Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


Everything posted by bbean

  1. I know about the RAD. But I think my needs are similar viSci, because I actually need to "wipe" a cRIO before removing it from a "secure" area and then re-image it from the clean media.
  2. I need to image a few cRIOs in the near future. Have you had any luck finding details for restoring the cDAQ image?
  3. Do you have ASRL1 open any where else, say in MAX or another part of your program? Is it possible the CONSOLE OUT switch is enabled which will then use the COM1 port? https://knowledge.ni.com/KnowledgeArticleDetails?id=kA00Z000000P9zxSAC&amp;l=en-US Edit: Just noticed after finally finding a picture of the 9045 on the NI Website 👾 that it doesn't look like it has DIP switches for CONSOLE OUT. So not sure if you can check in MAX to see if its enabled. <\rant> Its impossible to find anything on the NI website nowadays. Its gotten so bad, that I now wish the
  4. Its just a hassle. I understand the risk reward decision. I just wanted to indicate Mads isn't a lone wolf.
  5. Currently exploring using some of these: https://www.acromag.com/sites/default/files/TT334_996h.pdf to condition the signal to an AI cDAQ module
  6. I confess I haven't dug too deep into this but based on the support note here, I'm not to optimistic: Thermistor Measurements Using the NI-9219 there is a 10K upper limit for resistance measurement (we have 10k thermistors...so the resistance will exceed this at lower temperatures) The NI-9219 has an unregulated voltage source that excites anywhere from 220µA to 420µA across the thermistor depending on its resistance 10k thermistor measurements seem like a pretty common item, not sure why NI doesn't have an off the shelf module/approach for this with cRIO/cDAQ Support note
  7. The thermistors we are using are very small and based on the experience of others on the project, current > 100uA causes self heating of the thermistor and sensor error. Ideally we run @ 10 uA source current
  8. Has anyone used cRIO to measure a bunch of thermistors? We have to add thermistor measurements to an existing cRIO chassis and I'm surprised to find out NI doesn't offer an out of the box solution for this. From what I've seen they say you can use the NI-9219 for thermistors up to 10k but the current would be way to high and would cause self heating.
  9. Sounds like a firewall issue. One side may be blocking the connection attempt. Not sure about linux, but a recent windows update made the firewalls a little more strict and caused similar problems for me.
  10. Ok if you said PXI I was going to say check the RAM type. I had a evil crash that appeared randomly on machines and after a long process with NI's help found that it was the RAM. NI sells "certified" RAM for the their PXI's and I will always buy that in the future even though its a complete ripoff. Back to your issue. Have you tried the Desktop Execution Trace Toolkit to check for reference/memory leaks yet? I wouldn't be scared about going under the hood of the db toolkit, but I wouldn't go there quite yet.
  11. what kind of hardware is the application running on ? eg desktops, rackmount computers, pxi racks?
  12. Question regarding the Notify (state).vi in the Observer Register Palette. Underneath the hood, the code looks like its sending a message every call (vs only when the data changes). Is that correct?
  13. Ok makes sense.. I had some more time to test today. I tested the following and they seemed to work: TestClient with Async connection.vi (LV2014)--->LAN--->TestServer.vi (LV2014) TestClient with Async connection.vi (LV2014)--->LAN--->TestServer.vi (LV2016) TestClient with Async connection.vi (LV2016)--->LAN--->TestServer.vi (LV2014) One potential "bug" in the package. When I click "Show Example" button in VIPM. It opens the following path: ...\examples\drjdpowell\Messenging\TCP Example instead of what I imagine the intent is to ope
  14. I tried a quick test of the new build only traversing the local host from client to server and it worked well. I will try a more extensive test across a local network tomorrow. I need to update VIPM to 2017 on all the machines to get the package installed. The ping feature of the example is nice because previously when I set up a test with only server-->client messages, if you pulled the network cable the TCP actor on the client side wouldn't timeout or error so you didn't know something was wrong. Quick question, is there a reason you decided not to implement the ping and "keep a
  15. Replacing the query with a send and wiring in the reply address worked. I just temporarily created an asynch create VI (without dynamic dispatch to test). If you are updating the RemoteTCP Messenger class, can you expose (make a datamember of the class) the timeout value the Actor uses during communication to the Remote Service.vi? It would be nice to be able to adjust this timeout if necessary. Thanks for your help
  16. Thanks for the mod Sorry for peppering you with questions, but I have another one. I'm trying to connect to a remote server that may or may not be there. I want to have the capability to attempt and retry the connection in a non blocking fashion (since it may not be there at all). Since the default timeout is 5 seconds and timeout is not exposed in the Remote Service.vi a synchronous approach can hang for a long time. I tried creating an asynchronous remote connect lvclass in the attached example (mods your TCP client server example) that inherits from the Action.lvclass in your library
  17. That sounds good. Is there a downside to simply flattening to the lowest LabVIEW version Messenger Library supports? Based on my limited testing it seems like the unflattening in higher versions of lower versions works without code changes on the unflattening side. It might be less effort for you this way.
  18. I modified the following VI in the library as a test and it seemed to "work" with messages between 2016 and 2014: C:\Program Files (x86)\National Instruments\LabVIEW 2016\vi.lib\drjdpowell\Messenging\Core Messages\VarMessage\Flatten Data.vi I am not sure if any information is lost flattening 2016 variant data to 2012 data. Need to research further, but thought I'd throw the VI up for discussion Flatten Data.vi
  19. Yes there is a way as to tell 2016 to flatten to 2014 (and lower) described in Thorics link above. Enjoy your holiday we can look at when you get back.
  20. Hi Thoric, Are you having the variant problem using Messenger specifically or just the same generic problem with flattening variants between versions of LabVIEW? I took a little peak under the hood of the Messenger Library flatten / unflatten VIs and they have a U8 byte to define what items are present in the flatten data. Maybe you already tried this based on your message, but one possible workaround would be to embed the 5 bits of version data (would only work up to LV2020 ) from the white paper you referenced into the upper portion of the U8 in the messenger library. Not sure i
  21. I have a scenario where I'd like to use Messenger to send TCP messages between a LV 2014 machine/app to/from a LV 2016 machine/app. I started experimenting using the examples provided with the Messenger library.... Starting TCP Control Server (Messenging).vi on the 2016 machine and TCP Control Client (Messenging).vi on the 2014 machine. On startup, the first message from the client (2014) goes through to the server (2016) fine, but when the 2016 machine replies back the received message on the 2014 machine is not unflattened properly in the "Route Back Reply" case of the TCP Client Actor an
  22. Take a look at drjdpowell's Messenger library (available in VIPM). I believe the demo shows an example of how to do what you want. Its relatively easy to learn the basics, and its even more powerful under the hood.
  • Create New...

Important Information

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