Lesson 5 of 5
Testing technical objects
9 min
Listen to this lesson
Technical objects are the foundation of every maintenance process, so their tests come first in the cycle. If a functional location is missing, a notification cannot be created against it. If the cost center is wrong, every order settles wrongly. If installation fails, the history of a machine is broken from day one. In a conversion, most of these objects come across from ECC, so the tests check two things: that the data arrived intact, and that the processes that change it still work.
Test cases for technical objects
| Test | Steps | Expected result and evidence |
|---|---|---|
| Create functional location | Create 1710-ASM-L1-W04 with CMCFL | Label accepted; superior location 1710-ASM-L1; visible in IH01 |
| Reject an invalid label | Try 1710-ASM-LINE1-W04 | Label rejected because it breaks the edit mask |
| Create equipment | Create spare winding machine 10000453, category machines | Record saved with cost center and planning plant from Organization view |
| Install equipment | Install 10000453 at 1710-ASM-L1-W04 from a given date and time | Usage list shows a new period starting at that date and time |
| Dismantle and reinstall | Dismantle motor 10000470, install spare 10000471 | Two new usage periods with the correct dates and times |
| Blocked installation | Install a second machine at a location with individual installation | System refuses the installation |
| Serialized equipment to stock | Dismantle serialized motor into storage location 171S | Serial number shows in stock in 171S |
| BOM in order | Create an order on 10000451 and pick parts from its BOM | Components carry the BOM's material numbers; reservation and requisition created |
| Classification search | Search all motors with POWER_KW = 15 | Hit list matches the manual count |
Contoso's technical object test set.
The usage list is the evidence
For installation tests, a screenshot of a success message proves little. The evidence is the equipment's usage list: each installation and dismantling should appear as a separate period, with the date and time entered in the test, the right functional location, and the right superior equipment. Check it from both sides: from the equipment (where has this motor been?) and from the functional location (what has been installed here?). The two views must agree.
- BeforeRecord the current usage period of motor 10000470 and spare 10000471
- ActDismantle 10000470 at 06:00; install 10000471 at 08:30
- Expected10000470: period ends 06:00, new period in storage. 10000471: new period in machine 10000451 from 08:30
- AfterRead both usage lists and the machine's structure in IH03
- CompareDates, times and locations match the test record exactly
Conversion checks
For Contoso's conversion, Priya adds a reconciliation: the number of functional locations, equipment records and maintenance BOMs per plant in ECC (EP1) before the mock conversion, compared with SAP S/4HANA after it. Rosa samples twenty pieces of equipment across both plants and compares their usage lists, classification values and cost centers field by field. Differences must be zero or explained. The usage history from ECC must still be readable after the conversion; it is years of maintenance knowledge.
What would you do?
A tester reports that installing spare motor 10000471 "passed" and attaches a screenshot of the save message. Priya reviews the evidence. What should she ask for?
Keep the test data recipes. A test that says "install a motor" is hard to repeat; a test that says "dismantle 10000470 from 10000451 at 06:00, install 10000471 at 08:30, expected periods as listed" can be rerun in every mock conversion and after every SAP S/4HANA feature pack. Over time, these recipes become Contoso's regression set for technical objects.
| Object | Count in EP1 (plants 1710/1720) | Count in CMQ after Mock 2 | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| Functional locations | 1,842 / 1,106 | 1,842 / 1,106 | Equal |
| Equipment | 3,415 / 2,078 | 3,415 / 2,078 | Equal |
| Maintenance BOMs (usage 4) | 612 / 344 | 612 / 344 | Equal |
| Equipment with class MOTOR values | 1,190 / 702 | 1,190 / 702 | Equal; 1 custom report adapted |
Illustrative course data: Contoso's technical object reconciliation after Mock 2.
- Test technical objects first; every maintenance process depends on them.
- Include negative tests: invalid labels and blocked installations must be refused.
- Use the usage list, read from both the equipment and the functional location, as installation evidence.
- In a conversion, reconcile counts and sample records field by field.
Check your understanding · not graded
Lesson check
1. What is the best evidence that an equipment installation test passed?
2. Why include a test that tries an invalid functional location label?
3. What should a conversion reconciliation of technical objects compare?
4. From which two sides should installation history be checked?