Jump to content

TomOrr0W

Members
  • Content Count

    36
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    3

TomOrr0W last won the day on August 19

TomOrr0W had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

8

About TomOrr0W

  • Rank
    More Active
  • Birthday November 27

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Location
    Michigan

LabVIEW Information

  • Version
    LabVIEW 2017
  • Since
    2008

Contact Methods

  1. You might want to post a link to this thread in that thread. The attachment is listed as unavailable - the error message says "This attachment is not available. It may have been removed or the person who shared it may not have permission to share it to this location". Brian's original attachment is also listed as unavailable. Maybe that was JKI's problem all along - they wonder why no one sends them examples while not realizing that they don't allow anyone to post code.
  2. @ShaunR: Were you referring to VI Macros when you mentioned LV 2009?
  3. It looks like the issue is putting nested VIMs in a class. See https://forums.jki.net/topic/2641-vi-calling-vim-fails-to-build-fixed-in-vipm-2017f1/ and https://forums.ni.com/t5/LabVIEW/VI-Package-Manager-Fails-to-Build-with-Malleable-VIs-VIMs/td-p/3871468. @Jim Kring If you are still looking for a simple reproducing case of this bug, here is one.
  4. I get the same errors as you in both LV2019 SP1 64-bit and LV2019 SP1 with VIPM 2019.0.0.
  5. @drjdpowell was able to build a VIPM package that uses nested VIMs. See https://lavag.org/topic/21268-malleable-buffer-seeing-what-vims-can-do/
  6. If you do this, you still end up with a broken buffer wire (you just also get a broken data wire if you choose to incorrectly wire in a scalar). Note that the type of the output wire now matches the input wire now instead of being a DVR. I am using LV2019 64-bit in case 2018 32-bit has a different implementation. If you then convert the malleable vi to an instance vi or copy the type specialization node into the top-level vi, both wires unbreak. Also note that nothing changes if you also do the same change (adding a third case with a passthrough on top and broken data wire on bottom) on the Add to Buffer (By Value).vim called in the Type Specialization [0] and [1] cases.
  7. Hi Cat, I haven't tried an offline install or non-standard location install of any of the NIPM products yet, so I can't help you on the main issues. Wiping all prior NI software (one thing NIPM makes easy is uninstalling everything but itself) before installing LV2019 seemed to work well for me on a couple testers. You mentioned LV2019 SP1, which might have some more caveats for offline installs. NI changed their license manager again with that version - I would be interested to see if it works offline at all (there seems to no longer be a way to cancel the activation login dialog and enter codes, but maybe something will change when offline): https://forums.ni.com/t5/Volume-License-Manager-and/NILM-4-5-Feedback-Questions/td-p/3984686 I've felt for a while now that the NI License Manager 4.x versions are vastly inferior to the 3.x versions.
  8. I played around with the continuous and finite examples using a 9205 (mine is in a 9178 chassis, but that shouldn't matter), and analog start triggers configured on the same AI as the task's first channel seem to work for RSE continuous measurements, but not differential measurements. They also seem to work for Differential finite measurement, but trigger off the channel configured, not the differential pair. Continuous differential measurements exhibit the same behavior in NI's examples as in your code. A continuous measurement doesn't make much sense for your application, as you are only measuring once after the trigger. Once you do get triggering working, you may be able to use DAQmx connect terminals to route the AnalogComparisonEvent (you can find this if you enable advanced terminals in the I/O Name Filtering) to another card, which could then be used to drive circuits without any software timing involvement. If you change to the 9178 or 9179 chassis, one of these terminals could be the BNC connections on the chassis itself.
  9. Try running VIPM as an administrator. I have had similar issues happen when trying to install packages that were cached from the tools network by another user. Cached packages (and some other VIPM settings, I would assume) are stored in %ProgramData%, and Windows 10 seems to think that you shouldn't be able to access files in program data created by (in this case downloaded by) another user.
  10. I don't know of any ready-built solutions, but I did come up with the idea below when you mentioned not wanting to reorder (there may be a way to do this with channel wires, but I am not really familiar with that feature) (vi is also attached, saved to LV2018): Parallel Processing Order.vi
  11. I realized you might be including the menu bars, tool bars, and resize handles in the size. I tried turning them off on the 2018 vi, and it still doesn't generate an error (FP.PanelBounds = FP.WinBounds = 100-100-101-101). Panel Size Debug 2018-2.vi
  12. I am able to set panels to 1x1 in Windows 10, LabVIEW 2016-2018. Note that the VI saves with size 1x1, but the panel widens to show the run button when you open the vi. In some subpanel code I am working on in LabVIEW 2016, I found that any pane containing subpanels set to fit control to pane can't shrink below 5x5 without throwing error 1. Panel Size Debug 2016.vi Panel Size Debug 2017.vi Panel Size Debug 2018.vi Panel Size Debug Subpanels 2016.vi
  13. Looking at the readme files, LabVIEW 2015 SP1 is also supported on WIndows 10 (http://www.ni.com/pdf/manuals/374715d.html) if you have issues with the 2016 versions.
  14. Has JKI ever mentioned why they chose to have this restriction? I would ask the question on their forums, referencing this thread, but I don't really want to keep track of another forum account just to ask one question.
  15. My apologies if this is browser-specific (I am using Microsoft Edge). I have noticed that topics being moved to another forum make it so their original forum stays marked as unread even after you click on all the topics (including the moved one). You can use Mark Site Read to clear this state, but it seems like a forum bug. Example below: All LabVIEW General topics have been read but a topic was recently moved (in the red box): Yet LabVIEW General is listed as unread on the main page: and the Software and Hardware Discussions Page:
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

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