28 Nov
2014
28 Nov
'14
9:31 p.m.
I have some of these DEC SBB module drives, but the foam has gone
crumbly, wondering if it is ok to remove the foam and operate without
it?
http://images.esellerpro.com/2131/I/842/7/100_2665.JPG
29 Nov
29 Nov
7:08 a.m.
On 11/29/2014 12:31 AM, Nigel Williams wrote:
I have some of these DEC SBB module drives, but the
foam has gone
crumbly, wondering if it is ok to remove the foam and operate without
it?
http://images.esellerpro.com/2131/I/842/7/100_2665.JPG
Of course. It's just noise reduction.
- J.
8:51 a.m.
Get that F'ing foam out of there!!
Not only does it get crumbly, there is sometimes an intermediate stage
where it smells like vinegar, and is a strong acid.
When my best friend was alive, he stored his camera stuff in airtight
cases in foam.
After his death, I went through what was left of his stuff.
One case had a Visoflex, bellows, and a Leitz Tele-Elmarit 180mm M
Visoflex mount lens. 250 of those were made. One in decent shape goes
for $2K. His was brand-new, quite possibly the last, and only one in
perfect shape. The foam ATE into the barrel of the lens, destroying all
collector value.
--
Grumpy Ol' Fred cisin at xenosoft.com
1:09 p.m.
On Sun, Nov 30, 2014 at 3:51 AM, Fred Cisin <cisin at xenosoft.com> wrote:
Not only does it get crumbly, there is sometimes an
intermediate stage
where it smells like vinegar, and is a strong acid.
ick! thanks for the tip, will get right on it.
The most egregious use of foam I've encountered was in a token ring
hub, where a block of foam was use to support the small PCB which ran
the width of the hub. The PCB held the relays that sit behind the
sockets, of course with the foam atomized the PCB was swinging around
on the wires.
1:37 p.m.
I had a number of ceramic ICs with gold pins in old anti-static foam; ate
the pins right off.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Nigel Williams" <nw at retroComputingTasmania.com>
To: "General Discussion: On-Topic and Off-Topic Posts"
<cctalk at classiccmp.org>
Sent: Saturday, November 29, 2014 4:09 PM
Subject: Re: foam in DEC SBB drives, ok to remove?
On Sun, Nov 30, 2014 at 3:51 AM, Fred Cisin <cisin
at xenosoft.com> wrote:
Not only does it get crumbly, there is sometimes
an intermediate stage
where it smells like vinegar, and is a strong acid.
ick! thanks for the tip, will get right on it.
The most egregious use of foam I've encountered was in a token ring
hub, where a block of foam was use to support the small PCB which ran
the width of the hub. The PCB held the relays that sit behind the
sockets, of course with the foam atomized the PCB was swinging around
on the wires. 
7:33 p.m.
New subject: IC storage / anti-static foam
On 11/29/2014 3:37 PM, Mike Stein wrote:
I had a number of ceramic ICs with gold pins in old
anti-static foam;
ate the pins right off.
I know this was discussed before but....
What are recommended methods for storing a variety of ICs where they are
easily accessible as needed, keeps them safe and for the long term?
7:56 p.m.
New subject: IC storage / anti-static foam
I've had the same thing happen to me only it was the Z80 and mask programmed roms for
the TRS-80 Model III and a set of chips to make a 6800 based SBC way back when I was in
college. All the chips were packed in black anti-static foam and now the pins which are
steel, I think, have tiny bits of foam stuck to the pins and it won't come off very
easily. These days I just keep the ICs in the anti-static tubes they're shipped in.
I hope this helps.
Kip Koon
computerdoc at sc.rr.com
http://www.cocopedia.com/wiki/index.php/Kip_Koon
-----Original Message-----
From: cctech [mailto:cctech-bounces at classiccmp.org] On Behalf Of Michael Lee
Sent: Saturday, November 29, 2014 10:34 PM
To: General at classiccmp.org; Discussion at classiccmp.org:On-Topic Posts
Subject: IC storage / anti-static foam
On 11/29/2014 3:37 PM, Mike Stein wrote:
I had a number of ceramic ICs with gold pins in old
anti-static foam;
ate the pins right off.
I know this was discussed before but....
What are recommended methods for storing a variety of ICs where they are easily accessible
as needed, keeps them safe and for the long term?
30 Nov
30 Nov
7:13 a.m.
New subject: IC storage / anti-static foam
At 3:37 PM 11/29/2014, Mike Stein wrote:
I had a number of ceramic ICs with gold pins in old
anti-static foam; ate the pins right off.
At 10:33 PM 11/29/2014, Michael Lee wrote:
What are recommended methods for storing a variety of
ICs where they are easily accessible as needed, keeps them safe and for the long term?
At 10:56 PM 11/29/2014, Kip Koon wrote:
... have tiny bits of foam stuck to the pins and it
won't come off very easily
As with many things in this world, the quality of anti-static foam varies greatly. I use
foam which I bought in mats from a local electronics distributor (since closed) about 20
years ago. I have some ICs which have been stored in that foam for as long as I have owned
it. Their pins are not discolored nor are they stuck to the foam.
As for storage, the majority of my IC stock must be carried in the field for work
(overstock stays at home). If, for example, I am working on a transmitter and find a bad
4011 on the controller board, I can't get one at Radio Shack. The remaining parts
houses in the area are closed on Saturday, so if I find that IC on Friday evening that
client will be off the air until Monday if I don't have the part in stock. If it is
not in my field parts storage it would be a four- or five-hour round trip (for some
clients) to go back home and get one.
My main field storage for small parts (resistors, capacitors, semiconductors, fuses, etc.)
is a large Plano tackle box:
http://www.planomolding.com/product.php?BCCID=111&PID=655
The body holds four large Stowaway boxes. One is compartmented for ICs and other semis,
and each IC compartment has three layers of cut-to-fit static foam holding ICs. There are
currently 532 ICs in that Stowaway, plus transistors and diodes in storage envelopes, and
other semis such as bridge rectifiers.
When I leave the house for work I never know what I may face in the field. Although my
Explorer cannot hold all of the tools, instruments, and parts that I might need, what I
carry is enough to provide a long-term or short-term repair better than 99% of the time.
Dale H. Cook, Contract Engineer, Roanoke/Lynchburg, VA
http://plymouthcolony.net/starcityeng/index.html
12:59 p.m.
New subject: IC storage / anti-static foam
On Sun, 30 Nov 2014, Dale H. Cook wrote:
As with many things in this world, the quality of
anti-static foam
varies greatly. I use foam which I bought in mats from a local
electronics distributor (since closed) about 20 years ago. I have some
ICs which have been stored in that foam for as long as I have owned it.
Their pins are not discolored nor are they stuck to the foam.
"quality" also as in TYPE.
The worst offenders of all have been the "Highest quality" and most
expensive of the foams.
1:19 p.m.
New subject: IC storage / anti-static foam
On 11/30/2014 12:59 PM, Fred Cisin wrote:
The worst offenders of all have been the "Highest
quality" and most
expensive of the foams.
The cheapest variety of this stuff (and the least subject to
degradation) for me has been polystyrene foam painted with some sort of
black conductive paint.
I recall that expensive DIPs were sometimes shipped with a molded rubber
retainer that also protected the pins.
Tubes are good, however.
--Chuck
1:37 p.m.
New subject: IC storage / anti-static foam
Note that the clear IC tubes do *not* provide any protection against static electricity;
they just don't generate any *additional* static charge from items rubbing against
them (such as from the ICs jiggling around during shipping, rubbing against other items,
etc.) like untreated plastics can. They aren't conductive enough to protect against
external zaps.
The same goes for the pink antistatic bags; those don't create additional static
charges during handling like plain plastic bags do, but they also don't protect their
contents from external zaps. At all!
To protect from external charges, you can use things like the black foam for DIPs (which
has a relatively high conductivity in order to keep the pins of an IC at the same
potential), the silver bags (which protect contents *when sealed* by forming a Faraday
cage around them), etc.
Here's a good video demonstrating the difference between
anti-static/static-dissipative packaging (pink stuff, DIP tubes, etc.) vs. static
*shielding* packaging (silver bags, black conductive bags, black ESD-shielding totes,
etc.):
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=imdtXcnywb8
--
Mark J. Blair, NF6X <nf6x at nf6x.net>
http://www.nf6x.net/
29 Nov
29 Nov
5:33 p.m.
On Nov 29, 2014, at 8:51 AM, Fred Cisin <cisin at xenosoft.com> wrote:
When my best friend was alive, he stored his camera
stuff in airtight
cases in foam.
After his death, I went through what was left of his stuff.
One case had a Visoflex, bellows, and a Leitz Tele-Elmarit 180mm M
Visoflex mount lens. 250 of those were made. One in decent shape goes
for $2K. His was brand-new, quite possibly the last, and only one in
perfect shape. The foam ATE into the barrel of the lens, destroying all
collector value.
You really know how to hurt a person, don't you? I use both film and digital Leica
M's, including the Visoflex bellows and lenses, so this is a seriously painful story.
That is one of the rarest Leica lenses around.
Zane
10:57 p.m.
When my best friend was alive, he stored his
camera stuff in airtight
cases in foam.
After his death, I went through what was left of his stuff.
One case had a Visoflex, bellows, and a Leitz Tele-Elmarit 180mm M
Visoflex mount lens. 250 of those were made. One in decent shape goes
for $2K. His was brand-new, quite possibly the last, and only one in
perfect shape. The foam ATE into the barrel of the lens, destroying all
collector value.
You really know how to hurt a person, don't you? I use both film and digital Leica
M's, including the Visoflex
bellows and lenses, so this is a seriously painful story. That is one of the rarest
Leica lenses around.
30 Nov
30 Nov
1:57 p.m.
New subject: OT: camera damage from "the best" foam
When my best
friend was alive, he stored his camera stuff in airtight
cases in foam.
After his death, I went through what was left of his stuff.
One case had a Visoflex, bellows, and a Leitz Tele-Elmarit 180mm M
Visoflex mount lens. 250 of those were made. One in decent shape goes
for $2K. His was brand-new, quite possibly the last, and only one in
perfect shape. The foam ATE into the barrel of the lens, destroying all
collector value.
You really know how to hurt a person, don't you? I use both film and digital Leica
M's, including the Visoflex
bellows and lenses, so this is a seriously painful story. That is one of the rarest
Leica lenses around. Ouch indeed. I have a small amount of Leica M stuff
(M2 and M4 bodies,
visoflex, 4 lenses, nothing rare). It's beautiful, although I must say
that I prefer a Nikon F to the Leica M+visoflex.
So do I. I would have kept my old visoflex and bellows, and sold off the
Tele-elmarit and some of the rest.
I sold the 180 Viso-M Tele-Elmarit to KEH. They've [probably PAINTED it
and] listed it for $1272 in "bargain (damaged) condition".
Fred, was this lens still usable after that. The
barrel was pitted, I
guess, but did the focussing mount still work and was the optics OK. I
use my cameras, I don't collect them, so cosmetic damage is not so
significant (I picked up a Nikkor 180mm for a very good price because
somebody had scratched an inventory number on the barrel. Optically
perfect, so still an excellent lens)
The glass came through OK! There might be some very minor damage to the
front coating. The focusing still works, but not as smoothly, and has
one rough spot. The lens barrel was a lot worse than a simple asset
marking; it looks like a kid was playing with an engraver, and then
stored it in a puddle.
Frankly, anybody needing something in the 180mm range has a lot of [in my
opinion] better options in newer gear. For example, my rangefinder
coupled 200mm Komura or ANY SLR with a 200mm lens is WAY more convenient
and easier to use than visoflex plus 180mm tele-elmarit - THAT is an
extraordinary amount of weight and bulk. Therefore, the primary value of
that lens would have been to a collector who wants the RARE aspect, and
they want it to look good. Cosmetic damage is significant in THAT market.
One of Chris' other friends really wanted the 2-1/4 x 3-1/4 Graflex with
lenses, so I let him have it, but I kept the 47mm Super-Angulon which
might even cover 4x5! I am now making adapters to put it on a tilt/swivel
bellows for playing with movements on medium format, 35mm, and digital.
Not very difficult - it's on a Compur 00?, which seems to be the same
threads as what Schneider used for some enlarging lenses.
When I first opened the case, everything felt WET. I thought that I was
dealing with water damage. But, a few hours later, the foam had further
metamorphed into a dry crumbly powder.
Chris was doing his laundry at my house (last load was in my dryer).
Does anybody here want a whole bunch of size XXL/2XL Cabela's shirts?
How many BIG guys are there here?
I've mentioned, on this list his PBM1000 computers (made by Wordstar
corp, while it was still Micropro). But those, his books from the 1980s
and 1990s, and his Sperry PCs got dumpstered before I got a chance to
rescue them.
--
Grumpy Ol' Fred cisin at xenosoft.com
2:55 p.m.
New subject: OT: camera damage from "the best" foam
Are there any Leitz microscope collectors on the list? I wasn't planning
on putting this here but about a month or so ago I got a call from a friend
of a friend and picked up a nice collection of Leitz (and some very old
options), Olympus, Nikon, Reichert, and Zeiss microscopes and options. I
hang on to the Zeiss. There was a Leitz micro photography kit with book in
leather case. All looked unused and I'm guessing were from around 1900 or
so. No copyright in the book.
I'm always interested in hearing about Zeiss items.
I'm sorry about the loss of your friend.
On Sun, Nov 30, 2014 at 3:57 PM, Fred Cisin <cisin at xenosoft.com> wrote:
digital
Leica M's, including the Visoflex
> When my
best friend was alive, he stored his camera stuff in airtight
> cases in foam.
> After his death, I went through what was left of his stuff.
> One case had a Visoflex, bellows, and a Leitz Tele-Elmarit 180mm M
> Visoflex mount lens. 250 of those were made. One in decent shape goes
> for $2K. His was brand-new, quite possibly the last, and only one in
> perfect shape. The foam ATE into the barrel of the lens, destroying
all
collector
value.
You really know how to hurt a person, don't you? I use both film and bellows and lenses, so this is a seriously
painful story. That is one
of the rarest Leica lenses around.
After Chris had a heart attack and died in my kitchen, the loss of his
camera gear was anti-climactic.
In addition to the foam damage, the main body of his camera stuff was
missing! (stolen by the county agents who "secured" his house?)
A week before his death, we were taking some snapshots at Point Lobos, and
he promised to dig out and loan me [permanently!] a 35mm summicron, and my
choice of rigid or collapsible 50mm summicrons.
I was also listed for the cameras in his most recent will, although the
house is slated for somebody else.
But, when we got access to the house, there were some gaps on some of the
shelves.
I would have kept one M body, and the summicrons, and sold off whatever
else duplicated what I already have. How many bellows and how many 90mm
Elmars can one want?
On Sun, 30 Nov 2014, tony duell wrote:
Ouch indeed. I have a small amount of Leica M
stuff (M2 and M4 bodies,
visoflex, 4 lenses, nothing rare). It's beautiful, although I must say
that I prefer a Nikon F to the Leica M+visoflex.
So do I. I would have kept my old visoflex and bellows, and sold off the
Tele-elmarit and some of the rest.
I sold the 180 Viso-M Tele-Elmarit to KEH. They've [probably PAINTED it
and] listed it for $1272 in "bargain (damaged) condition".
Fred, was this lens still usable after that. The
barrel was pitted, I
guess, but did the focussing mount still work and was the optics OK. I
use my cameras, I don't collect them, so cosmetic damage is not so
significant (I picked up a Nikkor 180mm for a very good price because
somebody had scratched an inventory number on the barrel. Optically
perfect, so still an excellent lens)
The glass came through OK! There might be some very minor damage to the
front coating. The focusing still works, but not as smoothly, and has
one rough spot. The lens barrel was a lot worse than a simple asset
marking; it looks like a kid was playing with an engraver, and then
stored it in a puddle.
Frankly, anybody needing something in the 180mm range has a lot of [in my
opinion] better options in newer gear. For example, my rangefinder
coupled 200mm Komura or ANY SLR with a 200mm lens is WAY more convenient
and easier to use than visoflex plus 180mm tele-elmarit - THAT is an
extraordinary amount of weight and bulk. Therefore, the primary value of
that lens would have been to a collector who wants the RARE aspect, and
they want it to look good. Cosmetic damage is significant in THAT market.
One of Chris' other friends really wanted the 2-1/4 x 3-1/4 Graflex with
lenses, so I let him have it, but I kept the 47mm Super-Angulon which
might even cover 4x5! I am now making adapters to put it on a tilt/swivel
bellows for playing with movements on medium format, 35mm, and digital.
Not very difficult - it's on a Compur 00?, which seems to be the same
threads as what Schneider used for some enlarging lenses.
When I first opened the case, everything felt WET. I thought that I was
dealing with water damage. But, a few hours later, the foam had further
metamorphed into a dry crumbly powder.
Chris was doing his laundry at my house (last load was in my dryer).
Does anybody here want a whole bunch of size XXL/2XL Cabela's shirts?
How many BIG guys are there here?
I've mentioned, on this list his PBM1000 computers (made by Wordstar
corp, while it was still Micropro). But those, his books from the 1980s
and 1990s, and his Sperry PCs got dumpstered before I got a chance to
rescue them.
--
Grumpy Ol' Fred cisin at xenosoft.com
10:05 p.m.
New subject: OT: camera damage from "the best" foam
I'm always interested in hearing about Zeiss
items.
A few years back a good friend was having a clear-out
and said he had 'an old microscope' if I wanted it. I did.
It turned out to be a fairly modern (1970s?) Zeiss with
a few accessories. It needed a trivial repair to the PSU
for the lamp but was otherwise perfect. Yes, I am
keeping it...
-tony
10:02 p.m.
New subject: camera damage from "the best" foam
Frankly, anybody needing something in the 180mm range has a lot of [in my
opinion] better options in newer gear. For example, my rangefinder
I have always considered an Leica M + visoflex to be something of a kludge. I
really can't understand why my father bought that back in the 1960s rather than
say a Nikon F.
coupled 200mm Komura or ANY SLR with a 200mm lens is
WAY more convenient
I think using the Leica rangefinder, with its relatively short base line, with a 200mm
lens is not going to be that accurate.
FWIW, the only reason I have the 180mm f/2.8 Nikkor is that due to the cosmetic
damage the camera shop was selling it for less than a 200mm f/4 Nikkor which is
what I actually went to buy. Since I don't take action shots, I didn't need the
extra
speed, but it might be useful. And it will do what I want (pick out details on buildings,
etc).
and easier to use than visoflex plus 180mm
tele-elmarit - THAT is an
extraordinary amount of weight and bulk. Therefore, the primary value of
that lens would have been to a collector who wants the RARE aspect, and
they want it to look good. Cosmetic damage is significant in THAT market.
Sure. It's a great pity this happened.
-tony
3435
days inactive
3437
days old
16 comments
12 participants
participants (12)
-
ard＠p850ug1.demon.co.uk -
cclist＠sydex.com -
cisin＠xenosoft.com -
computerdoc＠sc.rr.com -
healyzh＠aracnet.com -
js＠cimmeri.com -
mhs.stein＠gmail.com -
mikelee＠tdh.com -
nf6x＠nf6x.net -
nw＠retroComputingTasmania.com -
radiotest＠juno.com -
useddec＠gmail.com