Use Auto Schedule dynamic lock

Question

Hello
The setup is as follows:
My customer wants to run 4 individual test fixtures off the same PC. Each test fixture will run at least 4 parallel tests at the same time using the parallel model. For now we can assume that it is the same sequence that is executed across all sockets and fixtures. This may change but the same lock conditions will persist over different sequences.
What i need to do is to lock steps and resources, both internaly in a fixture and across all fixtures. Here is where my problem lies.
If i use a regular lock then i can acomplish this, all i need to do is keep track of what fixture is actually executing the steps. I can lock on a parameter, say Parameter.Fixture. Or just lock globaly ignoring what fixture is actually executing.
But if i try to Use Auto scheduling then this will not work. Im not all that familiar with the auto schedule functionality but it looks like if i use the same parameter, it locks on the actual parameter rather than the value the parameter holds. What i then tried was to use an array as the lock, the expression would then typically be Locals.Locks[Parameter.Fixture]. But this didnt sit well with the execution that threw me a -17502 Error. I cant use double lock expressions as that may allow a single fixture to aquire them both.
The customer would like to use auto scheduling to lower test times. Typically there would be a unique instrument used over all fixtures that would be treated as a single resource, while some test steps cant be executed at the same time within a fixture (radio tests which intereferes across sockets).
Anyone have an idea on how to create a dynamic lock expression that the step will accept, or have i missed something fundamental with the Auto Scheduling step?
/ Nimgaard
Solved!
Go to Solution.

Answer 1

Thanks for the input.
@James: Ok, then i think i got it right. I will probably post in the suggestion as i think it would be better to support lock on what the expression evaluates to rather than the component of the expression itself. I can however see why it works as it does because if you got an instrument handle then its easy to just use that handle as the lock. And when you look at the examples, it looks like actual hardware on a single test environment is what was in mind.
@dowNow: I cant do that because each fixture has its own hardware. If i put a global lock they will wait for each other which will create unnecessary long test times, and if i put one lock/hardware then any fixture can access hardware it doesnt have physical access to. At the same time, the customer wants to run it all in one application on one computer, the idea is to be able to have an operator load the different fixtures and run the tests without having to run between stations/computers. I checked the example and placing the steps is easy enough. I also have it running correctly with regular locks but that will also increase the test times as the internal resources in the test equipment will have to wait in sequence instead of using the first available resource.
Another question:
The issue is obviously tied to the OI as they want to run it on one computer, if they didnt want that then it wouldnt be a problem really. As far as i can tell, all executions are shared within the same AppManager. Would it be right to think that sequences that run on different AppManagers wont share locks, and if so, is it possible to have more than one AppManager in a single application?
Another way to solve it that comes to mind is to have each fixture access a slightly modified copy of the master file with different names on the locks. Obviously not ideal to handle code like that though.
/ Nimgaard