power supply ON/OFF

[gireesh]

you only given the this foolish solution go to earlier threads

[gireesh]

are you tried with the actual power supply

[RavensFan]

What are these two messages supposed to mean?

No one has your power supply, so only you can truly test out the code and see if it works, and debug it if it doesn't.

Seeing an earlier reply is a "foolish answer"?  If the answer was already given earlier, then why shouldn't you be told to go back and reread it again?

This thread is dragging on way too long.  You've gotten a tremendous amount of help, but yet you don't seem to be able to take that next step and be able to use it properly and figure out how to do things yourself.

[Dennis_Knutson]

Agree. Way, way too long.

Gireesh,

I would strongly recomend that you look into a LabVIEW class or one of the LabVIEW books. A current class is going to use the latest version of LabVIEW but it looks like you might be able to get a book that was written for your old version. Even using a new version in a class would help enormously.

[gireesh]

what you are telling?

as per the earlier thread only i made this and also it is working fine. after two or three thread same person telling it is foolish solution. i got an idea from the link 

and this one also from dennis

 I think I made another mistake with the indexing of the Boolean array. Double check to see which one is the foldback alarm.

any other or corrected one never given.

I don't know about this.after getting solution (I don't know it is foolish or not? whatever I tried it is success.)

after success only i give a feed back. 

---

one request if you can, please delete this post. Don't go further with these type of comments.

I ashamed of these talking and i am taking the full responsibility of this mistakes and bad comments.

I am leaving from this post. there is no to and fro reply. stopping.

thank you for upto this solutions. BYE!!!!

---

[gireesh]

your way of talking is different entirely different.

you only told your answer is foolish because i tried your solution with some changes.

and the way talking should change. because no one has your knowledge. I think you should have patient than others.

[Dennis_Knutson]

Well, in my opinion, your modification of my code was foolish by creating that while loop over the whole thing. If really showed your inexperience with LabVIEW and in my opinion, the instrumentation. You also seemed to have ignored some of the earlier advice. Designing the process does not require does not require any LabVIEW knowledge and it is here that I think you need to work. Once you have that (as already mentioned), then the implementation should be pretty simple.

[gireesh]

Thank you for reopen.

Actually my interest in LabView was gone. Today I was in full rest. 

---

I never go through the LabView bookshelf or any books. I studied by self only. I mainly used Context help. Two year back I did not know about LV. What I was done, place mouse over each palettes and the context help shows the details. I simply connected one after one. 

---

Please explain what was my mistakes and how to correct it? i can go through the earlier threads.

Beg your pardon, if you can

[Dennis_Knutson]

Okay, one last try.

You set up the supplies and initially check for a current fault. If there is no fault, you would continue with the rest of your program. If there is a fault, you would shut down the supplies and then take some action so that the fault is fixed (i.e. sto the program and remove the unit under test for example). Looping around the code does nothing except repeat the current fault condition.

If the previous sequence does not show a fault and you continue with some test or whatever, you would still want to monitor the power supplies for a fault that could occur during the rest of the test. In order to do this, you would need a separate loop that does nothing except check for a foldback condition. The separate loop is required because you want this to run in parallel with the remainder of your code. If a fault is detected in this separate loop, you need some mechanism to transfer that information to the other part of your program. Perhaps a queue or notifier. Remember that no one here has no knowledge of what your entire program is supposed to do or how because you have not shared that information. An earlier suggestion was to draw up a flow chart/diagram of what it is you are trying to do. That is good advice.

[gireesh]

Beg your paerdon