Peak find trouble (doesn't scale?)

[alexderjuengere]

---

@Henrik_Volkers wrote:

Could be a hint to dig into old DLL code. 😄

There appear to be several dlls related to this topic, looks like we are interested in "PeakD2014"

"PeakD" is for the Waveform Peak Detection.vi,

"PeakD2010" and "PeakD2014" can be interchanged, for the example in Message 5

But this change has no effect on the result.

I wonder where the last one in this list, "PeakDetector" is used ....

maybe that's the dll to dig into ...

[Henrik_Volkers]

Today I got the confirmation that it's  a bug

The number of the filed Bug Report is 351083.
However you need internal access to enter the site and watch the ticket.

[JÞB]

---

@Henrik_Volkers wrote:

Filed a bug report.

Could be a hint to dig into old DLL code. 😄

In the past arrays with >130k points easely caused a memory overflow 😉

so maybe this ( and some more old) code wasn't tested for such cases.

---

Really you are not quite using the vi correctly.  I like nice squares.  Run the signal through Scale.vi and it behaves very well

[Henrik_Volkers]

---

@JÞB wrote:

---

...

---

Really you are not quite using the vi correctly.  I like nice squares.  Run the signal through Scale.vi and it behaves very well

---

Input is array of DBL, so that shouldn't be a problem in the E-6 scale ... not really a high range ... (DBL range is something like E+-300)

Why does it work with a decimated (raw / unscaled) data?   

Unless noted in the help (or done in the vi with a normalize.vi? and creating another data dublicate?)  I still would name it a bug.

But you are rigth this vi isn't used correctly if used with bigger numbers of width and data in terms of calculation time 😉 :D)