State Machine SubVI

Can the attached VI statemachine be converted to a subvi ? I have tried several variations but unsuccessful so far. Would like to have a subvi icon with external connections SP, RO, and Overide. I am creating other applications that will use multiple instances of this code.
AO0, AI1, (daqassis) and the override boolean need to be external inputs and should not be embedded in the statemachine. I left them embedded in the statemachine for functional demonstration purposes.
Thanks
Attachments:
MFC.vi ‏118 KB

Lynn,
Thanks for all the information ! I had to rethink my program structure based on what you said. I created a case structure that produced almost the same functionality as the previous statemachine. I am not ready for the producer / consumer solution yet.
I was able to convert the case statement to a subvi by selecting case structure then creating subvi from edit menu. I did not edit the subvi icon yet. There is no need to modify the connector pane that was generated by LabView yet.
I copied and pasted a second set of controls, added the subvi, and wired it together. Well it wasn't nearly that easy but I got there.
Regards
Attachments:
MFC Radio Butt3.vi ‏100 KB
MFC Radio Butt2.vi ‏105 KB

Similar Messages

Running SubVIs with state machines in parallel

Hi,
I'm new to labview, working on it for a couple of weeks.
I'm building an application where there are a number of identical elements atht each is controlled by an identical state machine which is independent from all others.
My problem is how to place each state machine in a subvi and running them in parallel.
Each of the subvi has a while loop for the state machine, and the program gets stuck inside never entering another subvi.
Is there an elegant way to run a couple of SubVIs each holding a state mchine in parallel?
I come from the VLSI world so there is no problem implementing this kind of logic in hardware description language but the labview way to do it eludes me...
thanks you very much for any help,
Eyal.

braxat2000 wrote:
Hi,
Thank you everybody for your kind help.
The problem was solved and my application is OK now.
For future reference,
I used the execution reenter subvi to allow multiple instances of it in parallel, and added a global variable that the subvis can change, and the main can read from.
Used semaphores to make sure correct parallel write to common sources.
Cheers,
Eyal.
Great solution- but how to avoid race conditions in the global variable? Globals are notorious for causing headaches, nightmares and nausea so if there is a way to avoid them and enforce a bit of cause- effect its highly desirable. In this case you have clones of a re-entrant vi running in parallel so you CAN'T use a functional global (the most common solution see Ben's famous Action Engine nugget)
Since we can't enforce data dependence we need something else as a cause-effect team..... Change event dependency would be a good substitute. Two methods for getting this type of dependence would be a dynamic event or my favorite the "Named Queue" set the data type of the named queue as a cluster of instance of source and data from your global and the main loop will be able to see EVERY write to the queue AND the source. Moreover the queues datatype can be expanded to offer any information the main vi needs to be a good executive. In fact a new sub vi that "monitors status" of the clones would make the application highly scalable and robust.
Jeff

How to use a event structure with a state machine

First, I would like to inform you that I only work on LabView part time, and have much to learn. Anything I do learn, I usually forget until I need it again, because I only work on it part time.
Using your StopWhileLoopMOD[1].vi, I am trying to put a state machine inside the event structure.
Related link: http://forums.ni.com/t5/LabVIEW/How-to-stop-while-loop-in-Event-case/td-p/465564/page/2
Here is my application: on the front panel, the user can select any combination of 7 different tests. I have created cases to perform each step of each test in the correct order, but if the user presses stop, the tests won't stop because some of the cases have a while loop inside the event structure (like you mentioned is a bad idea). The user should be able to stop the test, reselect tests to perform, and re-start the tests.
When the start button is pressed for the event structure, I need all the cases to run in the proper order, unless stop is pressed.
In the past I have indexed an array and used that to run the state machine, but it won't stop immediately.
I have sub VIs that are built in while loops because the outputs of the product needs time to stabilize.  The state machine stops and waits up to a certain number of iterations. If it passes the test, the while loop stops and the next state starts. If it takes too long, it exits and reports an error. Maybe I need to just use the state machine and not an event structure?
Is there a good example of an event structure?
metzler CLAD
Solved!
Go to Solution.

I'm not sure exactly what you are asking, but it sounds like you want to script a bunch of tests and if the user says stop, to immediately stop the current test and abandon the others? I'm going to assume that you know how to clear the array so that it will abandon the others, so I'm guessing that you are having trouble abandoning the current test? If this is indeed the case, then the problem is that you are not able to propagate the message from the main VI FP which is the GUI to the sub vi which is the test, where the test may or may not have a GUI (FP visible) of it's own. Threading was the first thing to come to mind, but this may not be necessary using events.
You can do this by passing a refnum of the stop button to the subVI, where you can then add that wait to the event case structure.
I've attached 2 VIs, mainvi.vi which is just a loop displays the count*2 (number of seconds passed since running) that will call subvi.vi and then check to see if the stop button is pressed. mainvi.vi is by no means a state engine, it is just a simple loop for demonstration purposes. subvi.vi just waits 2 seconds and leaves, it is a better structured state engine with an init state to start a poll case to wait for events and an exit state to clean up. You can modify this any way you wish to get it to do what you want. You will note that even if subvi.vi is being executed, it will terminate immediately when the stop button is pressed.
Hope this helps.
A
Attachments:
mainvi.vi ‏17 KB
subvi.vi ‏33 KB

Trying to create multiple state machines out of same VI to monitor each cFP channel results in what seems to be shared memory between machines

Hi,
I'm trying to create a state machine which monitors a single channel on a field point. I want to monitor up to 64 channels at a time, each one with different instances of the same VI. The VI itself needs to maintain information mainly through feedback nodes both in its own block diagram and subVIs within.
All instances of this VI will be executing inside a main loop as they do not execute loops of their own as this would create 64 threads on the cFP-2200 we're using which I believe would be too much.
My attempted solution to all of this was to make the Channel Monitoring VI along with all SubVIs reentrant and "pre-allocate" for each instance. This does not seem to help as each VI seems to maintain the state of the one which ran before. Maybe I'm missing a step?
Is there a better way to approach this problem without writing a separate VI for each channel and the maintenance headache that would cause?

Hi Ben,
I actually read your document for another puzzle and it worked well, I think largely because it involved subVIs which were meant as separate threads. In that case, I used methods to alter inputs while the VI was "running."
In this case, as you know, my SubVIs are not looping inside, they are instead single calls but they do need to maintain the state at the end of their previous call, adding to the data they're tracking after they are called subsequent times. I tried the "call by reference" to call them each time. Below is a screenshot of the VI used to create the occurances and a SubVI used to execute each occurance, this subVI is embedded inside a while loop which I did not show here:
In running my tests, there still seems to be some data sharing of internal variables and feedback nodes between the SubVIs I'm calling, which I do not want. Am I approaching this in the correct way? Is what I'm trying to do even possible?

State Machine and producer consumer design patterns

Hi!
In my application I am using state machine(for top level VI) and producer consumer(for subVIs) design patterns throught out.
If there is no activity on the front panel for 1min then the ideal state is invoked. Following are the situation of the ideal state:
1. It checks for any hardware present on the network . If no hardware is found on the network within 1 min then the application and LabVIEW exits.
2. While the ideal state checks for the hardware, and user clicks on any front panel button then it should exit the ideal state. The control
should be in the respective button state.
I am able to achive the point#1 mentioned above but could not get the point #2 to work. I am including the snap shot of
the state machine(default case) and prouducer consumer(deafualt state).
Each screen has the concept of the ideal state. The only additional step in the subVIs is that when the ideal state is reached and the time has expired then it will close the subVIfront panel.It will go to the exit state of the Main(top level) VI. Thus closing the application and quitting LabVIEW.
Any ideas or suggestions. Will multithreading and notifiers help?
TIA
Rachana
Attachments:
Sanpshot_Of_Design.zip ‏75 KB

Hi Rachana,
I was thinking about using event structures wherein there would an event case that would handle any value change event for any of the buttons on the front panel. But before suggesting that, I would need to know more about the Ideal State subvi( more specifically, how is it checking for any hardware present on the network and where is the one minute wait coming from?).
Please feel free to respond to this post with your questions/comments.
Regards,
Ankita A.

How to implement state machine architecture

Earlier in this forum, i had taken help in improving the subparts of my main vi, now i had developed a main vi,it is working correctly without any error, but i had used sequence architecture in that and as everyone says we should use state machine instead of sequence architecture, i am posting my vi please help how to implement state machine architecture in this, and actually in my vi, i am having 5 tabs( presently i have developed only 2 tabs) 1. patient info, 2.naadi acquisition, 3.nostril temp., 4.vision acquisition, 5.other info. presently with tab control i am using case structure so that only only particular page runs at particular time, i want to know how can i improve this code to work more efficiently.
Attachments:
intelligent diagnostic bench.lvproj ‏68 KB

i am sorry, i thought that vi's are by default attched with project files,i am attaching the main vi and all other associated subvi's also.
Attachments:
Final Diagnostic Project.vi ‏375 KB
createfolder(SubVI).vi ‏65 KB
checkstring(SubVI).vi ‏11 KB

Discrepancy between execution time of state machine and flat code

I am trying to optimize the performance of my application, and I've found that the same code executed as a case in a state machine, and flat on the block diagram takes a dramatically different amount of time to run. I'm trying to figure out what I'm missing here. The picture shows a test vi I threw together (the next post will have the diagram image for the "Add New" case of my Buffer Engine.vi - basically the same as what is in frame 5). The fifth frame in the sequence is what I am concerned about. It shows that executing the case in the state machine takes ~700ms, and flat, ~113ms.
Any thoughts?
Chris
Attachments:
Test Times.jpg ‏124 KB

Thanks for the suggestion Altenbach. I had to insert a for loop to replace array subset indivually for each column of new data to place in the buffer, but even with the extra processing, the result was about 80% faster. I guess I'll have to come up with a system to track where to place the data (it was convenient to always drop the data at the end..), but that shouldn't be an issue.
However, this suggestion doesn't address the original concern. The same array resizing was going on in both the subvi and the sequence frame. This improvement should increase the performance of each, but doesn't explain the difference.
As an aside, I contemplated using a queue, but without the ability to dequeue from both the beginning and the end, I don't see how I can use them for this. I want to trash the oldest data, not hold up the acquisition. In any case, I don't think it would be faster because the memory isn't pre-allocated. Now I am considering just storing the data in a control, and passing the reference as necessary. The question is, is reading the value from a control faster than reading from a shift register?
Thanks again.
Chris

Using multiple events structure inside state machine to control the Tab

Hi y'all,
Anne here.I have a Tab indicator in my front panel and I want to be able to control the flow of my program based on what controls I clicked inside the tab. I am using a state machine architecture and inside every state, I use an event structure to check for user interaction to determine the next state and what tab page is going to be displayed next. This means that I am actually using multiple event structures in my application and I use them in just one while loop, but just that they are not running in parallel since I am only using "one event structure per state" which means that only one event structure is running at one time. My questions is, programming technique wise, am I doing it correctly? So far, I am not facing any problem (I am still in the early stage of the project) but I want to check with you all first on your opinion regarding this architecture. Will there be any issue on using multiple event structures in a vi? Since I will be using a tab, and the controls available in the tab will be the controls that will control my event structure for that state, by right, there should be no issue. Am I correct to assume this? Is there any limit on the use of event structures? I have attached here a simple sample of the architecture that I am talking about for your reference. I have attached a 2010 version and a 8.6 version. Let me know what you think or any opinions that you may have.
Hoping to hear from you soon! Thanks so much in advance!
Cheers!
Anne
Attachments:
State Machine-Event Structure Sample_2010.vi ‏19 KB
State Machine-Event Structure Sample_8.5.vi ‏25 KB

Hi jak888,
I decided to use tabs cause I don't want to have subvi pop ups every time i need to perform the process in the state and show an update in the front panel. This is actually going to be more of an ATE where you will have to choose first whether the one using is the operator or the engineer. If the operator is logged in, she will proceed to choose what test to run (this state will have its own event structure). This part, I don't want a pop up, so what happens is that from Login page, if the user logs in as operator, the tab will automatically switch to the Test Selection page. After selecting the test, it will proceed to Start Test state and the tab will show the Result Summary page. If the user logs in as engineer, then a totally different tab will be automatically shown next and so on. By doing this, I will be able to show an update on the front panel objects without having the subvis pop up. I will also just need to use the call reference functions to call my subvis, making my Main VI more generic. The tab Page header will be hidden so the operator will actually not see that there is a tab and that there are a lot of controls and indicators cause they are hidden in the tabs and that page will only be shown based on what they selected from the main tab.
I appreciate your thoughts! thanks so much!

Help with cycling sequence structure, I may need a state machine?

Hi All,
So I have this VI that needs to control two solenoid valves by opening and closing them through the digital outputs.
I want the program to have a function like this
Phase 1: Valve 1 open, Valve 2 closed (Amount of time for this defined by user)
Phase 2: Both valves closed (for .1 seconds)
Phase 3: Valve 1 closed, Valve 2 open (Again, this amount of time is defined by user)
and I want it to cycle through phase 1-3 100,000 times. However, every 10,000 cycles of phase 1-3 I want it to change the condition on Phase 2 so that both valves are closed for an hour instead of .1 seconds, then after this hour loop I want it to return back to the original cycling conditions (.1 sec instead of 1 hour) until it does another 10,000 cycles.
I was thinking that a sequence loop would be fine because I would wire it up with timing and a counter, and every time it goes to the last sequence it would increase the counter so that when its at the phase 2 timing I can use a case structure (if counter > 10,000 hold 1 hour, if counter <10,000 hold .1 sec) and then in the last sequence reset the counter to 1 if it is >10,000.
I thought a sequence structure would be good for this but I'm fairly new to labview and if theres a better way to do this I'm open to suggestions .
Attached is my code so far, except that I have not finished wiring the ports for valve B
Attachments:
Adhesive Pressure Cycling.vi ‏100 KB

First, you should avoid the use of a sequence structure. Don't even consider it to be an option. At least not at this stage of your learning. Learn how to use data flow. Also, avoid the use of local/global variables. They tend to lead to race conditions which in turn result in some difficult bugs to find and fix. Think of the wires as your variables.
As for the time delay in your state machine, your actual state should delay for a short time like 100 ms. Use the current time of day to determine when you have reached your desired timeout. If you use a single delay of an hour your program will be unresponsive for that hour. Users tend to get very annoyed if they try to stop the program and they have to wait a long time for it to actually stop.
Here is a basic example that shows the concept in a state machine.
When naming states for your state machine give them a meanigful name. Use a typedefed ENUM for your state variable. For simplicity sake the example attached does not use a typedef. But naming things like State 1, State 2 and so on makes the code difficult to read and understand. Your Open/Close valves states can be written in such a way that they are generic and take the valve data as input. At a minimum I would create a subVI to do this so you only have one piece of code to manage. You could have explcit states though such as Open Valve A and Open Valve B that call your generic Open Vavle subVI with the appropriate input data.
One last comment, the express VIs tend to be very inefficient. They are OK for learning how things are done but I would implement their functionality directly. For example, the express VIs tend to open, initialize, do something, close the instrument. You really don't have to do all of that every time. Open and Initialize once in the begining (hint, this could be a state), put the stuff that does the work in appropriate states/subVIs (other states) and then close at the end of your application (the exit state for example).
Mark Yedinak
"Does anyone know where the love of God goes when the waves turn the minutes to hours?"
Wreck of the Edmund Fitzgerald - Gordon Lightfoot
Attachments:
Simple Delay in State Machine.vi ‏15 KB

Multiple same states in a state machine

Hi all,
This is a follow up on a post at the wrong location. I have attached one state in my state machine. That state appears maybe 3 more times in the state machine, so maybe I should make it into a subvi instead, but I was thinking since there are not too many low level nodes and leaving the code in that state out of a subvi seems to be more clear, I thought maybe leaving the code out is better. Not sure which way to go, please feel free to give me suggestion.
Yik
Kudos and Accepted as Solution are welcome!
Attachments:
ALRM_AlarmSummary_BD.png ‏19 KB

If the state is the exactly the same I would not recommend copying it. If you need to make a change to the code you now have multiple places to make the update. Also, rather than making it clearer what is happening I think it leads to more confusion since someone looking at the code will spend time trying to figure out why there are multiple instances of the same state. If you want to document the flow (actually the state transitions) then simply document them and keep that document up to date. That documentation would most likely be easier to read and see what the system is doing then reverse engineering the code.
Mark Yedinak
"Does anyone know where the love of God goes when the waves turn the minutes to hours?"
Wreck of the Edmund Fitzgerald - Gordon Lightfoot

Any penalty to using one big cluster in a state machine?

I've been working on a lot of small/medium sized state machines lately, and I've gotten into a habit of putting most of my data (single values, arrays, strings, even LVOOP objects) in one cluster that I pass from state to state with a shift register. I just unbundle the data I need in each state, work on it, and bundle it back in for the next state. Part of me says that this is a bad idea - that I should separate the big cluster into a set of smaller clusters that group the data by logical categories. Another part of me says that if I do it that way, I'm just creating needless clutter on my diagram.
So my question is simply this - is there any significant performance penalty for using a single cluster rather than multiple clusters in this fashion? I never run the whole cluster into subVIs, and I never split the main cluster wire, so it doesn't seem like there should be... but I've been wrong before!
Thanks,
Jason

As Norbert mentioned, the answer to your Q is dependant on your data structure. Provided you can do all of your data manipulation "in-place" there should not be any issues. The more complex structures can still be handled "in-place" but you may have to use the in-place operations to achieve this effect. Depending how comfortable you are with those operators, they can complicate the appearence of our code.
If you can'y do everything "in-plcae" and you have a Super-Cluster, then its time for me to Quote Rolf again when he wrote "Once all of you physical memory is filled up with a single cluster, your application is probably going to suck."
So lest say you have cleared all of the above hurdles and still want to use a single SR that has all data for all states. I ask you to carefull examine where the app may go in the future and what type of animal it could turn into. if there is even a small chance that app may turn into something that non-computer users will use (requires robust app to prtect itself from dumb users) the single cluster approach is going to get in your way when the app gets big.
1) If you have to add another field to the cluster, every function that uses that cluster should be re-tested. WE have an app in-house that was developed by our customer and we support. There is an 800+ step proceedure required to re-verify the app!
2) AS more functionality is added you will add more states to your state machine. Personally, I cringe when I see the support developer have to choose from a list of 300 states when working with the Stae machine.
3) You will have a hard time re-using code aside from cutting-n-pasting
4) When you unbundle manipulate and replace, you are in danger of creating duplicate data which will impact performance.
I never went through the formal IS training but my wife did and she has given me the short version to learn how to normalize a DB. There is actually a science to the process that results in only related items being grouped together and if you take to the full exdtreme of "fully Normalized DB", there absolutely no duplicates of data. For LV apps a Fully Normalized DB adds some overhead so I don't go that far.
THe following will ignore using an Object Oriented approach and stick with old-school ideas.
So after I analyze my data structures and group related items together and review who touches what when, THEN I try to wrap-up the data in Action Engines. More often than not, the action will replace some or most of the work done in some states. From your Q it sounds like your "read-mod-replace" constructs can be moved into AEs with little effort.
Now for OOP
I'm still learning OO system design but I have found myself "turning my apps inside out" with LVOOP. By this I mean rather than think that the data AND the function are inside the AE, the data is outside and acted on by what is inside the LVOOP methods. I have been amazed at the degree to which LVOOP can operate in-place, but I digress. There is some arguement/design pattern that says that if you have a function like a test that uses other classes, then you can create a class for the test and slam all of the required object into you need.
Done rambling for now. As usual, if there is anyone out there that want to correct me any of the above, please do so!
Ben
Ben Rayner
I am currently active on.. MainStream Preppers
Rayner's Ridge is under construction

LabVIEW Queued State Machine as Parellel Process Enabler

Hi
LabVIEWs Queued State Machine Architecture is a detailed article on its application for parallel process programming geared to take advantage of LabVIEWs hyperthreading capabilities and multi-core processor PCs of today.
I am writing future book chapters as blog articles so your critique/comments are appreciated.
Anthony L.

I have really enjoyed the articles on ExpressionFlow. I also like this one, but I think it could use just a little work. I think that the content is good. However, about 1/4 of the way down, you have:
A general layout of QSM-PC architecture comprises of the four objects annotated by the encircled numerals 1 to 4 shown in Figure 1.
These objects are namely: (1) Queue reference object; (2) User events
object (optional for head-less embedded applications that require no
user interaction); (3) Main state machine object; (4) One or more
parallel processes subVI objects.
You then go on to have
Item (1) The Queue Reference
Item (2) Consumer Object State Machine
Item (4) Parallel Process SubVIs
You need to reconcile the two. I think that a separate (probably earlier??) chapter/article on event structures including dynamic (user) events could be referenced as item 2.
Thanks for the articles and I hope that this helps!
Bob Young
Bob Young - Test Engineer - Lapsed Certified LabVIEW Developer
DISTek Integration, Inc. - NI Alliance Member
mailto:[email protected]

Data acquisition in a state machine

I've recently learned how to implement state machines, but I have a question that I haven't been able to find an aswer to.
Question:
How do I record uninterupted data (presently i'm using the DAQ assistant to record a single channel at 10kS/s at 1kS intervals) without interfering with my state machine?
Background:
I have a time sensitive test setup (measuring pressure in a rocket chamber), and I'm using labview to both record a single pressure transducer as well as operate the valves (O2, N2, igniter, etc). I'm using a state machine Labview architecture (just learned how). Presently, the DAQ assistant sits in the "Idle" state, and timers (valves need to be turned on at specific times) and manual buttons control when the other states are activated. I have a 10ms timer controlling how often each state is run, and this is the root of my concern.
Main concerns:
I'm worried that:
1) I'm forced to change my data recording to 10ms intervals to match the 10ms timer, and
2) The 10ms timer will interrupt my data recording when it's in another state.
It's very important that the pressure data is recorded without interruption but that I have high time resolution in controlling my valves as well.
Thoughts:
1) Maybe I put the 10ms timer in the "Idle" state only, and this way the other states won't interrupt the data acqusition
2) Maybe there is a way to completely isolate the state machine for controlling the valves and the data acqusition. I'm not sure how to do this.
3) People on the forums have been talking about Queuing their data acqusition, but I'm not sure how this would benefit my situation.
Thanks to everyone for their feedback!

The data acquisition and state machine timer do not have to be equal, you should however have the same data write rate as you have data read rate, otherwise over the course of long running programs you can build up a large buffer of data to be written using a lot of memory, or lose data.
Your data acquisition should be continuous, the most common way of doing this is every time you receive data write it to a queue, then when you are in other states except your data write stage you simply build up data in the queue that is to be written when you enter the write state again.
Think of it as traffic reaching a set of lights:
The traffic represents the data acquisition, there is a constant flow of it always coming through, the state of your state machine is the lights, green is the data write state clearing the queue, red is when in any other state, letting the traffic build up behind the lights.
It is just important that the light is green long enough to let the traffic not build up too much, otherwise you have a jam.
EDIT: For the basics of how queues work, look at the Queue basics example from the example finder.

Data acquisition & state machine

Hi all,
I am working on a project that is capable of data acquisition, analyse, and record processes. I have to acquire data of temperature from 8-32 channels and that of pressure from 7 channels. After analysis, I have 48 outputs. I want to record raw data (acquired) and analysis data at the same time.
1) Is it possible to record two text files (raw data and analysis data records) at the same time?
I also want to adjust acquired sample rate but I have doubts about utilizing it in a state machine. For now, I have just used time elapsed function to acquire data once in 60 seconds.
2) How could I set sample rate of acquisition except using time elapsed function?
I also have one more doubt about timing. If I needed to acquire sample once in 60 seconds, but the analysis took more than 60 secs, what would happen?
3) How can I prevent data loss in this case?
I have not prepared a user interface yet.
4) How can I utilize it? Do I put graphs and indicaters in the same VI or is it better to prepare another vi just for user interface?
Thanks in advance
Egemen
Attachments:
Program.llb ‏433 KB

Hi Egemen
-          If we need to acquire data and analyze it at the same time we recommend the architecture producer-consumer to prevent data loss, and yes you can record two text files at the same time. Please take a look to this architecture.
-          http://www.ni.com/white-paper/3023/en
-          Basically you use the first loop to acquire data and the second one to analyze and record data (using queues).
-          https://decibel.ni.com/content/docs/DOC-2431
-          You can also find examples about this architecture at the developer zone.
Regards

How can I keep a state machine readable when using large amounts of in/outputs

Hello, I am new to Labview,
Read trough the fundamentals and the
getting started and a lot of examples.
What I want to do is use a standard
state machine from the template, and add some stages, for example
orange, apple, banana. At this point I can use numeric controls to
put in the amount of oranges, apples, bananas there are. I can even
use a led to tell the user which state of the state-machine is
active.
The thing is there will be more numeric
controls and more leds and it would be nice if the code would still
be readable when there are 20 inputs and 20 outputs.
Questions
(1) It would be nice if I could use the
typedef to select the right state AND the corresponding numeric
controls and leds out of a cluster or an array kind of structure to
keep the number of wires low. Is this possible, how can I do this?
(2) I tried to put the numeric controls
into a cluster but that way I can't put the numeric control for the
apples in the upper right corner and the numeric control for the
oranges in the lower left down corner of the front panel.
(3) An example would be really nice, I
know that I saw some examples describing this problem but there are
so many examples that after a few hours of searching I haven't found
the right one yet.
Thanks in advance for the effort.
p.s. I will not use Labview to do
calculations on fruit, I am only using this to make the question
easier to understand.

I can only start a proper answer but I might as well start with that.
When I am developing State Machines I have to think about what data is used and manipulated in each state. I then have to think about where am i going to keep and manage the data. I list all of the fields that are "touched" in each state and what values are used together and which are independent form the others. After this phase of the analysis, I usually have some data structure defined (cluser array etc).
Then I flipp from thinking about the state to thinking about the data (after all this is LabVIEW and the data-flow paradigm is critical). If I see data that is only used by the State machine and is used in many of the states, then the data structure get put in a shift-register for easy access in each state. This maybe enough of an answer for your fruity question.
When i see data that is shared or only used in a handful of states then I concider putting the data in an Action Engine. Depending on how you design your AE, you can access each of the fruit totoal by name or increment etc as required.
If your app demands many fileds that are all related (can't be broken into distinct data structures) then create a cluster that has all of your values that are used by the AE. Then create an Wrapper VI for each call of the AE but only put the associated fields on the FP of the wrapper and then bundle that value into the cluster and invoke the AE.
Ben
PS: Sorry about reverting to neBulus mode but this topic could take days to cover in detail.
Ben Rayner
I am currently active on.. MainStream Preppers
Rayner's Ridge is under construction

State Machine SubVI

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for