Jump to content

HorseBattery_StapleGuy

Members
  • Posts

    5
  • Joined

  • Last visited

LabVIEW Information

  • Version
    LabVIEW 2017
  • Since
    2017

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

HorseBattery_StapleGuy's Achievements

Newbie

Newbie (1/14)

  • First Post Rare
  • Conversation Starter Rare
  • Week One Done Rare
  • One Month Later Rare

Recent Badges

0

Reputation

  1. Wow, I hadn't heard of any of these. (Newbie here) Are any of these actually more cost effective against NI? Actually, I guess that's going to depend a lot, considering there's tons of form-factors and applications. They don't seem to have their prices listed. Something tells me they'll have the same price ranges, so probably just as expensive in the end without considering changing to new hardware, docs, support/tools, etc.
  2. That's really interesting. Is that something people actually do? Like I imagine it'd have to be a specific situation where the hardware requirements don't match and you have to spin something custom I guess. I imagine that would be really, really expensive in most situations no(?) Because I imagine you'd have to solve calibration issues, layout issues, emission and immunity, plus all the front ends that you'd need like the protection part, the communication interface for the card, testing, certification, etc.
  3. I know that. In most scenarios I imagine unless there's a massive cost reduction without sacrificing some system requirement it won't be worth it. Like maybe there's a requirement of hundreds instead of just one piece or something. But I'm asking more because I want to know what other brands/competitors people use for those kinds of things. Or rather what is the competition of NI in price and capabilities. (For DAQs)
  4. Hello guys! Sorry for asking this question, you've probably heard it before! Are there any decent alternatives to NI hardware like analog input modules when it comes to DAQs? I'm talking about equipment combos like this: NI-9208 (24 bit, 16 channel analog input module) and maybe cDAQ-9188 or cDAQ-9174, or some other model. For example, I've seen and know that there's much, much cheaper alternatives for industrial control if using something like a PLC. But most of those AFAIK have analog input modules that reach 16 bits, and that's not considering the differences in scan rates, for the acquisition tasks, etc. For example in the case of those module its 500S/s. (Pretty sure its aggregate and at high-speed mode though) - Edit: Forgot to mention, all the ADC inputs of these are Isolated too right? They also have a lot of certs. What other options are there besides NI hardware for these tasks? I also know Keyence has equipment, but its also really expensive I think. Plus: Just in case, you may be wondering if me researching alternative equipment is cost effective / would save cash. But my salary for a month is much less than just one module from NI. ( I'm in a developing country. )
  5. That's funny actually. I used to think this stuff didn't matter anymore until I was put in projects where that stuff is suddenly relevant. A lot of the stuff we make has to be right once they leave my hands. Otherwise its GG M8 try better next time. For example in C I've had to pay attention to things I never paid attention to way back then, like sticking to memory with hard limits / avoiding dynamic memory. Not using recursion to not abuse the stack, etc. (Really low powered/cheap weak embedded chips) Upper bounds in execution, etc. Or use different kinds of standards/guidelines for reference, like MISRA. Its actually surprisingly fun despite the limitations. But also tedious. How would something like that look for LabVIEW though? I mean its compiled code but there's probably a big amount of heap usage / memory shenanigans going on under the hood that you probably can't avoid. (At least when programming for desktop)
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

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