explosion is not done, consultant say this would lead to a 3-level hierarchy (original item, substitution item as sub-item, new deposit bottle as sub-item of sub-item). 3-level hierarchy could not be handled.

Also, we are asked by the customer to overwrite the original item with the (rule-based) substituted item putting original material/amount/location into item Z-fields.

I don't know exactly what kind of modification and user exit handling will be required to make the whole process work correct.

We are working on a sandbox release with GATP done in SCM system.

I'd be happy to gain some insight or just to hear about experiences with such (standard) situations.

Best regards

Clemens

Please excuse me for re.posting this question here as I got no reply in forum "SCM APO Production Planning, Interfaces and Global ATP"

[Former Member]

Clemens

Unless you are doing Multi-level ATP or CTP, the deposit bottles (components of finished goods) dont have any role in GATP. I did not quite understand the business requirements related to deposit bottles.

Overwriting the original item with the substituted item is going to be very technically complex. I hope your client/ consultant has really thought through all scenarios such as ATP Check during Sales Order entry (Create/ Change), ATP check during Credit hold release, Orders created through EDI/ BAPI, Backorder Processing, Multiple Product/ Location substitution.

Having said that, see if this approach works - When the material and plant is entered on the sales order, before the actual ATP check, call the APO availability check BAPI in simulation mode with Product/ Location substitution. Use the results of this simulation ATP check to replace the original material/ plant which will then trigger another ATP check where you dont have rule substitution. See if user exit in ECC Material Determination functionality can be used.

At the risk of repeating myself - this is complex. And that might be why SAP doesnt provide a standard way to do it !

Rishi Menon

[Clemenss]

Hi Rishi,

first of all thank's a ton for your valuable suggestions. I will check this simulation mode as soon as possible.

Again: I'm not a functional consultant, so I'm not familiar with BOM handling. Our functionals said, that a product or plant substitution by GATP would not delete the original sub-item (the deposit bottle) but lead to a new sub-item carrying the substituted artice. Then a BOM explosion could not be done by the system because it would lead to a three-level BOM (original article/plant on original position with non-relevant position type, sub-position with substituted article/plant and (should but can not) sub-sub-position with new deposit.

I'm not sure whether 3-level-structure is not possible in Retail or if it is due to company-specific handling.

Thank you for supporting my original opinion that overwriting the original item will be a very complex and thus risky task. The danger is reduced because we are working on a pure evaluation system landscape that will never be set productive. But the management expects it will work and functions can be integrated in a later release.

We will discuss your suggestion and hopefully we can do the simulation and substitution before bom explosion. Still I have also serious doubts because GATP would never know what it did for us - no idea about the consequences.

I'd be happy if I got more input here.

Thanks and regards,

Clemens