Re: Why do some older instruments require waits between writes?

2004-05-16 Thread Brian Powell
You wrote, I find it hard to believe that so many instrument did not
really meet the spec

I think you ascribe too much computing intelligence to these
instruments.  Many of these devices run a simple homemade operating
system, or better, a commercial single-threaded embedded operating
system.

I'd bet most devices have a single microcontroller that is monitoring
I/O, command processing, front panel processing, and taking the
measurements.  And the code to handle all that wants to handle just
one thing at a time.  For example, if an instrument is taking a
measurement, and you're sending it the next command, a lot of
instruments abort the measurement because it thinks you have something
new and important to say.

Part of the beauty of virtual instrumentation is that you have a real
operating system at your disposal, and a lot of different things can
be going on in the computer at the same time without interference.

Brian



Re: Why do some older instruments require waits between writes?

2004-05-15 Thread [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Indeed the older instruments may not have been fully compliant.  The
response time of the micros in these instruments running @ 4 Mhz is
just not good enough to respond to (or even change bus states) back to
back commands from a 3 GHz processor.  They may also have depended
upon one of the other forms of handshaking requiring you to test for
device ready before communicating again.  The developer tester of the
time would not have encountered a problem depending on the test
methodology.  Even today, a rush to market will leave untested and
non-compliant corners of device interaction.  Nothing to do except
hope that you are working with a company that is responsive to your
needs.  My opinion.



Why do some older instruments require waits between writes?

2004-05-14 Thread David at Lockheed
This is something that I have wondered about.  Often when using older
instruments with newer computers it is necessary to slow down the
writing of  instrument specific commands (ie set freq, get number of
points).  Writing two commands too closely in time causes the test
instrument to lock up or to generate errors.  If the instrument meets
the GPIB spec, this really should not happen.  It should stop
handshaking if it is not ready to receive data (such as commands). The
argument that I've heard that computers have gotten much faster should
not make sense since even a newer computer still writes through a GPIB
interface, and the test instrument should be able to react quickly
enough to meet the spec.  I find it hard to believe that so many
instrument did not really meet the spec, but were built to respond as
quickly as computers at the time could issue data.  Thanks for any
help in resolving this mystery.  If I can understand what is going on,
perhaps I can stop peppering my programs with waits.