NI Home > Community > NI Discussion Forums

Data Acquisition Idea Exchange

Showing results for 
Search instead for 
Do you mean 
The NI Idea Exchange is a product feedback forum where NI R&D and users work together to submit ideas, collaborate on their development, and vote for the ones they like best. View all of the NI Idea Exchanges to post an idea or add your opinion on an existing one today!
New Idea

Add 64bit Linux support to DAQmx

Status: New
by Member ibm0815 on ‎08-04-2014 06:36 AM

It would be great to develop software on 64bit Linux sytem using DAQmx.

Since we`re developing software for 64bit Linux this is a must for us - this means a 64bit Kernelmodule as well as 64bit libraries.

Additional TDMS Metadata

Status: New
by Knight of NI Knight of NI on ‎05-16-2014 02:13 PM

Just ran into a situation where I need to stream a lot of data to TDMS.  The only problem is that I need to store additional metadata with the channels.  I could go through all of the generated TDMS files and insert them after the fact, but this is kind of tedius.  I propose a way to add metadata to the channel.  My first thought was to use a variant input on the Create DAQmx Channel, but some of the polymorphics already have really fully connector panes.  So I am now thinking to just add a property to the Channel Property Node that is just a variant.  When logging to TMDS, the variant attributes can be put in the metadata of the channel.  Do something similar for the group so that we can have additional group metadata.


Metadata that I'm currently thinking about could include sensor serial number and calibration data.  I'm sure there is plenty of other information we would like to store with the TDMS file.



How often you have build Labview applications using simulated DaqMx boards ...

And how often you were limited by the default behaviour of simulated boards ... ( Sinewave for analogic inputs, Counter square signal for digital inputs ... )


It would be nice to integrate in DaqMx simulated boards, the abilty to modify the default behaviour of simulated inputs ... thru dedicated popups


It would be nice, for each task linked to a simulated daqMx board, to launch a popup window ...


  • For digital input, give the abilty to modify for each configured channel , the current binary value.
  • For analog input, give the ability to choose between a fixed value, a sine wave, a square signal ... white noise ...
  • For digital output, give the ability to view the current setted values
  • For analog output, give the ability to view the current simulated output value on a waveform chart ...


A more powerfull tool could also integrate a simulated channels switching mechanism ... A simulated output could be linked to a simulated input 


This feature could be a good way to create an application which could simulate a complete process ... this application could be used to validate a complete system

(such a kind of SIL architecture)


Other idea .... A complete daqMx simulation API ...


  • Creation of an API which could instanciate a simulated daqMx board (Wich could be seen via MAX)
    • Takes place of the actual limited daqMx simulated board
  • This device could then be accessed by other application thru daqMx
  • This API could have access to all channels of this simulated device.
  • This API could force, programmatically, the value of the simulated input channels according to a realistic process model


Something like this ...





The vast majority of my working life is spent with RIO devices or midrange X series cards, but I often come across applications where an inexpensive, reliable DAQ would be handy for low level tasks - monitoring presence sensors, measuring voltages at moderate precision and slow speed, providing interlocks for material storage bins etc.


Traditionally, you'll see a lot of USB 600X units being used for applications like these. However, running on USB has a few associated problems: unreliability of the Windows bus, cable strain relief on USB connectors, mounting of USB 600X units, connection type. Don't get me wrong, you can do a lot with these units but they're not an ideal, inexpensive solution for production processes.


There's a jump between the functionality of these USB units and X (or even M or E for the vintage crowd) series cards. The only thing that's really in that range anymore is the B series PCI-6010 card, which has the fantastic benefit of using a 37W DSUB connector too, but is a little limited in terms of channel offerings and the like.


I'd like to see the B series range revived to provide products that fit between the PCIe-6320 and the USB 600X devices, providing non-USB connection and preferably with a DSUB backplane connector for cost and ease of use. This would provide a more reliable offering for simple acquisition tasks in the industrial environment at a cost-effective price point.

NI MAX global virtual channels

Status: New
by Member Freelion8 on ‎08-24-2015 07:56 AM

Why new NI MAX does not sort global virtual channels by name? It used to be very handy to have that option, however, after 2014, they decided to remove this very useful function away without any reason (at least I can not think of any reason). I am currently using NI MAX 15.0 and I could not find anything in the menu about how to sort my global virtual channels by name. They could have implemented something in the menu easily to sort channels by name or something else instead of removing that useful function.

Every n encoder pulses callback

Status: New
by Member SteveD123 on ‎06-28-2015 02:32 PM

It is a frequent requirement to make measurements on production lines. Position on these is often tracked with Rotary Encoders . Many NI devices can accept the quadrature pulse train from such a device, and correctly produce a current position count. The information in the 2 phase pulse train allows the counter to correctly track foward and reverse motion.


What would be very useful would be a callback in NI-DaqMX that is called after every n pulses, ideally with a flag to indicate whether the counter is higher or lower than the previous value, i.e. the direction.


This has recently been discussed on the multifunction DAQ board here: . So I am not alone in requesting something more programmer friendly than the workaround offered there.



We mostly develop PXIe based high speed (RF) applictions which stores data on one or more RAIDs.

Several customers already asked for a high speed ethernet connection do move this data over the net.


Yet there is only one PXIe 10 GBE availible and it is NOT from NI.

We would already need a 40 GBE solution the comming year.


PCI Express 40 GBE ist almost commonly avalilible, a mezzanine board solution would be sufficient if nothing else works.

But there is no carrier board availibe, too.


I feel kind of left alone with all this data, waiting on those bigg RAIDs for beeing processed / copied.



Terminal Block layouts

Status: New
by Member Kalle on ‎09-18-2012 01:58 PM

NI Terminal block layout should be designed so that wiring can be done straight from terminal to wire trunking.


For example TBX-68 has 68 wire terminals aligned to inside of the terminal block. This causes that each wire should make tight curve to wire trunking. Another problem with TBX-68 is that wires are heavily overlapped because of the terminal alignment.


Also the cables from terminal block to DAQ device should be aligned to go directly to wire trunking (not straight up).





Hard Drive cRIO Modules

Status: New
by Active Participant rex1030 ‎12-08-2010 01:56 PM - edited ‎12-08-2010 01:57 PM

We really need a hard drive crio module for long term monitoring and reliably storing large amounts of data remotely.






1. Solid State Drive: Fast, reliable, and durable. Extremely high data rates. It would be a very high price module but it could be made to handle extreme temperatures and harsh conditions. It should be available in different capacities, varying in price.


2. Conventional Hard Drive: This would give any user the ability to store large amounts of storage, in the order of hundreds of Gigabytes. This type should also come in varying storage capacities.


For this to be useable:


1. It would need to support a file system other than FATxx. The risk of data corruption due to power loss/cycling during recording makes anything that uses this file system completely unreliable and utterly useless for long term monitoring. You can record for two months straight and then something goes wrong and you have nothing but a dead usb drive. So any other file system that is not so susceptible to corruption/damage due to power loss would be fine, reliance, NTFS, etc.


2. You should be able to plug in multiple modules and RAID them together for redundancy. This would insure data security and increase the usability of the cRIO for long term remote monitoring in almost any situation. 



Current cRIO storage issues:

We use NI products primarily in our lab and LabVIEW is awesome. I hope that while being very forward about our issues, we will not upset anyone or turn anyone away from any NI products.  However, attempting to use a cRIO device for long term remote monitoring has brought current storage shortfalls to the forefront and data loss has cost us dearly. These new hard drive modules would solve all the shortfalls of the current storage solutions for the crio. The biggest limitation of the cRIO for long term monitoring at the moment is the fact that it does not support a reliable file system on any external storage. The SD Card module has extremely fast data transfer rates but if power is lost while the SD card is mounted, not only is all the data lost, but the card needs to be physically removed from the device and reformatted with a PC. Even with the best UPS, this module is not suitable for long term monitoring. USB drives have a much slower data transfer rate and are susceptible to the same corruption due to power loss.


When we have brought up these issues in the past, the solution offered is to set up a reliable power backup system. It seems that those suggesting this have never tried to use the device with a large application in a situation where they have no physical access to the device, like 500 miles away. Unfortunately, the crio is susceptible to freezing or hanging up and becoming completely unresponsive over the network to a point that it can not be rebooted over the network at all. (Yes even with the setting about halting all processes if TCP becomes unresponsive). We would have to send someone all the way out to the device to hit the reset button or cycle power. Programs freeze, OS' freeze or crash, drivers crash, stuff happens. This should not put the data being stored at risk.


I would put money on something like this being already developed by NI. I hope you guys think the module is a good idea, even if you don't agree with all the problems I brought up. I searched around for an idea like this and my apologies if this is a re-post.



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

Status: New
by Member crcragun ‎03-12-2015 02:32 PM - edited ‎03-12-2015 02:33 PM

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.





For those of us who develop using DAQmx all the time, this might seem silly.  Nonetheless, I'm finding that users of my software are repeatedly having a tough time figuring out how to select multiple physical channels for applications that use DAQmx.  Here's what I'm talking about:



Typically a user of my universal logger application wishes to acquire from ai0:7, for example.  They attempt to hold down shift and select multiple channels, only to assume that one channel at a time may be aquired.  For some odd reason, nearly everyone fears the "Browse" option because they don't know what it does.



While, as a developer, I have no problem whatsoever knowing to "Browse" in order to accomplish this, I was just asked how to do this for literally the fifth time by a user.  Thus, I'm faced with three choices: Keep answering the same question repeatedly, develop my own channel selection interface, or ask if the stock NI interface may be improved.


I'm not sure of the best way to improve the interface, but the least painless manner to do so might be to simply display the "Browse" dialog on first click rather than displaying the drop-down menu.


Please, everyone, by all means feel free to offer better ideas.  What I do know for certain, though, is that average users around here continually have a tough time with this.


Thanks very much,




Currently, there is no way to format a .txt file to log data with a time stamp that includes the current time that the data is being acquired. When creating a "Save to ASCII/LVM" event, the "Time Axis Preference" setting under the File Settings tab has two options: Absolute Time or Relative Time. Relative time works as expected, logging the time starting from 0 seconds until the data acquisition is complete. However, the Absolule Time setting logs the time stamp as time in seconds from some arbitrary point in time, usually the Windows system time in seconds. 


This timestamp is essentially useless without a conversion to the actual time. It would be great if the Absolute Time logged the current time in hours:minutes:seconds instead. 

Many CAN protocols require a byte in a cyclic message to be incremented each time the message is sent (this is often byte 0). I might have read somewhere that this is possible with VeriStand but I am not using it. So when using only LabVIEW and the NI-XNET API, the only way to achieve this is to call the XNET Write function to manually set the value of this byte. But having to call the API each time the message should be sent removes all the benefits of cylic messages... Moreover LabVIEW can't guarantee the same level of speed and determinism (if the message is to be sent every 5ms for example).

Being able to configure a signal to be an auto-incremented counter would be a huge improvement. To me, this is a must-have, not a nice-to-have...

Show "Advanced" DAQmx Terminals by Default

Status: New
by Trusted Enthusiast on ‎06-04-2013 04:38 PM

By default, DAQmx terminal constants/controls only show a subset of what is really available.  To see everything, you have to right-click the terminal and select "I/O Name Filtering", then check "Include Advanced Terminals":


Untitled 1 Block Diagram _2013-06-04_16-16-29.png



I guess this is intended to prevent new users from being overwhelmed.  However, what is really does is create a hurdle that prevents them from configuring their device in a more "advanced" manner since they have no idea that the name filtering box exists.


I am putting "advanced" in quotes because I find the distinction very much arbitrary.



As a more experienced DAQmx user, I change the I/O name filtering literally every time I put down a terminal without thinking about it (who can keep track of which subset of DAQmx applications are considered "advanced").  The worst part about this is trying to explain how to do something to newer users and having to tell them to change the I/O name filtering every single time (or if you don't, you'll almost certainly get a response back like this).




Why not make the so-called "advanced" terminals show in the drop-down list by default?

I often use one DAQ device to test the basic functionality of another device and like to be able to quickly do this through test panels.  Unfortunately, MAX does not allow the user to open more than a single test panel at once.  The current workaround for this is to launch the test panels outside of MAX (see this KB).


It would be nice to have the same functionality when opening test panels in MAX.  Specifically, I would like to be able to do the following with a Test Panel open:

1.  Be able to navigate through MAX to do things like check device pinouts, calibration date, etc.


2.  Be able to move and/or resize the original MAX Window (it always seems to be blocking other applications that I want to view alongside the Test Panel)


3.  Open a test panel for a second (or third...) device.


It is nice that there is a workaround in place already but I think it would be nice if MAX had this behavior to begin with.

Full cross-platform compatibility for DAQmx

Status: New
by Member grdetil on ‎04-26-2011 12:45 PM

It would be great if the full DAQmx library supported all NI data acquisition products on Windows, Mac OS X and Linux. The situation right now is too much of a hodge-podge of diverse drivers with too many limitations. There's an old, full DAQmx library that supports older devices on older Linux systems, but it doesn't look like it's been updated for years.  DAQmx Base is available for more current Linux and Mac OS systems, but doesn't support all NI devices (especially newer products).  DAQmx Base is also quite limited, and can't do a number of things the full DAQmx library can.  It's also fairly bloated and slow compared to DAQmx.  While I got my own application working under both Linux and Windows, there's a number of things about the Linux version that just aren't as nice as the Windows version right now.  I've seen complaints in the forums from others who have abandoned their efforts to port their applications from Windows to Mac OS or Linux because they don't see DAQmx Base as solid or "commercial-grade" enough.


I'd really like to be able to develop my application and be able to easily port it to any current Windows, Mac or Linux system, and have it support any current NI multi-function DAQ device, with a fast, capable and consistent C/C++ API.


Anyone else see this as a priority for NI R&D?

Add support for SCXI-1600 in 64-bit Windows

Status: New
by Member dougm on ‎09-08-2011 05:21 PM



I recently discovered that the SCXI-1600 is not supported in 64-bit Windows.  From what NI has told me, it is possible for the hardware to be supported, but NI has chosen not to create a device driver for it.


I'm a bit perplexed by this position, since I have become accustomed to my NI hardware just working.  It's not like NI to just abandon support for a piece of hardware like this -- especially one that is still for sale on their website.


Please vote if you have an SCXI-1600 and might want to use it in a 64-bit OS at some time in the future.






Add LabVIEW events based on hardware

Status: New
by Trusted Enthusiast Trusted Enthusiast on ‎08-26-2010 12:47 AM

Based on this question, I would like to add a new category of events to LabVIEW: Max-events.


This category could contain the following events:

-Hardware Added

-Hardware removed

-Configuration changed





If you know other events, please post them.

One more DAQmx feature?

Status: New
by Proven Zealot Proven Zealot on ‎04-05-2014 05:01 PM

At the new client.. no shock to many of you I "Get around"


I explained to some of my new compadres the DAQmx "Tasks" need to be created once.... Preferably during development!

I even created a new task in MAX using the DAQmx wizard, Dragged it to the LabVIEW project explorer and all of that!


I even went so far as to name the "AUX" temperature channel "armpit"- Trust me, after 5 minutes delivering a .lvproj based on the "Contineous measuement and logging (DAQmx) project template" it was impressive to the client that the plot "armpit" showed 37C on the chart.  Guess where the thermocouple was.


So, Because I am that amazing, I showed them that they could Drag-n-Drop the Task to MAX and use MAX to monitor my armpit temperature.  I even showed them that MAX could show them the wiring diagram!


"HOLD IT"! they said, The wiring diagram is right there! On SCREEN! per channel! 

That is where I just about lost my mind!  They wanted to see this connection diagram for another Channel--- that worked! BUT there was no way to output that wonderful data!


"Can I create a Wiring Diagram for this channel, device or task?" were the next words out of their mouths.  I WAS STUNNED!  "Not today" I said, "I'll post that excellent idea!"


I find myself quite often needing to modify the DaqMX tasks of chassis that aren't currently plugged into my system.  I develope on a laptop, and then transfer the compiled programs to other machines.  When the other machines are running the code and thus using the hardware I have to export my tasks and chassis, delete the live but unplugged chassis from my machine, then import the tasks and chassis back in generating the simulated chassis.  When I'm finished with the task change and code update, to test it I have to export the tasks and chassis, plug in the chassis, and re-import to get a live chassis back.


Can it be made as simple as right clicking on a chassis and selecting 'simulated' from the menu to allow me to configure tasks without the hardware present?




Certified LabVIEW Developer

GE Appliances

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!
Idea Statuses