On May 18, 17:14, Eric Dittman wrote:
> > On May 18, Pete Turnbull wrote:
> > > The standard (as far as I know -- the ones I have came from a
> > > microPDP-11/53 in a BA23 case) boot ROMs are 23-261E5 and 23-263E5.
I seem
> > > to have accidentally left binary images in my DECROMs directory at
> > > www.dunnington.u-net.com/public/ :-)
> >
> > Eric, do you have the facilities to burn these EPROMs? If not,
> > I can help you. Feel free to contact me.
>
> Yes, I can burn most types of EPROMs, including
> the ones on this board.
Are they ordinary 27128s or something different? I've seen a lot of DEC
EPROMs which had fewer pins than "standard" -- though AFAIR only 8KB ones.
--
Pete Peter Turnbull
Network Manager
University of York
On May 18, Eric Dittman wrote:
> > Eric, do you have the facilities to burn these EPROMs? If not,
> > I can help you. Feel free to contact me.
>
> Yes, I can burn most types of EPROMs, including
> the ones on this board.
Good deal.
-Dave
On May 18, 13:41, healyzh(a)aracnet.com wrote:
> On May 18, 14:06, Eric Dittman wrote:
> > I've been gifted with a PDP-11/53 (or 53+) CPU module.
> I just heard from someone a few minutes ago, that if you've got a 3rd
party
> disk controller that you can boot the system off you should be able to
> simply remove the ROM's.
Well, only if they fit, physically and electrically. Most 3rd-party boot
ROMs I've seen (eg Dilog, Emulex, Plessey, GR, etc) wouldn't be the right
type for the board. The code might work; I suspect the ROMs from an 11/73
or 11/83 might work. I never used an 11/53 much, but from what I remember
it's pretty much like other 11/73+ or 11/83 boards, just with memory on it
as well as SLUs and bootstrap etc. I've no doubt someone else (Megan?
Allison? others?) can expand on the differences.
--
Pete Peter Turnbull
Network Manager
University of York
> Has anybody tried one of the DALLAS "smart socket" products with
this
thingie?
Unfortunately the 48T02 is a TOD clock and calendar as well as
NVRAM, so
there's no suitable SmartSocket to replace it. The registers have
to be at
particular places and use a particular protocol too.
Just got the data sheet and the Dallas DS1642 is a direct form, fit and
function replacement for the MK48T02(B).
It says so right at the start of the sheet.
Cheers,
Lee.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
----
This email is intended only for the above named addressee(s). The
information contained in this email may contain information which is
confidential. The views expressed in this email are personal to the sender
and do not in any way reflect the views of the company.
If you have received this email and you are not a named addressee please
delete it from your system and contact Merlin Communications International
IT Department on +44 20 7344 5888.
_____________________________________________________________________
This message has been checked for all known viruses by Star Internet
delivered through the MessageLabs Virus Scanning Service. For further
information visit http://www.star.net.uk/stats.asp
On May 18, 17:32, Dave McGuire wrote:
> On May 18, Pete Turnbull wrote:
> > or 11/83 might work. I never used an 11/53 much, but from what I
remember
> > it's pretty much like other 11/73+ or 11/83 boards, just with memory on
it
> > as well as SLUs and bootstrap etc. I've no doubt someone else (Megan?
> > Allison? others?) can expand on the differences.
>
> I believe the memory on the 11/53 board can be accessed much faster
> than memory on the qbus, as well.
Yes, I believe so. Anyone know *how much* faster? I don't think it was
all that much faster than PMI memory. And I think the /53 *doesn't* work
with PMI, which the /73 and /83 do (only the /83 was supported to use it,
though).
--
Pete Peter Turnbull
Network Manager
University of York
On May 17, 22:10, Louis Schulman wrote:
> OK, the power supply works! I have power on the motherboard. Now on
> to the next problem.
>
> When attached to a composite monitor, I get video, but it is a
> rolling/pulsing screen. Yes, I have the sync set to 60 Hz.
I've seen that happen on Mark 1's where the sync isn't well matched to the
monitor's needs and it couldn't lock. That seemd to happen with 50Hz
versions and certain monitors, due to the timing of the sync pulse relative
to the start of frame. Since this is a Mark 2 and I assume you're using it
at 60Hz, I doubt that's the problem. Does switching between the 50Hz and
60Hz settings make a difference? If so, there's probably something wrong
with the timing.
Looking at the schematic, VSYNC is generated by the counters and
multiplexers at 13A, 19B, 20B and 21B, and the 74LS74 flipflops at 18A and
18B. The 50Hz/60Hz switch controls the multiplexers at 13A and 19B, and
they choose the reload values for the counters at 20B and 21B. You should
see a high multiple (I'm too lazy to work out the frequency :-)) of 60Hz at
21B pin 15 and a lower multiple at 20B-15. That in turn feeds the LS74 at
18B, via the gate at 16A, and the VSYNC signal comes out of 18B-5. If you
have a scope, that will tell you if the signal looks about right, if not,
but you have a logic probe, at least you can look for 60Hz pulses.
If it's extreme, perhaps the vsync isn't getting to the video socket. It's
mixed by ORing it [1] with the HSYNC in the LS32 at 9B (pin 9 is VSYNC, 10
is HSYNC, 11 is composite). The composite sync is buffered by by an LS04
at 10H (in pin 10, out pin 11) and then via R59 is mixed with the video
data (via R58) to the base of the video transistor.
[1] which is what causes the problem for some 50HZ monitors; the HSYNC is
effectively lost during the VSYNC pulse, which is very close to the first
used scan line, so the top few lines of the screen tend to tear.
> So, can you supply a troubleshooting procedure to find where the
> problem lies? Again, keep in mind that this is a Sorcerer II (with
> apparently 32K in Rows 2 and 3, is this the proper configuration)?
Two rows is quite normal -- if the ICs are 4116 or equivalent you have 32K;
if they're 4104 or equivalent you have 8K. I think you mean rows B and C
(look for the numbers at the edge of the board). Physical row C is
actually "row 1" or bank 1 as far as the RAM decode is concerned, and row B
is bank 2. Row A is bank 3. The banks have to be filled in order 1,2,3
(rows C,B,A). So, yes, your setup is normal.
If you can read the screen display, BASIC will tell you how much RAM is
free after it initialises. If you don't have BASIC, the monitor ROM will
tell you the address of the top of RAM after it initialises.
--
Pete Peter Turnbull
Network Manager
University of York
On May 18, 14:06, Eric Dittman wrote:
> So, does any here have a source for bootable ROMs
> for this CPU?
The standard (as far as I know -- the ones I have came from a
microPDP-11/53 in a BA23 case) boot ROMs are 23-261E5 and 23-263E5. I seem
to have accidentally left binary images in my DECROMs directory at
www.dunnington.u-net.com/public/ :-)
--
Pete Peter Turnbull
Network Manager
University of York
On May 18, Pete Turnbull wrote:
> The standard (as far as I know -- the ones I have came from a
> microPDP-11/53 in a BA23 case) boot ROMs are 23-261E5 and 23-263E5. I seem
> to have accidentally left binary images in my DECROMs directory at
> www.dunnington.u-net.com/public/ :-)
Eric, do you have the facilities to burn these EPROMs? If not,
I can help you. Feel free to contact me.
-Dave McGuire
On May 18, Pete Turnbull wrote:
> or 11/83 might work. I never used an 11/53 much, but from what I remember
> it's pretty much like other 11/73+ or 11/83 boards, just with memory on it
> as well as SLUs and bootstrap etc. I've no doubt someone else (Megan?
> Allison? others?) can expand on the differences.
I believe the memory on the 11/53 board can be accessed much faster
than memory on the qbus, as well.
-Dave McGuire
It seems that someone told the seller his PDP-11/34 didn't have CPU
cards. The seller ended the auction and relisted, this time with a
bullet point saying "Sorry there are no CPU cards".
--
Jeffrey S. Sharp
jss(a)ou.edu