How To Fix FMCA_BRF118 - Fact type sequence &1 is not multi-valued

FMCA_BRF118 - Overview

• Message type: E = Error

• Message class: FMCA_BRF - FMCA -> BRF Interface

• Message number: 118

• Message text: Fact type sequence &1 is not multi-valued

Self-Explanatory Message

Since SAP believes that this specific error message is 'self-explanatory,' no more information has been given.The majority of messages in the SAP system have a message text, however this is frequently insufficient to comprehend or resolve the problem.

To make things easier, more detailed information is frequently added to describe the issue, how to fix it, and the necessary steps or configuration modifications.

Unfortunately, there isn't any extra information in this error notice.

What else can you do?

First, use our AnswerBot below to get a possible cause and solution (requires a premium subscription).

Also, review the in-depth Common Questions & Answers listed below; you could discover a solution there or be able to connect with others who have faced similar challenges.

You can also try searching the SAP support portal (support.sap.com) but you need a special user ID to access it. It is possible that an SAP support note exists that provides additional details about the mistake or even steps for fixing it.

FMCA_BRF118 - Details

• The SAP error message FMCA_BRF118, which states "Fact type sequence &1 is not multi-valued," typically occurs in the context of Business Rule Framework (BRF+) when working with fact types in decision tables or rules. This error indicates that the fact type you are trying to use is expected to be multi-valued, but it is defined as a single-valued fact type.
  
  Cause:
  
  Fact Type Definition: The fact type in question is defined as a single-valued type, meaning it can only hold one value at a time.
  Rule Configuration: The rule or decision table is configured to expect a multi-valued fact type, which leads to a mismatch.
  Data Input: The data being processed may be attempting to input multiple values into a fact type that does not support it.
  
  
  Solution:
  
  
  Check Fact Type Definition: 
  
  Go to the BRF+ workbench and check the definition of the fact type &1. Ensure that it is defined as a multi-valued fact type