Hello Experts,

We've been working in the Paper industry for a couple of years now & use the IS-Mill DIMP functionality ONLY to the extent of being able to configure our Orders in ECC & in allowing combined Orders in ECC. We, as most of the industry does, use an external trim tool that optimizes the making of Sales Orders using a Trim Sheet. We use enhancements in the APO system to combine orders at the planned order level. Below are a couple of topics that seem peculiar to me in this environment & was wanting to understand how others in the industry handle these constraints -

• Configuring FERT BOM's: Given that we are majority MTO & that are a uncontrollable production over-runs, it would have made sense to have some functionality that would enable us to use up the configured (KMAT) products (the over-runs that otherwise lie on the floor as unused inventory). We know, only the KMAT BOM's can be configured, while the FERT's cannot.
• Production Threshold: Once a Paper Machine starts production, it is sub-optimal to produce below a certain threshold quantity. Based on the run & the machine lets take for ex: 1500sft of paper is the minimum that will have to be made. This is a hard constraint. I did not however see any provision in APO to use these constraints during the Planned Order creation.

It would be interesting to hear comments from experts in this area.

Cheers

Hello Experts,

I have couple of questions and would be thankful for any input on this.

1. Which table would have any indicator / information to show that a particular order is a combined order and its associated production orders?

2. I need to send the combined order to MII and am using LOIPRO03 but do not see the associated production order in the IDoc. How can these be obtained?

3. The one indicator I see in the IDoc is field FLG_MLTPS = X which I assume is an indicator that this is a combined order. Is this assumption correct?

Would appreciate your comments on the above.

Thanks in advance.

Srinivas

Hello Experts,

I am using the above FM to confirm a combined order. The structures are populated with necessary details (to the best of my understanding) including I_ORDER_CONF_FLAG = X and I_END_CONF = X.

When this is executed, I get an error message "No settlement rule exists for object number".

The combined order has the two original orders as the settlement objects and in turn original orders have material numbers as the settlement objects. The original orders were created against sales order with variant configuration.

Can some one please let me know what is that I might be missing?

Thanks in advance

Srinivas

Hi Gurus,

Please tell me some business process of Steel Industry.

Regards

Das

I know, a lot of things are written about Cloud and Cloud solutions - and I do not want to repeat to much of that. Still I think it is worth to take a look into what cloud means in Mill Products & Mining companies.

Generally, I have the impression, that we are certainly not among the frontrunners in this shift in deployment in these industries. And I think this is really logical - investments in asstes in these companies are long-term investments and are not that easy to build up or to close again. This kind of mental pattern is probably also used in IT investments.

When I talk to Mill Products & Mining people, I have the impression that it really depends on the region they are located, how savy they are on moving (parts of) their IT investment in the cloud. While I face a lot of hesitance in Europe, especially in Germany, I seem to run into open doors when I talk to people in Latin America.

And in addition, I find it very different, if I have a chat with someone from IT or with someone from the business. The business guys are usually rather positive - they see a lot of advantages in deploying a cloud solution:

• it should be up and running in a very short timeframe so that they can start with a new/improved process rather quickly
• they expect it to be easier to swap after some time - if necessary - to a new solution from another supplier
• they see the specialised functionality provided for their business needs

The IT persons thoughts are a bit different usually - very often they see some potentially risky points in moving into the cloud:

• what about integrating data that needs to go into / is coming from the cloud solution? Who takes care about this integration point?
• what about downtime? Who is reliable if the business can not do their work due to whatever kind of failure (solution, network...)? It is just another layer adding complexity to the landscape.
• What about data security?

And probably they are both right - and can probably learn a lot from each other. As I expect that cloud is here to stay for a good time, I think we need to make up our mind also on where we find a good fit also in Mill Products & Mining industries...

First of all - I would expect it is in areas, that are not sooooo different from other industries, so I would see it as a natural move to start with rather administrative processes such as:

• MRO procurement
• Travel expense reporting
• Knowledge management/sharing tools

A little bit advanced, I would alredy see the usage in sales. As our products are on the one hand simple, but on the other hand are not that simple to reflect in the system (in SAP language, you usually use variant configuration and batches to a high degree), a consumer product type of approach in sales is feasable for Mill Products & Mining companies.

And the real value is probably in processes that are closer to where the value is created - in production, but that is something I see further down the line...

I would really like to hear some examples from you - are you on the IT side or on the business side? What is your thought on 'The Cloud'? From which part of the world are you?

Hello Experts,

Can some one please share the FM / BAPI that can be used for IS Mill related transaction codes such as MILL_CUT, MILL_OC etc. Also it would help a great deal if similar such information is shared also for confirmation of combined orders.

Thanks in advance

Srinivas

Dear Sir,

Can anybody provide an addon ppt in production process for textiles industry

Hello experts,

I have been trying to confirm a combined order by calling different FMs available for the purpose.

I have tried using  MILL_OC_ORDER_CONFIRMATION and MILL_OC_ORDER_CONFIRM_POST so far.

Apart from passing combined order number and other parameters, I am also passing ATRKZ = Z in the structure CAUFVD.

When executed, the FM gets executed and I do not get any message (error or other otherwise). But the order confirmation is not posted.

Can some one please give me some inputs as to what parameters to check and which FM to use and how?

Thanks in advance.

Srinivas

I work in a paper manufacturing company , which uses SAP. Now they want to make pulp on some of the machines and sell it as the finished good. So,we need to set up the SAP for that.

This is a new functionality for my organization. so,I am looking for some guidance , as how this should be handled. Any suggestions, documentations or info about either standard or best practices in this regard, will be greatly appreciated.

Thanks in advance.

P.R

Hello,

We are in the early process of evaluating IS-Mills DIMP functionality based on ECC 6.0 and with SCM 7.0 and have a question related to gATP check for Batch Managed materials.

1) Question

·      

       Is it possible to perform a gATP check based on the Sales Order UOM and not the product Base UOM so that the order can be confirmed based on pieces in stock regardless of quantity available in Base UOM? (See scenario below)

2) Scenario 

• Product Base unit of Measure is pounds (LB)
• Material is batch managed and is kept in inventory as stock material
• Sales order entered for unit of measure – “Roll”.
• Order quantity = 1 roll
• Per Material Master alternative UOM, 1 Roll = 1,000 LBs
• In stock, we have 1 batch representing 1 Roll however actual batch weight is 980 lbs (due to theoretical vs actual weight variances).
• When gATP check is executed in our system, it checks based on base UOM (lbs) and will never allow a full confirmation based on the customer ordered quantity of 1  Roll.

3) Business Requirement

• If customer ordered in UOM of 1 Roll and there is 1 Roll available in stock, Sales order line item should be fully confirmed regardless of weight of that actual batch in stock

We understand it is possible in ECC and ECC-DIMP systems, to define batch specific units of measure and define batches as “Single Unit batches”. We also saw there is also functionality in IS-Mills called “Sales Order Fulfillment with Requirements Reduction in Pieces but are not clear how this integrates into the gATP check.

4) Feedback requested

• Options in standard ECC (non IS-Mills) with APO
• Options in IS-Mills DIMP ECC with APO

Thank you

Experts,

I wanted to understand if anyone has had experience in dealing with the Mill/Paper environment where an APO integration was involved. To be more specific, these industries need, what we call the "combined production orders". While we can use Block planning in APO (alongwith CDP) & promise orders using Capable-to-Promise to customers, what has remained a question to my mind is how do we create the combined production orders automatically (via CIF) once we've set the conversion from APO?

Most of the implementations use some kind of external Trim optimization engines (greycon, X-trim, I see that SAP has a tool called TrimLight). SAP clearly has made provisions within the APO programming to connect with the trim tools. Are there instances of implementations that do not use these Trim tools & yet combine orders in ECC? If yes, how? I know the IS-Mill functionality has provisions to combine Sales Orders, Plnd Orders & Production Orders.

Cheers

Dear all, the way steel industry products are bought, manufactured and sold it is clear that to map them into SAP , one would need Variant Configuration with immense amounts of Macro authoring for rules. The trouble is in promising the date of delivery, or rather honoring it once you have promised. This can only be done by utilizing a combination of GATP and PPDS. Basically using CTP.

My request to Gurus here is, if anyone has been in similar circumstances, can she / he guide me with some information, material ...or just continuing this discussion. We are about to enter a large scale SAP implementation with above scenario as a focus area.

regards

Does anybody know if there are any best practice Mill Products documents available?

Regards

Warren Nash

Hello,

We are testing the integration of classified ECC batches into APO and are encountering a CIF SYSFAIL error when transferring batch class 023 to APO.

SYSFAIL occuring in Function Modules /SAPAPO/CIF_CHR30_INB and SAPAPO/CIF_CLA30_INB. Status Text of CIF error only indicates "::000"

We have followed the links for integration of Class/Characteristics and integration of Batches and have done the steps outlined below.

http://help.sap.com/saphelp_scm70/helpdata/en/b3/12813b680c250fe10000000a114084/content.htm?frameset=/en/b3/12813b680c250fe10000000a114084/frameset.htm

http://help.sap.com/saphelp_scm70/helpdata/en/48/646f4be7fb4f93e10000000a42189d/content.htm?frameset=/en/b3/12813b680c250fe10000000a114084/frameset.htm

Background

ECC 6.0 DIMP/ SCM 7.0

Steps taken

1) We have created a batch class 023 and variant class 300 with the same exact technical name (ie Z_ROLL)

2) Within each class, we have designated specific characteristics to be APO relevant via Organizational Area assignment (ie Org Area)

3) Within SCM config, we have configured Organizational area for class type 230 (ie Cross-Application Components Classification SystemClasses Maintain Object Types and Class Types) , assigning it to table /SAPAPO/VERSKEY

*Note - Configuration scheme in APO is CDP

4) Created and generated specific CIF integration model for Class/Characteristic object including the Org Area "A" filter and class types 300 and 023

5) Upon Activating CIF integration model, class 300 is succesfully transferred to APO (we see the APO class "Z_ROLL" in the system under class type 300 and APO Class type 400)...HOWEVER we do not see batcg class type 230 in APO.

6) Looking at SMQ2 (inbound APO queues), we see the CIF SYFAIL mentioned above

We are looking for any thoughts on potential missing configuration steps/other causes of this  specific SYSFAIL. Message searches on this SYSFAIL did not yield anything specific. We are beginning debugging of the CIF queue in parallel.

Thank you 

Hi,

We need to use the resource/storage location linked to recall the storage location code while automatic goods receipt in the confirmation screen such that to link the production line to a specific storage location. Thanks

A.Rouby

The first fully integrated Enterprise Financial Modelling product for the Mining Industries

Original article: http://www.rpmglobal.com/news-and-media/the-first-fully-integrated-enterprise-financial-modelling-product-specifically-targeted-at-the-mining-industry

             ###

RungePincockMinarco (RPM) has today launched the first fully integrated EFM application specifically built for the mining industry, XERAS for Enterprise ™.

         BRISBANE, Australia (May 30, 2013)

XERAS for Enterprise represents the next generation of RPM’s industry leading budgeting and financial modelling software product XERAS ™, which is used by major mining companies all over the world.

Launched with the support of global ERP powerhouse SAP AG (SAP), XERAS for Enterprise seamlessly integrates SAP’s Financial and Maintenance Management modules with the financial modelling capabilities of XERAS. This integration allows for unprecedented levels of financial visibility and cost control, from individual mine sites through to corporate management reporting systems.

Speaking at the product’s launch in Brisbane, Australia, RPM’s Chief Executive Officer Richard Mathews said, “The focus of the industry has clearly shifted to driving productivity improvements. Across our global client base we are seeing a growing demand from Boards and senior management for increased visibility, control and predictability of capital and operating cost structures. The ability to explain the difference between actual and planned financial results and to predict the financial implications of changes in the mining environment is of critical importance to our customers.”

Mr. Mathews went on to say, “We’ve listened to what our customers have been telling us and specifically asking for. They wanted us to take the visibility they get at an operational level from our market leading XERAS product and extend it across the Enterprise and we have done that with SAP.”

“Our relationship with SAP makes perfect sense given our almost identical customer base in the industry. This product has been a long time in the making and we are thrilled to bring it to market now. Never before has a complex mining company had the ability to see the immediate financial impacts of a change in an operational mine plan reflected in real time in a corporate budgeting and reforecasting systems.”

XERAS for Enterprise represents the first of RPM’s technology products to take the strategic step forward into the enterprise environment. XERAS for Enterprise follows closely behind the successful launch of RPM’s enterprise enabled XERAS 8.0 last week.

Commenting on this milestone, Board member and company founder, Dr. Ian Runge said, “The conversion of physical attributes of a mine plan into a cost by consumable category was the basis for the original development of XERAS over 20 years ago. To see this natural extension in which mining executives now have full financial visibility from the mine site all the way through to the corporate ERP is very satisfying to say the least.”

With a centralised platform for conducting analysis and generating different scenarios using auditable and validated information, XERAS for Enterprise bridges the gap between the mine and the boardroom. It exposes the strengths and weaknesses of the mine plan and provides critical information which management can use to act upon.

XERAS for Enterprise provides many new significant business benefits which Darren Rostron, RPM’s XERAS Product Manager explains.

“XERAS for Enterprise gives our customers the ability to perform in depth plan vs. actuals analysis. It not only provides variance reporting but also lets you get under the covers so you can truly understand the reasons and underlying logic behind the causes.

“It allows you to reforecast dynamically on the go. When unexpected events occur, such as equipment failure, weather events, or a major drop in commodity prices XERAS for Enterprise quickly helps you understand the financial impact on the business and make informed decisions.

“XERAS for Enterprise standardises financial costing models, enabling fast consolidation and central control of underlying assumptions. The days of manually rolling up financial models into giant spreadsheets are over. Its rapid consolidation of multiple budgets allows operational and financial managers to understand their future financial position across their entire global operations.

“The improved cost visibility provided by XERAS for Enterprise means that senior management are able to drill down through all the layers of the financial plan, right through to the underlying base assumptions at a particular site if they want.

“It makes the crucial job of financial modelling, budgeting and reforecasting much simpler. With XERAS for Enterprise, it’s easier for financial managers to make decisions with confidence.

“Having a single source of truth for financial planning is paramount in today’s mining environment. We endeavor to provide better access to information for technical and operational decision-making, which in turn delivers more efficient mining and certainty for key stakeholders.”

Mr. Mathews concluded by saying, “One of the most frequently asked questions in mining today is why actual costs are different to the original budget or the recent reforecast. XERAS for Enterprise gives you the power to answer this question quickly and accurately right from your desktop.”

“If you want to consolidate all your financial costing models at the push of a button, reforecast rapidly and have full financial drill-down to your operational costing models, XERAS for Enterprise is the perfect solution for you.”

-END-

For further information or to arrange an interview, please contact:

Michael Baldwin

Chief Marketing Officer

+61 407 518 885

globalmarketing@rpmglobal.com

Hello Experts,

We've been working in the Paper industry for a couple of years now & use the IS-Mill DIMP functionality ONLY to the extent of being able to configure our Orders in ECC & in allowing combined Orders in ECC. We, as most of the industry does, use an external trim tool that optimizes the making of Sales Orders using a Trim Sheet. We use enhancements in the APO system to combine orders at the planned order level. Below are a couple of topics that seem peculiar to me in this environment & was wanting to understand how others in the industry handle these constraints -

• Configuring FERT BOM's: Given that we are majority MTO & that are a uncontrollable production over-runs, it would have made sense to have some functionality that would enable us to use up the configured (KMAT) products (the over-runs that otherwise lie on the floor as unused inventory). We know, only the KMAT BOM's can be configured, while the FERT's cannot.
• Production Threshold: Once a Paper Machine starts production, it is sub-optimal to produce below a certain threshold quantity. Based on the run & the machine lets take for ex: 1500sft of paper is the minimum that will have to be made. This is a hard constraint. I did not however see any provision in APO to use these constraints during the Planned Order creation.

It would be interesting to hear comments from experts in this area.

Cheers

Processing the Fast Entry screen of the Multi Item Order seems very manual.  Can anyone tell me what I’m doing wrong?

We are in a Make to Stock environment making rolls of bubble wrap.  We are currently operating without variant configuration. 

MRP generates planned orders for Finished Goods, several of which use the same extrusion. The difference in the finished goods are things like:  length of roll; width of roll; type of core; type of outer bag; and labeling. We want to create one multi item production order to produce all of the finished goods that come from the common extrusion for the week.

I can use CO40 Conversion of Planned Order to convert the first Finished Good's Planned Order to the Production Order but then I must use the Fast Entry screen to manually add other FG header materials and the quantities required of each.  I cannot make use of the “convert planned order to production order” functionality for these subsequent header materials.  Am I missing something here?  It seems very manual not to be able to make use of the MRP generated planned orders that exist for the other Finished Goods!

Thank you for your help!

I'm trying to create a material in ECC with Material Type 'MCFE'. IS-DIMP 617 is installed for the Mill Products. This populates 2 mandatory fields 'Vers.cat.' (VTYPE) and 'Maint.Auth' on the first screen of material master. The values cannot be entered manually. Where and how to maintain values for these fields?

Hello Experts,

I am using the above FM to confirm a combined order. The structures are populated with necessary details (to the best of my understanding) including I_ORDER_CONF_FLAG = X and I_END_CONF = X.

When this is executed, I get an error message "No settlement rule exists for object number".

The combined order has the two original orders as the settlement objects and in turn original orders have material numbers as the settlement objects. The original orders were created against sales order with variant configuration.

Can some one please let me know what is that I might be missing?

Thanks in advance

Srinivas