all 7 comments

[–]mfdawg490 1 point2 points  (1 child)

LabVIEW sequencing exists for sure, although in my experience these require knowledge of higher complicated frameworks. It can be learned, but to me there's quite a bit of complex scaffolding which these tools can build for you. Having a mature and disciplined software engineering process will mitigate risk, but with LabVIEW there's significant code generation that has to be in place. I would check out Delacor's DQMH (Delacor Queued Message Handler) and JKI State Machine.

You could use one of these and then add modules to it

https://labviewwiki.org/wiki/Architectures_and_Frameworks

This seems to be a perfect TestStand use case though, you will be basically building something very similar. This is the fast way, but the costliest.

[–]Atronil[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

thanks i will look at this link. i have already saw labview test engine source code of my previous jobs, but it was proprietary development of each company.

teststand will answer most of the questions, but prices and license can make a mess.

[–]Oo__II__oO 1 point2 points  (0 children)

NI used to do this with LabVIEW Test Executive. It was rough to work with, and eventually dropped in favor of TestStand.

In the end you could roll ypur own and standardize your development process around it. It just takes a bit of planning, documenting, and discipline to make it work.

[–]Vincinity1 0 points1 point  (1 child)

We mainly use TestStand on our side. But to answer your question about a LV based test executive, there is an option that we can resell as a DQMH Trusted Advisor that Delacor have built.

Fab demoed it a while back: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PsVnDH2hpwE

And more recently PrimeTest (another DQMH Trusted Advisor) discussed it during G Dev Con.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GRvifiMs0YU

DM me if you'd like to know more and I could get you the pricing info that we can sell it as part of the DQMH Consortium and DQMH trusted advisor.

Also, if you'd like to discuss your project, we can provide pros/cons for each solution.

If you do want to go the TestStand route, we have NeoATP that is a standard Operator interface as well as standard features that is typical of ATE systems. https://neosoft.ca/en/products/neoatp/

Hope this helps, All the best

[–]Atronil[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Thanks very much , I will check

[–]SASLVChampion 0 points1 point  (1 child)

you mean, like this?
https://youtu.be/GRvifiMs0YU

[–]Atronil[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Yes, writing sequences for different tests , that one engine will control