NI TestStand Idea Exchange

Community Browser
About NI TestStand Idea Exchange

Do you have a feature idea for how to improve NI TestStand? Submit and vote on ideas now!

  1. Browse by label or search in the TestStand Idea Exchange to see if your idea has previously been submitted. If your idea exists sure to vote for the idea by giving it kudos to indicate your approval!
  2. If your idea has not been submitted click Post New Idea to submit a product idea. Be sure to submit a separate post for each idea. Note: the TestStand Idea Exchange is not the appropriate forum to submit technical support questions.
  3. Watch as the community gives your idea kudos and adds their input.
  4. As NI R&D considers the idea, they will change the idea status.
  5. Give kudos to other ideas that you would like to see implemented!

The TestStand R&D team is committed to reviewing every idea submitted via the TestStand Idea Exchange. However, we cannot guarantee the implementation of any TestStand Idea Exchange submission until further documented.

Top Kudoed Authors
cancel
Showing results for 
Search instead for 
Did you mean: 
Post an idea

Recently I tried to add in custom error handling to the NI_DatabaseLogger.seq, but because Plugin Sequence files don't support Engine Callbacks, this was difficult.

 

This idea is to allow model plugins to access Engine Callbacks, so that we can override their behaviour with customised sequences.

In TestStand you can create a comment in a variable, but that comment will be deleted even if the data type of the variable is changed. This does not make too much sense because it happens that the customer needs to change  the data type, and then he has to re-write the comment completely. This feedback comes straight from multiple customers and it makes sense that it should be so.

 

Thank you everybody. Best,

 

Corrado

The Search Directories.Insert method should only insert the directory if it is not already there.

 

The Method includes an index argument, if the directory is already there, then it should move the existing directory to the requested index.

 

While we were working on the shipping examples for DQMH, we discovered that the insert method was creating duplicates every time it was called. We implemented a work around that includes a for loop to check each of the items in the search directories list to see if it is the directory we are trying to insert, if it is, we delete it. Once the for loop ends, then we insert the directory where we want it.

 

You can see a video of the issue and how we worked around it here: DQMH 3.1 Only inserts the Delacor examples directory into Search Directories once

The current placement creates confusion about what you’re actually closing out of when you click it. It makes me hesitate and wonder what I am about to close. 

 

If you click it when there are multiple files open, it just closes out of the tab on top. If you click it when there is only one file open, it closes out of the whole pane, including the Sequences and Variables windows.

 

TestStandX.png

 

It would eliminate any ambiguity if the X for each file were on the tab for that file and if there were a separate X for the pane, like you typically see in tabbed programs.

 

You could also just put an X next to the pin on each little window instead, like the X in the Step Settings pane and the Insertion Palette in the screenshot above. 

The "Report Options" dialog box provides a lot of flexibilty in the way reports are generated for sequences executing under the Batch model.  A new report can be generated for each UUT, for each socket, etc.  One option that appears to be lacking, is to flat out not generate a Batch Report.  Doing a brief search, I found at two other folks who were trying to do the same thing:

 

http://forums.ni.com/t5/NI-TestStand/Disable-Batch-Report-TestStand-2014/td-p/3091476

 

http://forums.ni.com/t5/NI-TestStand/How-do-I-disable-batch-report-in-the-batch-model/td-p/238387

 

Suggest adding another check box to the Report File Pathname on the Report Options dialog box to disable batch reports.

Hello,

 

As we can read in this very good document, we can add information in header for UUT in Report.

It is mentionned that we can do that for StationInfo in the same way:

"The report below includes the custom data in the AdditionalData container.  The process for adding custom Station data is similar, but uses the Parameters.ModelData.StationInfo property instead of Parameters.UUT."

In fact, it doesn't work in TestStand 2014 and later, certainly the same for 2013 because the default report plug-ins doesn't support it as you can see in the help of TestStand 2016.

Maybe NI can add it like it is done for UUT.AdditionalData. The goal is to avoid to put some Station Info in UUT result to show it easily in reports.

 

Best regards.

MaximeR

CLA - CTD

 

In order to keep file clean, sequence analyzer helps in finding "potentially unused variables". To delete such variables, each warning in sequence analyzer result has to be double clicked and then delete has to be pressed to finally remove that variable.

 

In many cases with large sequence file, there could be dozens of unused variables and in a single work-space there are dozens of .seq files.

 

Is it possible to provide a button or some option to remove all unused variables from a sequence file?

Find yourself placing a Sequence Call step and trying to determine the appropriate value to enter for a numeric parameter called "Direction"?  Tired of creating sequences with numeric parameters named like the following: "Direction_0_Up_1_Down_2_Left_3_Right"?

 

The solution is to support the creation of variables with enumerated type within TestStand.  Enums could be created as custom variables and then used as wherever a self-documenting variable is required.

 

 

Enum type creation:

 24440i0A04C051A35273A4

 

 

 

As seen from a Sequence Call step to a subsequence that uses an Enum as a parameter: 

 

24442i5CDD825A78B161E5

 

The settings field can easily become too long to see every active option and there's not necesarily any consistency between steps if they have differing options. What I mean by that is if you only set the "Do Not Record Result" (my favorite) option in one step, it will be on the left of the settings field. But if you now set several options on another step, the settings are not lined up so that it becomes hard to see at a quick glance which steps I forgot to not record (because TS still doesn't default to not recording steps). You have to analyze the settings line for each step.

Current settings.PNG

 

I propose something more graphical and ordered. Here's my idea of at least ordered. The text could be replaced with icons representing each setting.

Ordered settings.PNG

 

Then it would be graphical, ordered, and concise. What more can you ask for?

Why not make it possible for Teststand to generate reports in PDF format?

It would make it a lot easier to send a testreport of a specific board to people not connected to the actual tester.

 

Today we use XML but this requires the stylesheet to be present on the readers pc.

Graphs are also not showing correct unless you do a manual setup of the settings in Internet Explore.

 

PDF would make my life a lot simpler

 

/Michael

 

When creating custom step types, it is highly recommended to use Post-Step for calling execution module instead of Default Module.

Thus, when instanciating a custom step type, parameters passing is not saved within the sequence but only in the step type definition.

This allows to change parameters passing without having to update all the step types instances.

 

In some big test benches, it is intersesting to have low-level step types and high step types based on low level step types.

High level step types execution modules are sequences using low level step types.

 

Since sequence adapter is not available for Post-Step, we are obliged to call the sequence through Default Module.

Thus it can generate problems when adding parameters in sequence call.

 

I suggess to allow Sequence Call in SubStep creation :

 

SequenceAdapterInPostStep.png

 

Jean-Louis Schricke, MESULOG

TestStand Architect

Currently there is only the "Create type from struct" button available, when there is an parameter, that requires an array of structs, in a .NET call

2016-07-13_15-53-49.png

 

What would be nice, is to have the features available, that are available when passing clusters to labview:

2016-07-13_15-58-35.png

 

That is: 

  • The Add Array Item button
  • The Delete/Delete All Item buttons
  • The feature of 'uncollapsing' a struct and setting the values for each field in the struct.

 

I think it would be a great idea to allow the sequence adapter to expand containers like the CVI and LabVIEW adapters do when you are editing the module for the step. 

 

 

See attachment.

Right now, you really can't reliably use anything other than a basic ASCII character set in TestStand, which means that some SI units (such as ohms) cannot be represented in their preferred way (with an omega).  It also means that you can't put non-english characters in your sequence file and reliably have them show up if your sequence file is opened on a different computer with a different language localization (which causes a huge problem if your customer demands support for non-English languages, and has more than one site -- that speaks a different language -- around the world).

 

Make TestStand support Unicode, so we can use the full greek character set for things like units, and so we can type characters from any language in our sequence files, and not have them change to a different character if we open them on a computer with a different localization.

 

TSomega.png

Do you ever write an expression in TestStand with a bunch of parenthesis () and get lost halfway through trying to figure out which pairs are open and which are closed.  Well, I do.  Every Day.  And I spend accumulated hours a week just trying to keep track of which ) goes with which (.  If I'm lucky I can look for a little red item in the expression, or click on the check expression checkbox, but when I have a 'only runtime evaluatable' expression I'm out of luck (which is rather often) ).  Some languages/editors have a parenthesis matching, where the ) your cursor is on causes the matching ( to get bold or flash.  Others start coloring each pair a different color, so it's easy to see them all.  Why can't TestStand do something like this????

TSparenthesis.png

 

There are some macros to specify report file name by expression in report options.

 

Specifying Report File Paths by Expression - NI TestStand 2014 Help - National Instruments
http://zone.ni.com/reference/en-XX/help/370052N-01/tsref/infotopics/specifyreportfilepath_byexpressi...

 

$(FileDate) contains speces in the string, e.g., "2015 12 15". If you want to delete space, you need to use $(FileYear), $(FileMonth), and $(FileDate) instead.

 

But there is no similar expression for time, i. e., there is only $(FileTime) and we do not have any macro such as $(FileHour).

 

SearchAndReplace function doesn't work for the macros. It is very helpful if we have $(FileHour), $(FileMin), and $(FileSec) as standard macros.

 

Before:

ReportOptions 01.png

 

After:

ReportOptions 02.png

 

 

Often working with Full Featured UI and Simple UI codes to create custom interfaces for TS, I noticed that the versions shipped with LV2012 are full of deprecated functions.

Also, most of their implementation go against good LV coding rules.

 

Re-writing them could be a great idea !

Sometimes it is useful to be able to search for instances of custom data types. Unfortunately, there doesn't appear to be a way to do this in TestStand.  It would be really nice if you could search for instances of types in the Types window or perhaps through the Find/Replace utility:

 

Suggestion.png

 

Suggestion2.png

It would be really helpful to have a diagram showing the order in which process model callbacks execute for the sequential, parallel, and batch models and their relations to the various test sockets.  The TestStand documentation does contain a list of the model callbacks, but it would be nice to have them in a diagram format so that a developer doesn't have to open the process model files and figure out that information.

For some reason I was certain this was already in the idea exchange, but I couldn't find it -- so I'll post it.

 

Select Case structures are frustratingly difficult to use if you want one case to support multiple values.

 

In text languages you can often do something like

 

Switch (Foo) {

Case 1:

execute this code;

Case 2:

execute this code;

Case 3:

Case 4:

Case 5:

execute this code;

Case 6:

execute this code;

Default:

execute this code;

}

 

Notice that the case for 3,4,5 is all the same, and I just need to put it in place once.

TestStand can't do this.  You need to do something like this:

how to do select case on multiple values

which is horribly difficult to write, maintain, and understand what is happening.  It would be MUCH easier if select case on multiple values worked like this:

SelectCaseImplementA.png

where it looks just like other text based languages, although it takes up quite a bit of realestate on the screen.

or maybe something like this:

SelectCaseImplementB.png

where I can just type in a comma separated list of allowed values.  The similarity with text based languages disappears here, but it is much smaller on screen (but notice how it shows nicely in the description field) and lines up better with LabVIEW notation.

 

 

Note: LabVIEW already supports doing this, and also supports ranges of values (eg 3, 5..10, 12 for numerics) which would also be nice, and also supports case sensitive and insensitive comparison for cases.