JimPanse

No answer... Has anyone ever gotten the daqmx driver to work under Labview? Have a nice start of the week, Jim

Hello experts, I am trying to install the daqmx driver on Ubuntu as described here: https://www.ni.com/de-de/support/documentation/supplemental/18/downloading-and-installing-ni-driver-... apt-get install ni-daqmx The installation works smoothly. Unfortunately the VI's of the daqmx driver are not visible under Labview 2021SP1 after the installation. I am of the opinion that you should also install the package: apt-get install ni-daqmx-labview-2021-support to make the VI's visible under Labview. But this package is not included anymore. In former times there was this package. My question: How do I make the daqmx VI's visible under Labview? Greetings, Jim

Hello Rolf, it looks like it's working. Thanks for your help, Jim

Hello experts, I would like to use the two functions: int clSerialInit(unsigned long SerialIndex, void** SerialRefPtr); int clSerialClose(void* SerialRef); Execute via a Call Library Function Node. I have chosen the parameterisation shown. But it does not seem to work. The function prototype does not seem to be correct either. Can someone tell me how to parameterise the call library function Node in order to execute the two functions? Have a good time, Jim

I haven't yet found the "egg-cellent" in the area of real-time, vision and automation. A few years ago, I thought Labview RT based on Phar Lab was it. There is no RT Linux Labview for Desktop PCs. From my current point of view, a modified RT Linux is a possibility to realise these requirements. And I need the variety of hardware solutions that a desktop PC offers. The NI hardware is too limited and does not offer many possibilities. And with the NI software solutions, you don't know how long they will be supported. In your opinion, which development environment is best suited for such applications?

It's almost easier to say goodbye to Phar Lab and Labview Realtime and go for Linux RT (preempt_rt). The current RT Vision project will now run under Linux RT (preempt_rt). Does anyone have any idea what the roadmap of Labview for Linux is? 1-2 years ago an NI employee told me that an Imaq driver for Linux should be released in the near future. Nothing has happened yet either. Therefore, I have now switched from the expensive NI PCIe 1433 cards to EURESYS GRABLINK.

This device (purchased part) has only one USB connection which was realised with FTDI. There is no other interface on it. I don't think there is a Pharm Lab FTDI driver. Therefore, the question is, is there an RS232 to USB (FTDI) adapter with which the communication could work? Phar Lab can use RS232. Or is the approach just wrong?

It is a desktop PC running Phar Lab on it. I assume that there is no driver for USB FTDI converter under Phar Lab. Maybe I am wrong about this. So I thought I could use a RS232-USB converter (if there is such a converter) which then communicates with the USB-RS232 (FTDI) converter. RS232 communication works under Phar Lab.

Hello experts, I would like to communicate via Phar Lab with a USB device that uses an FTDI chip. Is this easily possible? Is there a RS232 to USB converter that can be used under Pharlab? A converter for a converter I would be very grateful for any suggestions. Greetings, Jim

Is there an official statement from NI how long Labview will be supported?

so, if you look at the share price. https://www.nasdaq.com/de/market-activity/stocks/nati you can see a nice separation there. until 2016, ni was reasonably solid and had a slow steady growth. in 2016 they decided to make everything more efficient and lived at the expense of their customers. at some point the customer notices the reduced performance and looks for an alternative. which is reflected in a share price decline since 2018..... a bold summary... this roughly reflects the correlation of the share price with my personal experience with ni.

I found the strategy of approx. 10-15 years better for my needs. if you continue to operate the current strategy like this, then I won't give labview much longer. that is the view from my field of application.... that might be enough for me until retirement. i would be interested to know how high the profit per employee of ni was 10-15 years ago and how it is now. then you could estimate whether it is a successful course or whether it is going down.

I also think that it is the strategic staff that is leading labview in the wrong direction. the concept of labview is certainly unique and has its justification. the strategic decisions are simply the wrong ones. the management should be fired and a few innovative engineers should be left to make the decisions. there are enough new technologies waiting to be implemented with labview.

Every now and then a small improvement comes along. a real innovation was the leap from version 7x to 8x. I think fpga is not bad either, but it is actually too expensive and there is no real support for it either. I work a lot with realtime and vision and I have to say that nothing has happened since usb3 vision. where, for example, are the coax press frame grabbers? also that pharlab was discontinued without an alternative for desktop pc's. that's why i switched to labview linux and built the realtime system myself under linux. and if you ever need support for labview linux you're really on your own. in my eyes they've been milking the cow for the last 10 years... at some point even the last drop is sucked out. 10 years ago you called ni and wanted to test a card and 2 days later it was on the table. today you can't even find someone at ni who knows about stuff. NI sBRIO or System on Module was also a good approach. but where is the interface to integrate smartphones into labview. or the pi... there are only non-commercial projects like linx.

Hello experts, I'd like to make a general assessment. I have been working with Labview for about 20 years and occasionally contact Ni to solve technical problems or to find out about and buy products. I have been observing the trend that service has been getting worse and worse over the years for years now. I have not seen any real new developments in labview over the last 10 years. with the termination of nxg and the associated waste of resources, I have the impression that ni has to save money at every corner to keep the shop running. of course this is at the expense of customer support. i wonder if ni is about to go bankrupt or what is the strategy behind it? slowly i am looking around for alternatives to labview as i can hardly see a future for labview after the current impression. how do you see it...? what is your impression? greetings, jim

Hello, experts, I am just taking my first steps with Labview on Linux. For the implementation of various projects I am missing the drivers for Linux as I am used to from Windows or Pharlab. I have heard that Imaq and Vision will come at the end of this year.... all without rifle. Which image processing tool would you recommend for Linux? For Ethercat I have discovered the following : https://openethercatsociety.github.io/doc/soem/index.html Does anyone have any experience with this or are there already Vi`s for Ethercat under Labview Linux? Furthermore I would like to use USB3 Vision, Gige Vision and Cameralink under Linux. Are there any recommended drivers for Labview? Are there any other drivers, programs etc... for Labview for Linux? A good time Jim

It is about an image processing where the result is a parameter for a control. Here I need a real-time in the range of 1 ms.

Is it possible to make Windows 10 realtime capable, so that i can use Vision?

I could imagine that RT Linux from a PXI system also works on a PC. This will certainly not be allowed by licensing law.

This means that RT Linux for Desktop PC is theoretically possible. Can I buy a Linzens from RT Linux for Desktop PC´s? And how long will Pharlab ETS be available?

Hello, experts, in the current description of the NI Vision Acquisition Software it says: http://www.ni.com/pdf/manuals/375130k.html Deprecated Features ◾NI - IMAQ 19.0 .... ◾Removed support for LabVIEW Real-Time targets running Phar Lap ETS OS Will the OS Labview Real Time (Phar Lap ETS OS) be discontinued and is there an alternative based on Linux? a good time Jim

Hello, Rolf, thank you for your message. I don't know if I understood it right. The software should be developed under Windows. The program created in this way runs independently on the FPGA and communicates via RT FIFO with RT? If I understood that correctly. Is there an example or a forum post where this is discussed? A nice week start Jim

Similarly I tried to integrate the framegrabber under RT. Since the framegrabber is not found there is no RIO reference. I don't know how this works. A direct image processing is absolutely necessary. And also the data exchange of the results with the fieldbus. The question (which I cannot answer yet) is whether you need an FPGA or can implement it with CUDA. Since I already have experience with FPGA, I chose this solution. I have no experience with CUDA. If I would use CUDA then Windows is mandatory. I don't think CUDA works on RT. The advantage with CUDA would be that you don't need the expensive FPGA frame grabber.

There is currently no 100% definition of the requirements. This is all in a state of flux. Full or Extended Full is required. Power over CL is not mandatory. I need real-time for communication with the 5 most common fieldbus Systems. I didn't understand your suggestion to transfer the FPGA code to the frame grabber under Windows and then use it under RT. How should the communication under Labview Realtime with the frame grabber work if the frame grabber is not recognized under RT?

It can't be that the specification says that the frame grabber is supported and then it doesn't work. I can't afford such a procedure with my products. I could also imagine a different solution approach, e.g. with an additional extension. Make Windows real-time capable. But here I am still at the beginning. Providers who promise this are among others www.intervalzero.com/ https://kithara.com/ www.sybera.de/ …. There are certainly many other providers here. Advantage: The Framegrabber works under Windows. No Labview Realtime would be necessary anymore and the associated expensive licenses and development extensions. What do you think of this solution?