View Single Post
Unread 02-28-2003, 09:11 PM   #20
Since87
Pro/Guru - Uber Mod
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Indiana
Posts: 834
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by unregistered

re the software:
have (very) limited exp with LabVIEW 5.1 and 6.1, the latter being far better for ease of use
(by the ignorant/untutored such as I)
The guy, who knows where the software would be, wasn't in today, so I don't know what we've got. I'd guess it predates 5.1.

Quote:
Originally posted by unregistered

- the value of LabVIEW seems to be with the virtual instrument drivers which enable instrument setup and control through the GUI w/o ever having to program anything;
Matlab I think requires use of the GIPB command instructions
I haven't used either, but it is my understanding that LabVIEW is very user friendly.

Quote:
Originally posted by unregistered

my simplistic appraisal of the 'need' is this:
- no control required, though with LabVIEW PID controllers and such are quite simple to setup - just REAL difficult to 'tune', and the requisite flow control hardware is unknown to me
- just data acquisition; hit 'START' and everything starts recording at the frequency/interval defined
. several parameters need a 'live' display as they are the 'controlled variables', and need to be viewed as a graph

this the kind of 'system control' you had in mind ?
What I had in mind was a system where you setup the hardware, start the software, go to bed, and look at the results file the next morning.

It sounds like you need to tweak things on the fly. What would those things be? What would it take to automate? Fan speed (of a DC fan) would be simple enough to control based on feedback from flowrate sensors. (A single fan providing a wide enough operating range might be a problem.)

How do you control water flow? Is it set and forget, or does it need frequent tweaking? I presume there are electrically controllable valves available. Mfgs?

I can write software to do the direct GPIB control of the instruments and come up with some computer interfaceable device for controls. It probably wouldn't be very user friendly by todays standards, but is that an issue? The software could just output a data file that could be pulled into Excel.

What I'm proposing would be nowhere near as flexible as LabVIEW. If you upgrade an instrument for example, the software would need to be partially rewritten to interface to the new hardware. If this could get the job done though...
Since87 is offline   Reply With Quote