From Friday, April 19th (11:00 PM CDT) through Saturday, April 20th (2:00 PM CDT), 2024, ni.com will undergo system upgrades that may result in temporary service interruption.
We appreciate your patience as we improve our online experience.
From Friday, April 19th (11:00 PM CDT) through Saturday, April 20th (2:00 PM CDT), 2024, ni.com will undergo system upgrades that may result in temporary service interruption.
We appreciate your patience as we improve our online experience.
04-27-2012 05:46 AM - edited 04-27-2012 05:52 AM
Anwer B and C are clearly wrong.
But I am not sure any of them are right but if any Answer D seems the nearest to being correct.
So why is A the correct answer, surely it's not during the execution of SubVi but the elased time of the execution of SubVi
04-27-2012 05:58 AM - edited 04-27-2012 06:01 AM
To get the timing of the sequence structure, the ms timers would both need to be outside the structure; before frame 1, and after frame 3. As it is, the timers will only time the middle frame.
EDIT:
Although, if we make the (rash) assumption that there is nothing else on that block diagram, then the subtract operation and the count VIs will take a few CPU flops each, and both answers A and D would be expected to be be the same number
04-27-2012 06:16 AM
I get what it's timing. But it's not the elapsed time during the execution of the SubVI as the SubVI would of had to finish to get the elapsed time.
04-27-2012 07:04 AM
I had to re-read all of that several times before I figured you were querying the word "during". My brain is terrible for skim-reading and making assumptions.
Yes, I totally agree with you. As worded, all 4 answers are wrong. The Result indicator would show the execution time of the second frame.
04-27-2012 07:47 AM
Great catch! and thanks for reporting the error. We will have the sample exam corrected and posted as soon as possible.
Zaki Chasmawala - Certification Development Group Manager
04-27-2012 01:02 PM
Of course answer b could be correct also if the execution time of subvi was significantly less than 1 ms. The code shown below has a zero result more often than non-zero with numeric 2 <= 100000.
Lynn
04-27-2012 07:43 PM
@zakic wrote:
Great catch! and thanks for reporting the error. We will have the sample exam corrected and posted as soon as possible.
Zaki Chasmawala - Certification Development Group Manager
Zaki,
Perhaps you need someone with experience behind the podium. I've been chatting about the quality of tests on this forum, Breakpoimt and less public ones
(Yes, I just spoke on the phone today with Hunka RE: what are the barriers to re-cert? Look for a Private forum post "Kaison Event")
Jordan may need to take this post down. But I am your Champion in this! Let us fix the exams
05-01-2012 07:41 AM
Behind the certification podium we have not one person, but a cross functional team of experienced R&D developers, Systems Engineers, Applications Engineers, Certified Partners, and Training & Certification R&D engineers!! We leverage the subject matter expertise of the team to develop, review and test the certification exams. There are opportunities for CLDs and CLAs to participate in the development activities. If you are interested, please email me at certification@ni.com
05-01-2012 09:21 AM
@johnsold wrote:
Of course answer b could be correct also if the execution time of subvi was significantly less than 1 ms. The code shown below has a zero result more often than non-zero with numeric 2 <= 100000.
Lynn
Lynn,
Looking back at this example the 0 is expected. no output from the for loop is used the dead code removal optimization should kill the loop so that the compiled code would have no loop and simply read Numeric and numeric 1 once each.
05-01-2012 10:09 AM
Jeff,
You are right. Even though my hasty example may be irrelevant, answer b (Zero) may be right for many real world cases.
That makes this another case of a poorly worded question, or at least, answer set.
Lynn