Indicator only recives data at the termination of VI

[LabViewEnthusiast]

I have had this problem happen several times. What happens is that I right click a node's terminal and select create>>indicator. But the indicatior only updates when at the end of the VI when I stop it. Anything before that it just shows the previous value, like 0, instead of updating in the middle of the program when it recieves the data. This has happened with a SubVI that I made (unsigned 16-bit indicator) and with the "read" VI (not the "easy read" VI). With the read VI, I made an indicator for the "buffer", which was a string value. It should be noted though that the indicator was a funny, unusual type that the NXT Toolkit ususally has when you select create>>indicator. With the SubVI, I ran it indipendantly and it worked fine, so it was "outputing" data through the terminal. I also put a breakpoint on the wire from the SubVI to the indicator, and it never activated, the VI only ended when it was supposed to.

Does anybody know what's up, know what I should do, or have this happen to them before?

[JS]

Could you post the VI or a screenshot of it? That would be helpful.

[LabViewEnthusiast]

Sorry, I was on vacation for a week and did not see the last reply. I will try to document my problem with screenshots and such.

[MikeS81]

HI LabViewEnthusiast,
it sounds like you never leave your subvi. You will anyhow see that the indicator get a new value, but you first write it to the outside connected indicator if you leave your vi.
Mike

[LabViewEnthusiast]

Mike, could you please  refrase your words a bit or maybe give an example? It was a little confusing.

[MikeS81]

Hi LabViewEnthusiast,
for me it sounds like your sub vi contains a loop which you never exit. If this is right you can maybe see your indicator get updated, but the indicator which is connected in the calling sub vi will never be updated because the loop is still running.
Can you show your code or a picture of it, it would be easier to help you.

Mike

[LabViewEnthusiast]

Thanks Mike; that makes sense now. And it sounds like a good idea but I don't think that's the case with this problem. I've included attachments of a Word document that further discribes my problem and the two VIs that are related to the problem. Hope that helps. Sorry that it's taken a while to get back to this thread