Additional NI Software Idea Exchange

Community Browser
cancel
Showing results for 
Search instead for 
Did you mean: 
Post an idea

I have many procedures that check for certain conditions before completing its intended function. If a precondition is not met, the procedure exits. It'd be nice to be able to pop up dialogs as necessary. Right now, in order to do so, I have to have the procedure call other alarms if I want any sort of feedback/popup which gets convoluted pretty quickly. Thanks.

I created a VI and wrote the description thinking I will retrieve it later in Veristand but it is not the case.

I have to copy and paste it into Veristand.

 

It would be nice to have teh direct copy.

Hello,

I'd like to see the Calculated Channels in System Explorer displayed in something other than the evaluation order. I'd like to sort by name due to the large number of calculated channels that I have.

Thanks.

To raise the visibility of the increasing number of NI VeriStand add-ons available on the website, I suggest we put a button on the Getting Started Window of NI VeriStand that takes the user to www.ni.com/veristand/addons.htm

 

This doesn't have to be a button on the window, it could be in the menu.. under file, tools or help.

The Project Explorer is inoperable when the System Definition File is open.

I frequently want to open the Workspace or Stimulus Profile Editor while working on the System Definition File.

This should be possible because it is already possible to let the Workspace open before you start the System Definition File.

 

Frank

Aside from the fact that most of the errors are just pulled up from device drivers which makes them vague and not at all related to the actual VeriStand function happens (so part 1 of this feature request is an overhaul of our error reporting in VeriStand), it would be great if it actually logged these or gave you the option to save to a file. This means that you can then send this to NI Support for assistance or at the very least, document issues.

Is there any development in improving the pallet of Calculated Channels? The new stimulus profile editor has a very large list of mathematical and logical functions while the Calculated Channels pallet is very limited. Thanks.

Also, it'd be great if the conditional could be a bit more flexible (e.g., allow multiple conditions) or be changed to a switch/case type function.

The built in CAN information channels for timestamp and time difference are useful. However, to detect a dead CAN network, I'd really like to know the time since a message was last received. The time difference doesn't work because it waits for a next frame before computing the time difference. If I have a 10 Hz frame that is not coming in, it will just display 0.10 s even if no new frames come in. I'd like to have a time since the last message so I can detect if the message is no longer coming in. I was thinking of doing a difference between system time and the most recent receive time, but system time is relative to the start of VeriStand while the CAN receive time seems to refer to real world time. I hear that real world time will be available in VeriStand 2012, so we can more easily do this checking in a calculated channel, but it'd be great to have this feature as a CAN information channel. Thank you.

Hello,

 

You can not choose multiple Workspace objects to move in VS 2011, so it is time-consuming to organize the Workspace. I hope that 1. you can choose and move multiple objects at the same time  2. you can align object by alignment tool like below images.

Align.png

 

regards,

 

Saku

Hello,

 

As the Idea : Controls for macros , it would be nice to add screen controls in order to handle with procedures !

 

For the moment, VeriStand RT procedures are only launched using alarms !

 

It could be usefull to be able to launch or stop procedures using screen objects. (Like the Model controller !)

 

ProcedureObjects.png

 

Manu.net

Currently, In VeriStand, you can refresh Models if you made a change or added/removed channels.  I would like to be able to refresh custom devices so I do not have to completely remove it and add it again when I add or remove a channel. 

Hey there,

 

Versioning is often a fairly important matter when it comes to long/large projects. When a new FPGA bitfile is generated in LabVIEW, there's a possibility to change its version (in the build specification). As a result, a parse of the .lvbitx file as text file can be used to decypher the aforementioned version (it's following the <BuildSpecVersion> tag).

 

Though, there's no simple way (aside of making a Custom Device or modifying the accepted tags in the xsd file)) to get this information in Veristand after importing a new FPGA personality. The version may be important, but more information about the bitfile might need to be made public in this window :

FPGA_Info.png

 

In fact, there are a bunch of information that are readable in VeriStand about the model imported (name, version...). Once more, the FPGA needs the same feature 😉

 

Have a great day,

 

 

Hi,

 

Today we need to configure the hardware in MAX and in System Explorer.

 

Allow VS to import the hardware configuration from MAX and eliminate the DIO number of ports and port size manual definition.

 

I guessed the PXI2569 and PXI2570 configuration in a trial and fail matter till I found the number that did not cause an error during deploy.

 

Import all board I/O configuration and let the user remove what is unused later.

 

Cheers,

CHCastro

I'd like a way to select/deselect dependencies that get sent to the target upon deployment. I understand that all dependencies are necessary for a project to run. However, I deploy one system definition to many targets, and often there are very minor changes that don't need a transfer of all the dependencies which takes time. Also, the fact that the default is to transfer all dependencies means I need to keep every computer updated and sync'd or else a deployment could fail. I'd like the ability to manage which dependencies to transfer and potentially overwrite. Thank you.

Hello,

 

In System Explorer, you can not change the order of items by drag & drop. It is better for users to change the order of items like Calculated Channel.

image.png

 

However, I guess better mapping usablitity will resolve this problems. If the mapping is like below image and the order can be changed, it is better for users to map all things.

image2.png

 

Regards,

 

Saku

Currently error messages are quite vague - they say what failed, but don't say where. It might be fine in LabVIEW development, where error pops up in the exact location on the block diagram, but it's not well suited for Veristand, where all we have is the error message. Take this as an example:

 

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
The VeriStand Gateway encountered an error while deploying the System Definition file.

Details:
Error -1074384704 occurred at Project Window.lvlib:Project Window.vi >> Project Window.lvlib:Command Loop.vi >> NI_VS Workspace ExecutionAPI.lvlib:NI VeriStand - Connect to System.vi

Possible reason(s):

NI-XNET:  (Hex 0xBFF630C0) A property value was out of range or incorrect. Solution: specify a correct value.
=========================
NI VeriStand:  NI VeriStand Engine.lvlib:VeriStand Engine Wrapper (RT).vi >> NI VeriStand Engine.lvlib:VeriStand Engine.vi >> NI VeriStand Engine.lvlib:VeriStand Engine State Machine.vi >> NI VeriStand Engine.lvlib:Initialize Inline Custom Devices.vi >> Custom Devices Storage.lvlib:Initialize Device (HW Interface).vi

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
 

I'm trying since 2 days to figure out which property is invalid - I have 4 CAN channels and 2 LIN channels in the SDF... If there was an information about the channel/value that causes the error, it'd be far easier to sort the problem out.

Custom Device development does not have a very good design/develop/test work flow. To improve this, the custom device template tool needs to be rewritten so that it better incorporates design before creating the project/library/VIs.

 

In order to better incorporate design into the process, I envision a custom device template tool that is configuration based. From this tool, a developer would be able to specify the pages, actions, RTM, dynamic buttons, help topics, and glyphs. The developer should also be able to specify any options the custom device or a given page, RTM, or button may use such as multiple target support RT driver VIs, delete protection, rename protection, RTM/button dependencies and behavior, etc.

 

Once the developer finishes designing the custom device, the XML should be fully implemented and all the necessary VIs (actions, pages, RTMs, etc.) would be created in the library. This would greatly cut down on the overhead of creating new files from templates and modifying the XML over and over. It also encourages developers to do more design of the custom device up front instead of designing while they code.

 

For completeness, it would also be nice if the tool had the capability of linking into Requirements Gateway or something so they could do requirements tracking. I'm not sure how this would work, but it's something that maybe should be investigated.

 

The final aspect of this idea is that there is a need for better testing of custom device developments. I find it difficult to do good tests because my code is always tightly coupled to Item Properties or other things that require VeriStand references. I think this tool could also script some high level test code that would be able to run the pages or RT driver VIs outside of the VeriStand executable. In order to accomplish this, I think VIs could be developed that use the SysDef API to load system definition item information outside of the VeriStand executable so that the references could then be passed to the appropriate page or driver VI. I envision the test VIs are wrappers that wrap up the page, action, RTM, or driver being tested. In the case of pages, the custom device would need to be added to a SysDef and the Init VI would need to be executed. Some pages would also require the section or channel being added to the appropriate section or channel as well. If the configuration tool could script most of this work, I think it would be very helpful.


Regards,

 

Mike

I was thinking for very large systems that use the same channel configuration for multiple channels on the system configuration can be very tedious. A work around for this is the API to build a system definition file but for those customer's with limited or no LabVIEW or .NET experience this isn't valid. 

 

Since we can test the IO channels in MAX by creating tasks for all of our hardware I would like to add the ability to pull the configuration information from a task we've created in MAX and apply them to our channels in VeriStand. So in stead of setting MIN, MAX, input configuration, shunt resistor location and value for 100 channels I can configure it in one location (MAX) and apply the settings to all my Current Channels. Task configuration.PNG

The other issue is if the channel doesn't support all the configurations from each page then we need to contact NI support to add functionality. Recently I worked with a LVDT sensor for a SCXI chassis. This allows customers to have an instant workaround rather than having for NI to allocate resources to update the page.

 

Current VeriStand.PNG

 

By adding MAX task to act as the template for our channels we can edit the parameters for all channels of the same setup from one location (MAX) vs each individual page. This also allows you to test individual channels instantly in MAX to make sure the configuration is valid without resolving other errors across the whole system definition.

MAX Task for VeriStand.PNG

 

Again this is more for deployments where they have 100s of channel similarly configured where configurating each channel is tedious but they are not unique.

Currently when trying to see errors we need to enlarge the window, scroll through the items, and then take a screenshot of the dialog. This was encountered when trying to share my errors with support. We should make this easier through the proposed ability.

 

 

Hello Folks,

 

As a developer, I use to have several screens for Test data display, Manual panel, Model execution control panel, etc. As per to the operator any screen other than Test data display is unnecessary.

 

It will be really good, if we could include the Screen selection in the "User Accounts Manager" with respect to the users like shown below

 

Operator options.PNG

This option lets the administrator to select the specific screens whichever is necessary for the operator.

 

 

-SID