I have different results between CVI 6.0 and 8.0

[Scott Youngren]

Three years ago, I completed a test program compiled under CVI 6.0 running in the Windows98 SE environment on a 900Mhz computer. It is a program which makes many analog measurements of a module resulting in establishing a set of “Calibration Factors” which is written into the modules Eprom. This program is successful in that the module performs perfectly at the system level.

This year, having upgraded to CVI 8.0 in the Windows XP environment, I  recompiled the exact same code under CVI 8.0, and installed it on the same computer running Windows 2000. The resulting performance is that the Calibration Factors are highly inconsistent meaning that repeated “runs” of the test program give entirely different results, results which are totally unusable. Then, removing the computer hard disk with the XP / CVI 8.0 compile and connecting the old hard disk with the Windows98 / CVI 6.0 compile, the test program works perfectly.

The computer communicates to the instruments using GPIB bus using the same AT-GPIB/TNT interface card. The  instruments include a Keithley 2001 DMM, Agilent 53132 counter/timer, and an old HP3497A switching system. Measurements are also obtained from the UUT’s A/D convertor with the digital bus being read by an digital input module in the HP3497A.

In attempting to troubleshoot the problem, I substituted the 900Mhz computer, with my development computer 1.6Ghz,  running Windows XP and a PCI-GPIB card.  The results were the same: inconsistent with repeated runs.

So, my questions to National Instruments would be, is there some detail about the differences between the CVI 6.0 vs  CVI 8.0 environments that is being overlooked to cause this difference in performance?

Could there be any influence by the different Windows operating system, Win98, Win2000, Win XP?

Scott Youngren

Senior Test Engineer

Northrop/Grumman Navigations Systems

818-715-3562

CVI 8.0 Ser. No. M62X86964

[TerryS]

Hi Scott,

What GPIB driver version are you using with CVI 6.0 and CVI 8.0?  With the CVI 8.0 environment, if you run our GPIB example, do you see any incorrect readings?  Also, for the CVI 8.0 environment, when you say you are getting inconsistent readings, does that mean sometimes it works or every run is giving bad readings?

[Scott Youngren]

Thanks for the help. I should have included the GPIB info.

The "older" Win98 computer has a AT-GPIB/TNT with 2.7.1

My development computer XP SP2 has the PCI-GPIB with 2.43

The recompiled test program using CVI 8.0 was compiled in release mode just as the older CVI 6.0 program.

I will continue to find additional information and try to narrow down the cause of the inconsistencies.

Meanwhile, the old Win98 computer is back on-line and module testing is proceeding.

Scott Youngren

[Scott Youngren]

Terry

I missed this question: Yes, every test run is inconsistent.

[TerryS]

Hi Scott,

If you run our GPIB example for CVI 8.0, do you receive any incorrect readings?

[Scott Youngren]

Terry

I will go into the lab and try it, and more specifically, I'll try addressing the instrument I think might be the problem.

thanks

Scott

[Scott Youngren]

Terry

The GPIB example [gpibw.prj] works fine. All of my GPIB functions perform fine under 8.0 as in 6.0,

in fact, I'm finishing a 2nd test program using the exact same hardware and driver code. It is much simpler and it works fine.

I'll include my "intermediate" driver,

Instrmts.prj, a DLL used in both applications for your inspection. The GPIB instruments on line are

Keithley 2001 using KE2001.fp

HP53132 using hp5313xa.fp

HP6129 using my own driver

HP3497A using my own driver

This entire setup is housed in a 1980 creation [with older DMM and Counter] which was previously run by an HP85 computer!

There may not be anything wrong here in the supplied code, but it may some hard-to-find timing issue with my hardware between the instruments and the UUT. I'm continuing to look at that.

[nayer]

Hey,
I apologize to junry to perform NI-Spy this will show at which call you are getting an error, and will help you troubleshoot it.
Regards,
Nikhil A.