Hello Eugene,

I have seen the "Asset Tree" discussion as you said.

Concerning your comments I totally agree with you: As long as an equipment is in a storage location in MM, MM "thinks" as you say, that it will stay in its storage location as long as it will not be "consumed" for being attached to a functional location. Thats the problem. Only solution I see: Consume it by a project in order to place it on a functional location. But I am very sceptical, because each time when you return it to the warehouse you have to reenter it in SAP MM.

On the other hand, a little outside the box thinking: An equipment (even a PRT) should not be in MM (as it is not a material), it should be in PM.

The "stock report" in this case would moreover be the information about "what do I have in my functional location warehouse?"

Thanks for discussing this topic with me Eugene!

This message has been edited. Last edited by: Martin_,

SAP has introduced a solution to this in SAP Enterprise version 4.7 extension set 1.10. It is Equipment Installation and dismantling with simultaneous goods movement.
See SAP Release Notes for version 470 x 110 Chapter 17 section 17.7.9.1

Hello David I saw 5 lines of release note to make installation / dismental together with material document

With SAP ssng one transaction and one step itself is a great challange, how does two in one will reduce the pain!!

Has any one used this new functionality? Can some expert give their opinion on advantage of this trnasaction from PLM extention 1.10?

Hello MadMax,

follwing up the MM approach another idea would be to handle your functional locations as part of the warehouse as you mentioned.
So all you have to do when using these parts is a goods movement from the stock to the functional location and backwards after the job has been finished.

@David: Thank you for the link - that is really interesting!

Does anybody know where to find this transaction? What do you have to do?

@Bob: Do you know this transaction? In which context are you interested to use the installation and removal with simultaneous goods movement?

@maintiger: Ich hab nicht ganz verstanden was du meinst: Die Idee wäre das "warehouse" in MM zu verwalten, und sobald ich etwas anfange zu benutzen, muss ich es von MM in PM transferieren... War es das was du mir sagen wolltest? Falls ja, dann ist eben die Sorge dass ich in dem Moment 2 Transaktionen machen müsste... es sei denn, man könnte es, so wie es David sagt, in einer einzigen Transaktion von MM rausbuchen und gleichzeitig ins Lager buchen.

Sorry about talking in german, it's just that I want to be sure that I understood what maintiger wanted to say...

Hello Mad Max,

I do not know the transaction; it is not mentioned in the release note.

I hoped some expert will give opinion and share their experience with us and let us know if this two in one transaction works well or has additional needs.

For me the person who issues the material is not same as person that dismantles or installs equipment. How one transaction can be executed together!? Who will do this work warehouse person or Maintenance engineer?

Also as I understand we may have to add few more tabs in master data! I need to be sure before I do anything on my development server.

Experts please advice.

Rgds

Hello MadMax,

I understand that you want to use some tools for temporary use on the plant. These tools will come from a store and you want know where these tools are located when in use.
So I suggest to handle them just as "normal" parts in the warehouse (MM). So you can find them very easy while they are not in use (e.g. warehouse_1).
Now you add some some storage locations to your MM. These storage locations are the places where you use your tools (e.q. the manufacturing place of your turbines, let's call it M_turbine).
When you need the tool you just have to make a material movement (from the storage location warehouse_1 to M_turbine). Seen from the MM view, the tool is stil on stock.
After the work has been finished make a material movement back from M_turbine to warehouse_1).

And here is the German text:
Ich gehe davon aus, dass Du Werkzeuge für eine kurze Zeit verwenden willst. Diese werden in einem Lager verwaltet und Du möchtest wissen, wo diese Werkzeuge zu finden sind, wenn Sie benutzt werden.
Daher schlage ich vor, die Werkzeuge als "normale" Teile in MM zu verwalten. Damit können Sie jederzeit gefunden werden, wenn sie nicht in Benutzung sind (z.B. warehouse_1). Jetzt musst Du noch weitere Lagerplätze in MM hinzufügen (z.B. den Montageplatz der Turbinen, nennen wir ihn M_turbine).
Wird nun ein Werkzeug benötigt, dann musst Du nur eine Materialbewegung von warehouse_1 nach M_turbine gemacht werden.
Nach Beendigung der Arbeit geht dann das Werkzeug wieder zurück auf den Lagerort warehouse_1.

Hello Maintiger,

thanks for your answer! Now I understood your idea... You want to create more MM storage locations in order to say that our equipment is at m_turbine.

There is one problem with that approach: The system can never tell you when an equipment is available and when not (in my point of view), because as soon it is in a storage location it is in stock. MM doesn't know that the storage location m_turbine means that the equipment is used, and neither it knows for how long. (In this case, the notion PRT would be missing, as you would not really assign a PRT to a work order).

Looking forward to your comment! ;-)

This message has been edited. Last edited by: Martin_,

Hello Martin_,

you asked for my comment. Here it is:
Just set up a good naming your "production stores" . Maybe you call them something "prod_xxxx". Then you will see that a tool in stoe "prod_m_turbine" is in use (if the system has accurate data

Maybe this comment may help you.

Where are you located in Germany ?

What is really wanted here? Storage locations in MM represent warehouses or satellite stores which are divided into zones and/or locations or bins. I won't create any arbitrary storage locations if these do not exist physically. Tools should be handled using PRT.

If the current set up is not quite working, it's better to assess your approach whether it's the right one than to push ahead with quick fixes.

An old word of wisdom in Maintenance says that each tool shall be used for the specific job it was designed for. If you want to screw something in, use a screwdriver do not use a knife.

Same idea, the MM module is for Materials Management: raw materials, assemblies, WIP, finish products, spare parts; not for tools.

Hello Eugene,

I agree with your oppinion, if you can do (within SAP) what you want and what can be payed.
In that case PRT will be the best solution.
If the SAP team is not willing to implement this, I think that such a work around can solve the requirements Martin_ is talking about (if MM is implemented).

The SAP team should meet users' rquirements, not the users follow the SAP team's agenda esp'ly if the team consist of IT.

They should but in my experience they won't.

In many projects (especially PM projects) I see the fact that the maintenance department can't define the requirements for the software implementation as they don't know much about the software. And the PM module is one of the latest parts of SAP R/3 which gets implemented. So most of the system is already "running" and "can't" be changed.