Problem with outbound-driven opportunistic cross-docking

[artemixa]

Hi there!

I have an issue with outbound-driven opportunistic cross-docking performing in embedded EWM S/4 HANA 1909. According to the book at SAP Press "Warehouse Management with SAP S/4HANA", the process is:

I activated Cross-Docking at warehouse and product levels, specified Storage Type Search Sequence with Goods Receipt zone and Stock Determination. I assigned all necessary indicators at product master data.

So Firstly, I created inbound (with HU) and outbound deliveries and transferred them into EWM. Secondly, I performed Goods Receipt for InbDel.

Thirdly, I created opened warehouse task for PTWY activity:

Now I'm trying to create outbound warehouse task. As I understand, inbound WT should be cancelled, then Cross-Docking task should be created. But instead the system gives me the message:

But if the WT for PTWY was cancelled, the Cross-Docking WT would be created without any issues.

It would be pleasure for me to get any ideas for solving that problem.

P. S. My problem is linked with that issue: https://answers.sap.com/questions/11707380/inbound-driven-ewm-opp-cross-docking-issues.html. But I couldn't find an appropriate answer for solving the problem.

Also I've read sap.help about CD in EWM (https://help.sap.com/viewer/9832125c23154a179bfa1784cdc9577a/2020.001/en-US/92d39a281861405696552d7b5340f81a.html) but it also coudn't help me.

P. P. S. A wonderful guide for Opportunistic Cross-Docking here: https://blogs.sap.com/2020/05/22/embedded-ewm-opportunistic-cross-docking.

UPD: 04.06.2021

Scr1

Scr2

Scr3

[JuergenPitz · Accepted solution]

Hi,

I can not help with the problem why the system gives you an error message when trying to find stock in your storage type 0080, but maybe something about why the system does not cancel the WT.

First of all: the documentation says "it cancels the putaway WT without violating the FIFO principle". So, the system only cancels the existing WT if the stock which is being picked in the WT has a newer GR date when the stock which is in the inbound delivery. Now the question is: when can this ever be the case? Is the stock you have in the warehouse really with a newer GR date then the one which is still in the GR zone? How the hell do you manage that?

What the book does not describe: the second condition which has to be met, is that the open WO is in a RF queue. Why is that? Because only then the system can assume that the WO is not in processing yet (if there is not RF queue, somebody could be already on the way for picking). But let's simply assume that this is the case.

So why does the system not cancel the WT? Coming back to the FIFO topic. You wrote, that when the open WT is canceled (or does not exist yet), then CD does work. So in this case, we do not care about any GR date?

Yes, that is true. The standard implementation does of course not care about FIFO. Because that is something you have to build by yourself. When do you want to violate FIFO and by how much.

So what about that thing for cancelation?

You can make one simple test: open the customizing node "Determine Storage Type Search Sequence for Stock Removal". Find the line which is used for the creation of the pick WT. This is the same, where in the storage type search sequence, which is found, you have to add the goods receipt area which you want to consider for CD. What is the removal rule? Probably FIFO. Remove that rule, save the entry, and then try the scenario again. If you have not done anything in the BAdI implementation, I would bet then the open WT is cancelled?

And this is were it gets funny... The documentation is very... optimistic? We do not check if FIFO is violated or not. All we check is if the removal rule uses the GR date or the best-before date - and if this is the case, then we simply do not cancel the WT (that this is checked is what at least a colleague explained me after debugging the BAdI when we tried to understand what happens. I myself can not read that.).

Brgds

Juergen

---

Want to learn EWM?
Check for EWM courses: https://training.sap.com/search?q=ewm
Get a SAP Learning Hub Subscription: https://training.sap.com/learninghub

And it is EWM. NOT eWM - Duh!
And if your question includes the word "transfer order" - do NOT tag the question with Extended Warehouse Management!

[JuergenPitz · Accepted solution]

Hi,

and as bad as my programming skills are (none existing), now I even found the piece of coding. And it is even simpler then what I assumed:

"IF lv_fifo = abap_true AND
lt_ordim_o_2_iopp IS NOT INITIAL.
* Don't touch existing WT's if stock removal rule is FIFO
CLEAR lt_ordim_o_2_iopp.
CONTINUE.
ENDIF."

Again: the decision if and how much you want to violate FIFO is yours - and that means you have to build that in your own BAdI implementation. It always amazes me to read when customers implement the standard BAdI implementations and notice what happens then...

Brgds

Juergen

[artemixa · Accepted solution]

Hello, juergen.pitz!

Thank you for your time spending to this problem!

1) The issue, the system gives me an error message when trying to find stock in the storage type 0080, occurred because of I have't have any materials here. I've done such way for the system have only one choice from what place to pick the stock (GR zone).

2) My opened WO is in RF queue:

3) According to your advice, I deleted "FIFO" Stock Removal Rule from Storage Type Search Sequence:

But it still does not work. The opened WT is not canceled and message is the same.

When I tried to enter the values manually to create PICK WT, the system asked me to confirm opened WT for HU:

I have no implementation of any custom BADI.

Could you name the program, which checks existing of stock removal rule (program, from which one you have send the piece of code)?

UPD. Sorry, the forum does not give me the permission to attach any screenshots in the comment.

I attached them in the topic above.

[JuergenPitz · Accepted solution]

Hi,

you have an HU in the inbound delivery? What is the quantity in the inbound delivery and in the outbound delivery order? If the outbound delivery order requires less then the full HU, the standard does not take a partial quantity. And I have not checked the process with a HU at all, not sure if a cancellation occurs then.

Brgds

Juergen

[artemixa · Accepted solution]

Thank you, juergen.pitz, for your help!

Now it's gonna be okay. WT without HU was canceled. So, in case to manage Cross-Docking and cancelation WT, the stock should be ruled without HU.

However, another problem is appeared: how to perform Cross-Docking for the items, which are relevant for automatic packaging? May be by the implementing of custom's BADI? But, I think, this is the topic for other question.