LabVIEW
Possible Bug with Waveform Graph
Solved!
Hi Hatef,
on LV2014SP1 I can confirm there is a difference in graph appearance (gridlines) when the x scale is flipped vs. not flipped.
In "not flipped"-mode I get nice gridlines for (nearly) any increment I like. When x scale is flipped I get gridlines seldomly…
I tested using these values:
- x scale range from 5 to 125
- increment in the range of 10 to 40
The grid lines are one thing that appear and disappear for some values. But it is odd that reading back the properties that are just set gives different values for the normal vs. invert node versions of the same graph. It is not clear what the "start" value means in this case. It seems to be calculated incorrectly given the beginning and ending axis values.
It used to be that the invert mode was automatic if you inverted the axis begin and end values. When this was formalized into the "invert" mode property it seems that the "start" value for gird lines was not adapted correctly.
It is a "minor cosmetic" bug. But it is hard to work around without going and duplicating all the graphics of graphing.
I can only second that : don't expect this feature / bug to be fixed anytime soon. And try to find a workaround. A hint, to my experience, is to avoid setting all the axis scale properties at once with the XScale.Range cluster. Try instead to set the individual elements in a specific order. I think changing the min and max always triggers an "optimization" of increments, even if you don't want that. Acually, even when you get the desired scale aspect, and even if you disable autoscale, writing data to the graph later WILL affect the scale divisions (increments), no matter what the data are.
I wasted tons of hours years ago (it was LabVIEW 8.something) to get exactly what I wanted in a non-inverted scale. Here is the code I wrote at the time, in case it could help you :
Good luck !
Vincent
Even if it gets assigned a CAR (Corrective Action Report) that CAR gets assigned priority and verification. Then it will be assigned a target to get fixed. That target may be deferred depending on the severity, number of people impacted and if there is a workaround. For example a waveform chart bug reported late last century has been indefinitely deferred as being a major rewrite effort for very small return. Bug fixes come out about 1/year (in February) with a new release fixing some bugs every August.
I suggest you look at a workaround. One would be a adding the vertical lines as another data trace in your data.
