From 04:00 PM CDT – 08:00 PM CDT (09:00 PM UTC – 01:00 AM UTC) Tuesday, April 16, ni.com will undergo system upgrades that may result in temporary service interruption.
We appreciate your patience as we improve our online experience.
From 04:00 PM CDT – 08:00 PM CDT (09:00 PM UTC – 01:00 AM UTC) Tuesday, April 16, ni.com will undergo system upgrades that may result in temporary service interruption.
We appreciate your patience as we improve our online experience.
03-31-2016 10:13 AM
@RavensFan wrote:You didn't follow Ben's directions.
He is telling you how to make a property node that looks like this.
(You'd need 4 of them, one for each array in each of the two clusters.)
That and/or the hidden array index is set to something other than zero.
Ben
03-31-2016 10:19 AM
As I mentioned my first reply to this thread...
it will NOT work for strict type def controls.
Ben
04-01-2016 01:51 AM - last edited on 04-13-2016 11:21 AM by LiliMcDonald
Thanks Ben and Raven,
I was using the property nodes in the wrong place. Now I am able to get what I want in the subVI (MaxValues_320.VI). However in the main VI (that is where I create the cluster) it still doesn't change. I have already changed from stryct type definition to type definition and the cluster is set to size to fit.
I'm attaching the main VI so you can check it.
Thanks in advance for your help!
Admin note: attachment removed per user's request - 04/13/2016
04-01-2016 03:11 AM
Finally I was able to do it building the clusters in the subVIs, and then in the main VI using property nodes to set in one case visible (those that were displaying 8 elements) and not visible (those that were displaying 6 elements) in the other case, the other way round. It's a solution though I think not the best one as I ended up having 4 controls.. but it works
Thank you for your help! 🙂
04-01-2016 07:55 AM
Going to extra indicators seems like a hack. Why didn't your VI in message 13 work?
I see you used the array size and numCols properly for two of the arrays (Driven Results, Driven Flags). But you just hardcoded a 6 in for the Non-Drive controls. That was in the True Case.
Yu didn't do anything in the False Case.
Move almost everything OUTSIDE the case structure. The vast majority of the code should be identical no matter which case you run. Only the subVI and unbundle should be in the case structure.