NI TestStand Idea Exchange

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

We use VIPM to manage our reuse in LabVIEW, and it works wonderfully, but there's nothing for TestStand.  I'd like to be able to create and distribute packages with like functions, roll-back/forward project-based configurations, etc, within the TestStand development environment.  I know that a lot of stuff can be done manually, but it's monolithic - I need something that's modular.

I would like to see Shared or Separate FileGlobals available to all Types of Sequence File not just limited to Batch or Parallel Process Models.

 

Regards

Ray Farmer

Currently, you have to choose between these options on each file (and the only indication of the choice is in the sequence file properties dialog).  Both options can be quite useful in the Parallel and Batch Model (of course there isn't much of a difference in the Sequential Model).  Clunky workarounds also exist like using Shared File Globals and having arrays for anything per-execution or using Separate File Globals while putting anything shared in Station Globals or in LabVIEW Functional Globals, but I think native support for both in the same file would be much cleaner and easier.

This could be just having two "FileGlobals" categories in the Variables pane (I prefer this), or it could be a right-click option on each individual File Global.

 

TomOrr0W_1-1729015156875.png

TomOrr0W_0-1729014466032.png

 

      I am currently working on a project using the Teststand software's seq editor. This project has many steps, with nearly 3000 steps. During my seq editing and debugging process, sometimes I need to repeatedly jump in different sections and change some parameters. Oh my God, quickly finding a step between so many steps is driving me crazy, and I feel like my life is getting dark.

      So I was thinking, why can't Teststand add a serial number display to the left of the seq edit box? This way, whether I am positioning a certain step or telling my colleagues which line needs to be changed, I simply need to obtain or convey a line number information. I believe that adding this information to an editing form is not particularly difficult.

      Why not make it better to use?

      Brothers, it's already 2023. Are you willing to continue enduring this pain?

It would be nice to have an Auto-populating folder option for TestStand projects much the same way that LabVIEW project do.  

 

Folders added to TestStand projects are snapshots of the folder's contents when added.  Any files added to the folder on disk afterwards are not marked for inclusion with the deployment at analysis time.  This behavior is fine as a default.

 

However, there are times when you do want to automatically include all files in a folder.  Having an auto-populating folder option would mark the folder and all its contents for inclusion automatically with the deployment at analysis time.  After analysis is over the user could still choose to uncheck any files they wish before selecting the build button.

 

From version to version, it's only natural that developers will be adding new files to established folders.  Since the TestStand project doesn't aid in development activities, it's easy for folks to forget to add files while they're developing.  We often have a faulty build or two with each release because necessary files aren't making it into the build.  We ultimately have to delete the folders in the project and re-add them, then go through the hassle of fixing the paths and included files. An auto-populating folder option that integrates with the build utility would save us time and headaches.

 

I would like to see commands like AllOf, AnyOf, AND, OR, etc. work with boolean arrays as inputs.

Hello everybody,
it should be possible to mark a sequence file for a time based autosave during development of the file.

 

Also possible would be a temp file which is saved automatically, so no data will be lost, if TestStand or the computer crashes during the development of a sequence file.

 

That would be nice 🙂

Regards

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

Like described in this article I have to build Custom Data Types manually to pass enum strings to TestStand.

It would be very nice if I could import LabVIEW Enum TypeDefs into Teststand as Custom Data Types. This way I could save a lot of time.

I find myself creating arrays alot and I usually have the array already made in excel or note pad or another type of file in which the list might be around 20 or more entries.  Now in the past I've come up with a simple way to import the arrayed data from a file, but however i don't believe everyone is doing this and generally I don't need the file in which gets imported (usually a simpler version of the master).  So i suggest could we add the support to copy from excel or from notepad and paste special into an array.

 

TS_Paste.png

 

 

 Conclusion:

This idea might not be the best, fastest, or easiest way to import arrays from other programs, but the idea would be to find an easy way to import arrays.

 

Thanks,

 

Hi,

 

As in the subject: add ability to sign the sequence with the digital signature.

 

It would be good in this feature will be able to access the certificates stored not only in Windows containers, as it is done in LV now, but the containers located on external carriers USB cards, card readers.

 

 

Hi,

 

Exactly as in subject: add shortcut key to File-->Unload All modules.

 

It is very annoying to go again and again through File-->Unload All after each iteration of the module development.

Hello,

 

For the moment, the precondition builder editor only allow to check steps status or to create custom conditions.

 

It would be nice to add a way to test the current sequence Status.

 

To handle this, i create my own custom condition by using the runtime variables Runstate.SequenceFailed and  Runstate.SequenceError.

The problem is that these variables doesn't exist at edit time.

 

I think that adding this feature to the precondition builder editor could simplify our work.

 

Thanks.

 

Manu.

Background --

 

When I have a step in a sequence file, and I change the Load Option of the step, and I go to Sequence File Properties and change the global Load Option to something other than "use step load option", I get red exclamation marks next to my load options on my steps to let me know that that value is overridden by the global sequence file option.

 

HOWEVER

if I look at the Result Recording Option, I see the step result recording option configured for that step.  But, that can be overridden by the Sequence Properties  -> "Disable Result Recording for All Steps".  I would expect that I would get a similar red exclamation mark next to the result recording option in my step properties configuration page to let me know that that value is overridden by the sequence option.  Possibly also update the settings column to include "result recording disabled" message like it would if I flagged just that step option to disable result recording (although I am a little more on the fence about this part)

 

highlightResultRecordingOption.png

 

On a similar but different topic, it is horribly hard to understand whether a sequence itself has configured to disable results recording.  I need to go through each sequence individually and look at the sequence properties.  Adding a settings column for the sequence list view would be nice.

 

The ability to type in a property string to search for:

 

properties finder.png

I currently use property loader to load calibration data from a file during test.  I populate this file using export.  The problem is that now I want to write a calibration sequence as well and there is no property exporter step to do this programatically in TestStand.  I will end up writing my own code to create this to emulate the way that Import/Export does it but it would be nice if this was supported as a TestStand step.

When editing in CVI, I often find it useful to copy the contents of 'Find Results' into an edit window so I can edit/parse/filter/sort the information.  I would like to be able to do the same thing in the TestStand Sequence Editor.  Saving the Find Results to a plain text file would be an acceptable alternative.

 

Thanks,

JoeN

When a step cannot be preloaded due to the prototype being out of date (if, for example, a VI was updated after it had been placed in a sequence), an error message pops up telling the user what is wrong. This can then be used to track down where the step is that is causing the issue. Some of the error descriptions get quite lengthy.

 

While this does provide the user with information as to where the error is occuring, the only option is to click "OK", which then closes the message. In long sequences with many subsequence calls and steps (many of which may be similarily named), it is cumbersome to find the specific step that was listed in the error message that is now no longer viewable. At times I find myself having to get to the general area where I thought the error was listed as occuring, and then click RUN again just to get the error message to pop up again, and then continue narrowing it down (repeating this process several times). This is very cumbersome.

 

There is a simple solution to this issue. The easiest method would be to simply include a second button in the error message that brings you directly to the step that is causing the issue (with it selected in the step window). This would solve the main issue of trying to find the step that was listed in the error message as being the problem.

 

To go a step further, there could be a button that simply activates the "reload step prototype" that you have to do once you are at the step that is out of date.

 

To go even a step further, and solve another issue I would like to see remedied, there could be the option of reloading all steps that call that module (since they are now likely all out of date and need the prototype refreshed). Currently, if a VI is called repeated throughout the sequence, then each one must be found and have its prototype reloaded manually. This is very tedious.

 

There may be other preloading errors besides the "prototype out of date" issue (ex: VI not found, etc.) that could use the same functionality of a button that brings you to the offending step, but this is what I am running into at the moment.

 

Regards,

When putting values into an array of number local variable, there is little documentation specifying the correct way to input values in an array. The documentation needs to be improve and/or the error message that pops when evaluating your statement should be fixed to better demonstrate the problem. The current error states "Variable or property types do not match or are not compatible. This value will cause a run-time error." A getting started documentation that addresses variable syntax would also be helpful, these ideas will improve ease of use for people working in TestStand. The typical syntax when working with arrays is the use of a bracket [] and the error that appears when using a bracket for arrays is even less helpful. Attached is an image of an example of the fixed error that would demonstrate this problem more thoroughly (The red highlighted section would be a potential change to the errors).

 

Capture.PNG

Finding syntactical errors -- missing arguments, arguments of the wrong type, ... -- involves either manual inspection or running a sequence to see where it croaks.  TestStand could use the equivalent of a broken run arrow from the LabVIEW environment.  As in the LabVIEW environment, clicking on that broken run arrow would present a list of the syntactical errors, and double-clicking on one of the entries in that list would take you to the entry itself.