Jump to content

infinitenothing

Members
  • Posts

    354
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    15

Everything posted by infinitenothing

  1. Why do you say the current would be too high with a 9219? The user manual say it would apply 2.2V which would be 400uA. I guess if you wanted a lower current you could get a current source module and measure the resulting voltage with an analog input card to get resistance.
  2. Try right clicking, saving the image to disk, and then drag the saved file from explorer to your block diagram. The snippet is in 2017 so if you need an earlier version you might have to ask someone to down convert it or... there's not that many blocks there, maybe you can try and recreate it.
  3. I guess this is a "what's new in LV" thread now. There are some performance improvements in the conditional indexing tunnels on a for loop. I think it allocates the max size and trims it at the end. The async tools are also a huge performance increase over the old VI server method. Also, DVRs now allow parallel read access which is cool. The menu plugins provided many productivity improvements. VIMs make reuse easier. Regarding the new dynamic refnum behavior, does everyone agree that the right terminal is more or less obsolete and could probably be replaced with something like a linked tunnel? Am I misunderstanding the new behavior?
  4. Even VI server is going to have some drawbacks like accessing latching booleans and whatnot. If anyone has and idea exchange post in support of automated GUI test, I'd kudos it.
  5. My example uses the second technique (subtracting a constant at IMAQ Subtract). Where are you getting these requirements from? Also, it's nice if you let us know where you've cross posted this so we don't duplicate efforts https://forums.ni.com/t5/LabVIEW/calculate-1-e-2-of-beam-intensity-profile-Measurement/td-p/3766062/page/2 https://forums.ni.com/t5/LabVIEW/Background-correction-and-Normalizing-Image/m-p/3766148#M1060967
  6. That's a snippet so in theory, you should be able to just drag it into your block diagram negating the need for a VI file
  7. The current behavior looks like the incoming reference on the left terminal overrides the previously "wired from the inside" right terminal. If that's the intended behavior, I feel like the the "right" terminal is now obsolete because of linked tunnels.
  8. Not sure if we're still doing this but there's another subform for ideas: https://lavag.org/forum/37-labview-feature-suggestions/
  9. Are you looking for an automated tool or free labor? If it's the former, I don't know of one.
  10. Maybe: http://zone.ni.com/reference/en-XX/help/371361H-01/lvhowto/hex_display/
  11. Is this what you're looking for? http://zone.ni.com/reference/en-XX/help/372916J-01/nivisionconcepts/supportvectormachines/
  12. Have you tried the express VI? It looks like you don't need a shifter.
  13. I don't entirely understand what you're getting at. When you say "searching the camera" are you talking about using something like IMAQdx Enumerate Cameras? And when you say "autorun to acquire figures" do you mean you're looking to use dataflow to delay when some events happen? That seems like a general purpose labview question and not a vision question. You'll probably want to use a sequence structure or a queue.
  14. I'm not sure what the myRIO has built in (USBtoSerial drivers built in? CLIP?) but if you had to, you could always just program the FPGA and use a level shifter:
  15. I'm guessing that's intended behavior since the two references are "equal" (see below). The problem is "when are two references equal". Different people might have different answers. It's too bad you can't "override" the equivalence operator with a functor replacing the "heart of the algorithm"
  16. It's a personal preference but I don't like using delete array for that purpose because I think it's confusing. I'm sure it costs me a few milliseconds when I see it and think "why would I want to delete an element from that array?" We want code that's easy to read not easy to write right?
  17. I'm considering distributing a wrapper application that can download updates from the internet or internal network. I'm thinking that, so the user doesn't have to think too much about file locations or windows explorer, maybe just have the update in the form of a PPL and then async launch the top level. Has anyone had success going down this route? It would probably be a good idea to secure the PPL by either signing it or making sure to download it using SSL.
  18. Hash digest? That's just another equal sign to change right? Or they could license it on a virtual machine appliance and distribute the appliance right? Or install it on a server, wrap it in a TCP interface and make it accessible over the network. Go through my links. If you really want to protect something it has to be running on your physically secured hardware. Everything else is just obfuscation. If you just want to make it challenging to hack, then you've probably done enough by removing the FP and BD and using the TPLAT. It's hard to give more specific advice without understanding the code better.
  19. The bad news is that DRM is fundamentally flawed. A dedicated hacker would probably modify your DLL/object code and "wire" a true constant to your case structure that enables the functionality. Your best DRM is probably a team of rabid lawyers . Have you seen the third party licensing toolkit? Regarding sensitive string, no, that's never totally safe.
  20. That VI always returns an array of all zeros. If I use a feedback node as shown it's 10% faster than my first example:
  21. I've never done performance testing but I've always used rotate and replace to avoid the build array. It should be very easy to make a malleable VI out of it to further reduce block diagram clutter. For example:
  22. You can search for the model numbers here to get code: http://www.ni.com/downloads/instrument-drivers/
  23. Is there a way to check if we're in the customer experience feedback program?
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.