On 5/8/2006 at 11:18 AM Tim Shoppa wrote:
And recording the output of an analog computer is most
easily done with
a scope or pen-plotter. These can be added to an EC-1 quite easily but
are not the basic setup.
My recollection of the EC-1 was that a scope was considered necessary by
Heath to use the thing. IIRC, the op-amps in it were okay, but weren't
precision affairs, like the stuff from Philbrick. Potentiometers were
plain old carbon units, not precision 10-turn units.
Think of it as more of a "trainer" than a quality analog computer. I think
the only interesting problem that I ever got going was the bouncing ball.
There were many other "trainers". I recall one for digital computers that
was essentially a large metal drum with lights and switches serving as
memory. One would take large (laminated?) cards perhaps 10" wide and wrap
them around the drum, then, as the drum rotated, the lights would instruct
you what to do.
Exactly the same timeframe as the EC-1.
At about the same time as the introduction of the EC-1, Argonne National
Labs was trumpeting their hybrid computer. (Now THAT would be a collector's
item!) :)
It was hard back then to think of the EC-1 as a "computer" since it wasn't
a stored-program unit. "Computers" of this sort have been around for a
long time--in the industrial process control area, the work was often done
with pneumatics or hydraulics--there were sqare-root extractors,
differentiators, etc. And what is your gas or water meter other than an
integrator? Long before the use of electronics for computation, rather
sophisticated mechanical analog computers were being used for military fire
control applications.
If I acquire a ball-and-disk planimeter, is it a vintage computer?
Cheers,
Chuck