Additional NI Software Idea Exchange

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

Currently there is no specific upgrade path for VeriStand. This affects code reuse and portability when trying to keep up with the latest version. It's understandable that there are going to be limitations, but lack of documentation makes this task very difficult. 

Currently there are caveats when upgrading system definition in VeriStand. It would be helpful to have a tool to help VeriStand developers check and see what type of issue they might run into when upgrading a system definition. Specifically an issue that I've encountered was that my pathing for the upgrade was correct but the mapping of the items turned out wrong. An example of something a tool could help out with is a test for the Model item map. That test would verify that all model maps refer to the fully-qualified path to the item. 

Currently when we try to look into the Model's Parameters we don't really know the difference between he Path and Expression indicators. A tip strip would be helpful in figuring out the correct paths. 

Currently when trying to see errors we need to enlarge the window, scroll through the items, and then take a screenshot of the dialog. This was encountered when trying to share my errors with support. We should make this easier through the proposed ability.

 

 

Hi,

 

We are using the VeriStand SystemDefinition .NET API to automatically generate VeriStand .sdf files. However the SystemDefinitionAPI only seems to work when accessed in 32Bit applications (in our case Matlab/Simulink). As in the future more and more applications will only be available as 64Bit versions, this very convenient VeriStand feature will no longer be usable for us. Thus I strongly suggest for to provide also a 64Bit compatible version of the SystemDefinition .NET API. Interestingly, other VeriStand .NET APIs (like the Execution API) seem to work well even when accessed from 64Bit applications.

 

Best regards,

Thomas Zettl

 

The types of scale is limited to lookup table, polynomial and thermocouple.

For thermocouple the scale is only available for input (electrical -> physical).

It will be interesting to add other scales, like thermocouple on output, time to frequency (1/x).

The best will be the capability to define custom scale.

I would like to able to build Simscape models successfully using the VeriStand Model Framework for my real-time targets. 

When using VeriStand with Source Control SW paths for Real-Time Sequences in the Stimulus Profile Editor need to be customized on every check out because it’s not possible to use a relative path for a Real-Time Sequence in a Stimulus Profile Editor.

Even if the Real-Time Sequence is in the same folder like a Stimulus Profile itself it isn’t found and the path has to be be adjusted.

 

SPE Screenshot direct.JPGSPE Screenshot.JPG

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

                                                                        

So it would be awesome if it would be possible in VeriStand 2017 to use relative paths for a Real-Time Sequences in a Stimulus Profile Editor.

By default Veristand sorts custom devices channel alphabetically.

It is sometimes useful, but most of the time it gets annoying. I would prefer Veristand to show channels in the order they have been created.

Nice to have would be the ability to decide, for a specific custom device, if the channels have to sorted or not.

I created a VI and wrote the description thinking I will retrieve it later in Veristand but it is not the case.

I have to copy and paste it into Veristand.

 

It would be nice to have teh direct copy.

It would be nice to have support for XNET LIN Multiplexing to use with VeriStand. 

We have dozens are targets that are deployed to by an automated system depending on test cases being run. However, we have no API (short of building our own system) to retreive what system definition a target is currently running. This would help us improve our test case speed by only deploying when needed, and also improve configuration management and traceability.

Currently the entire realtime sequence must be set to stop execution on fail or not.  It would be better to allow each realtime sequence call the ability to generate an error message on fail and then allow the user to define if the appropriate action would be to notify only and continue, notify and give option to continue or abort, or to abort on fail and notify.   

This attached file is a picture that shows the outcome of current drag and drop UI setup (above the box), and the desired drag and drop UI setup (below the box).

 

As you can see above the box, when I drag and drop each channel that a user could select for a single digital output, the controls are numerics by default.  It would be quite tedious for a user to drag and drop each required channel, and then interpret the channel's function based on its name alone. Below the box, I right clicked a channel from the tree, and then selected a control based on the datatype that makes sense with respect to the channel's function. It makes sense that the controls are numerics by default because in the Set Channel Value.vi (part of Custom Device API library), the only accepted datatype is Double. However, it would be nice to be able to set a channel's datatype in a custom device's configuration VI. Channel, folder, and device properties can be set using a polymorphic VI that supports many data types. I propose that channel values could be handled in a similar way. Then in the VeriStand UI, when a channel is drag and dropped from the system definition tree, it could be recognized as Boolean, ring, numeric, etc...

 

Further desireable functionality would include a custom control which would allow the user to drag a single channel from the system definition tree. The custom control would be composed of multiple programmer-defined controls whose data would be passed to the driver in a cluster since there could be multiple datatypes. Using the attached file as a visual example, the custom control would programatically update its appearance based on the desired output mode (discrete, PWM, or encoder).

Hello! 

 

It would be extremely usefull and would save lots of frustration if the Veristand Sequence Editor (and all of verstiand for that matter) had undo and redo functions. It is surprizing that software of this caliber does not have such a basic function. I posted this in the main veristand forum and wanted to also make sure it made it into the Idea Exchange.

 

Thanks!

It is very helpful if the expired signal of watchdog timer can be routed in the system as PXI Trigger, and so on. Users can use this function easily to increase reliability of their system without creating a Custom Device.

During the test phase, the possiblity to add a a formula or a conditionnal channel instead of just a number, would be really appreciate.

This feature was included in TIV, a competitor software and we really missed it.

 

add formula.png

 

The Embeded Data Logger and Waveform Data Logger could have some sort of array (either two 1D array or one 2D array) allowing to create custom parameters to the TDMS file. The array could be defined in the SDF or during operation using a LabVIEW VI to pass data to it.

If your project performs data acquisition of channels as Waveform data type(instead of single point), you can't associate this channel to a Aliases. Since the waveform data type receives a buffer of data, you could choose some common options for that channels, such as max buffer value, mean among others.

Since it does not exist, I had to create an workaround by acquiring data as single point and logged them using embedded data logger, then had to use Diadem to create the waveform channel.

In addition, it would also allow to acquire data in higher rates because the waveform acquisition loop runs ins parallel to the PCL.

This feature would be extrememly handy for those who are using waveform acquisition and logging, and would save me some months of work.

When we have to develop add-ons for Veristand, we need to search into examples and existing add-ons to find how to implement some basic or advanced functionalities.

For example : using the node browser control in a labview dialog box, or finding the list of the optional inputs for custom workspace.

 

This is really time consuming !

 

Veristand is missing documentation for add-ons developpers. It would be good to have a Reference Manual like in TestStand.