Replacement for AT-MIO-16E-10

[BARRIER GUY]

 Hi everyone,

We currently have several old systems in operation using the AT-MIO-16E-10.  This board is used on a Windows 3.1.1 platform and a custom program written in VB 3.0 does the DAQ and machine control.  I was wondering if a AT-MIO-X16E-10 would possibly be a direct drop in replacement without having to change any of the old VB 3.0 programming.  The AT-MIO-16E-2 has been recommended as a drop in replacement at a price of approximately $3000.00 (Slightly less that double the price from the last AT-MIO-16E-10 card that we ordered 8 months ago).  I have access to a AT-MIO-X16E-10 and  since the board is going into a spare system that will sit on our shelf, I would rather keep the cost down.

Thanks for your help,

Barrier Guy 

[Margaret F.]

Hello,

Thank you for posting to the NI forums. To maintain your program, the greatest concern is that the driver remains the same. What version of the NI-DAQ driver are you currently using? I am having some difficulty finding information on the board that you are considering using for replacement. Can you confirm the model number as well please? If we can be sure that there is no change in driver, than there should be no problem using the new board.

[EBL]

Hi, Barrier Guy.

The AT-MIO-16XE-10 differs from the AT-MIO-16E-10 mainly in that it has 16-bit resolution. The instrumentation amplifier is substantially the same, so it provides the same voltage ranges. The performance of the 16-bit board is likely to be better in most respects, especially for accuracy. There may be some ways it's worse; for instance, the DAC output may not be as fast. There may be other functional differences that I'm not remembering, but it would certainly be safe to drop a 16XE-10 in place of the original card to look for problems. I can't think of any reason why you would have to change any code (providing you're using the NI-DAQ driver, and voltage-scaled data), but of course that doesn't mean there isn't a reason.

Hope this helps,

Ed

[BARRIER GUY]

Hi Margret,

Thanks for getting back to me. 

I believe that we are using NIDAQ version 5.0 ( about the last version to support DOS) and the boards are configured using the NIDAQ configuration utility. 

 Thanks,

Barrier Guy 

[BARRIER GUY]

Hey Ed,

Thanks for the links.  I will take a look.  I'm not to worried about being more accurate in this application and as long as the update time is less than 60ms, I don't think there would be a problem.  I will be on the road for approximately two weeks and will try to get back to this later. 

Thanks again for the help,

Barrier Guy