It's the bee's knees !
It's the bee's knees !
That is awesome! How does it feel, fairly mature? Are they planning to add old school equipment in as well?
Windows only.... Sucks!
yeah, the compatibility list is pretty short.
Windows only.... Sucks!
Yes, that does suck. Doesn't run under wine either, unfortunately uses .net 4.0.yeah, the compatibility list is pretty short.
They said more was coming, just hoping they don't leave older stuff off the list.
Windows only.... Sucks!
Yes, that does suck. Doesn't run under wine either, unfortunately uses .net 4.0.yeah, the compatibility list is pretty short.
They said more was coming, just hoping they don't leave older stuff off the list.
for the 'windows only' crybabies : Too bad you have to live without all the great software available on that platform.
for the 'windows only' crybabies : Too bad you have to live without all the great software available on that platform.
Too bad Agilent is ignoring a fair share of their customers. Also I don't appreciate being called a crybaby just because I made a valid but different choice. Why are you crying about crybabies?
Too bad Agilent is ignoring a fair share of their customers. Also I don't appreciate being called a crybaby just because I made a valid but different choice. Why are you crying about crybabies?
I made a valid but different choice. Why are you crying about crybabies?
A new soft that don't support MAC OSX or even Linux ::)Your PC is indeed the server. the mobile apps can remote connect to the PC provided they reside on the same network. ( so it only works behind your router.
Nice they thought of mobile, but I'm almost sure that you need a PC as server to use the mobile app...
Ah, man, why can't someone write one of these that isn't vendor-specific? |O All this does is make me want to avoid Agilent stuff. It DOES NOT make me want to buy Agilent.let's flip this around : go complain to the other vendors that you want them to make something for their products.. they don't have anything.
AGILENT: THIS MAKES ME WANT TO AVOID YOUR PRODUCTS.
Vendor lock-in is silly to those who have gear from more than one vendor, like every place I've ever worked or set foot in for any reason.
Does it REALLY matter if you have to use an OS you might dislike to get that done? It shouldn't. Your primary concern should be to get the effin job done. Everything else is secondary.It's an extra hassle and extra cost. I don't want to buy a windows copy nor install an extra operating system just for this reason. Don't get me wrong I appreciate the software even exists. I will do it if I need the capability, but it still annoys me because it wastes my time needlessly.
The truth of the matter is that Windows makes development of software like this a lot easier than it would be to develop on other platforms.Not true. It is actually harder to write Windows software than to write Linux software.
I don't like that they only support Agilent hardware. C# and .NET in general is object oriented. They could have written an interface that I could have crafted a plugin for that supported the instruments that I have on my bench. But, no. Agilent management believes that if you have a choice you will choose non-Agilent hardware, so they find ways to remove choices and lock users into their products artificially with software like this.Well put and agreed. But now that I understand more easily. I hate it but I understand. In an ideal world they'd be selfless and not money-driven so they'd include an API. But Agilent wants to sell Agilent equipment. I'd even get it if they'd be making windows, and their software would be windows only. But since Agilent's making test equipment, they're annoying some of their customers with not supporting MacOS and Linux. Cross platform is not as hard as making and API to support every peace of test equipment possible. Its easier to wrap my head around than not being cross platform.
[...]
Yes, it was Agilent's effort that created the software. Why would they let anyone just piggy-back on that? For the same reason that Microsoft lets anyone write software for their operating system; it encourages adoption of the operating system. Allowing other vendors to offer plugins for BenchVue would encourage adoption of BenchVue. The greater the adoption of BenchVue, the greater mindshare that Agilent/Keysight will have in customers' minds.
The truth of the matter is that Windows makes development of software like this a lot easier than it would be to develop on other platforms.Not true. It is actually harder to write Windows software than to write Linux software.
let's flip this around : go complain to the other vendors that you want them to make something for their products.. they don't have anything.
besides , you can use other vendors machines. simply flick em into compatibility mode. Set your rigol multimeter in 34401 mode. Same for the Fluke or Keithleys that can emulate the 34401 commandset.
Too bad Agilent is ignoring a fair share of their customers. Also I don't appreciate being called a crybaby just because I made a valid but different choice. Why are you crying about crybabies?[rant]
Ah, man, why can't someone write one of these that isn't vendor-specific?
All this does is make me want to avoid Agilent stuff. It DOES NOT make me want to buy Agilent.
AGILENT: THIS MAKES ME WANT TO AVOID YOUR PRODUCTS.
Vendor lock-in is silly to those who have gear from more than one vendor, like every place I've ever worked or set foot in for any reason.
And, do we know that emulated commandsets are supported with BenchVue?
Ah, man, why can't someone write one of these that isn't vendor-specific?
Why don't you go and write one?
Seriously. If you think there is a market there, go for it.
QuoteAll this does is make me want to avoid Agilent stuff. It DOES NOT make me want to buy Agilent.
AGILENT: THIS MAKES ME WANT TO AVOID YOUR PRODUCTS.
Vendor lock-in is silly to those who have gear from more than one vendor, like every place I've ever worked or set foot in for any reason.
You expected Agilent to support other vendors products?
But, you can send your own SCPI strings to a machine with this tool as well. So you could write your own machine definition. ( i don't know if it is in the release. the beta's had this)
Any device that can connect using VISA (GPIb , LXy , VXI , PXI compliant devices ) can be approached with this tool.
could be. version 1.0 .....
on the SCPI : i was thinking about another tool. nevermind my comments on that. Agilent has another tools that lets you probe instruments save states and gives help on the scpi commands. -brainfart- on my side. i'm getting old and easily confuses. too much stuff going on
It doesn't seem to support the function gen inside the Agilent X series scopes?Maybe they'd like you to buy Waveform Builder Pro for that?
I'm sorry but a piece of software designed to consolidate instrument control and data gathering locked to only one vendors instruments is an utter and colossal fail :--
I don't get it, why are people complaining about this?This software had me thinking it was something it isn't and with this new perspective it's probably an improvement over other vendor offerings.
The app is free, and it looks good. What do you expect Agilent to do, magically provide a tool that works with every other competitors instruments out there and solves everyones obscure needs? What real incentive is there for them to do that? Is it even possible?, heck they can't even support all their own instruments. Are they supposed to field support calls when you can't get their software to talk to their competitors instruments?
I think expecting them (or anyone else) to do that is not being realistic.
I'm sorry but a piece of software designed to consolidate instrument control and data gathering locked to only one vendors instruments is an utter and colossal fail :--
I don't get it, why are people complaining about this?
The app is free, and it looks good. What do you expect Agilent to do, magically provide a tool that works with every other competitors instruments out there and solves everyones obscure needs?
What real incentive is there for them to do that?
Is it even possible?, heck they can't even support all their own instruments. Are they supposed to field support calls when you can't get their software to talk to their competitors instruments?
I think expecting them (or anyone else) to do that is not being realistic.
I'm sorry but a piece of software designed to consolidate instrument control and data gathering locked to only one vendors instruments is an utter and colossal fail :--
I don't get it, why are people complaining about this?
Your guess is as good as mine as to why people vocalize their complaints sometimes and not all the time or none of the time.The app is free, and it looks good. What do you expect Agilent to do, magically provide a tool that works with every other competitors instruments out there and solves everyones obscure needs?
Not at all.What real incentive is there for them to do that?
What real incentive is there for anyone to do anything that isn't 100% selfish, then? That's a silly question. Incentives include: first to market with a universal bench monitoring system, which goes a long way toward market domination; making sure the name Agilent is on screen each and every time someone monitors their gear; providing opportunity to upsell to agilent gear when inferior equipment is attached; vehicle for agilent to deliver product updates, documentation, notices, firmware upgrades, etc.;Is it even possible?, heck they can't even support all their own instruments. Are they supposed to field support calls when you can't get their software to talk to their competitors instruments?
Of course it's possible. It's easier to create a framework with per-instrument plugins than it is to create one monolithic app that needs a full update every time any bit of gear gets a bugfix. Agilent did it the hard way, intentionally, to lock others out. This is the root of my complaint, personally.I think expecting them (or anyone else) to do that is not being realistic.
I don't. It is indicative of short-sighted thinking and lack of a bigger vision.
Why did HP spin off Agilent? Because of the way stocks work and how stocks are rated. It was a short-sighted decision with long-term consequences.
Why is Agilent spinning off KeySight? Because of the way stocks work and how stocks are rated. It is a short-sighted decision with long-term consequences.
Why are Agilent releasing software that is intentionally locked to only Agilent gear? Because they think this will sell more Agilent gear. It is a short-sighted decision and I guess we'll see what adoption looks like.
This software is only going to be adopted by people or organizations who:
A) have a genuine need for software like this,
B) haven't already written something that works with all the gear they need it to work with, and
C) ONLY have Agilent gear.
I don't know of a single shop on the planet (except maybe Agilent themselves) that only has gear from Agilent, and I have set foot in many.
99% of the TAM ( total accessible market) are running windows in the lab environment or to control instruments.Citation needed.
So pardon me if, the first thing the "church of Linux" crowd does is throw in the "it's not available for -insert flavor of distro's here- ". this irks me.I don't claim the OS I'm using is the only true one. I don't speak against people using Windows or MacOS or what ever they fancy. I'm not complaining.
...
what will you complain about next ?
...
Here is a great tool. It's free (Gratis as in free beer). Runs on cheap computers.
99% of the TAM ( total accessible market) are running windows in the lab environment or to control instruments.Citation needed.
I can finally announce it is ready ( i've known about this for almost 2 year . I was alpha and Beta tester for this thing)
www.agilent.com/find/benchvue (http://www.agilent.com/find/benchvue)
...
It's the bee's knees !
I think it is a good idea with this kind of software, but it will only be really useful for a limited amount of people/companies. That is, of course, completely acceptable for a Agilent software package (Who would expect big measurement companies to support their competitors).
Personally I have many brands of equipment and do not see any reason to install this software. I have many brands of equipment and my computer is not only used for equipment control. To fix this I have made my own software that works without any VISA drivers (i.e. I do not always need new drivers when updating windows), this software is limited to support exactly what I need.
I'm not going to ask you to show me the source for this, but if you could give me a bit of detail about how you architected this software and what language(s) you used, I would greatly appreciate it.
Why are Agilent releasing software that is intentionally locked to only Agilent gear?you got proof of that ? if not ... eat your words ! This is just plain false !
I program in Java and due to lack of time I have only implemented equipment with serial ports (including virtual) and lan connections.
I have lots of DMM, both bench and handheld, electronic loads, power supplies, relays. Basically I add equipment when I need it.
The program uses a script and generates CSV files with the result.
Each piece of equipment can generate one or more columns of data. The electronic loads generate V, A, W, Ah, Wh and one or more time coulmns. And I can control the settings from the script, for power supplies I can ask them to slowly increase or decrease voltage while logging.
You can see the result on my website: http://lygte-info.dk/ (http://lygte-info.dk/) many of the measurements are made with this software. The battery test is the most complex of them (All test is done with one setup and one script and takes a couple of days).
+1 for Java
+1 for minimum app required to get the needed results.
Why are Agilent releasing software that is intentionally locked to only Agilent gear?you got proof of that ? if not ... eat your words ! This is just plain false !
why does lecroy's scope explorer only work with lecroy scopes ? why does tektronix wavestar only work with their Arbitrary generators ? Why does your diesel engine only run on diesel and not water ? why does the batteyr of a nokia phone not fit in an iphone ?
why why why ?
The fact of the matter is that Agilent created a focus group constructed from people working in labs having to collect and control instruments. I was one of those people.
We each had a one on one interview and then Agilent distilled a set of questions. The second round we were all interacting with each other answering the question set and bouncing idea's off one another. there were Labwindows user, Labview user Vee users, C coders , VB coders and plenty of other platform users
The outcome of this experiment was the following : It is too annoying to have to write a program to do simple things like record data over time or grab screenshots and data dumps. Every time you want to do something simple you have to start coding . Why don;t you make a base tool that can control instruments from the desktop. and do simple things like logging over time and upload download files/ screendumps.
6 months passed and we got the Alpha. The alpha could only control a 34401 and a e3631. The user interface was annoying , too many buttons to click too many menus , not logical. this was reworked , polished, streamlined. another six months later alpha 2 passed critiscism . so beta was released.
Bugfixes, instrument disconnects etc were al solved. another 6 months later V1.0 is released.
don't go looking for conspiracies. Agilent created a focus group because they were got questions from users. so they anted to find out what was 'missing' in the gap between full blown code riting ala Labwindows Labview C or Vb and instruments on a bench.
This is the outcome.
In the real world it is almost always a homogenous mix of vendors, ages, and capabilities. I won't say "always" because I've not set foot in every lab.
I'm not looking for conspiracies, and I'm surprised and impressed that Agilent actually spoke to folks about their needs. That isn't common in my industry. What I'm not impressed by is that no one thought (or that collectively, you didn't think) that maybe since you're working on standardized physical interfaces (GP-IB, RS-232, Ethernet, USB), with a standardized data protocol (VISA) that it might be, oh, i don't know, wise, possible, or realistic to be able to talk to any gear that implements that protocol over those physical interfaces. It just doesn't seem like a stretch to me, and as a software developer, I can tell you it was absolutely a design decision to do prevent that
Yes, because it would be quite a risk for a company to allow the program to support other vendors tools, because THEY would end up with the support calls when it doesn't work.
The software community worked that out long ago - don't offer technical support for other vendor's stuff.
the more I talk about this the more I am resolved to create the mythical open test framework myself. if done properly it will be awesome.
Then don't waste your development time complaining here about how some company is a pack of unfair bastards for not giving you exactly what you wanted for free. Go create it yourself.
my kid is using my computer. :)
Hurry.
Windows only.... Sucks!
How is it false? This software doesn't support hardware from other vendors. It is intentional because the ability to connect to non-Agilent hardware isn't present. Didn't work last night when I tried, anyway.Just because it is not in there doesn't mean it is intentional. It is only intentional if there is somewhere a written clause in the design spec that says 'thou shalt not support non-agilent machines'. it works fine with a rigol dmm configured to emulate a 34401. if they deliberately wanted to cripple it they could have probed to find the real name ( yes there is an instruction to do that ) and shut down. They don't.
Proprietary connectors/software/protocols/form factors suck, and everyone knows it.fine. let's all agree toonly make instruments using 10 watt 10k resistors , 2x4's and nails. anything beyond that is 'proprietary'. definately no SMd or BGA as joe schmoe can't solder that at home with his flamethrower. Let's stop making asics and construct everything with 2n2222 transistors. IC's are the work of the devil.
you get a CD with marketing documentation and a very basic user's guide.have you taken the time to read the users and programming manuals from agilent for their new instruments? They are hundreds of pages. very detailed. Schematics don't make sense anymore. Half the machine run's on ASIC's you can't get your hands on and trying to fix the 10 layer boards full of BGA's is BER : Beyond Economical repair. Agilent , Keithley and Tektronix have ZERO income from hobbyists anyway. Hobbyists and small companies buy used stuff from ebay. Hobbyists fix broken stuff found in the bin. Not their target audience.
I'm surprised and impressed that Agilent actually spoke to folks about their needs. That isn't common in my industry.Really ? i'm am flabbergasted ... speechless.
Either Agilent has done that all wrong, or they've blocked the ability to load external modules.Oh, it is object oriented. But they don't provide an API so you could attach your own code. This thing is closed source. sorry.
Get on the Agilent forums. voice your gripes there. you may get lucky !
dear shiftregister, please keep clocking yourself until you contain all zero's. thank you. :)Windows only.... Sucks!
Damn! That sucks indeed!
you forgot booze. Actually forget the blackjack and the h...Get on the Agilent forums. voice your gripes there. you may get lucky !
Based on the general response I'm getting here, I'm not even going to try. I'll make my own framework! With hookers! And Blackjack!
the same crap is still ongoing today. Nationla labwindows and labview 'drivers' are only made for national stuff.It's no where near that bad. There are drivers submitted by third parties (nitwits?) that may or may not be certified by national. There is a huge collection of non-NI drivers on their driver website
all others are skeletons or crap thrown together by nitwitsThat's a bit harsh. Non-certified drivers are a good starting point to create or modify your own
the ones that do work right are not interoperable becasue the instruments are not interoperable as they violate the SCPI standard. poof. there goes the nice balloon.I must have SCPI's purpose all wrong then. It's just as difficult for the standard to cater for every instrument as it is for benchvue or any other "framework". In Labview if a device requires some "non-standard" scpi commands you simply double click the icon carrying out the function and in the "schematic" for that you just change the ASCII command to what ever the instrument requires. If instead of MEAS DCV it needs DCV just go in there and change it. It's that simple
So , you are welcome to make your own super duper environment that supports all. I'll be the first one looking at it.Like it or not, your words carry a fair bit of weight and I won't for a second presume to tell you how to think but you should consider that discouraging experimentation or simply just trying things for oneself isn't conducive to advancement in anything.
But you better include a driver for my half million dollar scope that is complete and bug free or i will be the first one lighting the flamethrower the moment you start a topic that your version 1.0 is released. 'Wo is you' when i find out it doesn't support all the machines i have. (and i got some really archaic ones you can't even get your hands on). and it better run on windows is i can't be arsed touch those weird environments like Loonix or that overpriced CrapOS.
so it is lost upfront. you are looking to a massive investment developing this and a massive financial investment buying every single piece of testequipment ever made to complete your program.
Trusting your 'users' to supply working and complete drivers ... has been tried many times. doesn't work. Users are nitwits and complainers.
So what is it that BenchVue gives over NI LabVIEW?You can use labview to create something like Benchvue. The difference is Labview is designed for designing interfaces (amongst many other things) where as benchvue is just the interface
Anyway, just what does Agilent BenchVue give vs. NI LabVIEW? What is it for if it's just for Agilent?
So what is it that BenchVue gives over NI LabVIEW?
Just tell me to go away, if that's what you mean. I'm not asking for a ban, but if you tell me to chill out, I will. Just say that, if that's what you mean.
I don't know. The lack of enthusiasm for my notion is telling me that maybe it actually would not be useful to many. I am always resistant to the idea that I might be wrong
You are both right and wrong. Of course it would have been nice if Agilent had written the software to support other instruments and/or allow user to add their own. But there are reasons why they didn't do that, and you IMO are wrong to complain about a free piece of software and calling Agilent "unfair" for not doing so.
I'm not sure I used the word "unfair" and if i did, I misspoke. Point taken.
If you're fair, Agilent, and I've already established that you're not, you'd allow other vendors to show features that their own hardware has that other vendors' hardware does not, including Agilent.
i just want a way to support my gear, not all gear, or even your gear, necessarily. I do want you to be able to add your own gear, though, and anyone else can add their own devices. I am not interested in supporting all gear, just myHold it. Let's change 'i' and 'my' with 'agilent' in the first sentence....
Appearantly not for the professional market then. They may not want to get in the way of LabView (which supports Linux and Mac).Windows only.... Sucks!Yes, that does suck. Doesn't run under wine either, unfortunately uses .net 4.0.
[snip]
[snip]
Except for the Visual Basic, that's pretty much what I had in mind. C# is much more a native language to me, and I know that's not true for everyone.
This is inheritance and polymorphism is the very basis and the power of object oriented programming.
VB.NET and C#.NET are not very much different and easy to manually read/convert code between them. Good old VB5/6 to VB.NET is a massive (and much needed) change. Ditching all those COM objects, etc.
Now I am just trying to get NI-VISA to recognise my chinese instruments. My SDG1025 is basically the same as the LeCroy WaveStation 2000 series, and I downloaded the LabVIEW driver but it fails to do anything so far. I only get COM and LPT ports, no USB. The EasyWave software provided by Siglent requires NI-VISA, so I don't understand why it is only visible to EasyWave and nothing else that uses VISA.
I'm not sure I used the word "unfair" and if i did, I misspoke. Point taken.QuoteIf you're fair, Agilent, and I've already established that you're not, you'd allow other vendors to show features that their own hardware has that other vendors' hardware does not, including Agilent.
you can download it here :
http://www.elektor.com/products/books/programming/visual-basic-for-electronics-engineering.12244.lynkx (http://www.elektor.com/products/books/programming/visual-basic-for-electronics-engineering.12244.lynkx)
Today I need to measure some stuff and decided to use the BechnVue and found following issues, maily minor, depends on your usecase:
The BenchVue was installed on clean WinXP SP3.
Power supply E3631A - it is not possible to select more traces and trace the voltage and current simultaneously, It has slow response compared to other instruments. But it has been connected over GPIB and not USB.
Function generator 33522B - It works correctly, and I can recomends it for usage. I would like to see the name of ARBs which are stored in the instruments and not only the PN7..PN20.
Multimeter 34411A - No issue found, I can recomend it for usage
Multimeter 34461A - No issue found, I can recomend it for usage
DSOX3k scope - just able to take screenshots, it is similar to the VNC connection to the instruments more over the control the instrument.
EXA Signal Analyzer - Similar to the DSOX able to take the screenshot not control the instrument.
Keithley 2002 in HP3458A emulation mode is not recognized and not work at all.
Hi - I have a 34401A as well as a Prologix USB-GPIB adapter. Does anybody know if it could be used with BenchVue? Or would I have to use the serial interface of the 34401A? Is there any advantage one way or the other?
Thanks!
Serial prt should work. Prologix will not work. That thing is NOT a real gpib controller. Only GPIB cards (pci , isa, usb , ethernet ) from NI, Agilent or NCS are supported.
Base Price US$ 553
Serial prt should work. Prologix will not work. That thing is NOT a real gpib controller. Only GPIB cards (pci , isa, usb , ethernet ) from NI, Agilent or NCS are supported.Quote from: Agilent WebsiteBase Price US$ 553
**cough**
Very interresting!
Just for curiousity, I saw that you are organizing the code by brand, one folder for rigol, one for agilent, instead of organizing by type, say multimeter, scope, functiongen.
so, since you have these:
Oscilloscopes (scope):
- Agilent InfiniiVision 3000A X-series
Function Generators (fgen):
- Agilent InfiniiVision 3000A X-series (Wavegen option)
Which file in the Agilent folder is for each of these?, are the functiongen defines and scope defines in the same file?
And, I thought I saw something about 34401A in the agilent folder also, not anything about it in the readme, does that mean that is in the works, or fully supported?
Mostly asking because I have an rigol ds2202a-s, which is an scope and an fuctiongenerator (wavegen or something), and I have an agilent 34461A which i would like to try to get into this.
But first, i have to understand python, I'm more into C# and stuff like that ;)
Btw, will this work on Windows?
import ivi
import numpy as np
import time
msox = ivi.agilent.agilentMSOX3014A("USB::2391::6056::INSTR")
msox._interface.timeout = 10000
scope = msox
fgen = msox
freq = np.logspace(2,5,61)
amp = np.zeros(freq.shape)
fgen.outputs[0].standard_waveform.waveform = 'sine'
fgen.outputs[0].standard_waveform.amplitude = 0.5
fgen.outputs[0].standard_waveform.dc_offset = 0.0
fgen.outputs[0].enabled = True
scope.channels[0].enabled = True
scope.channels[0].offset = 15e-3
scope.channels[0].scale = 5e-3
for i in range(len(freq)):
print("Frequency %e" % freq[i])
fgen.outputs[0].standard_waveform.frequency = freq[i]
scope.timebase.scale = 1/freq[i]
time.sleep(10.0)
print("Reading peak-to-peak voltage")
amp[i] = scope.channels[0].measurement.read_waveform_measurement('voltage_peak_to_peak', 1)
with open('output_3db.csv', 'w') as f:
for i in range(len(freq)):
f.write("%e, %e\n" % (freq[i], amp[i]))
I managed to get a new, factory sealed box Agilent 82357B USB-GPIB for $150 shipped from an Asian ebay seller. That is only a little more than a 82357B knock-off. Definitely worth the extra for the real thing. Now I can ditch my old Pentium 4 with the ISA-slot NI GPIB-TNT. Just finding something as new as a P4 to support that ISA card was difficult and expensive (but not as expensive as a PCI GPIB was a few years ago).Serial prt should work. Prologix will not work. That thing is NOT a real gpib controller. Only GPIB cards (pci , isa, usb , ethernet ) from NI, Agilent or NCS are supported.Quote from: Agilent WebsiteBase Price US$ 553
**cough**
So it's like a posh version of labview??Tell me about it. I just recently converted the Teledyne LeCroy Wavestation driver to work with my Siglent SDG1025. I have the 45 day trial of LabView.
With probably more ball-ache? I hate labview. With a passion.
Hi - I have a 34401A as well as a Prologix USB-GPIB adapter. Does anybody know if it could be used with BenchVue? Or would I have to use the serial interface of the 34401A? Is there any advantage one way or the other?
Thanks!
Sounds more like they've missed something.
QuoteSounds more like they've missed something.
lol, I hope your right!
But it sounds more like they're planning something...
QuoteSounds more like they've missed something.
lol, I hope your right!
But it sounds more like they're planning something...
Hello Stuart,
I am following up on your Quote Request on the BenchVue Software. This software is available to you at no cost. Please follow this link and halfway down the page you will find the link for download.
http://www.home.agilent.com/en/pd-2368912-pn-34840B/benchvue-software?nid=-33002.1080833.00&cc=US&lc=eng (http://www.home.agilent.com/en/pd-2368912-pn-34840B/benchvue-software?nid=-33002.1080833.00&cc=US&lc=eng)
If you have any questions, or need anything else, please contact me and I will be glad to help you.
Hi Joel,
Thanks for the quote.
When I try to data log using Benchvue past 1 hour, the logging stops.
When you try to manually set the logging to anything > then 1 hour then Benchvue gives you the following error:
“Elapsed time is limited to 1 hour for unlicensed software version”
I can't find a provision in the software to upgrade and it's certainly not for sale on Agilent’s site.
Can you explain how one gets the full version of the software or is this a work in progress?
Do you know if unlimited logging is planned or if a more advanced, non-free software is under development?
Sorry for the trouble but I need to record data for a week.
Thanks again,
Stuart
So I spoke with Agilent. There will be an advanced version of Benchvue released in the fall. Pricing is not yet set. I could not get information about the additional features. One of them will be that it will allow you to datalog for as long as you like.
They said that they will maintain a free basic version, which is what I'm guessing is available now.
I recommend that you download the older Digital Multimeter (DMM) Connectivity Utility, while you still can. It allows you to datalog indefinitely. I did 70,000 records before I shut it down.
http://www.home.agilent.com/agilent/software.jspx?ckey=2303260&lc=eng&cc=US&nid=-536902435.1060970&id=2303260&pageMode=CV (http://www.home.agilent.com/agilent/software.jspx?ckey=2303260&lc=eng&cc=US&nid=-536902435.1060970&id=2303260&pageMode=CV)
Cheers to all,
Stuart
get a reality check
Im trying to run a lab tech testing facility
I dont have time for geek stuff
sorry wrong planet
Something being free does not render that thing immune to complaint or critique, and it does not justify one using complaint to invalidate another's opinion.I'm referring to people who use this 'free' tool as an excuse to complain and say they won't buy Agilent products again just because the free tool doesn't do everything they want it to. ;)
So quit saying people should not complain because it is free. Free has nothing to do with it.
Have a look at this thread on Python based Instrument Control (https://www.eevblog.com/forum/testgear/python-based-instrument-control/).
I just can't get interested in Python or any Python apps.
Have a look at this thread on Python based Instrument Control (https://www.eevblog.com/forum/testgear/python-based-instrument-control/).
I don't know why, but use of the Python language immediately makes me lose interest in a project. If Python were half as good as the vocal advocates say, it would be the best programming language ever created by a very, very wide margin. It is not the best programming language on the planet at all, and to me that means Python is chosen solely out of peer pressure or some other external force. This renders the entire effort moot to me.
I just can't get interested in Python or any Python apps.
I just can't get interested in Python or any Python apps.
+1 :)
Have a look at this thread on Python based Instrument Control (https://www.eevblog.com/forum/testgear/python-based-instrument-control/).semicolons make my full colon cramp up. combine that with the usage of indentation and it culminates in explosive diarrhea.
Im trying to run a lab tech testing facility
I had a very bad experience some years ago when I inherited a VBA project concerning instrument data sheets.
[...]
So the moral is .............
In the real world you wouldnt get the job with that attitude or if you had blagged your way through somehow you'd soon be fired
we senior managers have all learnt our lessons and can spot the BS in a heartbeat
stroll on >:D
So I spoke with Agilent. There will be an advanced version of Benchvue released in the fall. Pricing is not yet set. I could not get information about the additional features. One of them will be that it will allow you to datalog for as long as you like.
They said that they will maintain a free basic version, which is what I'm guessing is available now.
I recommend that you download the older Digital Multimeter (DMM) Connectivity Utility, while you still can. It allows you to datalog indefinitely. I did 70,000 records before I shut it down.
http://www.home.agilent.com/agilent/software.jspx?ckey=2303260&lc=eng&cc=US&nid=-536902435.1060970&id=2303260&pageMode=CV (http://www.home.agilent.com/agilent/software.jspx?ckey=2303260&lc=eng&cc=US&nid=-536902435.1060970&id=2303260&pageMode=CV)
Cheers to all,
Stuart
I've got a benchvue 2.0 final released version. Like you said, the "apps" are devided into 5 parts, DMM, Function Generator, Oscilloscope, Power supply and Spectrum Analyzer. Each app need an individual license. :-//
The new benchvue provide some simple online control function, and the "pro version" provide unrestricted measurement data logging with limit checking and alerts.
I've got a benchvue 2.0 final released version. Like you said, the "apps" are devided into 5 parts, DMM, Function Generator, Oscilloscope, Power supply and Spectrum Analyzer. Each app need an individual license. :-//
The new benchvue provide some simple online control function, and the "pro version" provide unrestricted measurement data logging with limit checking and alerts.
Thanks for the update.
Any idea, when the official public release will be out and how much the Pro version will cost?
No, you don't need expensive NI software. The VISA library can be procured for free and works with many different interfaces. Then you can interface with VISA from many different programming languages, including C, Python, and others. No need to use labview. There are also solutions that do not require the NI software at all, depending on the interface - there are native C and Python implementations of VXI11 for LAN instruments, for example. There is also the Linux GPIB project that supports several USB GPIB cables.There are also implementations of USBTMC available.
This I know but it need to be hard code, NI allow to build applications, logging ...May be you can try Dasylab.
If someone needs only logging feature with DMM DMM_Connectivity_Utility_1.0.2.0.exe work without any limitation compared to BechVue with 1h logging limit.