NWB Portal & NWB Client based deployment difference for Extension component 3.0 or 4.0

[Former Member]

Hi

Question 1)

As per EHSM Master Guide - We can access the user interface of SAP EHS Management using the following clients:

• NetWeaver Business Client for Desktop
• NetWeaver Business Client for HTML
• NetWeaver Portal

Could you please help me to clear below doubts?

• What is the difference between NetWeaver Business Client (HTML) and NetWeaver Business Portal in terms of EHSM (extension component3.0 /4.0) implementation? please share SAP Note if anyone have for the same.
• On what basis we can suggest client to go for NetWeaver Business Client (HTML) or NetWeaver Business Portal

Question 2)

With reference http://scn.sap.com/thread/3300367  “Mary Kilgo” has mentioned about Add-On Installed on ERP System Operated Side-by-Side to an Earlier ERP System.

Customer is having ECC6.0 with EHP 4 for Classic EHSM and he would like to implement EHSM extension component 3.0/4.0. Then he can manage it by separate SAP server having EHP5 for EHSM extension component. There would be two servers one is EHP4 for Classic EHSM & another is EHP5 for extension component 3.0/4.0

In the above scenario customer is access EHS data from two different systems

• Access Incident & Risk management from EHP5 server
• Product safety , DG, OH can handle through EHP4 server

Please correct me?  Also please mention what would be the implication if we go with above solution ?

Thanks

Sunil Jawalkar

[christoph_bergemann · Accepted solution]

Dear Sunil

regarding your second topic:

Question 2)

With reference http://scn.sap.com/thread/3300367  “Mary Kilgo” has mentioned aboutAdd-On Installed on ERP System Operated Side-by-Side to an Earlier ERP System.

Customer is having ECC6.0 with EHP 4 for Classic EHSM and he would like to implement EHSM extension component 3.0/4.0. Then he can manage it by separate SAP server having EHP5 for EHSM extension component. There would be two servers one is EHP4 for Classic EHSM & another is EHP5 for extension component 3.0/4.0

In the above scenario customer is access EHS data from two different systems

• Access Incident & Risk management from EHP5 server
• Product safety , DG, OH can handle through EHP4 server

Please correct me?  Also please mention what would be the implication if we go with above solution ?

These are my remarks:

If you use two SAP systems (or would use them) you need to take care regarding independent "upgrades"/updates" of the systems. Both solutions have now "fast" development / release cycles. Roughly once a year a new Enhance Package regarding SAP ERP is released and one new version of Component Extension is delivered. Regarding SAP ERP: I know that pwe year two support packages are prepared; i did not check freqneunce of Component Extension.

Normally companies try to avoid that (this type of set up); a "further" con might be:

If you would like to use the EHS data you need to prepare an ALE scenario and in the target system (there you would run Component Extension) you could "migrate" (based on changes) the data to be used in Component Extension (Standard as part of component extension). But in this case you need "basic" SAP EHS Management enabled in target system as well (phrases, specifications etc.) because you need to "book" the IDOCs in target system; therefore there is teh need to align both system in SAP EHS "classic" setup; this leads normally to higher support costs.

This set up does have a higher complexity (e.g. monitoring ALE !). If you would "simply" upgrade ECC6.0 with EHP 4 to e.g. EHP7 (which is released now) and "simply" add Component Extension you have one ! SAP system which is state of the art and avoid ALE transfer etc. I am sorry to say: regarding SAP EHS Management "classic" you will get some hints on SAP marktplace regarding "sizing" of SAP system. I have not checked that something similar  exists for "Component Extension". One "pro" of two seperate solutions might be that (in my opinion) the Component Extension SAP system does need not to have good hardware etc. as you would use "only" any process related to Component Extension in this system. In the SAP ERP "core" system you need to have sizings related to demands of SAP MM, SAP SD, SAP PP etc. (and normally this is clearly a "bigger" SAP system). In Component Etxension system there is now need to prepare WWI servers (to my knowlegde).

Before you start with your project: check demands of e.g. "Archiving", "Support topics" (two systems require higher support activities), "Update/Ugrade topics", performance aspects etc. But this SAP landcape can be managed.

May be you did misinterpret the explanaiton of Mary. I interpret the hint clearly like. you have two different SAP landscapes. One hardware (dev, Qual, prod)  with SAP EHS Management "classic" (running in SAP ERP) and a different hardware for Component Extension (Dev, Qual, Prod) only.

C.B.

[Former Member · Accepted solution]

Hi Sunil

regarding your first topic:

Question 1)

Differences Between NWBC for Desktop and NWBC for HTML

NetWeaver Business Client for HTML (NWBC for HTML) is a light-weight version of NWBC with zero footprint. It is aimed for casual users of NWBC and offers a subset of functionality of the NWBC for Desktop.

The look and feel of NWBC for HTML is very similar to NWBC for Desktop. Thus, the functions available to the individual users also depend on the PFCG roles that are assigned to the users. As with NWBC for Desktop both shell and canvas are available, but with no quick navigation, no menu entries, no Quick Launch, etc.

NWBC for HTML is ABAP only. It uses exactly the same URL as NWBC for Desktop.

For NWBC for HTML no extra installation is needed, it is automatically present within your ABAP system. See below for an overview of the different features offered in NWBC for Desktop and NWBC for HTML.

Key Difference b/w 2 features wise.

coming to recommendation to clients for all users NWBC Portal is suggestible and key users and for superusers NWBC Desktop is preferred .

Balajee