PDP-8 core memory problems.
hilpert at cs.ubc.ca
Mon Sep 5 21:28:09 CDT 2016
On 2016-Sep-05, at 4:36 PM, Jon Elson wrote:
> On 09/05/2016 05:46 PM, Mattis Lind wrote:
>> måndag 5 september 2016 skrev Jon Elson <elson at pico-systems.com>:
>>> On 09/05/2016 01:59 PM, Mattis Lind wrote:
>>>> I have now concluded that the fault is in the core memory module itself.
>>>> The sense winding is broken on bit plane 7.
>>>> Have you actually ohmed out the sense/inhibit wire?
>> This is by the way a four wire stack. Separate sense and inhibit wire.
> OH! I didn't know any PDP-8 had 4-wire planes. Very interesting. Hmmm, you could rig a pulse transformer to the inhibit wire to bring signals over to the sense amp.
>> Come to think of it, since the inhibit wire is OK, would it be possible to
>> arrange it as a three wire stack somehow. Change the sense amp and inhibit
>> drivers so that they use the same wire?
> Ah, you already thought of that. Well, it SHOULD be possible. You'd probably put a resistor in series with the pulse transformer so that all the select current went through the inhibit wire. Then, the only problem would be that the sense amp gets hit with a big pulse during the writeback. As long as the sense amp recovers from the overload before the next read cycle, it ought to work. Some 4-wire planes were set up so the polarity of half the sense wires were opposite to the inhibit, so the coupled inhibit current balanced out to zero in the sense winding. Any mid-sized 1:1 pulse transformer should do the coupling, the currents might be pretty high, but the duration isn't very long. (Minor nit, the inhibit wires only get pulsed one direction, so you might need a resistive path across the secondary to discharge the flux build up so it doesn't saturate.)
>> Maybe Brent can come in with some advice if this is possible or just
> It is NOT stupid, I think it could really work!
I'd tend to be more pessimistic about this working.
There are different requirements in winding a wire for purposes of inhibit and sense.
In the 3-wire arrangement the winding of the combined wire has to meet both
sets of requirements.
Specifically, for this case, in a 4-wire mem, where the inhibit wire was woven just for
the purposes of inhibit, I don't anticipate it's going to have the noise cancellation topology
needed to function as the sense wire.
Sense wires were woven as a floating loop feeding a differential amplifier. The loop is kept
quite closed or otherwise woven in a very balanced manner so that the magnetic fields from the
large select currents (and other influences) will cancel out or be rejected as common-mode influence at the
differential amp inputs.
The select current magnetic fields trigger the magnetic field reversal of the core, you want to sense the latter distinct from the former.
Unless you have circuitry with the wherewithal to distinguish those induced currents in the sense wire in time
(delay of the core field reversal from the select field), you otherwise have to minimise the influence of the select current fields on the sense wire.
If you look at the diagrams in my article you can see the sorts of differences in weaving topologies between 3 & 4 wire arrangements,
as well as examples of the tortured topologies resorted to to balance the sense loop.
In the 3-wire example there you can see how the S/I wire was split in half with a special resistor network at one end to allow inhibit current flow
while at the same time configuring it as a balanced loop for the sense function.
My article certainly isn't the last word on the variety of implementations, I believe there were 4-wire designs with sense wires parallel to
select wires as in the 3-wire designs for example, so you never know until you examine the specifics at hand,
but I think it unlikely you'd have much success getting the inhibit wire to function for sense, not without going to as much trouble
messing with the stack as if you tried to fix the sense wire.
If the sense wire is open I'd guess there's a good chance it's at one of the end points where it's soldered to a terminal or at an existing splice
from manufacture time and might be repairable if access could be had.
Might the stack have a parity bit array that could be redirected to replace the faulty bit array?,
perhaps foregoing the parity checking on that board-set if the parity logic is present.
More information about the cctech