cDAQ Chassis: Real Time vs Windows vs 9178

[wailard]

Hello,

I am constructing a DAQ system to take voltage measurements from several accelerometers and a torquemeter, while giving flexibility of more sensors in the future. We have tentatively selected the NI-9215 as the module for the above sensors. We would just be collecting data from a rotating machinery test rig and saving that data locally. I'm at the chassis selection stage and I'm having a hard time finding an answer to the following:

• Would something like the cDAQ-9178 suffice?
• What's the difference between this, and Windows / Real time cDAQ chassis like 9132?
• I read Real Time / Windows chassis are standalone computers, whereas I would just plug the 9718 into our existing computers, is this correct?

Thanks!

[Kevin_Price · Accepted solution]

The 9178 would just connect to a normal PC via USB.  It would give you a flexible platform for measurement-based apps.

A Real-Time chassis would run a a real-time capable OS rather than Windows.  If you needed to do automatic control at greater than human speeds (very roughly speaking, more than a couple times a second), then you might need to look into the Real-Time chassis.

From the description you gave, the 9178 ought to be sufficient.

-Kevin P