LabVIEW
Averaging of each element of array
Solved!
wiebe@CARYA wrote:
@altenbach wrote:
wiebe@CARYA wrote:
The for loop will average all channel data, as if it was a single channel.
... unless we use a parallel FOR loop with a sufficient number of instances. 😄
should that work?
It still seems to use 1 instance of the PtPyPt VI?
I'd expect 0,1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9, but I get 0, .5, 1, 1.5, 2, 2.5, 3, 3.5, 4, 4.5.
Form remembering older discussions and from plain logic, I thought it should. I guess it does not!
(even playing with the chunk size does not help)
To wrap this up, I would probably wrap (sic) the exponential filter into a reentrant subVI containing a feedback node. The global initialization will also eliminate the "first call?" primitive.
NOTE: depending how dirty your data is, you might need to protect from damaging values (NaN, Inf, -Inf) and from situations where the array size changes during the run. All this would simply need a little bit more handling inside the subVI.
@altenbach wrote:
(even playing with the chunk size does not help)
It gets slightly better if we place a small wait inside the loop (I guess if the iterations are low and the loop is greedy, the compiler decides against using more than one instance).
So yes, this does not work.
Of course we could place a case structure wired to I with N identical cases. Then it would work with or without parallelization. Not really a simplication, though. 😄
Well, Ive always wanted to clean that up anyhow. And found a little time
Use this (Bugs not included)
Previous attachment in 2019
attached here in 2015
VI properties are set per PtbyPt lvlib standards and I even hooked up the help tags
@msabah38 wrote:
I used the vi Means_PtbyPt.vi 27 KB in my program, but the results are not getting updated. I have attached my VI. Can you please tell where I am going wrong.
(I am not going to troubleshoot an unknown, untested subVI, but maybe it is buggy.)
I really think your approach is not reasonable! Why would you even do it that way?
So you are reading a local variables (that gets updates every ms!) every 100ms, meaning that you are only averaging 1% of the data, then you are trying to average 100 of these 1% points, so your sparse averaging time is 10 seconds!
Just use my solution and run with it!
Here's how I would write an N-point averager subVI (For simplicity, the averaging resets whenever the array size or the history length changes. Please verify correct information.
Note that this is very efficient because it just maintains the sum and adds the new values while subtracting the oldest.
