VeriStand

cancel
Showing results for 
Search instead for 
Did you mean: 

LabVIEW vs VeriStand

Solved!
Go to solution

Hi. I'm interested in hearing the differences in programming between LabVIEW and VeriStand. Not so much the implementation but rather the shift from someone exclusively using LabVIEW and then programming with VeriStand.

 

I have a job opportunity that involves strictly using VeriStand for a HIL application. I have never used VeriStand but programmed with LabVIEW for 20 years. I enjoy LV very much and tend to only take jobs that involve automation of data acquisition, instrument control, DUT performance testing, etc that utilize LV. So my question is to developers that have experience in both. I know you can use LV or VeriStand to control much of the same hardware, but is VeriStand significantly different from LabVIEW that a LV programmer wouldn't enjoy developing with VeriStand?

 

To help make the distinction, if I had to choose a new job that involved LabWindows instead of LV I wouldn't take it because even though both programs can accomplish the same automation, LabWindows' environment is text-based programming which I am not interested in developing in. But I have no experience in using VeriStand. So if you have experience in both what do you like and dislike about VeriStand? Would you rather use one or the other to program in?

BTW, I already know the benefits and drawbacks about LabVIEW (i.e. used it most of my career) so you don't have to tell me that, unless you want to complain a bit Smiley Tongue )

Thanks

0 Kudos
Message 1 of 10
(6,665 Views)
Solution
Accepted by topic author ooth

The guts of the VeriStand code you'll need to write, are written in LabVIEW.  It is sorta like how it is in TestStand.  There is this sequencer and reporting thing, but the guts of what makes it work is the individual steps when are generally written in LabVIEW (or some external language).  VeriStand is similar in that there is this application which calls to instruments to do things, and those drivers to talk to the instruments are VIs.  You'll do fine working at a company that uses VeriStand, if you are a LabVIEW expert.  That being said you may find it frustrating working with VeriStand at times.  Since you might be familiar with RT enough to know you can do a thing if it were pure LabVIEW, but running in VeriStand you may have other limitations that get in the way.  Things have improved but I knew a co worker who was constantly pulling his hair out trying to code around VeriStand limitations.  I told him to "rewrite VeriStand" every day.  When it meets your needs it saves you loads of time.  When it doesn't you might be frustrated.

Message 2 of 10
(6,654 Views)

Thanks for the input Hooovahh, especially relating it to TestStand. So if you didn't write external code that was called by VeriStand, would that mean you would have to use LabVIEW to implement the steps? In that case would VeriStand be considered an "add-on" to LabVIEW, or in other words, if you want to use VeriStand you would have to buy LabVIEW to actually develop the code? 

0 Kudos
Message 3 of 10
(6,649 Views)

@ooth wrote:

Thanks for the input Hooovahh, especially relating it to TestStand. So if you didn't write external code that was called by VeriStand, would that mean you would have to use LabVIEW to implement the steps? In that case would VeriStand be considered an "add-on" to LabVIEW, or in other words, if you want to use VeriStand you would have to buy LabVIEW to actually develop the code? 


I'm pretty sure LabVIEW is required to do any real VeriStand development.  It comes with various device specific software, but you'll have to write your own VIs to do any real work, and because of that you'll need your own LabVIEW license.  Is it possible to use VeriStand without LabVIEW?  Possibly but that's like saying could you make a LabVIEW application with only Express VIs?  Maybe but you probably don't want to try it.  Maybe the express VI example isn't quite as accurate since there is a pool of code written by others you could also use, but I'm just trying to say that in my opinion VeriStand needs LabVIEW.  Others may disagree.

 

I'm unsure if I would say LabVIEW is an addon for VeriStand or the other way around.  VeriStand did start out as an addon to LabVIEW and was sold by an Alliance partner.  NI bought it and made it its own product.  If I'm not mistaken VeriStand comes with a trial, you can download it and try out some of the shipped examples to see how it works and how to write custom devices.

0 Kudos
Message 4 of 10
(6,639 Views)

Downloading the trial is a good idea.

I hope some more people post their feedback.

0 Kudos
Message 5 of 10
(6,631 Views)

Hey Ooth,

 

VeriStand otu of the box has some limited functionality- reading and writing to DAQ channels and creating tasks, some datalogging, but if you want to do anything more with it (which many test situations call for) you have to make whats called a custom device. Read more here: http://zone.ni.com/reference/en-XX/help/372846M-01/veristandmerge/cust_device_overview/

 

Custom devices are, quite honestly, a bit of a pain to learn and not the easiest to implement, but as an experienced LabVIEW developer you shouldn't have too much trouble. I would recommend using the inline-async custom device wizard as it will set up the basic structure of the custom device for you:

 

https://github.com/NIVeriStandAdd-Ons/Inline-Async-Custom-Device-Wizard

 

For that you'll need the inline async API:

 

https://github.com/NIVeriStandAdd-Ons/VeriStand-Addon-Inline-Async-API

 

Another issue with VeriStand- other than the out of the box functionality, most things you'll do in VeriStand are "unsupported". Software for it is largely held in github repos maintained by the systems engineers at NI rather than being available on the NI website and supported by R&D and issues that you have are yours to solve, with limited documentation.

 

VeriStand is absolutely a powerful tool for test simulation, just expect to do customization on your own end and a lot of figuring things out.

0 Kudos
Message 6 of 10
(6,604 Views)

Hi Ooth,

 

I agree that Veristand does require LabVIEW expertise to make a real world application. Veristand does allow a new user to build some screens and collect data with no programming at all but... you will run into some limitations. For instance, the built in logger works fine but it is generic and can't create files with run time variations such as the file name nor can it determine where to put files whose path depends on date or serial number or whatever. The built in logger in Veristand is called a "Screen Object". A screen object is a drag and drop element you use to build user screens. You can make new screen objects by following a couple of examples and this works pretty well. I made a new custom logger object that retrieves data from several places, manually acquired or automatic, and builds a highly customized TDMS. It has an operator interface that allows it to figure out where to put the files on a server.

 

You should get along fine with the Veristand API. It can be frustrating as mentioned in an earlier post but once you get the hang of what it wants you to do, you can build a custom screen object pretty quickly. Debugging can be difficult. You don't get to use the standard LabVIEW tools because the custom objects are dynamic VIs launched from Veristand. But you can do a lot of testing outside of Veristand if you keep a debug global to disable some Veristand functions. The custom logger is a full queued state machine that launches its own dynamic VIs to perform data reduction in the background.

 

Post getting too long so I'd better stop now but thanks for putting up with it.

Dave

0 Kudos
Message 7 of 10
(6,600 Views)

Thank you Dave for your input. Sounds like working with VeriStand won't be a such a major shift from LabVIEW, except maybe the debugging part. 

0 Kudos
Message 8 of 10
(6,573 Views)

Hi ooth, Is your question already resolved? I want to recommend you to develop with NI Veristand.

As everyone said, we need deep LabVIEW knowledge but, NI provides special RTT hardware named "SLSC".

We can easily use the device on NI VeriStand.

 

NIWeek: HIL Test Solutions

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Fq9Z0wXy3CY

 

Do you know NI sales engineer? Why don't you have a discussion with them?

 

Regards,

Emboar

Certified LabVIEW Developer
There are only two ways to tell somebody thanks: Kudos and Marked Solutions

GCentral
0 Kudos
Message 9 of 10
(6,565 Views)

Hi Emboar,

I won't know if I get a clear resolution until I actually start using VeriStand. But thank you for the information about SLCS. I'm looking at it too. It's good know all the available options that are out there. 

0 Kudos
Message 10 of 10
(6,556 Views)