Google-Apps
Hauptmenü

Post a Comment On: Ken Shirriff's blog

"An 8-tube module from a 1954 IBM mainframe examined: it's a key debouncer"

15 Comments -

1 – 15 of 15
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Those modules are exactly like the ones I and some friends "liberated" from a scrap metal yard th Waterbury CT in the mid 60s, along with tubes sucah as 5881, 5691, 1nd 5693, all with aplications in radio, TV and audio. Relays, huge transformers, and banks of caoacitkrs were also part of the "loot". I didn't save much, just a couple of tubes now in use in radios. Ah, the felonies of youth...

January 6, 2018 at 7:35 PM

Blogger David Cortesi said...

"It contained 1700 vacuum tubes..." Are you sure there isn't a zero dropped from that? Because on docent rounds I tell people ENIAC had 18,000 and the UNIVAC I had 20,000.

January 7, 2018 at 8:06 AM

Blogger Ken Shirriff said...

According to the BRL report, the IBM 705 had 1,700 tubes and 4600 diodes in the arithmetic unit. (I assume that is the main computer excluding the core memory unit, power supply, and tape.) Looking at the 705 diagrams, the main system had four panels, each holding two rows of 40 modules. That would be 2560 tubes, but many spots where empty, so the 1700 number seems believable. The core memory unit had two more panels, so probably 1000 more tubes there.

20,000 tubes in the UNIVAC I seems too high. The BRL report says UNIVAC I had 5,200 tubes of 15 types, along with 18,000 crystal diodes. UNIVAC used largely 25L6 tetrode tubes while the 705 used dual triode tubes, which probably cut the number of tubes in half.

The 18,000 tube number for ENIAC matches what I've seen elsewhere. The ENIAC was extraordinarily inefficient with tubes, though, and later computers did much better.

January 7, 2018 at 12:14 PM

Blogger JL said...

Thanks, Ken. I really enjoyed the pictures and the entire video. Can you tell me where the neons were located in the module? I can't see them from here; maybe they're hidden behind a resistor. Were the neons visible from from the "front panel" of the module, or would the CE need to have the module out on an extender card to see them?

Did IBM have its own colour code for resistors?

"IBM's Early Computers" is a great book (along with "IBM's 360 and Early 370 Computers" by the same author.

January 7, 2018 at 12:36 PM

Anonymous Fatan Gaboo said...

Very surprising that this analysis does not call attention to the hysteresis / Schmitt Trigger action. This 2-tube circuit is exactly the "classic emitter coupled Schmitt Trigger" shown in Wikipedia's article entitled Schmitt Trigger, with cathodes coupled and tail current set by a 3.0K resistor. Dunno if this will turn into a clickable link or not:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Schmitt_trigger#Classic_emitter-coupled_circuit

January 7, 2018 at 1:03 PM

Blogger Ken Shirriff said...

JL: The neons were located on a console, not on the module itself. The module had the resistor for the neon but not the bulb itself, which would be somewhere more convenient. For the video, we wired up an external neon bulb. Also, IBM used the standard color code. E.g. the blue-red-red resistors are the 6.2K resistors on the schematic, connected to +140V.

Fatan: Footnote 12 describes the Schmitt trigger, but everyone seems to have missed that so maybe I'll make it more prominent in the article.

January 7, 2018 at 1:17 PM

Blogger David Cortesi said...

Now I can't find where I got that 20,000 number for UNIVAC 1. But it appears you are right, and I've been lying to innocent museum visitors. Dang it.

January 7, 2018 at 2:47 PM

Blogger Unknown said...

It can take only 2 in guitar amps, and make infinite tones of beauty unlike transistors. : )

January 7, 2018 at 4:13 PM

Blogger Unknown said...

On Ken's comment on uneven amount of tubes, From what I remember the ENIAC used 6-tube flip flops as its entire memory before it got a more advanced memory upgrade a few years later. The 1700 tubes in the 705 could also have more "tubes" per tube than ENIAC or UNIVAC had, the ones in this module had two per physical tube. Another difference is that unlike ENIAC, the 705 was a commercial system, so it had a smaller word size instead of scientific precision levels.

Well, can't wait for part 2!

January 8, 2018 at 5:46 PM

Anonymous Anonymous said...

Any thoughts on why SMS failed to reduce the number of parts while the 7400 succeeded?

January 9, 2018 at 5:57 AM

Blogger Ken Shirriff said...

Good question about why there were so many types of SMS cards, and a limited number of 7400 ICs. I think it's because 7400 ICs could implement (say) 90% of a computer, with an assortment of resistors, capacitors, transistors, and analog ICs filling in the gaps. But SMS cards were pretty much a 100% solution: if you needed filter capacitors, it was an SMS card. If you needed power supply monitoring, SMS card. If you needed special-purpose amplifiers for tape, SMS card. There wasn't an alternative to an SMS card if you needed some weird circuit. So you ended up with a "long tail" of SMS cards to do random stuff.

January 9, 2018 at 2:35 PM

Blogger Unknown said...

Thanks for posting this. I so enjoyed it. I used to toy around with transistor circuits ... well, I still do, I've designed a few tube amps, but haven't built them. Fun.

January 9, 2018 at 7:02 PM

Blogger Richard said...

Incredible, brilliant, brilliant and brilliant!

I have been following your work for more than a year and I have become increasingly fond of it.

You have rescued and cataloged much of the history of computers and that is of great contribution to all.

Few books offer such an in-depth subject on the subject.

You rescued a hiatus from my knowledge of the valves in computing.

Thank you very much for the material.

January 11, 2018 at 12:57 PM

Blogger Unknown said...

Dear Master Ken,

your Blog is so "ethically" and "authentically" made, your talk on "hackaday" on IC reverse engineering was spectacular and lots of people whom i know loved it, I hope two or three blogs are as ethically good as yours and so beautifully presented, your videos with marc is also brillant! god bless you and keep up your extraordinary work.

February 9, 2018 at 11:11 PM

Anonymous Globe Collector said...

That 91K is in the grid circuit of the second valve with a 33pF in parallel, this would pass the logic direct to the second grid for a second inversion. The second valve is being held strongly off by the 180K down to the -130v rail, but when the first valve is cut off (i.e, no anode current) then the voltage at the second grid is set by the potential divider of 180K to -130v and 109.4K up to +140v. Using Ohm's Law, 932uA flows through the whole stack and develops 167.7v across the 180K at the bottom, so the grid voltage at pin 7 would be 167.7-130 or +37.7v more than enough to drive the second valve into saturation.
NOW...looking at the picture of the circuit next door...look at the solder where the leads of the 33pF cap are wrapped around the tagstrip...There NEVER was any 91K there...that is how it is from manufacture, the 33pF alone is the coupling component turning the circuit into an edge detector...when the positive pulse hits the grid of V1 (Pin 2) the anode is pulled down (The saturation of a 12AU7 at vg=0 is about 80-100v, so the anode will come down c35v and the cathode up by 5-8v, that 35v high falling edge will go straight through the 33pF capacitor and drive the grid of V2 down to around 0v...but the cathode rises up too, making the fall about 38v, enough to cause the anode of V2 to rise up suddenly..but the 33pF will rapidly charge up and V2 will turn on again...so the positive going pulse at the anode of V2 will be very short...but your counter should grab it. When the pulse goes from the grid of V1 its anode rises and cathode falls, this rise is communicated by the 330pF if it is rapid enough, but as V2 is already saturated, any rise on its grid will have no effect at its anode!!
So this unit contains rising edge detectors with some sort of hysteresis/one shot action by the 3K in the cathode circuit...not inconsistent with the multiple functions of these plug-ins as you describe above.

One thing we tend to forget in this over-transistorized age every valve had to earn its keep and in many valve circuits a single valve might be called upon to perform multiple functions (often frequency domain separated) but that is not the case here with such simple circuits.

What is that last "floating" cathode follower used for, or does that valve simply just float?

I have never seen such a complicated stack of bench supplies in my life...really, if you had built a purpose made +140, -130, -60v supply it would have been a lot less cumbersome, and the bench a hell of a lot less cluttered.

March 29, 2018 at 2:54 AM

You can use some HTML tags, such as <b>, <i>, <a>

Comment moderation has been enabled. All comments must be approved by the blog author.

You will be asked to sign in after submitting your comment.
Please prove you're not a robot