LabVIEW

cancel
Showing results for 
Search instead for 
Did you mean: 

Synchronization of signal

Contrary to my previous statement, with those two modules, you may able to use the master timebase of either to synchronize the devices. I can't tell where the issue is in your code. Can you simplify that code? Ideally, we want to be able to verify that a time waveform acquired from the 9234 is synchronized with a waveform from the 9237. That should not require the use of averaging, filtering, shared variables, or even a timed loop. Build up the analysis once synchronization is verified.

Doug
Enthusiast for LabVIEW, DAQmx, and Sound and Vibration
0 Kudos
Message 11 of 16
(820 Views)

Hi Doug,

Thank you very much. Here I am attaching my revised VI. 

0 Kudos
Message 12 of 16
(809 Views)

Have you tried Channel Expansion? I don't have the hardware to test but I think it would work. LabVIEW 2018 version attached.

 

mcduff

 

Snip.png

Message 13 of 16
(806 Views)

Just before the DAQmx Perform Bridge Offset Nulling Calibration.vi in mcduff's simplified VI, I had to add DAQmx Timing VI to avoid error -201087. 

dsbNI_0-1627063314761.png

 

I ran the VI with simulated hardware.

Doug
Enthusiast for LabVIEW, DAQmx, and Sound and Vibration
Message 14 of 16
(797 Views)

Hi mcduff,

Thank you for your VI, I need to check the phase error by running a few tests. Can I add one additional channel (NI 9205) for an LVDT to this method like the following figure?

Moni98ce_0-1627066958954.png

 

0 Kudos
Message 15 of 16
(790 Views)

Channel Expansion should work for most cDAQ modules in the same chassis. So go ahead and add the 9205. You may have to play around with the order as @dsb@NI showed.

 

Note your channels will be phase locked and synchronous BUT you may have a constant phase offset between them that you can remove later. You will have to look in your manual for details. See this thread for details.

 

mcduff

0 Kudos
Message 16 of 16
(786 Views)