false X cycle

[70/70]

This is what I have seen so far.82-70c MP w/AS+ scoring. Machines were installed 10 days ago.Miss my 30's
sometimes #16 cycles really late..7-10 seconds after cycle input. When this happens the machine runs an X cycle (does not show X on mask),scores erraticly,sets new rack, goes to 1st ball and now the .086 processor used in AS+ (and most bowlers) are baffled
Not in chassis.
Reset CWC but did not swap.
Sweep motor seems to start good
Thats as far as I got
Ideas for tomorrow would be appreciated

[John_Galt]

Re: false X cycle

Originally posted by 70/70:
sometimes #16 cycles really late..7-10 seconds after cycle input.

<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">What closes the cycle circuit?
Electronic triggering? Start switch? Both?
Fix this and I'll bet scoring issues etc. go away as well.

[deb]

Re: false X cycle

FYI: The processor in the AS+ CWC is a Motorola 68000.

[Alastair]

Re: false X cycle

Ah ha the 68000.

Hmmmm will like this,...that processor is the one used in most washing machines and tumble driers still today [img]/content/btubb/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/wink.gif[/img]

[wb8yjf]

Re: false X cycle

I was at a house that had a similer problem - was the camera. If you have a good spare try that as well as the CWC.

Jon

[Pietenpol]

Re: false X cycle

Originally posted by Alastair:
Ah ha the 68000.

Hmmmm will like this,...that processor is the one used in most washing machines and tumble driers still today [img]/content/btubb/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/wink.gif[/img]

<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">The 68000 is comparable if not preferred to the 386 processor....which is used in the space shuttle.

Make anyone go hmmmmm?

[wb8yjf]

Re: false X cycle

Ain't nothing wrong with the 68000 except the size of it and the footprint. Thats one big arsed IC! [img]/content/btubb/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/eek.gif[/img] Obviously it works pretty well in this application [img]/content/btubb/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/wink.gif[/img] Plus, have ya tried to find a socket for these things lately? Getting pretyy rare..

[smalltownguy]

Re: false X cycle

The 68000 was used in many workstations and personal computers, notably Apple Computer's first Macintoshes and the Amiga. It was also used in most of Sega's early arcade machines, and in the Genesis/Megadrive consoles.

In the '80s and early '90s the Accuscore was a fairly advanced scoring system. Things such as proportional grid sizes and multicolored displays / graphics blew the competing AS-90 out of the water.

Then came Accuscore XL and the competing Quibica turned the tables on AMF to which it never recovered its former glory.

[70/70]

Re: false X cycle

I was unable to replicate the problem today. I hate problems that "go away" they are usually not "gone"
Great info from all on 68000 chip

[Alastair]

Re: false X cycle

Yeah... the camera is a good thing to swop out. I believe the big green cap on the board when goes bad will cause this problem of giving out X's. You can replace it yourself, or replace the camera.

Pietenpol - My post was for the member on Bowltech "Hmmmmm" as I thought he would understand and find humour in my comments.
When I was studing my Telecommunications Engineering Degree at uni I had to learn all about the 68000 microprocessor and its freinds and family.

[Andrew]

Re: false X cycle

The 68000 was the best chip ever. [img]/content/btubb/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/wink.gif[/img]

I feel I should qualify that. [img]/content/btubb/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/laugh.gif[/img]

Not for what it does now, but for what it did then.

It's along the lines of...
1. Always make something that isn't held back by current/aka past thinking,
2. Always look to the future and overestimate where human technology can take us, because we shall surely surpass it anyway eventually.
3. Make compromises that can be fixed tomorrow, without compromising the long term future.

Okay, for those who are interested:

1. It broke backward compatibility so that it could achieve its more important aims - that being breaking some barriers of contempory computing thinking (the same thinking that brought us the famous "640K is enough for anyone" epitaph).

2. It was forward-compatible in its addressing architecture. At a time of 16-bit addressing being the norm, the 68000 was built with 32-bit addressing capability. Its contemporary competitor, the 8086, was a 20-bit processor, but could only use memory in a 16-bit scheme. Both were capable of only 16-bit operations overall, but the 68000 could do it without segment manipulation (which is extra work, and hence a performance inhibitor). The real advantage came when the 68000 was upgraded to use 32-bit computation (i.e. the ALU, etc, for those playing at home). This meant, it could now do 32-bit operations. What is fantastic about that is that all the software written for it were already using 32-bit addresses! Instant upgrade from 16-bit to 32-bit performance with existing software! Meanwhile, 8086 users had to use software emulation to make 8086 software (with its 16-bit addressing) make use of new 32-bit technology ('converting' (tricking, really) 16bit software into using 32-bit addresses).

3. Well the compromise was to make a slower ALU (16-bit) with the architecture behind it (32-bit). But it could eventually seemlessly upgrade to the then very futuristic echelon of 32-bit computing.

Sorry for those who don't care. And 70/70 - Glad you solved your problem though.

Andrew.

[Pietenpol]

Re: false X cycle

Originally posted by Alastair:
Yeah... the camera is a good thing to swop out. I believe the big green cap on the board when goes bad will cause this problem of giving out X's. You can replace it yourself, or replace the camera.

Pietenpol - My post was for the member on Bowltech "Hmmmmm" as I thought he would understand and find humour in my comments.
When I was studing my Telecommunications Engineering Degree at uni I had to learn all about the 68000 microprocessor and its freinds and family.

<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">I wasn't sure if that comment would be clear or not. There's a phrase that goes..."Things that make you go hmmmmm" items that are thought-provoking. Was merely pointing out that the space shuttle and laundry machines share the same "brain".

[Andrew]

Re: false X cycle

In fact, the shuttle uses a lesser brain than the average washing machine (well and truly these days).*

NASA do not want to upgrade all of their vehicle computers to the latest and greatest. And for good reason. They work. They work flawlessly (so far - and it has been almost 30 years for some of them).

The one overwhelming problem with anything new is that it is untested to some extent. NASA really can't afford things that might not work. The older it is, the more it has been tested, the more likely it will keep working the way it has been.

One day they might upgrade to the well-tested Intel 486, or the wonderful 68000 (I think they have few of those on the shuttle already in fact).

*Actually, they do of course use some more contemporary processing power, but there are many 8086's in their core line-up for the reasons given above.

And we're not talking about necessarily the same physical chips, but the same model and software.

Interesting topic.

[img]/content/btubb/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/wink.gif[/img]

[TheGMan143]

Re: false X cycle

I, for one, am glad that NASA is slow to change to newer software/processors. Think about it... Could you imaging a shuttle, or even a satellite that used an AMD processor and a Microsoft OS in it? That would be the ultimate failure machine... I could just imagine the conversation at NASA:

"Hey, Bob? Weather satellite X5279J has a degrading orbit and we are getting no response from it."
"Aww dammit... I'l bet it locked up or bluescreened again... Call up Houston and see if there are any astronauts available for a flight... and get things rolling to gas up the shuttle"
"Hello Houston? Kennedy Space Center here... yeah, we need to pull some people together for a mission. What for, Oh nothing too major... Someone needs to take a spacewalk out to that new sattelite and press CTRL-ALT-DEL... then if that doesn't work, they'll have to press the RESET button." Yeah, I know we just had to do the same thing last week, but what do you want from me? It's not my fault it locked up again..."

[wb8yjf]

Re: false X cycle

Originally posted by TheGMan143:
I, for one, am glad that NASA is slow to change to newer software/processors. Think about it... Could you imaging a shuttle, or even a satellite that used an AMD processor and a Microsoft OS in it? That would be the ultimate failure machine... I could just imagine the conversation at NASA:

"Hey, Bob? Weather satellite X5279J has a degrading orbit and we are getting no response from it."
"Aww dammit... I'l bet it locked up or bluescreened again... Call up Houston and see if there are any astronauts available for a flight... and get things rolling to gas up the shuttle"
"Hello Houston? Kennedy Space Center here... yeah, we need to pull some people together for a mission. What for, Oh nothing too major... Someone needs to take a spacewalk out to that new sattelite and press CTRL-ALT-DEL... then if that doesn't work, they'll have to press the RESET button." Yeah, I know we just had to do the same thing last week, but what do you want from me? It's not my fault it locked up again..."

<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">[img]/content/btubb/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/rotflol.gif[/img]