cancel
Showing results for 
Search instead for 
Did you mean: 

EHS - QM Interface. Inspection Plan Creation

Former Member
0 Kudos
819

Hi all,

Has anyone used EHS-QM interface before?

I am tryng to create inspection plan characteristics from specification database and it is not working properly.

The customizing that I have done is:

1. We have Specify Environment parameters (i.e. EHQMEP_CONTROLKEY)

2. We have verify Product Safety, Quality Management and Material Management pre-requisites

3. We have filled Mapping Table (CGQM) with and standard value assignment type (SAP_EHS_1013_016) and a class characteristic (SAP_EHS_1013_016_EC_TEMP)

Then in CG02 we have:

1. We have completed a specification in CG02 with Usage QM and a Validity Area

2. In CG02 we create a inspection plan and select rating QM or Group all ratings

3. No Inspection Plan to be created is available

Any clue on what the problem migth be?

Best Regards,

Alberto

Message was edited by:

Alberto Garcí

Accepted Solutions (0)

Answers (3)

Answers (3)

former_member212503
Participant
0 Kudos

I am facing the same issue while creating new inspection plan through cg02

former_member42743
Active Contributor
0 Kudos

Alberto,

I don't have any help for you on this specifically.  But I did work with an EHS guy about 3-4 years ago on 4.7C(?) to get this working.  It was a bear but we finally got it going.  So it can be done.  Unfortunately I was very remiss in documenting that and I have no notes to share. 

Maybe I didn't bother because we found the functionality to be extremely limited at the time.  The plans we could create were very limited and we were unable to take advantage of much of the functionality in the plans.  I'm hoping that this has improved in newer versions.  It would be so cool to be able to maintain official product specs in EHS and have them update and transfer into QM.

If you get this working, I would love to get you to put up a document or blog in the QM area about your experience and sucess with this.  Any technical barriers and obstacles you ran into would be great too. I hope you'll consider it.

FF

christoph_bergemann
Active Contributor
0 Kudos

Dear all

1.) it might be helful to open a new thread regarding your topic in parallel EH&S FORUM

2.) To my knowlegde witH SAP ECC 6.0 EnhancementPackage 5 EH&S QM interface has been enlarged. I am sorry. My inquiry in internet regarding that was not successful. PLease check SAP Markeptplace as I am pretty sure that there was a change/enhancement

3.) we are not using this intertace but have played around a little bit.

The interfaceh EH&S => QM is in my opion "not well" designed. First of all:

a.) you need to trigger it manually (use of transaciton CG02)

b.) to my knowledge no change in EHST is tarbnsferred automatically to QM; e.g. if flash point has changed or density etc. the user is in charge to make sure that the data will be tranferred into QM

c.) the "trick" to map validity areas to plant (excatly it is a plant plant mapping)  is not goiod approach. Reason:

Normally a density is defined with usage "PUBLIC/EG_WORLD). The meaining is:

1.) can be used e.g. in Materiaql Safety data sheet (public document)  and other EH&S document

Now you can use (you must not) priorized ratings (e.g. rating QM does have higher priority as PUBLIC) in EH&S logic to transfer data from EHS& to QM but to my knowlegde you must make the "plant" <=> "PLant" by "hand" using furtehre validity areas.

That means fi you would like to use density 1 g/cm3 for all plants (and the QM inspecions plans) then you must enter any plant of relevance as validity area to map that to the inspection plan (which to my knowlegde once again is plant specific).

I am not sure if the EH&S QM interface supports you really to "start" immedeatly the generation of inspection plans regardgin all plants,. The link to SAP online help above will lead you directly in the right chapter.

Regarding phrases: sorry the analysis of thsi interfaxce has been done long ago; but phrases are "textes" which can have "any length". It might be a problme to map that to QM Plan. If you check that link above you will lead to this statement:

  • n the Function module column you can use a function module to define yourself how specification data is to be converted to an inspection characteristic.

As an example, use the function module EHQM09_BUILD_CHA_NO_COMP to develop analogous modules.

Therefore if necessary you could exchange this fuinciotn module by a customer specific one.

May be this helps

C.B.

PS: Regarding changes in EH&S QM Interface ECC 6.0/EnhPack 5: : may be refer to http://www.scribd.com/doc/58761766/37/Quality-Management

PPS: may be of interest could be: http://www.consolut.com/en/s/sap-ides-access/d/s/doc/Q-EHQM0904

0 Kudos

Hi Alberto,

Have you created the number ranges for the EHS-QM interface?

  • EHQMN_CODE
  • EHQMN_GRP
  • EHQMN_SLST

Remember there's also a log via transaction EHQL. Hope this helps!

Regards, Christiaan

former_member42743
Active Contributor
0 Kudos

Christiaan,

As I indicated to Alberto, there is not a lot of info on this functionality.  We'd love to have a blog or document in the QM area on this.  If you have this working or tested it, I would really like to hear your thoughts on it.

FF

Former Member
0 Kudos

Hello Firefighter,

Do you remember the set up for the number ranges. I have set up both internal (number) and external (aplhanumeric0 number ranges for each of the three 93) EHS-->QM objects. yet I still get a number range error in the EHQL log.

I was wondering if it might have to do with the use of phrases as values in the QM related fields that have number ranges from a subscription(Ex. NO-0000-0012345) verses using an internally generated phrase like "Yes" with teh phrase ID of 100000000012. Maybe the EHS-->QM interface uses internal numeric only? Do you know?

Do you maybe remember the NR settings?

former_member42743
Active Contributor
0 Kudos

See this: http://help.sap.com/saphelp_470/helpdata/en/4d/7d0a3aec6f3b42e10000000a11402f/content.htm

Item 2 - Other Settnigs - concerning the number ranges indicate you cannot use non-numeric without implementing the user exit specified.

So you are probably correct since your example starts with "NO" and dashes.

But I can't say for sure since I haven't worked with this since my first exposure to it as already reported here.

If you get it to work, we would love to see a blog about it.

FF