amending partial column in array

[TatankaWilly]

I am so close I can taste it!  What this VI is attempting to do.  I want to open a LARGE tdms data file (upwards of 4 GB).  I am wanting to open that large data file and save some smaller CSV files that focus on certain times within that large data file.  Than part works pretty well.

Where I am getting stuck right now is adjusting the time channel.  The time channel is stuck on the milli clock from the computer.  It won't go down to the resolution I need while sampling at 2700 Hz sample rate.  What I am trying to do, is take that first column, create a number that corresponds to the point in time for that file and then just increment that number by .00037 seconds per row.

I want to start the row at row 6 and end at the end of the other rows.  The numbers are extending all the way down even though they start early.

I have included my VI as well as an example Data file.

Thanks for looking.

Tim

[crossrulz]

The Export Waveform To Spreadsheet File should have 6 decimal places of resolution on the time stamp.  That should easily handle your 0.00037 second resolution.

Do you have a reduced TDMS file that we can look at?  Is the supplied CSV file created with just the Export or was it done with your extra edits?

[TatankaWilly]

The csv provided earlier is with the time column changed.

For some reason, TDMS is not on the 'approved' file extension list.  I have changed the extension to .txt and hopefully you just need to change it back before you use it.

It is only 8 channels instead of 32 but will hopefully get you in the ball park.

Thanks.

[crossrulz]

You are just fighting an Excel display format issue.  The actual data in your CSV has 6 digits of precision.  Here is what the file looks in a text editor using your TDMS file and your VI without the extra editing of the timestamp column.

10/15/2014  13:33:50.956317,-4.056170E-3,4.481100E-3,2.124648E-4,2.124648E-4,2.182604E-3,-7.726048E-4,2.124648E-4,3.496030E-3,3.729800E-2

[TatankaWilly]

Thank you for the information, but one thing I did fail to mention is that the end user of this little VI doesn't care about the absolute time stamp. All they care about is "at 122 sec into the test, the values are this". I am trying to give them that.