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.

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

StartTimeUnix.png

 

Looking at any step result, there's a TS.StartTime property, but it's referenced against the "the number of seconds since the application initialized the TestStand Engine"

 

What this means is that each step result is referenced against a somewhat arbitrary and changing epoch that isn't recognizable outside any one instance of the TestStand application, let alone by external applications.

 

I'd like to propose adding TS.StartTimeUnix, which contains the absolute time the step started.

I've added this in our model customization plugins, but to convert the epoch to UNIX I have to perform this calculation:

 

Seconds(False)-Seconds(True) + Parameters.Result->TS.StartTime

 

Why I'm asking for this:

In our step result database table, we've added a column for STEP_START_DATE_TIME which is absolute UTC time. To populate this I have to go through the gymnastics above. I revisited this code today and thought, "What silliness. This should be something natively supported." (Other than that I have no strong opinion on the matter)

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

 

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.

Almost all of our analog measurements are specified in %: example

 

a Power Supply DMM measurement limit is 24.00Vdc +/- 5%

 

We typically have 100+ measurements like this in a project

 

 

Why not include it in the default step types as an optional selection?

I sure would use it, so would my team.

 

I agree that it should not alter existing programs using the default step, but I believe that this feature should have been in Teststand when it was first released.

 

I have run across this in both analog measurements, and the results from an ADC

Think a limit of 0x234 +3%, -7%

 

 

It would be helpful to be able to provide a regular expression (like Labview Match Pattern) as a string value test limit.  We often look for a pattern of data within a string rather than a constant.

Maybe also a regular expression function within the built in functions within TestStand expressions would be a help also.  This could provide more flexibility if a user needs it.  For example adding option to gain match position, and match length as well as give the option to search in reverse and ignore case.

Currently, to export properties which are part of an array, such as the limits of a multiple numeric limit test, you have to specify each index of the array separately, like in the first screen shot, or else you get all of the raw XML, which is difficult to interpret and use. 

 

exports2.JPG

 

exports1.JPG

 

 

This is both labor intensive and unituitive. . If instead we had the option to export the array with the "?" and have it parse the information out like in picture 1, it would be much simpler to use.

 

Regards,

 

Kyle Mozdzyn

Applications Engineering

National Instruments 

Problem:

I create a model plugin and add some model callbacks to it.  Then I want to access those model callbacks from my client file.  I have to now add them to the process model so they show up in the list when I go to add callbacks.  I get that I can add it as a blue sequence and it will work   However, that is confusing to other developers if they don't know the plugin has the callback in it.  It is painful to change the process model every time I create a new plugin because the process model could be used on hundreds of machines whereas my plugin may only be needed for 1 or 2 machines.

 

Solution:

Option 1: Show all callbacks from any plugins in the callback dialog list

 

Option 2: create a configurable list of model callbacks.  Basically add any sequence files marked as model to the list and it will show all the callbacks from the sequence files in the list to the client, unless it cannot find the file in any search directory.  Then it wouldn't show.

 

Option 3: From the add callback dialog allow the user to browse to a sequence file which contains model callbacks

 

I think adding this functionality will greatly help in making the plugins more abstracted from the process models.  Just saying.

 

Cheers,

Hello,

 

It would be nice if there were an easy means of programmatically loading a database schema for result processing.

 

Here's my context for asking:

We have a custom database schema that must be loaded on all of our stations and we'd prefer that it "just works" when our customized database result processing plugin is loaded.

 

I managed to accomplish this by studying the format of TestStandDatabaseSchemas.ini and writing a parser to insert our schema as necessary. This was a bit painful, though, and the possibility of the format changing without notice has crossed my mind.

 

Thanks as usual to the R&D team.  (Assuming this idea gets some traction!  Smiley Wink)

 

Kind regards,

 

Mr. Jim

 

 

A nice feature of reporting is the ability to form the report file pathname using an expression.  However, since the path is resolved before the client Sequence file is executed, you cannot use properties populated in the client sequence file as part of the report pathname. Currently the only way to accomplish this without modifying the model or reportOptions callback is by including the <UUTStatus> macro in the path expression, which enables a portion of the process model which copies the report to a new path based on the result of the UUT:

 1.png

 

I propose that we add an option to force the report path to be re-evaluated after the client sequence to allow users to include properties evaluated in the client sequence file in the report file path without needing to include the <UUTStatus> macro.  (basically exposing the ReportOptions.NewFileNameForEachUUTStatus property in the dialog)

 

2.png

Would like to have the choice of "No Comparison" for a string value test like there is for numeric value test.

 

jvh

As NI has acknowledged (here, here) for more than 5 years, the Build .sql File button creates schemas with errors.  This is even true for the default schemas in the left of the dialog.  Would be great if NI would go ahead and correct this.  BTW - to create default tables in the meantime, a developer should use a SQL file located here:  <TestStand>\Components\Models\TestStandModels\Database

 

 

TestStand Database Options Dialog.png

I think it'd be a good idea to have a simple (checkbox?) option to change graph scaling in TestStand Reports to logarithmic. There doesn't appear to be a simple way to do this right now.

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

 

1) TestStand functions Time() and Date() only output local format; they should support both local and UTC format. (Like LabVIEW's Format Date/Time String)

 
2) TestStand configuration options should have a setting(s) for:
report time format local / UTC
datalogging time format local / UTC

 

 

When a 2d array is added to the report as table, you get the following table:

 

 

[0][0]  00

[0][1]  01

[1][0]  10

[1][1]  01

 

It would be better to have a table like this:

      [0] [1]

[0]  00  10

[1]  10  11

 

Currently this needs to be implememented in the stylesheet. But for a lot of users, this is a complex workaround.

 

 

In the report options, when you have selected to include measurements and insert graphs, it would be nice if TestStand could provide an option to display multiple numeric limit test measurements in graphical form. To expand on that, when the value goes outside of a limit, it would be nice to have a red point on the graph to show where this occurred at. 

 

mnlt.jpg

It would be nice to be able to log all requirement links during execution in the report. I think the option should be similar to "Include Attributes".

 

Currently, loging requirement links in steps is easy as additional result (preconfigured, just include it in step settings).

But logging requirement links in sequences or sequence files is not easily done. It requires either a dummy step which transfers the requirement list to the step requirements or an overelaborate expression in the sequence call step.

 

I think a drop down would be a good option:

"Log requirements list:

- For all steps

- For steps and sequences

- For steps, sequences and sequence files"

 

I am not sure if more options are necessary as empty requirement lists wouldn't appear in the report at all.

 

Norbert

It would be nice if Teststand came with a pre built sequence or example to Generate a Test Report of UUT Results that are already in the database.

The suggestion is to support logging a datetime with millisecond accuracy to an sql database with an NI_DataOperation step.

I tried to implement this, but the milliseconds are not written to the database.

It would be very usefull to support this feature.

 

The datetime field in the sql database is defined as follows:

CREATE TABLE

dbo.UUT_RESULTS (

UUT_STARTTIME datetime NOT NULL

)

 

The datetime is logged to the database, but only up to the seconds, although the format string is defined as "mm-dd-yyyy hh:ii:ss.sss" and the string does contain the milliseconds e.g. "2-10-2016 11:49:15.505".

Software Details: TestStand  version 2010 SP1, Operating System:  Windows 7
 
 

We in our company are done now several test systems where the best process model is Batch Model. Customers however does not want other reports than UUT report from each test socket. Simple skipping of batch report generation is not possible at the moment particularly now when plug-in structure has arrive for joy of us all. For me this wanted feature is late now because I manage to find out solution, with a great support of local NI team. Finally this feature of easy batch report disabling would serve future generations and today newbies. They will save hundres of hours when they don't have to use try&fail -method to skip those few meaningful steps but just make one selection in report options.