If you buy LabVIEW Professional, you get the "Professiional G Developers Tools
Reference Manual". In there, you will a brief chapter on Quality standards
such as ISO and some ideas for configuration management and testing guidelines.
I suspect that this is as much an official opinion you're liable to get from
NI.
"Ronald" wrote:
>Kevin,>>I think the last sentence is the truth: "There has to be a certain
amount of>trust between you and the auditor.">>What I did was what you wrote:
We've asked a calibration lab to certify the>number. The difference is that
I put it in another vi in which the measured>data is simply multiplied with
this number.>>In the sentence "Why isn't anyone from NI responding" I meant:
This could>give lots of users a lot of problems in the future. What's the
opinion of NI>in this...>>>Ronald>>Kevin B. Kent
schreef in berichtnieuws>39FE487F.6CDCBDC@mail.usa.alcatel.com...>> Ronald
wrote:>>>> > Mmm, idea!>> >>> > Why isn't anyone from NI responding?>> >>>>>
Not sure why you would expect them to. What we are talking about here is>>
revision control and>> following procedures. There are any number of ways
to keep someone from>> changing a VI.>> Password protect, remove diagram,
build it into an application.>> As far as revision number and revision control,
as long as none of the>above>> are done then>> it makes no difference. That
said there are a good number of revision>control>> systems (RCS)>> that prevent
unautorized persons from getting editable copies of VIs.>> As far as auditors
as concerned, if you follow your procedures then they>have>> little cause>>
to question your results.>> Another option is to have the calibration lab
(if you have one) certify>the>> number (10.2206) and>> simply put it into
the test procedure and make it an input on the front>panel.>> There has to
be a certain amount of trust between you and the auditor.>> Just my opinion>>
Kevin Kent>>>> >>> > Timothy John Streeter schreef
in berichtnieuws>> > 39FDDFCA.FB16A9AE@tait.co.nz...>> > > Hi Boozz>> > >>>
> > You could password protect your VI.>> > >>> > > Maybe you could have
a calibration program, that only authorized users>can>> > have access, that
saves the calibration data to a file>> > > for test system to read and also
generates a logged history of the>> > changes.>> > >>> > > Tim>> > >>> >
> Boozz wrote:>> > >>> > > > Hi,>> > > >>> > > > Some days ago I made a vi
(calculating the mean current from a>machine>> > over>> > > > 10 secs.) and
this instrument is used for a withness test. Of>course,>> > once>> > > >
this vi is made I can change the appearance of it by using for>example>>
> other>> > > > constant values etc.>> > > >>> > > > How can I be sure that
this instrument is accepted by an auditor (or>> > > > notified body)?>> >
> >>> > > > I looked at the vi-properties and noticed that every time I change>>
> something>> > > > in the vi (and of course save the whole thing), the revision
history>is>> > > > changed by LabView. Is this a solid way of proof that
nothing in the>vi>> > has>> > > > changed?>> > > >>> > > > Maybe this helps
in explaning my problem:>> > > >>> > > > I use a transducer that gives a
current of 0..20 mA linear to a the>> > actual>> > > > current of 0..50A.
I use the resistor from NI (249 Ohms, so the>current>> > will>> > > > be
transformed to 0..5 Volts). For recalculation we found out that>the>> > >
> measured voltage should be multiplied with 10.2206. In this case the>>
> system>> > > > (transducer, shunt and DAQ-board) acts as a 0.5% class measuring>>
> instrument.>> > > > We also calibrated this system.>> > > >>> > > > If
I want to cheat on the measurement (for whatever reason it may>be) I>> >
can>> > > > simply change the 10.2206 into another value. It's even possible
to>do>> > it>> > > > without having the current revision number changed.
(backup the>revision>> > > > before the one changed and voila)>> > > >>>
> > > This means: problem with my auditor.>> > > >>> > > > Does anyone have
any idea about how to solve this 'problem'. I think>> > this>> > > > can
be of very big consequence to NI as more and more conventional>> > apparatus>>
> > > are 'build' by LabView.>> > > >>> > > > Thanx>> > >>>>>
