Data Acquisition Idea Exchange

About Data Acquisition Idea Exchange

Have an idea for new DAQ hardware or DAQ software features?

  1. Browse by label or search in the Data Acquisition Idea Exchange to see if your idea has previously been submitted. If your idea exists be sure to vote for the idea by giving it kudos to indicate your approval!
  2. If your idea has not been submitted click Post New Idea to submit a product idea. Be sure to submit a separate post for each idea.
  3. Watch as the community gives your idea kudos and adds their input.
  4. As NI R&D considers the idea, they will change the idea status.
  5. Give kudos to other ideas that you would like to see implemented!
Top Kudoed Authors
cancel
Showing results for 
Search instead for 
Did you mean: 

Create a new ±60 V version of the NI9205 C-Series Module

Currently there are only two options for acquiring +/-60V input signals:

NI 9221: 8-Channel, ±60V, 12-Bit Analog Input Modules ($582)

NI 9229: 4-Channel, ±60 V, 24-Bit Simultaneous,Channel-to-Channel Isolated Analog Input Modules  ($1427)

 

I would like to see a new module provided that is identical to the NI9205 (32-Channel Single-Ended, 16-Channel Differential, ±200 mV to ±10 V, 16-Bit Analog Input Module, $881) but with an input signal range of ±60 V.

 

 

2 Comments
Member

What aspect of your application prevents you from using a couple of resistors as a potential divider to get the input voltage range you want?

Member

SteveD123,

If I only needed a couple of channels for greater than +/-10V range than I would use a resistor divider, however, there are times when I need many channels greater than +/-10V. I also work to reduce design complexity were possible. Although a resistor divider is a simple enough concept, the following are some reasons for not adding resistor dividers.

-          Adding a resistor divider increases noise susceptibility because the shielding has to be cut back much further to allows for the implementation of a resistor divider.

-          Adding a resistor divider increases the size and complexity of the schematic, increases assembly time, increases fault tree complexity and development time, increases integration and test time, increases opportunities for errors in wiring, increases parts procurement time and increases hardware implementation footprint. All of this adds cost to the project.

-          Also, there does not seem to be a good industrial solution for implementing/retaining a resistor divider, or other discrete components. Component carriers from Phoenix Contact work, but they are very expensive. It seems as though pairs of screw terminal strips are the best solution but still undesirable for our purposes.

Furthermore, requesting a +/-60V version of the 9502 should be no different than the existing 9201/9221 or 9229/9239 pairs of modules.

Thanks