No, nobody else inquired about it.
I have no idea it will fit a DEC backplane; AFAIK it was used on NCR
systems. It might take me a while to find it; when I do I'll try to
determine the dimensions of the pins and the wire gauge.
On Tue, Sep 24, 2024 at 10:41 PM Ryan de Laplante (Personal) via cctalk <
cctalk(a)classiccmp.org> wrote:
Hey Mike,
Did the wire wrap tool sell? Is it any good for DEC backplanes?
Thanks,
Ryan
On 2024-08-31 10:29 a.m., Mike Stein via cctalk wrote:
If I can find it, is anyone interested in a
battery-powered wire wrap
tool?
Not sure of the diameter but it's larger than
an IC socket, so I suspect
that it is in fact for a backplane.
Postage from Toronto.
On Sat, Aug 31, 2024 at 1:55 AM Vincent Slyngstad via cctalk <
cctalk(a)classiccmp.org> wrote:
> On 8/30/2024 7:25 PM, cz via cctalk wrote:
>> To try and turn this thread around: I'm looking to make an extended
>> memory controller for my pdp8/L. I've got a wire wrap backplane and
>> enough cards to make it work but I've never done wire-wrap on this sort
>> of scale.
>>
>> I've got an old Radio Shack Wire wrap tool and a lot of wire. Is there
>> any sites that discuss how to do reasonable wire-wrapping?
> Some of the older (single-sided especially) DEC back-planes were wrapped
> with heavier gauge wire, which needs a different tool. The newer
> back-planes seem to be wrapped with 30 gauge wire. You can tell the old
> connector blocks, as the pins appear rectangular, rather then square.
>
> There are all kinds of opportunity for optimizing routing for distance,
> cross-talk and and other esoterica. One thing that's worth doing,
> though, is to wrap for a max height of two, and such that all the
> connections (except possibly the last end of a given signal) are at the
> same height. So, if A B C and D are to be connected together, you
> connect A to B, then C to D (thus all at the lower level), then put the
> connection of B to C at a higher level. This dramatically cuts down on
> the amount you have to *unwrap* to fix something. Avoid situations which
> cross the height boundary, because then you have to keep unwrapping
> stuff you'd rather not, to expose the buried lower side.
>
> If you are wrapping by hand, you can be assured that you *will* make
> mistakes and have to fix something.
>
> I predict you will also find that you are really sick of wire-wrap long
> before you are done. These days, PCBs are inexpensive, and less error
> prone (in the sense that you almost always end up with exactly the
> connections in the netlist). OTOH, connectors are expensive and hard to
> reuse when soldered to a PCB. So you've got to be really confident of
> your netlist.
>
> You might consider investing in a tool where you pull the trigger to do
> the wrap. You'll probably get a more consistent result, and
> significantly fewer repetitive motion issues.
>
> Hope that helps!
>
> Vince
>