cRIO platform without MAX: how to calibrate channels?

[MattLawson]

Hi,

cRIO platform can  work with normal Labview data aquisition functions (daqMX) as well like a CDAQ, but only newer 904x models. .

Looks like not with the basic model 9063 model I chose.... (904x models are prohibitively expensive for this project). 

Anyway, If I'm using a CDAQ that doesn't support DAQmx, What software would I use to calibrate the analog channels?

Hardware I'm considering using

cRIO 9063

c SERIES 9401 (decode SENT position feedback signal)

c SERIES 9205 (analog inputs)

NI-9505 (dc motor driver )

to develop a stand-alone controller/data acquisition unit to replace our old custom designed board.

RT/FPGA code would be developed and built on the cRIO target to be used by other LV windows applications.   

I'm not planning on all the test stands having the RT/FPGA license installed.. is there anything standard NI SW like MAX I could use to calibrate the 9205 module? 

Looks like system manager can be used to view signals of cRIO unit, not sure about functionality to calibrate the channels though... 

https://www.ni.com/getting-started/set-up-hardware/compactrio/system-manager

I'm sure this will make more sense once I try out the cRIO demo unit, but I wanted to see what options I'd have available for built-in (if any) calibration features. 

Thanks!

Matt Lawson

[DillonL]

Hi Matt,

Thanks for posting.  There are options for calibration especially for the 9205 you mention on a the cRIO platform.  I would take a look at the link below as there is an example of self calibration using the FPGA interface that comes with the cRIO drivers.

http://zone.ni.com/reference/en-XX/help/370984T-01/criodevicehelp/9205_self_calibration/

[MattLawson]

Thanks Dillon.

I didn't know about the internal calibration features on the C series modules - calibration of the ADC channel alone (raw voltage signal) by comparing to internal voltage reference.  Something you can actually run on a frequent basis automatically if required..

We would still need external yearly calibration, particularly for current, torque sensing channels (need to consider the drift of the sensing element as well, not just the drift of the ADC channel).

Technologists are already familiar with MAX/DAQmx for performing external calibration of  other CDAQ based equipment, would like to keep the cRIO the same. 

I actually found a similar priced cRIO for $1900, the 9053 that supports DAQmx. 

cRIO-9053, 1.33 GHz Dual-Core, Artix-7 50T FPGA, 4-Slot, RT, Non-XT

vs

The 9063 with a 667 Mhz processor, 4 slot, etc. for the same price.

I wonder why the 9053 is the same price?  

Have to use 2018 version of Labview and RT/FPGA modules.   

The RT and Soft Motion modules I have access to are  2017, though I'm adding the FPGA one with this order, so it would be 2018. 
Guess I will have to weight the options of adding cost of upgrading the other 2 modules to 2018.

Any clarification would be appreciated!

-Matt 

[DillonL]

Hi Matt,

I'm glad the information was helpful.  As far for the differences between the 9053 and 9063, there are some hardware differences but these exist mostly in hard drive size and memory.  Depending on what your application space is however, this may not be something that will affect you.  If you can tolerate the lower storage and memory, the DAQmx support on the 9053 along with the more powerful Atom processor may be more capable.  As for pricing, we want to get the most capable hardware in the hands of as many customers as possible, so we generally price newer models similar to old. 

[MattLawson]

Looks like the 9053 has much more RAM (1GN vs 256 MB), and a better processor (1.33 Ghz 2 cores vs 667 Mhz), but a somewhat smaller FPGA than the 9063 (65,200 FF vs 106,400 FF, etc)

But I already have access the LV 2015 RT/Soft MOtion/FPGA modules - upgrading to 2018 costs about the same as buying the new modules outright.     We already have yearly subscription plans to keep our Labview license current, I'll ask about seeing how much the embedded suite would cost for yearly).  

The first step of this project is to create a single controller with a single cRIO - which either model will have plenty of horsepower to run.

Later I'd like to evaluate it running 8 -16 DUTs from a single cRIO ( using external motor drivers instead of for example a 9505 module).  In that case the newer model would be a better choice I think. 

MAX functionality would be nice plus too.

Decisions, decisions!

-Matt

[DillonL]

Hi Matt,

There are lots of decisions!  I would suggest you give one of our sales engineers a call and they will be able to talk you through the options we have and what would best fit your specific use case. 

http://us.ni.com/contacts

They are genuinely helpful and willing to talk through all the caveats. 

Have a great rest of your day!

[MattLawson]

Will do, thanks for following up Dillon. Final follow-up question: The original cRIO example (non DAQmx) included an internal calibration procedure with option to restore external calibration settings. I should still be able to perform an external calibration without DAQmx/MAX as well? Thanks Matt Lawson