Instrument Control (GPIB, Serial, VISA, IVI)
How can I control power supply by steps
Hi
Labview must be transferring colds, I was sick last week also.
I look at your code tomorrow
Labview must be transferring colds, I was sick last week also.
I look at your code tomorrow
Hi
Your flow is almost Ok.
The only thing I would change is the reading of the keithley.
I would do that in the same line as the reading of the HP. just befor or just after the reading of the HP.
In that case it is almost at the same time and belongs to the same power output.
As you set it now you can read the value from the keithley before the output is correct.
The saving of the data could use better naming but is in principle correct.
One way or the other you should not rename all vi's from a library.
The best way to have your own naming would be to name it completely different (don't be subtle but very clear)
Now I'm missing the PSU set output VI.
and I'm very curious why you use units in this vi.
Your flow is almost Ok.
The only thing I would change is the reading of the keithley.
I would do that in the same line as the reading of the HP. just befor or just after the reading of the HP.
In that case it is almost at the same time and belongs to the same power output.
As you set it now you can read the value from the keithley before the output is correct.
The saving of the data could use better naming but is in principle correct.
One way or the other you should not rename all vi's from a library.
The best way to have your own naming would be to name it completely different (don't be subtle but very clear)
Now I'm missing the PSU set output VI.
and I'm very curious why you use units in this vi.
Hi Sophie
This is what I meant about merging both read out of the agilent and the keithley.
It is not optimal because the keithley driver is very badly written, or better historical a mismatch product.
But it is already quite old and LabVIEW has grown a lot since then.
This is what I meant about merging both read out of the agilent and the keithley.
It is not optimal because the keithley driver is very badly written, or better historical a mismatch product.
But it is already quite old and LabVIEW has grown a lot since then.
Hi Spohie
The best way to proceed is to find out WHY there is a difference between the expected and real measurement.
Often the voltage or amp or gauss meter has an old value or picked up too much noise.
Or your waiting was too long or too short.
Also in magnetic measurements the hysteresis makes reproducibility more difficult.
But a simple way to check which measurement have to be redone could be the subvi below.
You made two mistakes that ruined your vi.
The first one is that you are interested in a difference >3 without using the absolute value of the difference so losing all values with a differenc of -3 or even bigger!
The second error is the 0 connected to the N of the for loop resulting in a very fast subvi.
LabVIEW is inherently lazy If you connect two arrays to a function or for loop it will execute only the smallest sized array for indexing.
(and the values of the other array until that index.
But will throw away the bigger indexed values of the bigger array.
And if it can do less because you tell the for loop to excute zero times it will also take the smallest (0) number of loops.
inside the case I did not check anymore!
sorry for the bad naming of the vi
The best way to proceed is to find out WHY there is a difference between the expected and real measurement.
Often the voltage or amp or gauss meter has an old value or picked up too much noise.
Or your waiting was too long or too short.
Also in magnetic measurements the hysteresis makes reproducibility more difficult.
But a simple way to check which measurement have to be redone could be the subvi below.
You made two mistakes that ruined your vi.
The first one is that you are interested in a difference >3 without using the absolute value of the difference so losing all values with a differenc of -3 or even bigger!
The second error is the 0 connected to the N of the for loop resulting in a very fast subvi.
LabVIEW is inherently lazy If you connect two arrays to a function or for loop it will execute only the smallest sized array for indexing.
(and the values of the other array until that index.
But will throw away the bigger indexed values of the bigger array.
And if it can do less because you tell the for loop to excute zero times it will also take the smallest (0) number of loops.
inside the case I did not check anymore!
sorry for the bad naming of the vi
