PCI-6602 and GPIB-USB-HS+ compatibility

[pcJM]

I had a hard time choosing the location of this post because it deals with the counter/timer and instrument control.

I installed the PCI-6602 driver and I could interact with the timing card by opening NI MAX and running self test. (I'm not sure which version of the driver was installed.)

I then installed the GPIB-USB-HS+ driver (NI-488.2 for Windows and LabVIEW Real-Time version 18.5) and lost ability to interact with the timing card. NI MAX no longer had the option to run self test on that device.

Has anyone else encountered this issue?

[Kevin_Price]

The driver for the 6602 would be the same driver used for a large # of NI data acq products -- DAQmx.  NI MAX can show you what version is installed.

I've used the 6602 quite a bit and have not heard of this problem before.  I've definitely had both DAQmx and the 488.2 driver installed on many systems before without losing the ability to interact with the DAQmx device.

I assume that each install you mentioned was followed by a reboot cycle before testing the devices in NI MAX, right?

Beyond that, I'd just resort to the usual Windows hand-waving kinds of fixes.  Repair install, re-install, full uninstall and try again, that kind of thing.

-Kevin P

[pcJM]

The DAQmx version is 9.2.3.

In the past, I've also used the 6602 and the 488.2 on the same system without a problem. The differences are (1) I purchased a new GPIB-USB-HS+ dongle and (2) these are different computers.

Yes, after each installation, I would reboot as recommended by the popup. After rebooting, I would start up NI MAX to see the changes.

I've played with the installation sequence...

- Install 6602, install 488.2

(Uninstall all NI programs)

- Install 488.2, Install 6602

(Uninstall all NI programs)

[Kevin_Price]

Sorry, no other great ideas here.  I'll start by noting that you're using a pretty old DAQmx version.  Most support people quickly advocate updating to the latest version of everything.  That'd be great if such updates were nearly 100% at delivering "all help no harm".  But my experience has led me to be more of a cautious and late adopter of new things.  (Fair warning, I may also be a curmudgeon.  I also tend to think that the Windows UI "look and feel" peaked with Windows 2000 and has trended downward ever since.)

By and large, DAQmx upgrades have gone pretty smoothly for me.  However, sometimes, a DAQmx version upgrade can break old code.  (The incident I reference in the link relates to counter pulse parameters, and the first DAQmx version that started throwing errors instead of auto-coercing was somewhere around 9.3 as I recall.)

-Kevin P