cancel
Showing results for 
Search instead for 
Did you mean: 

Cutting the batch where-used list and start batch history from scratch

0 Kudos

Dear community

When we print a certificate, the specifications and their results recorded come from the inspection lot of the batch. This inspection lot takes information from the inspection plan assigned. As a result, the certificate printed would have the value range of the inspection plan used in the inspection lot.

Good, but now I want to eliminate duplicated specifications in my inspection plans because I want to print one of them in the certificate for that batch. The specification was not printed before so the system does not care if it is duplicated. First I change the inspection plan.

But then, generating a new manual inspection lot and printing a certificate for it did not give me any result because the system considers the original inspection lot specifications  (where I used my old inspection plan version that now I discarded) and I see this "old" inspection lot in the batch where-used list.

Therefore, I want to cut the batch where-used network so the batch history starts anew and if I change the inspection plan, the system will finally print the certificate following my new inspection plan, so to say.

How to do this?

Thank you

M.

Accepted Solutions (1)

Accepted Solutions (1)

busyaban7
Active Contributor
0 Kudos

Hi Maria,

I have some open clarifications to understand your requirement better.

Please can you suggest if you are using Standard SAP Printouts in QC22 or you are creating QC printout through some custom mechanism. Please can you help me understand what exactly you mean by "Duplicated Specification" means.

It seems, you are using the specification (means MIC ranges) associated to the inspection plan in your printout. But insp lot has old MIC range selected, which doesn't hold good now as per new specification business has adopted. So you basically wish to print the new MIC ranges of the updated inspection plan, and not based on the range based on which it was inspected earlier. Is that understanding correct?

Thanks in advance for your clarifications.

Arijit


0 Kudos

Thank you dear Arijit,

Totally standard QC22 is used, and of course, the standard printouts of certificates for delivery notes used in SAP SD. There is no custom mechanism used here for this.

In relation to the "duplicated specification", when the system sees a duplicated MIC in the inspection plan, it does not print it (even if in the inspection plan you assigned different inspection methods) in the certificate.

Regarding your last paragraph, yes, your understanding of the issue is perfect.

Thanks again,

M

busyaban7
Active Contributor
0 Kudos

Hi Maria,

I think, you can try a custom SAP Script, attached to the certificate profile linked to your material, where this issue is getting addressed programmatically. You may consider taking help form ABAP team in case if this is workable.

Thanks,

Arijit

former_member42743
Active Contributor
0 Kudos

Ok.. I'm not sure I totally follow.

When you pick  01 - "insp. specifications from QM"  in the COA profile being used, the specs shown should not come from the inspection plans.

According to the info on the FM (and my knowledge of it), the spes should be looked for first in the inspection lot it self.  These are usually stored in table QAMV.  Once the specs are copied to that table, (when the inspection lot is released), they can't usually be changed except in rare cases.  Changing or deleting an inspection plan is not one of them.  Only if the lot is in a state where the sample can reset and the specifications reread from the plan. In which case you can't issue a COA anyway because you haven't recorded any results!

If it can't find inspection lot info, it takes the specs from the MIC.  It doesn't say what it does if no MIC is found so I guess you could have created all your characteristics in plans and not used any MIC's.  That's not a good idea and not a good design so I'm hoping that's not the case!  Let us know if it is.

Below is a screen shot of the config for the 01 - insp. specifications from QM.  I also included the help screen from the FM.  Can you verify that your 01 selecion is using the same FM as shown below and provided by SAP?

What you'll need to do is configure a new choice for the origin of specifications, say a Z1 - "specs from current plan".  You'll then need to have your developers take the above function module,  copy it to a new "Z" function module, delete all the logic about getting the specs from the inspection lot and instead put in all the logic needed to find the right inspection plan, get the specifications and return the correct value to the SAP script.  You shouldn't need to change the SAP script.  Just the FM that retrieves the specs for you.

Craig

0 Kudos

Hello Craig

Sorry for the late answer, I had some personal issues.

Thank you as always for your answers. I switched from our "3 Material spec from production chain" to option "1 Insp specifications from QM" and it worked.

Clear explanation of the issue:

Our issue was that an inspection lot was completed using an inspection plan whose specifications were wrong. So I said, no problem, I correct the ranges in the inspection plan and generate a new certificate manually. But the old ranges from the previous plan were brought.

After that as the first approach failed, I created an 89 lot, using the results I had but attaching the new version of my plan. But the system kept picking the old ranges!

After your answer, I changed the profile to option 1 (the system gave me a warning) and it printed the certificate with the values of the actual inspection plan that was correct.

The Customizing settings

In relation with your last point and your screenshot; We had option 3 and the Help menu says that here "When the specifications are loaded, the system takes the table of materials that  is specified in the certificate profile into account: The batch where-used lists are loaded first, starting with the batch and material in the document....." (the underline is mine) This means that I always had the same results because in the batch history I had the old "wrong" ranges in the first inspection lot of the history.

If there are no issues like a plan with errors, this option 3 behaved well always.

Awards

I acknowledged you for the answer and Arijit for his help

regards

M.

Answers (0)