LabVIEW
Feedback on Front Panel Design
Hey Guys,
I have developed a front panel for the purpose of viewing previously recorded data. Could you provide some feedback on the front panel design, both the good and bad.
Thanks.
Hi bilalskd,
@bilalskd wrote:
some feedback on the front panel design, both the good and bad
Some points:
- I prefer right-aligned numeric data, with the same number of fractional digits (if applicable). I would check the table and the graph scales…
- Labels should follow the same formatting: some are centered, some are left aligned with the control, some are "free"…
- Table: There's a typo in the table header…
- Table header: Frequency comes with unit Hz, magnitude doesn't have a unit?
- Table: do you really measure frequencies accurately with 9 decimal digits? (Don't show more digits than you can measure. 16bit ADs only provide ~5 decimal digits…)
- The button "EI Guidelines" should have the same height as the "Stress Level" indicator. The button description should be centered. (visual appearance)
- "number of averages" is cut off on the right…
- More strict spelling: either have all labels start with capital letters or none, but not mixed…
- Is the frontpanel set to scale with size? There's a scrollbar at the right to indicate even more graphs!?
- Graphs: the FFT graph shows units at the scales, the Time graph doesn't…
- Graphs: do you need the word "Waveform" in the Time graph label? Isn't the FFT graph showing the "FFT Waveform"?
- Why is "Datalog settings" colored while the other labels aren't? ("Datalog" is a special LabVIEW term: do you use them or do you create "more usual" data files?)
I like the graph look… 😄
Why do you have mMPa as unit? MilliMegaPascal, Wouldn't it be easier to use kPa, or even hPa (as often used in atmospheric measurements)?
Thank You GerdW for the feedback.
Yes I need the word 'waveform' in the time graph. I don't need to mention 'waveform' in the 'FFT' graph as it is a spectrum and this is the standard nomenclature for these graphs for my application.
Regards.
Search LabVIEW like a graph! 
@GerdW wrote:
Hi bilalskd,
@bilalskd wrote:
some feedback on the front panel design, both the good and bad
Some points:
- I prefer right-aligned numeric data, with the same number of fractional digits (if applicable). I would check the table and the graph scales…
- Labels should follow the same formatting: some are centered, some are left aligned with the control, some are "free"…
- Table: There's a typo in the table header…
- Table header: Frequency comes with unit Hz, magnitude doesn't have a unit?
- Table: do you really measure frequencies accurately with 9 decimal digits? (Don't show more digits than you can measure. 16bit ADs only provide ~5 decimal digits…)
- The button "EI Guidelines" should have the same height as the "Stress Level" indicator. The button description should be centered. (visual appearance)
- "number of averages" is cut off on the right…
- More strict spelling: either have all labels start with capital letters or none, but not mixed…
- Is the frontpanel set to scale with size? There's a scrollbar at the right to indicate even more graphs!?
- Graphs: the FFT graph shows units at the scales, the Time graph doesn't…
- Graphs: do you need the word "Waveform" in the Time graph label? Isn't the FFT graph showing the "FFT Waveform"?
- Why is "Datalog settings" colored while the other labels aren't? ("Datalog" is a special LabVIEW term: do you use them or do you create "more usual" data files?)
I like the graph look… 😄
What do you think about the overall impression? That's probably more what the OP was asking. Things like "is it well organized?" stuff like that.
Hi Billko,
the overall impression is "quite ok" - but I'm finicky about UI/UX.
More comments after looking at the latest image:
- use only a limited number of fonts/font settings. Right now there are several font sizes, regular/bold, colors…
- the background on the left side seems to be mis-aligned with those light-gray boxes, white borders… (visible around the "averaging parameters" cluster)
@GerdW wrote:
Hi Billko,
the overall impression is "quite ok" - but I'm finicky about UI/UX.
More comments after looking at the latest image:
- use only a limited number of fonts/font settings. Right now there are several font sizes, regular/bold, colors…
- the background on the left side seems to be mis-aligned with those light-gray boxes, white borders… (visible around the "averaging parameters" cluster)
Just want to make sure that you know I wasn't criticizing you or disagreeing and I figured you probably felt generally it was okay because you just skipped right over it. I was just quite curious about the overall impression you got. 🙂
