Blue Prism APD01 Exam Dumps & Practice Test Questions

Question 1:

Which combination of conditions ensures accurate matching of the Screen Text element labeled "Product Code"?

1. The Y-coordinate of the Screen Text element should be dynamically derived from the Y-coordinate of the Label element "Product Code".
   
   

2. The Label "Product Code" element's Y-coordinate cannot be derived because it is not selected.
   
   

3. The Screen Text element's Y-coordinate must have a Match Type set to "Equal".
   
   

4. The Window Text attribute of the Screen Text element must use the "Wildcard" Match Type.
   
   

5. The Window Text attribute for the Screen Text element should be left unchecked.

A. 1 and 4
B. 1, 2 and 5
C. 3 and 4
D. 1 and 5

Correct Answer: A

Explanation:

For ensuring accurate and consistent identification of a user interface element such as the Screen Text labeled "Product Code," it’s essential to configure key attributes correctly. Two critical elements in this context are the vertical position (Y attribute) and how the text is matched (Window Text attribute).

Statement 1 is correct. When automating interactions with UI elements, especially in tools like RPA, aligning the Y attribute of the Screen Text element with that of the related Label element provides positional consistency. By dynamically deriving this value, we ensure that the Screen Text element is located relative to a reliable reference point, minimizing mismatches due to UI shifts.

Statement 4 is also valid. Using a Match Type of “Wildcard” for the Window Text attribute increases flexibility when dealing with textual elements that may vary slightly between sessions. This is especially helpful if the text has dynamic portions, such as variable suffixes, dates, or numbers, which would break strict “Equal” matches.

Statement 2 is incorrect because even if the checkbox isn’t marked initially, it is still possible to derive the Y attribute of the Label element with proper configuration.

Statement 3 is not recommended in dynamic UI environments. Setting the Y attribute to "Equal" creates a rigid condition that may fail in slightly altered layouts.

Statement 5 is incorrect because merely unchecking the Window Text attribute doesn’t enhance accuracy. The match type configuration (Wildcard, in this case) has a more direct impact.

Thus, the ideal combination for reliable identification and flexibility is Statement 1 and Statement 4, making Option A the best answer.

Question 2:

Which of the following are valid design approaches for entering the value “2008 Cash ISA” into the Product Selection field, according to best practices?

A. Directly hard-code "2008 Cash ISA" into the action stage populating the field.
B. Use a text data item with “2008 Cash ISA” as its initial value to populate the field.
C. Set up an input parameter at the start to allow external assignment of the field’s value.
D. All of the above.

Correct Answer: D

Explanation:

Designing automated processes that populate fields such as "Product Selection" requires selecting the right input method based on flexibility, scalability, and maintainability. Each listed approach—hard-coding, using a data item, and configuring an input parameter—has its own merits depending on the scenario.

Option A: Hard-coding the value “2008 Cash ISA” directly in the stage is the most straightforward approach. This technique works well for static use cases where the value never changes. However, it offers the least flexibility. If the value needs to be updated, developers must manually change the logic, which increases maintenance overhead and the risk of missing some instances.

Option B: Using a data item to store “2008 Cash ISA” adds a layer of abstraction. Instead of embedding the value in multiple places, a single data item can be referenced across the process. This approach makes updates easier and reduces duplication. It’s ideal when the value might occasionally change, but not frequently enough to require external inputs.

Option C: Using an input parameter at the start stage introduces maximum flexibility. This method allows calling processes to inject the value at runtime, making the design highly dynamic and reusable. It’s suitable for processes that are part of a broader workflow or need to adapt to varying user input or external data.

While each method has distinct use cases, Option D—employing any of these strategies—is valid depending on project needs. For static values, hard-coding may suffice. For moderate flexibility, a data item offers simplicity. For complete adaptability, input parameters are best.

Best practices encourage designing for maintainability and scalability. Therefore, understanding when to use each method is essential for building robust, flexible automation solutions. All three methods are appropriate in the right context, making Option D the most comprehensive answer.

Question 3:

You are developing a Blue Prism process that reads input cases from a spreadsheet stored on a shared drive. However, the file path differs between the Development and Production environments. 

What is the most effective method to handle this difference in environments?

A. Store the Development spreadsheet path in a data item within the Process during development. When deploying to Production, open the Process and manually update the data item with the Production path.
B. Use a data item in the Process to store the Development path, then expose it as a Session Variable so the value can be changed from the Control Room when running in Production.
C. Store the spreadsheet path in an Environment Variable.
D. Pass the file path as a Startup Parameter each time the Process is executed.

Correct Answer: C

Explanation:

When working with Blue Prism in multiple environments, such as Development, Testing, and Production, it is essential to design processes that are both scalable and easy to maintain. File paths are one of the most common variables that change between environments, and managing these differences effectively ensures the process remains reliable during deployment and execution.

The best approach is to store the file path in an Environment Variable (Option C). This allows you to configure environment-specific values outside of the Process logic itself, ensuring a clear separation between code and configuration. Environment Variables can be set independently for each environment, so the same Process can reference the correct path dynamically, without any need for code changes or manual updates.

Option A involves manually editing the Process when transitioning to Production. This is not only inefficient but also introduces a high risk of human error during each deployment.

Option B uses Session Variables, which can be changed in the Control Room, but this adds operational overhead and becomes harder to manage as the number of processes grows.

Option D suggests using a Startup Parameter. While technically feasible, this approach is less manageable and scalable, especially in automated or scheduled runs where consistently passing the correct parameter may become challenging.

In summary, using Environment Variables provides a centralized, scalable, and maintainable solution for handling environment-specific configurations like file paths—making Option C the most appropriate choice.

Question 4:

When automating a browser-based application in Blue Prism, you encounter the error "There was an error during the spying operation" while trying to interact with a popup window. 

What is the most suitable workaround for this issue?

A. Modify the registry by setting the TabProcGrowth key in the Internet Explorer settings to 2.
B. Redesign the process so that it no longer needs to interact with the popup window.
C. Build a separate object to attach to the popup and attempt to spy the elements again.
D. Use Surface Automation to interact with the popup window’s interface.

Correct Answer: D

Explanation:

Popup windows in browser-based applications can sometimes present challenges for Blue Prism when attempting to identify elements through traditional spying techniques. The error message “There was an error during the spying operation” typically indicates that the Blue Prism spy tool is unable to recognize or interact with the elements of the popup using standard methods such as HTML, AA, or UIA.

In such cases, Surface Automation (Option D) is the most effective workaround. Surface Automation allows interaction with on-screen elements using image and region recognition rather than object-level interaction. This means the automation interacts with the visual representation of the window—like buttons or fields—by identifying screen coordinates or image patterns. It is especially helpful when the standard object models fail, as is common with dynamic or system-level popup windows.

Option A, which involves changing the TabProcGrowth registry key, may help in certain situations where Internet Explorer opens tabs in separate processes, but it does not directly address the core issue of spying a popup window.

Option B suggests avoiding the popup altogether, but this may not always be feasible. If the popup is a necessary part of the business process, skipping it would compromise the automation’s functional requirements.

Option C involves creating a new object to attach to the popup, which might help in specific cases, but it often leads to increased complexity and doesn't guarantee success if the popup cannot be spied on in the first place.

Therefore, using Surface Automation is the most reliable and practical approach when Blue Prism’s spying tools fail with browser-based popup windows, making Option D the correct answer.

Question 5:

What is a recommended practice when experiencing issues with launching and attaching to browser-based applications during automation?

A. Launch the application using the Start Process action from the Utility - Environment object, followed by an Attach stage
B. Store the application’s target URL in a data item instead of configuring it through the Application Modeller
C. Modify the Internet Explorer registry setting TabProcGrowth to a value of 2
D. Use Surface Automation to work with the browser application

Correct Answer: A

Explanation:

When automating browser-based applications using tools like Blue Prism, stability and reliability during the application launch and attachment phases are essential. A common problem encountered is inconsistency in attaching to the browser window, especially when relying solely on the Application Modeller’s predefined configuration.

Option A provides the most robust and controlled solution. By explicitly using the Start Process action from the Utility - Environment object to open the browser, you decouple the browser launch from the application model. This method grants more precise control over when the browser is launched and allows you to handle delays or conditions before attempting to attach to the session. Following this with an Attach stage ensures that the automation only proceeds once the browser is running and detectable by the system, minimizing failure rates due to premature attachment attempts. This two-step process is widely regarded as best practice in RPA browser automation.

Option B, while offering flexibility in passing URLs at runtime, doesn’t resolve issues related to timing or application state. It’s more about data management than ensuring application readiness for automation.

Option C involves altering a Windows registry setting that affects Internet Explorer's process handling. While it might help in niche cases, changing registry values is risky, can impact other applications, and lacks cross-browser applicability. It’s not recommended for general use and certainly not a scalable or maintainable solution.

Option D, Surface Automation, uses image-based interactions rather than object-based ones. While useful as a last resort, it is fragile and highly dependent on screen resolution, layout, and visual consistency. It's not a primary method for browser automation due to its unreliability under changing conditions.

Thus, the best and most dependable approach is A, as it separates the launch and attach actions, increasing automation resilience.

Question 6:

An object that automates a browser application runs successfully in Object Studio, but fails in Control Room because the web elements load slowly and inconsistently. 

Which method is most suitable to improve automation reliability?

A. Place a Wait stage with a Check Exists condition at the beginning of the action
B. Place a Wait stage using the Parent Document Loaded condition at the beginning
C. Place a Wait stage using the Document Loaded condition at the beginning
D. Avoid spying elements in HTML mode

Correct Answer: C

Explanation:

The core issue described is that the automated object functions well in Object Studio but throws exceptions in Control Room due to the slow, staggered loading of web page elements. This discrepancy often arises because Object Studio allows step-by-step execution, inadvertently creating enough time for the elements to load, while Control Room executes actions more rapidly, causing premature interactions with elements that aren’t yet available.

Option C is the most suitable solution because using a Wait stage with the Document Loaded condition ensures that the entire web page, including all scripts, frames, and dynamic content, has fully loaded before proceeding. This condition provides a reliable checkpoint that mitigates the timing issues resulting from asynchronous content loading. It guarantees that all necessary elements are present and ready to be interacted with, significantly increasing automation robustness.

Option A suggests using a Check Exists condition, which waits for a specific element rather than verifying the overall document state. This may work if you're certain that the specific element will always appear first, but it doesn’t confirm that all page components are ready, and therefore it’s less reliable in dynamic web environments.

Option B, using the Parent Document Loaded condition, checks only the top-level document. If the page contains embedded frames or loads components asynchronously, this method may falsely indicate readiness, leading to the same failures when interacting with not-yet-loaded elements.

Option D, advising against HTML mode spying, does not address the problem at hand. HTML mode is usually the most accurate and reliable method for identifying web elements. The failure here is due to timing, not identification, so changing spy modes would not resolve the issue.

In conclusion, using the Document Loaded condition (Option C) is the most effective way to ensure the page is ready for automation, especially when dealing with slow or asynchronous loading behavior.

Question 7:

If reading a web table directly into a collection fails using both AA and HTML modes in a browser-based application, what is the most effective alternative method to extract the table data?

A. Spy one table cell in HTML mode, then make its Path dynamic to read all cells into a collection
B. Apply Surface Automation techniques like OCR to read the table content
C. Change the registry setting at HKEY_CURRENT_USER\Software\Microsoft\Internet Explorer\Main\TabProcGrowth to 2
D. Use the Read HTML action and parse the table data using regular expressions

Correct Answer: D

Explanation:

When traditional modes like Active Accessibility (AA) or HTML fail to extract data from a browser-based table, the most robust solution is to leverage the Read HTML action paired with regular expressions. This method involves retrieving the underlying HTML structure of the page and applying pattern-matching techniques to extract the desired table contents.

Option A suggests dynamically modifying the path of a single cell identified through HTML spying. While technically feasible, this method lacks flexibility and reliability—especially with tables that change structure or content dynamically. It requires extensive manual work, and maintaining the logic can become a burden if the application changes frequently.

Option B, which involves using OCR (Optical Character Recognition), should be considered only when no structured access to the content is available. OCR is more prone to errors due to variations in font, layout, or resolution. It also tends to be slower and less accurate, especially when dealing with structured data like tables.

Option C refers to a registry modification for Internet Explorer, which might influence browser behavior but does not directly address or resolve the issue of reading HTML tables into collections. It poses additional risks and should not be used without thorough testing and understanding of system-wide effects.

Option D is the most appropriate. The Read HTML action allows you to access the full HTML source of the web page. Using regular expressions, you can efficiently and accurately parse out table rows and cells. This approach provides flexibility and precision, especially when direct element interaction is blocked or unstable. It also scales better for large or dynamically loaded tables.

In summary, Option D is the most reliable and maintainable method for extracting table data under the given constraints.

Question 8:

Which of the following statements correctly describe how browser applications can be interfaced with during automation? (Select three)

A. An HTML element can be read or written to even if it is not visible on the screen, as long as it exists in the page’s DOM
B. Enabling the Parent URL attribute ensures faster and more reliable identification of elements
C. Elements in a web application can be identified using Active Accessibility mode
D. Win32 mode can be used to identify elements within an Internet Explorer browser window
E. HTML spy mode can be used to identify HTML elements in any browser-based application

Correct Answers: A, C, E

Explanation:

Option A is correct. When dealing with HTML elements on a web page, visibility on the screen is not a prerequisite for automation tools to interact with those elements. As long as the element is present in the Document Object Model (DOM), it can be targeted by automation logic for reading or writing actions. This is a fundamental principle in web automation and makes it possible to interact with off-screen or hidden elements.

Option B is incorrect. Although the Parent URL attribute can help define context for an element, enabling it does not guarantee better speed or accuracy in identification. Element recognition relies more heavily on the element’s unique attributes like id, class, or tag structure than on the URL of the hosting page.

Option C is correct. Active Accessibility (AA) is a Microsoft technology originally intended to help assistive technologies. It is also useful in automation tools for identifying UI elements, especially when HTML mode fails or is not applicable. It helps bridge accessibility features with automation needs.

Option D is incorrect. Win32 mode is suitable for identifying elements in native Windows desktop applications, not web browsers like Internet Explorer. Using Win32 mode for browser windows is not effective because web elements are rendered through web engines, which do not expose their structure in the same way Win32 apps do.

Option E is correct. HTML spy mode is designed specifically for reading and analyzing web elements from a page’s DOM. It works across different browser types such as Chrome, Firefox, or Internet Explorer, making it a flexible choice for identifying HTML controls like buttons, fields, and tables during browser automation.

Thus, the accurate choices that reflect correct practices in web automation are A, C, and E.

Question 9:

Which of the following best describes the role of exception handling in a Blue Prism process design?

A. It allows processes to ignore business rules and continue execution.
B. It ensures that all stages execute in strict sequence regardless of errors.
C. It provides a structured approach to deal with unexpected events during automation.
D. It is only used in object layers, not in business processes.

Correct Answer: C

Explanation:

Exception handling in Blue Prism plays a critical role in developing resilient and maintainable automations. As a professional developer, you are expected to build solutions that can recover gracefully from unforeseen issues—such as data mismatches, application unresponsiveness, or logic errors.

Option C is correct because exception handling provides a structured approach for managing errors that may arise during the execution of a process. This includes using recover and resume stages, implementing exception types, and logging exceptions appropriately. These tools allow developers to trap errors, determine root causes, and decide whether to retry, skip, or halt the process.

Option A is incorrect as exception handling doesn't allow the bypassing of business rules. Ignoring business rules could compromise data integrity or violate compliance.

Option B misrepresents exception handling. Instead of enforcing stage-by-stage execution regardless of errors, exception handling enables processes to react dynamically to failures—often rerouting the flow or stopping execution with proper logging.

Option D is also wrong. Exception handling is equally important in both process and object layers. While the object layer may catch technical exceptions related to UI interactions, the process layer handles business-level logic and must be equipped to respond to failed transactions or data anomalies.

In summary, understanding and correctly applying exception handling is fundamental for passing the APD01 exam and building robust Blue Prism solutions.

Question 10:

What is the primary reason for separating business logic into the process layer instead of embedding it within the object layer in Blue Prism?

A. To enhance object reusability across multiple processes.
B. To simplify exception handling at the object level.
C. To allow the object to manage end-to-end automation flows.
D. To reduce the overall number of processes in a solution.

Correct Answer: A

Explanation:

The object layer in Blue Prism is designed to encapsulate application-level interactions such as clicking buttons, entering data, or reading values. The process layer, on the other hand, manages the business logic—the flow of operations based on business rules, decisions, and data inputs.

Option A is the correct answer because placing business logic in the process layer ensures that objects remain reusable and modular. If business logic were embedded into objects, it would tie the object to a specific use case, limiting its utility across different processes or scenarios. For example, a single object for a web application can be reused in various processes like data entry, validation, or reporting—provided it's free of embedded business-specific logic.

Option B is incorrect because simplifying exception handling is not the main reason for logic separation, though it is a secondary benefit. The main driver is code reusability and maintainability.

Option C misrepresents the role of objects. Objects are not responsible for end-to-end automation; they act as building blocks within the process flow. Embedding full workflows into objects breaks Blue Prism’s layered architecture principle.

Option D is flawed as the goal is not to minimize process counts, but to promote scalability and clarity. A well-structured solution might have multiple small processes working with reusable objects, which is more maintainable than one large monolithic process.

In conclusion, maintaining a clean separation between application logic (in objects) and business logic (in processes) is essential for scalability, reusability, and testability—key principles tested on the APD01 exam.