Re: error in Simple PID
I have run this VI, and it performs as it is supposed to with the first call node outside the main loop. This VI is meant to be inserted into a while loop. Its own while loop is only there to retain the previous values (in the shift registers); it doesn't execute more than once on its own. By placing the entire Simple PID.vi into another while loop and running, you'll see that the first call node works properly.
Re: reading a simple text file..
I think you might be better off reading the entire file at once with Read From spreadsheet File and then manipulating the resulting 2D array, but if you want to do it line by line then a good place to start is the Read Lines From File function on the File I/O palette. Inside of this is a case structure and case 2 reads one line at a time for x number of lines or until EOF is found.
RE: This is simple???
Seifert, George [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I thought I was taking the easy way out by using available drivers with all the error handling built in. The setup on some GPIB instruments is not trivial and it's nice to have the examples supplied with the drivers. It still seems somewhat of a toss up to me as to whether I should write my own drivers or live with all the installation hassles. I just don't understand why the installer isn't smart enough to install the run-time version of all the necessary drivers. Because it is hard for software to be smarter than humans ;-) Honestly, automatic detection alone of which components to include is almost an impossible task, deciding how much of each to include or not, in which order, with what dependencies, for Win9x/NT/2K/XP etc etc, makes this basically a harder job to design than the entire LabVIEW application is to write. And then with each new driver version you are again back to the start and can try to figure it out yourself. Why do you think the new Microsoft installer is so difficult to use once it didn't work as planned? Because it is a software package which tries to do all of this, except the component detection, which you have to manually tell it. One small thing going wrong and you are stuck with partial installations not being possible to resume or remove since the installer does not know where to start with both. Then you can try to do a registry clean, some MSI problem solvers and more esoteric magic and hope you get back to the point where you can do a new full install. And lets assume the installer says hey I need 1) LabVIEW runtime 2) several LabVIEW support components Notice that the application builder does these first two steps already as it is from LabVIEW for LabVIEW and threfore can quite easily know what LabVIEW needs. 3) VISA (VISA 3.0 full runtime 40MB, you only need serial, for instance) 4) IVI (fill in your MB) 5) GPIB (Enet?, PCI?, USB?, 1394?, classic?) 6) NI-DAQ for the little DIO line you used Jeez, my application is a simple 10 VI application and the installer uses more than 100 MB, are those guys from NI crazy? Last but not least about uninstallation. You update NI-VISA to 3.0.1 to fix a problem. Uninstallation of the application will not be able to uninstall NI-VISA 3.0.1 as well as it was not part of the original install!! Basically as much as you would like a smarter application builder. It is a project the developer who decides to try an attempt at it only can get frustrated with. There are definitely an endless number of other possibilities where someone can get at least a small chance to create something which will work in the end. Rolf Kalbermatter CIT Engineering Nederland BVtel: +31 (070) 415 9190 Treubstraat 7H fax: +31 (070) 415 9191 2288 EG Rijswijkhttp://www.citengineering.com Netherlands mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: This is simple???
I thought I was taking the easy way out by using available drivers with all the error handling built in. The setup on some GPIB instruments is not trivial and it's nice to have the examples supplied with the drivers. It still seems somewhat of a toss up to me as to whether I should write my own drivers or live with all the installation hassles. I just don't understand why the installer isn't smart enough to install the run-time version of all the necessary drivers. George -Original Message- From: Michael Aivaliotis [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, April 13, 2004 9:26 AM To: Seifert, George Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: This is simple??? Having experience with distributing GPIB applications myself, I have long decided to stick with the basic GPIB Read and Write functions. You don't need VISA for those. Also, IVI is nice to get started but each driver requires an install for the DLL's it needs. You should be able to read the IVI driver code and build a few simple GPIB calls to do what you need. Power supplies have a limited command set. Michael Aivaliotis I just tried to load an executable I built. In addition to loading the executable (which is thankfully very easy) I had to load VISA drivers, GPIB drivers and IVI drivers. All this for a relatively simple program that controls one GPIB power supply. Oh for the good old days when you just had to load one thing. Fortunately all this work is in-house. I'd hate to have to send this to someone and have them install it. Sorry for the rant. I just hope someone at NI is listening.
RE: This is simple???
Having experience with distributing GPIB applications myself, I have long decided to stick with the basic GPIB Read and Write functions. You don't need VISA for those. Also, IVI is nice to get started but each driver requires an install for the DLL's it needs. You should be able to read the IVI driver code and build a few simple GPIB calls to do what you need. Power supplies have a limited command set. Michael Aivaliotis I just tried to load an executable I built. In addition to loading the executable (which is thankfully very easy) I had to load VISA drivers, GPIB drivers and IVI drivers. All this for a relatively simple program that controls one GPIB power supply. Oh for the good old days when you just had to load one thing. Fortunately all this work is in-house. I'd hate to have to send this to someone and have them install it. Sorry for the rant. I just hope someone at NI is listening.
Re: A very simple hex conversion question
The basic assumption for using the Hexadecimal String to Number primitive is that the input is normal text. My input happens to be a 'Hex' input. Hence your solution fails. Please correct me if I am wrong. Thanks
Re: A very simple hex conversion question
Your original implementation will work if you change the representation of the integer wired to the type input to U16 (you have I32). The four character hex constant you have wired is equivalent to a 2 byte integer, not 4 bytes.
Re: need a simple VI to convert voltage into sound
cool
