CalcVal cannot pass the output of previous run to the next run on simulation using Run Plan.

Yes, you need to specify ?run “runName” in the calcVal arguments to indicate which earlier run plan entry you are referencing. You’ve not done that so it will be trying to get it from the same run, which isn’t correct because that test isn’t enabled in the same run. 

In other words, you need to add ?run “FINDING_UNTRIMMED_OFFSET” to the calcVal arguments (after the output name and test name).

More detail in the documentation of course. 

Andrew

Hi Andrew, 
I added the ?run argument but it still does not work.

The value that I am trying to pass is a scalar and has evalType "sweep" that I asked earlier here.
To be more specific here, I am trying to pass a standard deviation from monte carlo simulation in the first run (FINDING_UNTRIMMED_OFFSET) to the second run (FINDING_I_LSB) in the same run plan.

if I try to pass an output that has evalType "point" , it works.

Hi Andrew, 
I added the ?run argument but it still does not work.

The value that I am trying to pass is a scalar and has evalType "sweep" that I asked earlier here.
To be more specific here, I am trying to pass a standard deviation from monte carlo simulation in the first run (FINDING_UNTRIMMED_OFFSET) to the second run (FINDING_I_LSB) in the same run plan.

if I try to pass an output that has evalType "point" , it works.

This would be best handled by customer support (mainly because to check this I'd need to put together an example to try it out, and I'm not working at the moment). At the very least you need to show:

1. Which IC sub-version are you using? (Help->About will show this - please include the entire sub-version not just the major numbers at the beginning)
2. Do you have corners enabled? Are the corners the same between FINDING_UNTRIMMED_OFFSET and FINDING_I_LSB? 
3. Are there any differences in variables or sweeps between the two tests?
4. Have I understood correctly that FIND_UNTRIMMED_OFFSET is a Monte Carlo run and FIND_I_LSB is a single-run-sweeps-and-corners run?

Andrew

Hi,

Andrew Beckett said:

This would be best handled by customer support (mainly because to check this I'd need to put together an example to try it out, and I'm not working at the moment)

Yes, I understand. It is already helpful that you are still answering in this time around.

1. IC6.1.7-64b.500.15 
2. Yes. I used model that includes mismatch in the first run and nominal for the second run, then I specified calcVal with ?cornerName argument. I also tried to use model with mismatch for both runs. it still shows the same error.
3. Yes. The first run is dc sweep. The second run is dc simulation without sweep.
4. Yes, you have. 

I attached again my setup here.

Given that there have been rather a lot of enhancements and fixes related to calcVal over the 4 years since the (rather old) version you're using, I would suggest first trying with a recent IC6.1.8 version rather than one from October 2017. 

Andrew