ATP check with MTO scenario and delivery with MTS scenario

[mari_saito]

Hi gurus,

In our client business, there is a situation that the ATP check should be done with the MAD to be sent from external system per each SO, and the delivery should be made with unrestricted stock.

To cator the requirement to use external date as MAD, we are thinking about to use either planned order / purchase requisition with account assignment of SO.

(FYI, due to the complexity of the MES, we are not going to use production order as a planned object)

It works fine when I configure the case with MTS scenario (special stock = E and account assignment = M into account in requirement class configuration), but it is not possible to post goods issue with unrestricted stock.

And if I go with MTS scenario (special stock/account assignment = blank in requirement class configuration), then it is of course possible to post goods issue with unrestricted stock but now it is not possible to use planned order / purchase requisition with account assignment of SO during ATP check.

What we want to do is:

ATP check with MTO scenario (only to take into account those future supplies with SO number in the account assignment)
PGI with MTS scenario (use unrestricted stock with PGI from delivery order, without moving them to sales order stock)

I've played around a lot but not been successful with the standard configuration.

Can anyone help and advise me if the requirement can be catored by standard SAP?

[Andreas_Krause]

Hi Mari,

from your description I am not sure if I understood your actual business requirement. What do you want to achieve?

What I derived from your description (might of course be wrong): When checking an order you basically want to limit the confirmation for the customer to the supply elements (purch. ord.) you explicitly created with an assignment to that customer. However, those supply elements are not 'real' but they are just a vehicle to allow you to define a certain quantity that can be used by this customer. The quantity is actually part of the unrestricted stock.

If there is dedicated supply created to cover the demand from the sales order then you have MTO where the supply is protected by being in special stock segment.

If you want to work with unrestricted stock you may want to consider Supply Protection and/or Product Allocation to address your requirement.

Regards,
Andreas

[mari_saito]

Hi Andreas,

Thanks a lot for your answer and sorry that I'm replying you late.

Yes your understanding is almost correct (thank you for reading my complex explanation carefully!).
What the business requires is to confirm quantity and date based on the externally determined information per sales order.

This point, I think we can achieve it with using MTO scenario (requirement class/type to check sales related futurue supplies only)

But how to allocate the stock for delivery creation / PGI, the point is not about protecting the confirmed stock, but about reducing the work to transfer the stock to the specific sales order.

As long as I checked the related configuration, I was not successful to use unrestricted stock without moving it to the sales order stock when I used MTO scenario for my confirmation.

What we want to achieve is to post goods issue directly from unrestricted stock, without seeing the error message "M7184: Sales order stock xxxxxx does not exist".

It would be really appreciated if you could give me further advice.

Best Regards,

Mari

[Andreas_Krause]

Hi Mari,

thanks for clarification.

Well I think there are two parts when it comes to an answer from my side at least: First, from ATP perspective it is correct to only look into specific stock segment in context of MTO. Second, although I am no expert in goods transfer/goods issue I think there is no standard automatism to achieve what you describe as you would normally receipt the goods in MTO scenario directly into special stock segment. However, I understood from your initial post that this is not an option.

Perhaps someone else in the SCN community has a solution or came across such case already and can add comments/solution?!

Regards,
Andreas