running multiple instances of VBAI does not work

[declercq_tom@waak.be]

Hello everybody,

We are running 4 instances of VBAI simultaneously. Recently we had to copy this (because production is doubling).

With our first system we experienced no problems when trying to run multiple instances of VBAI. This time however this does not work.

Our system:

• 4 cams: Allied Manta 201C
• camera's are triggered (rising edge) seperately but almost simultaneously.
• Four port NIC (with the correct driver :-))
• 4 ports and our on-noard port are bridged.
• computer: intel I5 (4 cores)
• Run-time license Vision Builder 2012.
• Programmed with Vision Builder AI 2012.
• Interface programmed in C# (receives images from the 4 programs and displays relevant info on screen).

Steps taken:

• Test with our program that opens 4 instances of VBAI. Result: Only 1 instance opens.
• Removed our bridge an connected our cams over a switch. Result: Only 1 instance opens.
• Opened the 4 VBAI-programs directly (but separately) in VBAI. Result: Each of the programs opens and is fully working.
• Opened 2 programs at once (with VBAI). Result: Fist opens and is fully working. When opening the second program we get error messages saying that it's not possible to connect with our camera.
• The above test was performed with:
1. The cams connected to our 4-port NIC.
2. The cams connected over a switch.
• I also wrote 4 simple programs (just grabbing an image followed by a delay)
• With those programs I tried the above test (opening VBAI 2 times and running both programs simultaneously). Same problem: 1programs starts, error messages when opening a second program.

I have a feeling that its a network issue, but what is bothering me is that, when bridged, I dont see a difference with our other computer that works on our original assemblyline. When working over a switch our settings are the same as on a computer which does not have a 4-port NIC. The other (and older) computer) allows us to run multiple instances.

Any thoughts?

All help would be greatly appreciated. I'm sure I'm missing something obvious here, but I really don't see it.

If you need more information on something, just let me know.

With kind regards,
Tom Declercq

[Brad]

Check your Vision Builder.ini and make sure there is an entry for AlliwMultipleInstances=true. You can check your setup that works to see what this looks like. Not sure how it got removed but that is likely the problem.

Hope that helps
Brad

[Vasileios.T]

Hello Tom,

I am Vasileios, an Applications Engineer with National Instruments. I am happy to assist you regarding your query.

As Brad responded, check your Vision Builder.ini, located in the installation folder of the Vision Builder AI,  to verify the following entry; allowmultipleinstances=True,  is set to true.
 
I would like to ask you some follow-up questions so I can get a deeper understanding of your issue:

1. How had you the cameras connected on your previous setup? Were you using a switch, and if yes, was it the same model, a bridge, or plc?
2. What model of NIC are you using?
3. In what resolution do you take your images? What is their size?
4. Could you post the error code(s) of the error messages you referering?

Could you please explain what do you mean by saying: “I dont see a difference with our other computer that works on our original assemblyline.”, are you talking about software or hardware?

It sounds to me as a bandwidth related issue. Does your switch support jumpo frames and if yes are you sure this feature is enabled?

I have found this article which might be helpful in your case:
http://www.ni.com/white-paper/12558/en/#toc3

I hope that this is helpful and you are successful in your application.

Kind regards,

Vasileios

[declercq_tom@waak.be]

Hello Brad and Vasileios,

Thanks for the replies!

We checked the Vision builder.ini and the entry allowmultipleinstances was allready set to true.

When I said that I don't see a difference between this set-up and the previous one, I really mean both hard- and software. We purchased an exact copy of our previous computer and installed all the software that was on the other.

On our first assembly line we first had a setup wich consisted out of a computer, a switch and 4 cams.

Later we bought a new computer with an extra 4-port NIC so we could eliminate the switch. (The NIC is NI PCIe-8233.) We bridged the ports to make this work. See post http://forums.ni.com/t5/Machine-Vision/bridging-a-four-port-NIC-with-the-on-board-port/m-p/3176578#M...

When trying to work with our new computer we started with the 4-port NIC. this did not work.

Afterwards we attached the cams over a switch (thus eliminating the NIC) and we had the same results. When doing this test we used the exact same switch that we used on our old setup.

Our images have a resolution of 1624 x 1234 (8-bit) and we only take 1 image every 5" (with each of the 4 cameras). Our MaxPeakBandwidth is set to 25000000 so this shouldn't be a problem.

Jumbo frames are enabled.

Th error code we are receiving states that our program is unable to acquire images from our camera and unable to read/write... (see immages in attachment.)

So, this looks like a network issue, but what is bothering me is that we get the same result when disabling our bridge and connecting our cameras over a switch.

I hope this clarifies some things for you. If you have more questions or need more information, please do not hesitate to ask.

With kind regards,
Tom Declercq

[Brad]

If you put all 4 cameras in the same inspections, do you start getting errors about bandwidth limitations as you add them? If so, you could try adjusting the Desired Peak Bandwidth to 250 for each camera.

http://digital.ni.com/public.nsf/allkb/EC76AC9B636C6B63862575480003BBFF

Are you using the same cameras as the setup that works? If so, you could also try copying the camera files from the setup that works and use them on the setup that doesn't work. You can find the camera files here:

C:\Users\Public\Documents\National Instruments\NI-IMAQdx\Data

Make sure to copy the icd files from the working system to the non working system and update iid files on the non working system to point to the newly copied camera files.

What error do you get when you try opening all 4 cameras at the same time? Either use 4 IMAQdx Acq steps in VBAI or use LabVIEW to call IMAQdx Open for each camera (this would be the preferred way to test to make sure and get the exact driver error).

Thanks,

Brad

[Vasileios.T]

Hello Tom,

Brad has posted some good steps to make sure that the cameras operate perfectly. Please make sure, when you copy the icd files from your working system, keep a copy of the existing icd files.

If Brad’s steps do not resolve your problem I would like to ask you to provide me with a MAX Technical report.  
Could you generate this report with any connection (NIC or switch)case, as long as both of the computers have the same hardware configuration (either the cameras connected to the switch or to the NIC).

Bellow I have attached a link with an article explaining how to do that:
http://digital.ni.com/public.nsf/allkb/271F252B4EF0A2E0862570E70056A1E4

This will help us verify, you have the same software and hardware configuration in both of the computers.

Kind regards,
Vasileios

[declercq_tom@waak.be]

Brad,

We deleted our icd-files and replaced them with those from the setup that works. No succes.

We will try making an inspection with 4 cameras in it. We'll let you know the result later today.

With kind regards,
Tom

[declercq_tom@waak.be]

Hello Vasileios,

We tried to make a technial report (of the not-functioning-system). We will post this later today.

While making this report however, we got an error message (Error 0xBFFF801D The selected device is not currently associated with the NI-IMAQdx driver). Can this somehow be related to our problem?

However, when checking this, the NI-IMAQdx driver was installed. We could always try to reinstall the Acquisition software from the NI-website.

With kind regards,

Tom Declercq

[declercq_tom@waak.be]

Please find the technical report in attachment.

With kind regards,
Tom

[declercq_tom@waak.be]

In attachment the technical report of our 'working' setup.

At a first glance, we do not see any relevant differences with the other report.

With kind regards,
Tom