We’re having issues synchronizing Material BOMs between SAP PLM 2022 and our manufacturing system when variant configuration attributes are involved. The sync interface validates attribute mappings but fails when the attribute values don’t have exact matches in the target system. We’ve configured the MBOM sync interface with attribute mapping rules, but the validation is too strict and rejects BOMs with minor attribute differences.
Error log shows:
MBOM_SYNC_ERROR: Attribute mismatch
Source: COLOR = 'Blue-Metallic'
Target: COLOR = 'Blue Metallic' (space vs hyphen)
Validation: FAILED - Exact match required
The pre-sync validation mechanism is blocking legitimate BOMs from transferring because of trivial formatting differences in attribute values. We need cross-system attribute compatibility without having to manually standardize thousands of variant attributes. Has anyone dealt with attribute mapping flexibility in the MBOM sync interface?
In addition to changing the matching mode, you should implement attribute value mapping tables. The MBOM sync interface supports lookup tables where you can define equivalent values across systems. For example, map ‘Blue-Metallic’ to ‘Blue Metallic’ so the sync recognizes them as the same value. This is more maintainable than changing the actual master data in either system. The mapping tables are maintained through the sync interface configuration transactions.
For attribute name mapping, you need to configure the ‘Attribute Cross-Reference’ table separately from the value mapping. This table maps source attribute names to target attribute names. Once you set up ‘Finish Type’ → ‘Surface Treatment’ in the cross-reference, the sync interface will automatically use the correct target attribute name during synchronization. The value mapping then applies to the actual attribute values. Both mappings work together during the validation phase.
Thanks, that’s helpful. I found the ‘Attribute Matching Mode’ setting and changed it to ‘Normalized’, which reduced the failures significantly. However, we still have issues with attributes that have completely different naming conventions between systems (like ‘Finish Type’ in PLM vs ‘Surface Treatment’ in manufacturing). Can the mapping tables handle attribute name differences, or do they only work for value mappings?
The strict validation is actually a configurable setting in the MBOM sync interface customizing. Look for the ‘Attribute Matching Mode’ parameter - it can be set to ‘Exact’, ‘Normalized’, or ‘Fuzzy’. Normalized mode will ignore case differences and extra whitespace. You can also define transformation rules that apply to attribute values before comparison, such as removing hyphens or standardizing spacing.