RE: Problems with a long board 1541

From: Ray Bryan (raycomp_at_visi.com)
Date: 2002-04-09 21:08:20

  • Next message: Daniele Gratteri: "1541 "long board" repaired!"
    On Tue, Apr 9, 2002, at 07:14 PM, Daniele Gratteri wrote:
    
    > > failed (a common occurence).  The same thing happens on the shorter
    > boards.
    > > On that board they are labeled UD1 & UC1 - check the pins with a scope or
    > > logic probe.  on UD1 the pins are paired as - 1-2,3-4,5-6, 9-8, 13-12,
    > > the out pin should always negate the input - if input changes and output
    > does not
    > > or output=input bad gate
    > 
    > This is an interesting thing: I cheched UC1 and UD1 and found that,
    > probably, they had already been substituted in the past since solderings
    > are
    > different from the other ones. But, damn, they haven't installed sockets!
    > :-(
    > I have desoldered both UC1 and UD1 and I will put in new parts as soon as
    > possible (at the moment I only have a 7414: could it work, also if it isn't
    > an
    > LS?). Can you confirm that UC1 is the '14 and UD1 is the '06?
    Danielle,
    I have the Schematic for 1540008 (board) layout 1540001 in front of me - parts list
    says uc1= 74LS14; ud1= 7406 this list _does_not_ suggest 7414 as a substitute
    (does not mean it won't work -just not recommended - speed might be critical).
    I forgot to note that the long board 1540001 also uses 4 2114 memory chips instead
    of the the single TMM2016/m58275 for the 2K of RAM.
    
    --RAy
    --
    
    ---------------------------------------------------------------
    |Raymond C. Bryan  651-642-9890 vox | The battle is sometimes |
    |Raymond Computer  651-642-9891 fax | to the small for        |              
    |795 Raymond Ave   -email:  raycomp | the bigger they are     |
    |St Paul MN  55114    @visi.com     | the harder they fall.   |
    |USA              Amiga - Commodore |     -- James Thurber -- |
    ---------------------------------------------------------------
    
    
           Message was sent through the cbm-hackers mailing list
    

    Archive generated by hypermail 2.1.4.