Hi Jordan,
I've attached a downsized VI and converted my tasks into VIs as well in the hopes that makes life a bit easier for you. I've actually gotten it to work better with the low frequency measurement specification, but I have yet to try that at the higher velocities that will yield higher frequencies. The signal is essentially a high frequency triangle wave oscillating about the actual velocity value, which I was hoping I could improve. In this case, it still doesn't allow me to use the orthogonalsmooth.vi
to perform filtering within the massive executable, but for some reason
it is perfect when I post-process. That's a secondary issue, though.
When I used the large range/2 counter option the data is nice and smooth if I plot an array but the waveform is where I run into gaps if I try to source timing info from my AI task. I suspected I could rememdy that if I forced the counter task to use a known time base and then adjusted accordingly, but I'm also a bit confused as to why I don't have this issue with the thermocouple task I also have running that's at considerable lower sasmpling rate than either of the other tasks.
In terms of the frequency measurement relative to the analog input task, it's not really a comparison, I just would like my force data and velocity data to have the same t0 and duration, without the gaps I've seen in the counter signal with the 2 counter task configurations.
Thanks again for the help!
