Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation


About stefanusandika

  • Rank
    LAVA groupie

LabVIEW Information

  • Version
    LabVIEW 2013
  • Since
  1. Hi @ShaunR !! Thanks for the reply. My initial tought about creating this was because there are so many hardware which grows so fast in the current time. There are some kind of 30 computers with this program running locally. Once there is a new hardware, I have to maintain 30 computers one by one, and in the future, we are planning to increase the use of this system in a new computer (also locally). So with the abstraction layer, I can easily maintain more, with less effort. The TCP/IP is one of the option I found out earlier. The other way are still in a try. Since abstraction
  2. Thanks for the reply @smarlow !!! Can you probably attached the lower version? My labview is 13.0.1f2 (32 bit) so I can't opened it. Thank you so much!
  3. Hi everyone, I hope you guys have a good weekend!! @smarlow : Thanks for your reply. There is no particular reason actually, I was trying to find the best way for the abstraction layer and TCP was the first article came up to me. I never work with LabVIEW before, therefore I took it as an option. Back to the problem, I will take a look on Notifier, however, in my case, main.vi are suppose to read the real-time (means there will be multiple data) only when the mian.vi is needed. My uderstanding on your writing is that Notifier only able to read single data (the last data from measurem
  4. Hi all, In the case of localhost communication, with continuous data exchanges from multiple client to server, what method would you use? Thanks
  5. @ShaunR : Hi again Shaun, thanks for your advice. I was just thinking that it would make it easier with the program as a windows services. Most of the guy in the production areas never work with LabVIEW, so the windows service could be a pretty handy solution. However, you are right that I should be giving more attention on the program, the windows server can be created later.
  6. @Bryan : Hi, I just realise that actually the computer is not always ON, after some period of time it has to be restarted. So, I will get your advice as a consideration in building the program. THX
  7. @Bryan : At most time the computer is always ON, however, the "safely aborted" would be one of the consideration. It's kinda confusing on how to create a generalized program to monitor different VI, not necessarily the windows service itself. However, a windows service could be a very helpful system to use. @JamesMc86 : I'm currently reading about this. Do you have any example with you about this NSSM? Thanks
  8. Thanks for the reply ShaunR and Bryan, @ShaunR : These 15 VI are seperated each other and each access the single hardware. Currently there are no connection between, except with the main VI. The main Vi actually only call the 15 VI one by one, and each VI will be excecuted under main program, and the result will be displayed after (using TDMS to display the result in excel file). I presume the name of the program is FireDaemon, is it correct? Most of the site I read before shows that they use FireDaemon for windows service. In addition, I develop the system (using HAL) because the lo
  9. Hello everyone, I'm really new to LabVIEW and have been working on a machine testing project. I had experience before with C++ programming using Qt Nokia. The machines are tested using NI hardware, connected via USB to the computer, all connection are in a local connection. There are currently 15 VI, each communicate to a single hardware. The main test program, which call the lower level VI (15 VI) based on a script. I would like to create a windows service, which could monitor these modules continuously (the program start when the computer start, and continuously monitor these 15 VI
  • Create New...

Important Information

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