7 Answers

• 00

  

  spaco 10/23/23, 6:17 PM

  Hello emka,
  is this possibly a question of cost element-based settlement (the activity allocation on the order) or not?
  Best regards
  Ulrich Fahrnschon

  report
• 00

  

  spaco 10/23/23, 6:17 PM

  Apparently not, I have tested both constellations, in both cases the KOAO process is used for billing. So the question is, when KOAL is/becomes relevant.
  Best regards
  Ulrich Fahrnschon

  report
• 00

  

  spaco 10/23/23, 6:17 PM

  I have one more question: Where exactly do you look when you write about KOAO and KOAL? In the above two constellations, the COBK contains the KOAO transaction and the COEP contains the KOAL transaction.
  Best regards
  Ulrich Fahrnschon

  report
• 00

  

  emka (Author)10/23/23, 6:17 PM

  Thanks for the answers! :-)
  So, have looked there again....
  I have two internal orders that have the identical allocation type (both are settled using the allocation type by cost element). So I would exclude your first assumption for the time being.
  Both internal orders are debited with RKL, but only one of them is settled with KOAL. The other one with KOAO. I couldn't really tell any difference in the RKL postings via the line item reports. I have displayed all columns in the KOB1 and tried to compare the two orders with each other.
  I find your second answer very interesting:
  "So the question is when KOAL is/will be relevant."
  -> How can I check this? Both are billed via KO88. So when does KOAO pull and when does KOAL pull? :-)
  I have to test first, but can the whole thing possibly be related to the billing type PER and GES?
  To your third answer:
  I always check the whole thing with the KOB1. So I look at the line items of the internal orders.
  Regarding your third answer, for now I am wondering what exactly is the difference between the two tables? Is COBK the header data (master data) and COEP the line items?

  report
• 00

  

  spaco 10/23/23, 6:17 PM

  Hello emka,
  seems to be really related to the billing method. For whatever reason. Anyway, I just ran an order with settlement type GES instead of PER and otherwise the same data as "above" and now the transaction is KOAO versus KOAL with settlement type PER.
  In COBK (CO document header) in both cases transaction KOAO, the difference in COEP (CO line items), from which yes also the KOB1 is fed.
  Best regards
  Ulrich
  

  Last edited on 15.03.16 17:14

  report
• 00

  

  emka (Author)10/23/23, 6:17 PM

  Thank you very much for your help!
  Yes, that was actually due to the settlement types PER and GES. I have evaluated this across all internal orders and some had only the settlement type GES stored. The whole thing is not really clear to me, but I will change that now so that all are settled via PER.
  Otherwise, thanks again and have a nice weekend!
  P.S.
  If someone knows, why SAP behaves in this case in such a way - I am gladly interested in a clarification. :-)

  report
• 00

  

  Bulling_Fred 10/23/23, 6:18 PM

  Hello,
  Distinction, could also be due to the fact that KOAL, in the settlement of the quantity and unit of measure is carried along.
  (with me the achievement allocation in hours of operating craftsmen). With KOAO there is no quantity entry.
  Greetings
  Fred

  report