crelf

No data about any child classes is ever saved in a parent class, development or runtime environment.

...and nor should it - but it's good to get the confirmation - thanks Stephen!

The Flatten Object to XML does not flatten all of the object. ***IT ONLY FLATTENS THE PARTS THAT ARE NOT THE DEFAULT VALUE***

Ohhhhhhhhhhh.... Of course that totally makes sense, although it's not quite what I'd expected

Thank you gents - I should have known that it was relatively easy Huge kudos to the NI R&D team that gave us LVOOP - IMHO it was really well thought-out

The QSM was taught as part of the orginal LV advanced course and was presented as "the type".

That was a loooooong time ago and that course has been several times, including very recently by Nancy Hollenback. I'm not saying that a QSM or QMH pattern isn't appropriate in some cases, but a lot of things have changed in the LabVIEW world in the last 10+ years

I just wanted to point out it is very important to clear the data acquisition task after you use it. This frees up the task and prevents memory leaks.

Okay - so here's a question: let's say I have a parent class with a bunch of child classes and I build it all into an exe - then, later, I want to add a new child class that inherits from the parent in the exe - is there a way I can just call it by name from disk and have all the inheritance exist? If so, how do I define that in that child class so the parent knows about it?

I've got to admit that I haven't actually tried anything - I'm just mulling around an idea at the moment...

The LV back end handles the situation of the class definition saved to disk is different than that which you are re-populating the object with.

What do you mean by "handles"?

Actually, it says "Ur computer needs" ...

Jerk.

... one of the birthday presents that I got for my wife: 6 pounds of click pens (~315)

Never let it be said that you're not a romantic Alan

We have a competition (don't even think about it Justin) in my family to buy the crappest Christmas present - my mother gave me a packet of clothes pegs once. Nothing else, just a packet of clothes pegs.

I don't get it....

twss.

"My computer needs RAM"

why do you have that clock inside the loop ?

It's kind-of a habit of mine - there are occasions when a loop without a sleep can take control of the thread execution engine in Windows, and essentially lock it - adding a 0ms wait sends an explicit message to the thread execution engine that it's okay to sleep this thread if needed. As you can imagine, there are situations where you wouldn't want the 0ms wait in there, but, as I said, it's a habit of mine. Read more here.

I do use NI-DAQ instead NI-DAQmx because of limitations of that traditional DaqPad that we have.

Oh - of course - you're right: the old DAQPads aren't supported under DAQmx.

While i was testing my program i found that the file format that save wave as a spreadsheet does not work the way i want. It's not a big deal, but do you or anybody knows the way that i could split those waveforms that are coupled in one array into two separate waveforms or at least two separate arrays of Y values.

The output of the NI-DAQ subVI in the loop is an array of signals - you could use index array to split it into two separate wires...

thanks again, it was very helpful to hear some thoughts.

Hey - that's what LAVA's here for

I disagree with crelf - I think the path constant should go above the while loop.

Ahhh - the beauty of dataflow

I'm lovin' this guy's poster:

Here are a few suggestions for cleaning up your block diagram and inmplementing some error handling (if an error occurs, the loop will stop and then report the error to the user).

Sorry - I don't have NI-DAQ installed, so those VIs aren't found (hence the "?" subVIs). Also, is there a reason that you're using NI-DAQ and not the newer and awesomer NI-DAQmx?

Great video. It reminds me of having to work with one of your minions.

I'm not sure my minions are that co-ordiated I've heard rumours of some pretty aggressive RC car races in your office though...

Please upload your code so we can comment.

In the middle of January I will start to develop any solution for this problem.

Great - if you'd like, you're welcome to upload or describe your design as you're designing it and we'll critique it for you as you go.

Wow - that's a tricky one due to the very very low contrast. My first instinct is to suggest a different setup - if the item that you're interested in is the tan/pink thing that takes up te lower part of the image and the gray/white part at the top is just a background, then I'd change your lighting - you're using lighting that's on the camera side of the object you're looking at, but I'd go for a back light - remove all the lighting (or, at least, limit it) from the camera side, and out the item on a backlight (something like one of these from NERlite) - that will give you a high-contrast image that you can then binarize with an appropriate threshold - that will make the defect really stand out - then you can maybe determine the angle of the edge, and then try a parallel rake that's perpendicular to the edge.

Shameless plug: You can find more infomation about all of these techniques, and more, in Image Acquisition and Processing with LabVIEW.

<rant>

You could try to solve the issue in software, but, if you can do it in hardware, you definately should! I've seen far too many setups where engineers have tried to apply countless software image transforms on top of other transforms to, essentially, get an image that the right camera/lense/lighting combination would have gotten much more consistantly. If you had a thermocouple on the end of 200 meters of noisy cable, you wouldn't try to filter out the noise in software - you'd fix the hardware setup. Image acquisition and processing is the same. As my old DAQ professor used to say: garbage in, garbage out

</rant>

I agree with Bob Hamburger that we need to get away from using oil via safer energy sources via Manhattan like Project effort. Not only to have clean energy, but also as a National soveriegn security measure to remove relliance on folks who devise daily to remove us from the planet.

I agree, but I think you're overstating it - as some ppl have already said in this thread, not as much crude oil comes from the countries I think you're talking about as we commonly think. The largest exporter of crude oil to the US is Canada, and I'm not sure the Canadians devise daily to remove he USA from the planet. (or do they? )

I've was involved in a project some 7-8 years ago that was a LabVIEW solar panel testing system (Control & DAQ) but the plugged was pulled due to other funding priorities at our large Aerospace company.

Is that becuase your aerospace company didn't see a good enough financial return from it? If so, that's good ol' capitalism at work. Don't get me wrong: I think capatilism is great, but I don't think it should be helf up as a shining bastian of all that is good in the world. It has its flaws like all other systems of government, and that's why, if we are to continue to be a society, we need to not be fundamental capatilists.

I never have said in that amount of time that Capitalism is perfect, but its far better than the rest (Churchill, bless his soul).

Indeed - couldn't agree more.

...I do see some great ideas from various European countries, but overall the USA has the best design. There is a movement here to follow Europe...

There is? Firstly, there's more than one system of government active in Europe, so I'm not sure what you're getting at. Secondly, I don't know where you are, so when you say "here" I don't know what you're referring to. Assuming you're in the USA, I can't see the USA going away from the current system of geovernment, irrespective of how flawed it may be percieved. Not that I'm saying that's it's right or wrong, but my perception is that there's too much "greatest country in the world" and "don't mess with the USA" and "the constitution is always right" bravdo for that to happen.

And yes, CRelf, since re-distribution of wealth is the real topic here (not sane science)...

I'm not sure Paul G. would agree with you That said, so many different things have been discussed in this thread I can't imagine that anything's off topic anymore

Kind of... without the selector being visible, there's no way to select the alternate functionality, so it might as well not exist.

You can right-click on a poly VI and "Select Type".

And without the selector, I think it is reasonable for any user of the the poly VI node to assume that all the functionality is available just by wiring inputs.

I agree that having the selector there is much more intuative for this use case.

Sounds like fun testing to be a part of. cRIO chassis + modules are rated at 30g?

Yep

I'm looking at a job that would have a cRIO chassis on a crash test sled that's hurtled into a barrier (pretty standard stuff), but the power supply on the sled will go from 12V DC to 0V DC on barrier impact. I'd like to continue acquiring data for at least 250ms after the power goes to 0V DC, and I was wondering if anyone out there has experience with a UPS/rechargable battery/capacitor network that can deliver 12V DC (not sure about the current - think an 8slot cRIO chassis with 4 modules in it) for at least 250ms and (here's the kicker) is okay with 30g shock in x, y, & z... Surely something like this exists, right?

Crelf & Daklu: You do realize that this is possible in LV today, right? And has been around since at least LV 6.0? The DAQ VIs are rife with this usage.

Um, yeah - that's why I posted about it Actually, it was the DAQmx VIs that first gave me the idea to make my own...

When I first learned about polyVIs, I filed a bug report that the poly VI wasn't broken even if two member VIs had the same inputs. Someone pointed this checkbox out to me, and I thought, ah, ok, now it makes sense. I let the bug report close as "not a bug." I did suggest that if there are two VIs added to the poly VI whose inputs are identical that the poly VI should be broken unless this checkbox is checked.

That was exaclty my thought when I first started playing with polys - shouldn't it forbid me to have two VIs with the same conpanes as poly children? I'm glad that it does allow me to do it (especially, as you pointed out, with the checkbox checked), but I think it would be a good idea to have a warning dialog if you do it - I can imagine all sorts of hair-pulling-out if you didn't mean to do it.

Woo hoo! I just hit my 100th post! At this rate, it'll only take me about 120 years to catch up to crelf