CLD: Jim's Enhanced Traffic Signal

[MrJimSmith]

In studying for the CLD, I found that the three sample programs were just not complex enough to match the actual test and I wanted something a little more difficult to practice with.  I took the existing Traffic Signal sample application, and jazzed it up a bit with multiple patterns, an auto/manual mode and a logfile. I was able to get this done in 4 hours (barely) the second time I tried it. I figured since a lot of us in the OC LabVIEW Users Group are taking the test soon, it might help some of you prepare, so here it is. Inside the zip file there is a word doc in the for the specification as well as the complete solution in LabVIEW 8.6 format.   CAVEAT: This hasn't been looked at by anyone else and it is likely harder than the actual test will be. I make no claims that it is suitable as an actual test sample, I'm simply providing it for people that want to try it.

[Hollister]

How many hours did it take you the first time?

[cirrusio]

Haha!  Nice!  Next step - objects!

[jazzbythebay]

You are absolutely right! I just took the CLD, not sure I did so well. I did think that the sample exams were not long enough. I would try practising 2 sample exams in 4 hours to DEFINITELY pass that exam.

[cirrusio]

Sounds like you had a similar experience to me, jazz.  Somebody ought to poke those guys at NI and have them provide an exam that is newer than 10 y ago.  There are too many productivity tools to make these exams comparable to the real thing.  Good idea with the 2 in 4 h.  Matt

[Hollister]

I couldn't agree more. I had no problem doing the sample exams in a short amount of time. The actual exam I took was about three times more complicated. It had so many bells and whistles it took me almost an hour just to get a flow chart written down on paper. I also had to make assumptions because the requirements in the exam were not clear and in some cases were incomplete. No one in in the room at my exam finished early. Everyone was scrambling to try and finish. I don't think pushing people to see how fast they can crank out a program is a good measure of there LabVIEW programming skills. I had to cut many corners just to get something running.

[jazzbythebay]

Yeah, I did convey this to my proctor (who was also the sales engineer for my location). I was getting through the sample exams in 3 hours so it came as a huge surprize that I barely finished the actual exam! Agree with Hollister, programming isn't always about speed. Personally, I prefer to write efficient code rather that just churning out a lot of it that doesn't work!

[MrJimSmith]

After failing my first attempt last year I spoke with one of the engineers that helps develop the tests at NI and explained how the practice exams were somewhat misleading and needed to be updated.  I even sent him some different practice exams I did and he indicated they knew the practice exams needed work and were planning on updating them. I'm not sure if that is still in the works, but they are definitely aware of the problem.

Hollister, the first time I tried this version it took me a little over 5 hours if I remember right. Since it's been a year since I took the exam, I suspect it would take me at least that long today despite the fact I am now working and writing LabVIEW code on a daily basis. I am not looking forward to having to re-test once my certification runs out in 2012.

[Peter Lamb]

Cheer up, Jim.  The recert will be much easier than you think.

CLD:

Certification Exam Details
- Prerequisite: Certified LabVIEW Associate Developer
- Format: Application development
- Duration: 4 hours
- Location: NI branch office, training center, or on-site at your location

Recertification Exam Details
- Recertification interval: 2 years
- Format: Multiple choice
- Duration: 1 hour
- Location: Pearson VUE testing centers or NI branch offices

[J.C._Flores]

Hey Peter.  Long time.

I read your reply and have to jump in here and state my opinion that the recert WILL NOT be easier than one would think. I took the CLD-R exam back in '08 and yeah: that multiple choice test was relative cake to the original 4 hr CLD.  On the other hand, having taken the CLD-R again this past Oct-2010, the test was drastically different so much that it seemed NI all of a sudden decided to test us now on architecture and general software engineering and programming principles.  What's up with that?  IMO, the test should continue to test knowledge learned at the point the original CLD exam was taken.  I do agree the test should be upgraded to incorporate new LabVIEW features from the current LV version.

Anyhow... I wouldn't want to get anyone's hopes up that the CLD-R is relative ease.  The tests are changing within NI and unfortunately for the worse.  This moving target is increasingly becoming a sore point within the dedicated LabVIEW community.  At $199 to take the CLD-R exam each time, at some point people will stop taking it if they're continuing to fail due to a lack of preparation for what the new CLD-R will be testing for.

-J.C..