BG
Bill Gold
Mon, Nov 7, 2011 5:31 PM
Joe:
When I removed my original NVRAM, put in the sockets and then installed the original NVRAM I got a few error messages when I turned the meter back on. I don't remember exactly what the complaint was but it involved a few calibration constants missing and the calibration password missing. My initial guess was that the batteries were gone and desoldering the NVRAM just finished the process. The date codes on the NVRAM was 1989 so I was just running on borrowed time anyhow.
I don't have a ROM programmer anyhow so I just installed the new NVRAM and did a full calibration to my local standards. I really don't care about traceability to NIST anyhow. What I have here is close enough for what I do.
I have tried to find out what material is used for the pins of the NVRAM is but no such luck from the Maxim/Dallas package datasheets. My guess would be the usual tin plate. Yes, gold against tin isn't the best idea, but it is better than tin against tin. You are simply not going to find these NVRAM with gold plated pins so you have no choice. I forget whether the gold migrates into the tin or the tin migrates into the gold. When we specified the plating of the "fingers" of our PC Boards, we used nickel over the copper and then 60u of gold over the nickel. This gave the best results for constant insertion and removal of the PC Boards from the mother board sockets, which were gold plated. We produced expensive ATE for Discrete Semiconductors, in the range of $100k to $200k each, so we wanted absolutely, positively good contact all the time and no failures due to repeated removal and insertion.
IMHO you are on the right track. Let's see what happens when you finally get the Loveland calibration.
Bill
Joe:
When I removed my original NVRAM, put in the sockets and then installed the original NVRAM I got a few error messages when I turned the meter back on. I don't remember exactly what the complaint was but it involved a few calibration constants missing and the calibration password missing. My initial guess was that the batteries were gone and desoldering the NVRAM just finished the process. The date codes on the NVRAM was 1989 so I was just running on borrowed time anyhow.
I don't have a ROM programmer anyhow so I just installed the new NVRAM and did a full calibration to my local standards. I really don't care about traceability to NIST anyhow. What I have here is close enough for what I do.
I have tried to find out what material is used for the pins of the NVRAM is but no such luck from the Maxim/Dallas package datasheets. My guess would be the usual tin plate. Yes, gold against tin isn't the best idea, but it is better than tin against tin. You are simply not going to find these NVRAM with gold plated pins so you have no choice. I forget whether the gold migrates into the tin or the tin migrates into the gold. When we specified the plating of the "fingers" of our PC Boards, we used nickel over the copper and then 60u of gold over the nickel. This gave the best results for constant insertion and removal of the PC Boards from the mother board sockets, which were gold plated. We produced expensive ATE for Discrete Semiconductors, in the range of $100k to $200k each, so we wanted absolutely, positively good contact all the time and no failures due to repeated removal and insertion.
IMHO you are on the right track. Let's see what happens when you finally get the Loveland calibration.
Bill
JL
J. L. Trantham
Mon, Nov 7, 2011 11:23 PM
Bill,
I don't know if I have damaged my 'cal' DS1220Y or not. The two DS1230Y's
had files that looked like what I was expecting when I read them. On the
DS1220Y, the original read on my BP-1600 gave an over current warning and
shut down. The chip was a bit warm from the unsoldering and, perhaps, that
was it. I then moved it from my BP-1600 to an Advin MVP and it read
promptly. I then re-read it on the BP-1600 and it read promptly. So, don't
know. Would be nice to find an image to compare with just to get an idea
about what it should look like.
That chip had a date code of 9713 and the two DS1230Y's were 9703.
In any event, new sockets and chips are on the way. If I have lost my
calibration constants, I would anticipate that the meter is still 'calable'
which is what I am hoping for. Then, once it gets back from Agilent, I will
be able to harvest the data from the new chips, archive it, and be in
business the next time the chips fail. Then, again, my current chip may
still be OK.
Joe
-----Original Message-----
From: volt-nuts-bounces@febo.com [mailto:volt-nuts-bounces@febo.com] On
Behalf Of Bill Gold
Sent: Monday, November 07, 2011 11:31 AM
To: volt-nuts@febo.com
Subject: Re: [volt-nuts] 3458A - To Modify or Not To Modify?
Joe:
When I removed my original NVRAM, put in the sockets and then installed
the original NVRAM I got a few error messages when I turned the meter back
on. I don't remember exactly what the complaint was but it involved a few
calibration constants missing and the calibration password missing. My
initial guess was that the batteries were gone and desoldering the NVRAM
just finished the process. The date codes on the NVRAM was 1989 so I was
just running on borrowed time anyhow.
I don't have a ROM programmer anyhow so I just installed the new NVRAM
and did a full calibration to my local standards. I really don't care about
traceability to NIST anyhow. What I have here is close enough for what I
do.
I have tried to find out what material is used for the pins of the NVRAM
is but no such luck from the Maxim/Dallas package datasheets. My guess
would be the usual tin plate. Yes, gold against tin isn't the best idea,
but it is better than tin against tin. You are simply not going to find
these NVRAM with gold plated pins so you have no choice. I forget whether
the gold migrates into the tin or the tin migrates into the gold. When we
specified the plating of the "fingers" of our PC Boards, we used nickel over
the copper and then 60u of gold over the nickel. This gave the best results
for constant insertion and removal of the PC Boards from the mother board
sockets, which were gold plated. We produced expensive ATE for Discrete
Semiconductors, in the range of $100k to $200k each, so we wanted
absolutely, positively good contact all the time and no failures due to
repeated removal and insertion.
IMHO you are on the right track. Let's see what happens when you
finally get the Loveland calibration.
Bill
volt-nuts mailing list -- volt-nuts@febo.com
To unsubscribe, go to
https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/volt-nuts
and follow the instructions there.
Bill,
I don't know if I have damaged my 'cal' DS1220Y or not. The two DS1230Y's
had files that looked like what I was expecting when I read them. On the
DS1220Y, the original read on my BP-1600 gave an over current warning and
shut down. The chip was a bit warm from the unsoldering and, perhaps, that
was it. I then moved it from my BP-1600 to an Advin MVP and it read
promptly. I then re-read it on the BP-1600 and it read promptly. So, don't
know. Would be nice to find an image to compare with just to get an idea
about what it should look like.
That chip had a date code of 9713 and the two DS1230Y's were 9703.
In any event, new sockets and chips are on the way. If I have lost my
calibration constants, I would anticipate that the meter is still 'calable'
which is what I am hoping for. Then, once it gets back from Agilent, I will
be able to harvest the data from the new chips, archive it, and be in
business the next time the chips fail. Then, again, my current chip may
still be OK.
Joe
-----Original Message-----
From: volt-nuts-bounces@febo.com [mailto:volt-nuts-bounces@febo.com] On
Behalf Of Bill Gold
Sent: Monday, November 07, 2011 11:31 AM
To: volt-nuts@febo.com
Subject: Re: [volt-nuts] 3458A - To Modify or Not To Modify?
Joe:
When I removed my original NVRAM, put in the sockets and then installed
the original NVRAM I got a few error messages when I turned the meter back
on. I don't remember exactly what the complaint was but it involved a few
calibration constants missing and the calibration password missing. My
initial guess was that the batteries were gone and desoldering the NVRAM
just finished the process. The date codes on the NVRAM was 1989 so I was
just running on borrowed time anyhow.
I don't have a ROM programmer anyhow so I just installed the new NVRAM
and did a full calibration to my local standards. I really don't care about
traceability to NIST anyhow. What I have here is close enough for what I
do.
I have tried to find out what material is used for the pins of the NVRAM
is but no such luck from the Maxim/Dallas package datasheets. My guess
would be the usual tin plate. Yes, gold against tin isn't the best idea,
but it is better than tin against tin. You are simply not going to find
these NVRAM with gold plated pins so you have no choice. I forget whether
the gold migrates into the tin or the tin migrates into the gold. When we
specified the plating of the "fingers" of our PC Boards, we used nickel over
the copper and then 60u of gold over the nickel. This gave the best results
for constant insertion and removal of the PC Boards from the mother board
sockets, which were gold plated. We produced expensive ATE for Discrete
Semiconductors, in the range of $100k to $200k each, so we wanted
absolutely, positively good contact all the time and no failures due to
repeated removal and insertion.
IMHO you are on the right track. Let's see what happens when you
finally get the Loveland calibration.
Bill
_______________________________________________
volt-nuts mailing list -- volt-nuts@febo.com
To unsubscribe, go to
https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/volt-nuts
and follow the instructions there.
S
Steve
Tue, Nov 8, 2011 12:07 AM
Joe,
I have the images from the chips in my 3458A. They had '94 dates so a few months ago I unsoldered them, read them, installed machined-pin sockets and burned new chips, and the meter came up with no problems. I hope to send it to Loveland soon. I'm on the road for the week but have asked a fellow ham to send me a copy of the files as we did the reading and burning at his place.
Steve
Sent from my iPad
On Nov 7, 2011, at 5:23 PM, "J. L. Trantham" jltran@att.net wrote:
Bill,
I don't know if I have damaged my 'cal' DS1220Y or not. The two DS1230Y's
had files that looked like what I was expecting when I read them. On the
DS1220Y, the original read on my BP-1600 gave an over current warning and
shut down. The chip was a bit warm from the unsoldering and, perhaps, that
was it. I then moved it from my BP-1600 to an Advin MVP and it read
promptly. I then re-read it on the BP-1600 and it read promptly. So, don't
know. Would be nice to find an image to compare with just to get an idea
about what it should look like.
That chip had a date code of 9713 and the two DS1230Y's were 9703.
In any event, new sockets and chips are on the way. If I have lost my
calibration constants, I would anticipate that the meter is still 'calable'
which is what I am hoping for. Then, once it gets back from Agilent, I will
be able to harvest the data from the new chips, archive it, and be in
business the next time the chips fail. Then, again, my current chip may
still be OK.
Joe
-----Original Message-----
From: volt-nuts-bounces@febo.com [mailto:volt-nuts-bounces@febo.com] On
Behalf Of Bill Gold
Sent: Monday, November 07, 2011 11:31 AM
To: volt-nuts@febo.com
Subject: Re: [volt-nuts] 3458A - To Modify or Not To Modify?
Joe:
When I removed my original NVRAM, put in the sockets and then installed
the original NVRAM I got a few error messages when I turned the meter back
on. I don't remember exactly what the complaint was but it involved a few
calibration constants missing and the calibration password missing. My
initial guess was that the batteries were gone and desoldering the NVRAM
just finished the process. The date codes on the NVRAM was 1989 so I was
just running on borrowed time anyhow.
I don't have a ROM programmer anyhow so I just installed the new NVRAM
and did a full calibration to my local standards. I really don't care about
traceability to NIST anyhow. What I have here is close enough for what I
do.
I have tried to find out what material is used for the pins of the NVRAM
is but no such luck from the Maxim/Dallas package datasheets. My guess
would be the usual tin plate. Yes, gold against tin isn't the best idea,
but it is better than tin against tin. You are simply not going to find
these NVRAM with gold plated pins so you have no choice. I forget whether
the gold migrates into the tin or the tin migrates into the gold. When we
specified the plating of the "fingers" of our PC Boards, we used nickel over
the copper and then 60u of gold over the nickel. This gave the best results
for constant insertion and removal of the PC Boards from the mother board
sockets, which were gold plated. We produced expensive ATE for Discrete
Semiconductors, in the range of $100k to $200k each, so we wanted
absolutely, positively good contact all the time and no failures due to
repeated removal and insertion.
IMHO you are on the right track. Let's see what happens when you
finally get the Loveland calibration.
Bill
volt-nuts mailing list -- volt-nuts@febo.com
To unsubscribe, go to
https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/volt-nuts
and follow the instructions there.
volt-nuts mailing list -- volt-nuts@febo.com
To unsubscribe, go to https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/volt-nuts
and follow the instructions there.
Joe,
I have the images from the chips in my 3458A. They had '94 dates so a few months ago I unsoldered them, read them, installed machined-pin sockets and burned new chips, and the meter came up with no problems. I hope to send it to Loveland soon. I'm on the road for the week but have asked a fellow ham to send me a copy of the files as we did the reading and burning at his place.
Steve
Sent from my iPad
On Nov 7, 2011, at 5:23 PM, "J. L. Trantham" <jltran@att.net> wrote:
> Bill,
>
> I don't know if I have damaged my 'cal' DS1220Y or not. The two DS1230Y's
> had files that looked like what I was expecting when I read them. On the
> DS1220Y, the original read on my BP-1600 gave an over current warning and
> shut down. The chip was a bit warm from the unsoldering and, perhaps, that
> was it. I then moved it from my BP-1600 to an Advin MVP and it read
> promptly. I then re-read it on the BP-1600 and it read promptly. So, don't
> know. Would be nice to find an image to compare with just to get an idea
> about what it should look like.
>
> That chip had a date code of 9713 and the two DS1230Y's were 9703.
>
> In any event, new sockets and chips are on the way. If I have lost my
> calibration constants, I would anticipate that the meter is still 'calable'
> which is what I am hoping for. Then, once it gets back from Agilent, I will
> be able to harvest the data from the new chips, archive it, and be in
> business the next time the chips fail. Then, again, my current chip may
> still be OK.
>
> Joe
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: volt-nuts-bounces@febo.com [mailto:volt-nuts-bounces@febo.com] On
> Behalf Of Bill Gold
> Sent: Monday, November 07, 2011 11:31 AM
> To: volt-nuts@febo.com
> Subject: Re: [volt-nuts] 3458A - To Modify or Not To Modify?
>
>
> Joe:
>
> When I removed my original NVRAM, put in the sockets and then installed
> the original NVRAM I got a few error messages when I turned the meter back
> on. I don't remember exactly what the complaint was but it involved a few
> calibration constants missing and the calibration password missing. My
> initial guess was that the batteries were gone and desoldering the NVRAM
> just finished the process. The date codes on the NVRAM was 1989 so I was
> just running on borrowed time anyhow.
>
> I don't have a ROM programmer anyhow so I just installed the new NVRAM
> and did a full calibration to my local standards. I really don't care about
> traceability to NIST anyhow. What I have here is close enough for what I
> do.
>
> I have tried to find out what material is used for the pins of the NVRAM
> is but no such luck from the Maxim/Dallas package datasheets. My guess
> would be the usual tin plate. Yes, gold against tin isn't the best idea,
> but it is better than tin against tin. You are simply not going to find
> these NVRAM with gold plated pins so you have no choice. I forget whether
> the gold migrates into the tin or the tin migrates into the gold. When we
> specified the plating of the "fingers" of our PC Boards, we used nickel over
> the copper and then 60u of gold over the nickel. This gave the best results
> for constant insertion and removal of the PC Boards from the mother board
> sockets, which were gold plated. We produced expensive ATE for Discrete
> Semiconductors, in the range of $100k to $200k each, so we wanted
> absolutely, positively good contact all the time and no failures due to
> repeated removal and insertion.
>
> IMHO you are on the right track. Let's see what happens when you
> finally get the Loveland calibration.
>
> Bill
> _______________________________________________
> volt-nuts mailing list -- volt-nuts@febo.com
> To unsubscribe, go to
> https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/volt-nuts
> and follow the instructions there.
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> volt-nuts mailing list -- volt-nuts@febo.com
> To unsubscribe, go to https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/volt-nuts
> and follow the instructions there.
JL
J. L. Trantham
Tue, Nov 8, 2011 1:14 AM
Steve,
I would love to see them.
Joe
-----Original Message-----
From: volt-nuts-bounces@febo.com [mailto:volt-nuts-bounces@febo.com] On
Behalf Of Steve
Sent: Monday, November 07, 2011 6:07 PM
To: Discussion of precise voltage measurement
Subject: Re: [volt-nuts] 3458A - To Modify or Not To Modify?
Joe,
I have the images from the chips in my 3458A. They had '94 dates so a few
months ago I unsoldered them, read them, installed machined-pin sockets and
burned new chips, and the meter came up with no problems. I hope to send it
to Loveland soon. I'm on the road for the week but have asked a fellow ham
to send me a copy of the files as we did the reading and burning at his
place.
Steve
Sent from my iPad
On Nov 7, 2011, at 5:23 PM, "J. L. Trantham" jltran@att.net wrote:
Bill,
I don't know if I have damaged my 'cal' DS1220Y or not. The two DS1230Y's
had files that looked like what I was expecting when I read them. On the
DS1220Y, the original read on my BP-1600 gave an over current warning and
shut down. The chip was a bit warm from the unsoldering and, perhaps,
was it. I then moved it from my BP-1600 to an Advin MVP and it read
promptly. I then re-read it on the BP-1600 and it read promptly. So,
know. Would be nice to find an image to compare with just to get an idea
about what it should look like.
That chip had a date code of 9713 and the two DS1230Y's were 9703.
In any event, new sockets and chips are on the way. If I have lost my
calibration constants, I would anticipate that the meter is still
which is what I am hoping for. Then, once it gets back from Agilent, I
be able to harvest the data from the new chips, archive it, and be in
business the next time the chips fail. Then, again, my current chip may
still be OK.
Joe
-----Original Message-----
From: volt-nuts-bounces@febo.com [mailto:volt-nuts-bounces@febo.com] On
Behalf Of Bill Gold
Sent: Monday, November 07, 2011 11:31 AM
To: volt-nuts@febo.com
Subject: Re: [volt-nuts] 3458A - To Modify or Not To Modify?
Joe:
When I removed my original NVRAM, put in the sockets and then installed
the original NVRAM I got a few error messages when I turned the meter back
on. I don't remember exactly what the complaint was but it involved a few
calibration constants missing and the calibration password missing. My
initial guess was that the batteries were gone and desoldering the NVRAM
just finished the process. The date codes on the NVRAM was 1989 so I was
just running on borrowed time anyhow.
I don't have a ROM programmer anyhow so I just installed the new NVRAM
and did a full calibration to my local standards. I really don't care
traceability to NIST anyhow. What I have here is close enough for what I
do.
I have tried to find out what material is used for the pins of the
is but no such luck from the Maxim/Dallas package datasheets. My guess
would be the usual tin plate. Yes, gold against tin isn't the best idea,
but it is better than tin against tin. You are simply not going to find
these NVRAM with gold plated pins so you have no choice. I forget whether
the gold migrates into the tin or the tin migrates into the gold. When we
specified the plating of the "fingers" of our PC Boards, we used nickel
the copper and then 60u of gold over the nickel. This gave the best
for constant insertion and removal of the PC Boards from the mother board
sockets, which were gold plated. We produced expensive ATE for Discrete
Semiconductors, in the range of $100k to $200k each, so we wanted
absolutely, positively good contact all the time and no failures due to
repeated removal and insertion.
IMHO you are on the right track. Let's see what happens when you
finally get the Loveland calibration.
Bill
volt-nuts mailing list -- volt-nuts@febo.com
To unsubscribe, go to
https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/volt-nuts
and follow the instructions there.
volt-nuts mailing list -- volt-nuts@febo.com
To unsubscribe, go to
and follow the instructions there.
Steve,
I would love to see them.
Joe
-----Original Message-----
From: volt-nuts-bounces@febo.com [mailto:volt-nuts-bounces@febo.com] On
Behalf Of Steve
Sent: Monday, November 07, 2011 6:07 PM
To: Discussion of precise voltage measurement
Subject: Re: [volt-nuts] 3458A - To Modify or Not To Modify?
Joe,
I have the images from the chips in my 3458A. They had '94 dates so a few
months ago I unsoldered them, read them, installed machined-pin sockets and
burned new chips, and the meter came up with no problems. I hope to send it
to Loveland soon. I'm on the road for the week but have asked a fellow ham
to send me a copy of the files as we did the reading and burning at his
place.
Steve
Sent from my iPad
On Nov 7, 2011, at 5:23 PM, "J. L. Trantham" <jltran@att.net> wrote:
> Bill,
>
> I don't know if I have damaged my 'cal' DS1220Y or not. The two DS1230Y's
> had files that looked like what I was expecting when I read them. On the
> DS1220Y, the original read on my BP-1600 gave an over current warning and
> shut down. The chip was a bit warm from the unsoldering and, perhaps,
that
> was it. I then moved it from my BP-1600 to an Advin MVP and it read
> promptly. I then re-read it on the BP-1600 and it read promptly. So,
don't
> know. Would be nice to find an image to compare with just to get an idea
> about what it should look like.
>
> That chip had a date code of 9713 and the two DS1230Y's were 9703.
>
> In any event, new sockets and chips are on the way. If I have lost my
> calibration constants, I would anticipate that the meter is still
'calable'
> which is what I am hoping for. Then, once it gets back from Agilent, I
will
> be able to harvest the data from the new chips, archive it, and be in
> business the next time the chips fail. Then, again, my current chip may
> still be OK.
>
> Joe
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: volt-nuts-bounces@febo.com [mailto:volt-nuts-bounces@febo.com] On
> Behalf Of Bill Gold
> Sent: Monday, November 07, 2011 11:31 AM
> To: volt-nuts@febo.com
> Subject: Re: [volt-nuts] 3458A - To Modify or Not To Modify?
>
>
> Joe:
>
> When I removed my original NVRAM, put in the sockets and then installed
> the original NVRAM I got a few error messages when I turned the meter back
> on. I don't remember exactly what the complaint was but it involved a few
> calibration constants missing and the calibration password missing. My
> initial guess was that the batteries were gone and desoldering the NVRAM
> just finished the process. The date codes on the NVRAM was 1989 so I was
> just running on borrowed time anyhow.
>
> I don't have a ROM programmer anyhow so I just installed the new NVRAM
> and did a full calibration to my local standards. I really don't care
about
> traceability to NIST anyhow. What I have here is close enough for what I
> do.
>
> I have tried to find out what material is used for the pins of the
NVRAM
> is but no such luck from the Maxim/Dallas package datasheets. My guess
> would be the usual tin plate. Yes, gold against tin isn't the best idea,
> but it is better than tin against tin. You are simply not going to find
> these NVRAM with gold plated pins so you have no choice. I forget whether
> the gold migrates into the tin or the tin migrates into the gold. When we
> specified the plating of the "fingers" of our PC Boards, we used nickel
over
> the copper and then 60u of gold over the nickel. This gave the best
results
> for constant insertion and removal of the PC Boards from the mother board
> sockets, which were gold plated. We produced expensive ATE for Discrete
> Semiconductors, in the range of $100k to $200k each, so we wanted
> absolutely, positively good contact all the time and no failures due to
> repeated removal and insertion.
>
> IMHO you are on the right track. Let's see what happens when you
> finally get the Loveland calibration.
>
> Bill
> _______________________________________________
> volt-nuts mailing list -- volt-nuts@febo.com
> To unsubscribe, go to
> https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/volt-nuts
> and follow the instructions there.
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> volt-nuts mailing list -- volt-nuts@febo.com
> To unsubscribe, go to
https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/volt-nuts
> and follow the instructions there.
_______________________________________________
volt-nuts mailing list -- volt-nuts@febo.com
To unsubscribe, go to
https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/volt-nuts
and follow the instructions there.
S
Steve
Tue, Nov 8, 2011 1:20 AM
Joe,
On the way!
Steve
On Nov 7, 2011, at 7:14 PM, "J. L. Trantham" jltran@att.net wrote:
Steve,
I would love to see them.
Joe
-----Original Message-----
From: volt-nuts-bounces@febo.com [mailto:volt-nuts-bounces@febo.com] On
Behalf Of Steve
Sent: Monday, November 07, 2011 6:07 PM
To: Discussion of precise voltage measurement
Subject: Re: [volt-nuts] 3458A - To Modify or Not To Modify?
Joe,
I have the images from the chips in my 3458A. They had '94 dates so a few
months ago I unsoldered them, read them, installed machined-pin sockets and
burned new chips, and the meter came up with no problems. I hope to send it
to Loveland soon. I'm on the road for the week but have asked a fellow ham
to send me a copy of the files as we did the reading and burning at his
place.
Steve
Sent from my iPad
On Nov 7, 2011, at 5:23 PM, "J. L. Trantham" jltran@att.net wrote:
Bill,
I don't know if I have damaged my 'cal' DS1220Y or not. The two DS1230Y's
had files that looked like what I was expecting when I read them. On the
DS1220Y, the original read on my BP-1600 gave an over current warning and
shut down. The chip was a bit warm from the unsoldering and, perhaps,
was it. I then moved it from my BP-1600 to an Advin MVP and it read
promptly. I then re-read it on the BP-1600 and it read promptly. So,
know. Would be nice to find an image to compare with just to get an idea
about what it should look like.
That chip had a date code of 9713 and the two DS1230Y's were 9703.
In any event, new sockets and chips are on the way. If I have lost my
calibration constants, I would anticipate that the meter is still
which is what I am hoping for. Then, once it gets back from Agilent, I
be able to harvest the data from the new chips, archive it, and be in
business the next time the chips fail. Then, again, my current chip may
still be OK.
Joe
-----Original Message-----
From: volt-nuts-bounces@febo.com [mailto:volt-nuts-bounces@febo.com] On
Behalf Of Bill Gold
Sent: Monday, November 07, 2011 11:31 AM
To: volt-nuts@febo.com
Subject: Re: [volt-nuts] 3458A - To Modify or Not To Modify?
Joe:
When I removed my original NVRAM, put in the sockets and then installed
the original NVRAM I got a few error messages when I turned the meter back
on. I don't remember exactly what the complaint was but it involved a few
calibration constants missing and the calibration password missing. My
initial guess was that the batteries were gone and desoldering the NVRAM
just finished the process. The date codes on the NVRAM was 1989 so I was
just running on borrowed time anyhow.
I don't have a ROM programmer anyhow so I just installed the new NVRAM
and did a full calibration to my local standards. I really don't care
traceability to NIST anyhow. What I have here is close enough for what I
do.
I have tried to find out what material is used for the pins of the
is but no such luck from the Maxim/Dallas package datasheets. My guess
would be the usual tin plate. Yes, gold against tin isn't the best idea,
but it is better than tin against tin. You are simply not going to find
these NVRAM with gold plated pins so you have no choice. I forget whether
the gold migrates into the tin or the tin migrates into the gold. When we
specified the plating of the "fingers" of our PC Boards, we used nickel
the copper and then 60u of gold over the nickel. This gave the best
for constant insertion and removal of the PC Boards from the mother board
sockets, which were gold plated. We produced expensive ATE for Discrete
Semiconductors, in the range of $100k to $200k each, so we wanted
absolutely, positively good contact all the time and no failures due to
repeated removal and insertion.
IMHO you are on the right track. Let's see what happens when you
finally get the Loveland calibration.
Bill
volt-nuts mailing list -- volt-nuts@febo.com
To unsubscribe, go to
https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/volt-nuts
and follow the instructions there.
volt-nuts mailing list -- volt-nuts@febo.com
To unsubscribe, go to
and follow the instructions there.
Joe,
On the way!
Steve
On Nov 7, 2011, at 7:14 PM, "J. L. Trantham" <jltran@att.net> wrote:
> Steve,
>
> I would love to see them.
>
> Joe
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: volt-nuts-bounces@febo.com [mailto:volt-nuts-bounces@febo.com] On
> Behalf Of Steve
> Sent: Monday, November 07, 2011 6:07 PM
> To: Discussion of precise voltage measurement
> Subject: Re: [volt-nuts] 3458A - To Modify or Not To Modify?
>
> Joe,
>
> I have the images from the chips in my 3458A. They had '94 dates so a few
> months ago I unsoldered them, read them, installed machined-pin sockets and
> burned new chips, and the meter came up with no problems. I hope to send it
> to Loveland soon. I'm on the road for the week but have asked a fellow ham
> to send me a copy of the files as we did the reading and burning at his
> place.
>
> Steve
>
> Sent from my iPad
>
> On Nov 7, 2011, at 5:23 PM, "J. L. Trantham" <jltran@att.net> wrote:
>
>> Bill,
>>
>> I don't know if I have damaged my 'cal' DS1220Y or not. The two DS1230Y's
>> had files that looked like what I was expecting when I read them. On the
>> DS1220Y, the original read on my BP-1600 gave an over current warning and
>> shut down. The chip was a bit warm from the unsoldering and, perhaps,
> that
>> was it. I then moved it from my BP-1600 to an Advin MVP and it read
>> promptly. I then re-read it on the BP-1600 and it read promptly. So,
> don't
>> know. Would be nice to find an image to compare with just to get an idea
>> about what it should look like.
>>
>> That chip had a date code of 9713 and the two DS1230Y's were 9703.
>>
>> In any event, new sockets and chips are on the way. If I have lost my
>> calibration constants, I would anticipate that the meter is still
> 'calable'
>> which is what I am hoping for. Then, once it gets back from Agilent, I
> will
>> be able to harvest the data from the new chips, archive it, and be in
>> business the next time the chips fail. Then, again, my current chip may
>> still be OK.
>>
>> Joe
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: volt-nuts-bounces@febo.com [mailto:volt-nuts-bounces@febo.com] On
>> Behalf Of Bill Gold
>> Sent: Monday, November 07, 2011 11:31 AM
>> To: volt-nuts@febo.com
>> Subject: Re: [volt-nuts] 3458A - To Modify or Not To Modify?
>>
>>
>> Joe:
>>
>> When I removed my original NVRAM, put in the sockets and then installed
>> the original NVRAM I got a few error messages when I turned the meter back
>> on. I don't remember exactly what the complaint was but it involved a few
>> calibration constants missing and the calibration password missing. My
>> initial guess was that the batteries were gone and desoldering the NVRAM
>> just finished the process. The date codes on the NVRAM was 1989 so I was
>> just running on borrowed time anyhow.
>>
>> I don't have a ROM programmer anyhow so I just installed the new NVRAM
>> and did a full calibration to my local standards. I really don't care
> about
>> traceability to NIST anyhow. What I have here is close enough for what I
>> do.
>>
>> I have tried to find out what material is used for the pins of the
> NVRAM
>> is but no such luck from the Maxim/Dallas package datasheets. My guess
>> would be the usual tin plate. Yes, gold against tin isn't the best idea,
>> but it is better than tin against tin. You are simply not going to find
>> these NVRAM with gold plated pins so you have no choice. I forget whether
>> the gold migrates into the tin or the tin migrates into the gold. When we
>> specified the plating of the "fingers" of our PC Boards, we used nickel
> over
>> the copper and then 60u of gold over the nickel. This gave the best
> results
>> for constant insertion and removal of the PC Boards from the mother board
>> sockets, which were gold plated. We produced expensive ATE for Discrete
>> Semiconductors, in the range of $100k to $200k each, so we wanted
>> absolutely, positively good contact all the time and no failures due to
>> repeated removal and insertion.
>>
>> IMHO you are on the right track. Let's see what happens when you
>> finally get the Loveland calibration.
>>
>> Bill
>> _______________________________________________
>> volt-nuts mailing list -- volt-nuts@febo.com
>> To unsubscribe, go to
>> https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/volt-nuts
>> and follow the instructions there.
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> volt-nuts mailing list -- volt-nuts@febo.com
>> To unsubscribe, go to
> https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/volt-nuts
>> and follow the instructions there.
>
> _______________________________________________
> volt-nuts mailing list -- volt-nuts@febo.com
> To unsubscribe, go to
> https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/volt-nuts
> and follow the instructions there.
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> volt-nuts mailing list -- volt-nuts@febo.com
> To unsubscribe, go to https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/volt-nuts
> and follow the instructions there.
JL
J. L. Trantham
Tue, Nov 8, 2011 1:37 AM
Steve,
Got em. U132 image is TOTALLY different from mine and much more of what I
expected.
I re-read U132 and it is somewhat different every time I read it. Sounds
like it is 'toast'.
Joe
-----Original Message-----
From: volt-nuts-bounces@febo.com [mailto:volt-nuts-bounces@febo.com] On
Behalf Of Steve
Sent: Monday, November 07, 2011 7:20 PM
To: Discussion of precise voltage measurement
Subject: Re: [volt-nuts] 3458A - To Modify or Not To Modify?
Joe,
On the way!
Steve
On Nov 7, 2011, at 7:14 PM, "J. L. Trantham" jltran@att.net wrote:
Steve,
I would love to see them.
Joe
-----Original Message-----
From: volt-nuts-bounces@febo.com [mailto:volt-nuts-bounces@febo.com] On
Behalf Of Steve
Sent: Monday, November 07, 2011 6:07 PM
To: Discussion of precise voltage measurement
Subject: Re: [volt-nuts] 3458A - To Modify or Not To Modify?
Joe,
I have the images from the chips in my 3458A. They had '94 dates so a few
months ago I unsoldered them, read them, installed machined-pin sockets
burned new chips, and the meter came up with no problems. I hope to send
to Loveland soon. I'm on the road for the week but have asked a fellow ham
to send me a copy of the files as we did the reading and burning at his
place.
Steve
Sent from my iPad
On Nov 7, 2011, at 5:23 PM, "J. L. Trantham" jltran@att.net wrote:
Bill,
I don't know if I have damaged my 'cal' DS1220Y or not. The two
had files that looked like what I was expecting when I read them. On the
DS1220Y, the original read on my BP-1600 gave an over current warning and
shut down. The chip was a bit warm from the unsoldering and, perhaps,
was it. I then moved it from my BP-1600 to an Advin MVP and it read
promptly. I then re-read it on the BP-1600 and it read promptly. So,
know. Would be nice to find an image to compare with just to get an idea
about what it should look like.
That chip had a date code of 9713 and the two DS1230Y's were 9703.
In any event, new sockets and chips are on the way. If I have lost my
calibration constants, I would anticipate that the meter is still
which is what I am hoping for. Then, once it gets back from Agilent, I
be able to harvest the data from the new chips, archive it, and be in
business the next time the chips fail. Then, again, my current chip may
still be OK.
Joe
-----Original Message-----
From: volt-nuts-bounces@febo.com [mailto:volt-nuts-bounces@febo.com] On
Behalf Of Bill Gold
Sent: Monday, November 07, 2011 11:31 AM
To: volt-nuts@febo.com
Subject: Re: [volt-nuts] 3458A - To Modify or Not To Modify?
Joe:
When I removed my original NVRAM, put in the sockets and then installed
the original NVRAM I got a few error messages when I turned the meter
on. I don't remember exactly what the complaint was but it involved a
calibration constants missing and the calibration password missing. My
initial guess was that the batteries were gone and desoldering the NVRAM
just finished the process. The date codes on the NVRAM was 1989 so I was
just running on borrowed time anyhow.
I don't have a ROM programmer anyhow so I just installed the new NVRAM
and did a full calibration to my local standards. I really don't care
traceability to NIST anyhow. What I have here is close enough for what I
do.
I have tried to find out what material is used for the pins of the
is but no such luck from the Maxim/Dallas package datasheets. My guess
would be the usual tin plate. Yes, gold against tin isn't the best idea,
but it is better than tin against tin. You are simply not going to find
these NVRAM with gold plated pins so you have no choice. I forget
the gold migrates into the tin or the tin migrates into the gold. When
specified the plating of the "fingers" of our PC Boards, we used nickel
the copper and then 60u of gold over the nickel. This gave the best
for constant insertion and removal of the PC Boards from the mother board
sockets, which were gold plated. We produced expensive ATE for Discrete
Semiconductors, in the range of $100k to $200k each, so we wanted
absolutely, positively good contact all the time and no failures due to
repeated removal and insertion.
IMHO you are on the right track. Let's see what happens when you
finally get the Loveland calibration.
Bill
volt-nuts mailing list -- volt-nuts@febo.com
To unsubscribe, go to
https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/volt-nuts
and follow the instructions there.
volt-nuts mailing list -- volt-nuts@febo.com
To unsubscribe, go to
and follow the instructions there.
and follow the instructions there.
Steve,
Got em. U132 image is TOTALLY different from mine and much more of what I
expected.
I re-read U132 and it is somewhat different every time I read it. Sounds
like it is 'toast'.
Joe
-----Original Message-----
From: volt-nuts-bounces@febo.com [mailto:volt-nuts-bounces@febo.com] On
Behalf Of Steve
Sent: Monday, November 07, 2011 7:20 PM
To: Discussion of precise voltage measurement
Subject: Re: [volt-nuts] 3458A - To Modify or Not To Modify?
Joe,
On the way!
Steve
On Nov 7, 2011, at 7:14 PM, "J. L. Trantham" <jltran@att.net> wrote:
> Steve,
>
> I would love to see them.
>
> Joe
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: volt-nuts-bounces@febo.com [mailto:volt-nuts-bounces@febo.com] On
> Behalf Of Steve
> Sent: Monday, November 07, 2011 6:07 PM
> To: Discussion of precise voltage measurement
> Subject: Re: [volt-nuts] 3458A - To Modify or Not To Modify?
>
> Joe,
>
> I have the images from the chips in my 3458A. They had '94 dates so a few
> months ago I unsoldered them, read them, installed machined-pin sockets
and
> burned new chips, and the meter came up with no problems. I hope to send
it
> to Loveland soon. I'm on the road for the week but have asked a fellow ham
> to send me a copy of the files as we did the reading and burning at his
> place.
>
> Steve
>
> Sent from my iPad
>
> On Nov 7, 2011, at 5:23 PM, "J. L. Trantham" <jltran@att.net> wrote:
>
>> Bill,
>>
>> I don't know if I have damaged my 'cal' DS1220Y or not. The two
DS1230Y's
>> had files that looked like what I was expecting when I read them. On the
>> DS1220Y, the original read on my BP-1600 gave an over current warning and
>> shut down. The chip was a bit warm from the unsoldering and, perhaps,
> that
>> was it. I then moved it from my BP-1600 to an Advin MVP and it read
>> promptly. I then re-read it on the BP-1600 and it read promptly. So,
> don't
>> know. Would be nice to find an image to compare with just to get an idea
>> about what it should look like.
>>
>> That chip had a date code of 9713 and the two DS1230Y's were 9703.
>>
>> In any event, new sockets and chips are on the way. If I have lost my
>> calibration constants, I would anticipate that the meter is still
> 'calable'
>> which is what I am hoping for. Then, once it gets back from Agilent, I
> will
>> be able to harvest the data from the new chips, archive it, and be in
>> business the next time the chips fail. Then, again, my current chip may
>> still be OK.
>>
>> Joe
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: volt-nuts-bounces@febo.com [mailto:volt-nuts-bounces@febo.com] On
>> Behalf Of Bill Gold
>> Sent: Monday, November 07, 2011 11:31 AM
>> To: volt-nuts@febo.com
>> Subject: Re: [volt-nuts] 3458A - To Modify or Not To Modify?
>>
>>
>> Joe:
>>
>> When I removed my original NVRAM, put in the sockets and then installed
>> the original NVRAM I got a few error messages when I turned the meter
back
>> on. I don't remember exactly what the complaint was but it involved a
few
>> calibration constants missing and the calibration password missing. My
>> initial guess was that the batteries were gone and desoldering the NVRAM
>> just finished the process. The date codes on the NVRAM was 1989 so I was
>> just running on borrowed time anyhow.
>>
>> I don't have a ROM programmer anyhow so I just installed the new NVRAM
>> and did a full calibration to my local standards. I really don't care
> about
>> traceability to NIST anyhow. What I have here is close enough for what I
>> do.
>>
>> I have tried to find out what material is used for the pins of the
> NVRAM
>> is but no such luck from the Maxim/Dallas package datasheets. My guess
>> would be the usual tin plate. Yes, gold against tin isn't the best idea,
>> but it is better than tin against tin. You are simply not going to find
>> these NVRAM with gold plated pins so you have no choice. I forget
whether
>> the gold migrates into the tin or the tin migrates into the gold. When
we
>> specified the plating of the "fingers" of our PC Boards, we used nickel
> over
>> the copper and then 60u of gold over the nickel. This gave the best
> results
>> for constant insertion and removal of the PC Boards from the mother board
>> sockets, which were gold plated. We produced expensive ATE for Discrete
>> Semiconductors, in the range of $100k to $200k each, so we wanted
>> absolutely, positively good contact all the time and no failures due to
>> repeated removal and insertion.
>>
>> IMHO you are on the right track. Let's see what happens when you
>> finally get the Loveland calibration.
>>
>> Bill
>> _______________________________________________
>> volt-nuts mailing list -- volt-nuts@febo.com
>> To unsubscribe, go to
>> https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/volt-nuts
>> and follow the instructions there.
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> volt-nuts mailing list -- volt-nuts@febo.com
>> To unsubscribe, go to
> https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/volt-nuts
>> and follow the instructions there.
>
> _______________________________________________
> volt-nuts mailing list -- volt-nuts@febo.com
> To unsubscribe, go to
> https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/volt-nuts
> and follow the instructions there.
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> volt-nuts mailing list -- volt-nuts@febo.com
> To unsubscribe, go to
https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/volt-nuts
> and follow the instructions there.
_______________________________________________
volt-nuts mailing list -- volt-nuts@febo.com
To unsubscribe, go to
https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/volt-nuts
and follow the instructions there.
JL
J. L. Trantham
Tue, Nov 8, 2011 1:41 AM
Steve,
Once I get my new chips and install the sockets, I'll burn one with your
image and see what happens. If I am correct, I suspect it will work fine
but not be accurate. I'll also do a simple 'cal' with my 10K resistor (good
to a few ohms) and 10 VDC reference (good to about 20 uV I think) and see
what happens as well.
Thanks for the images. I really appreciate your help.
Joe
-----Original Message-----
From: volt-nuts-bounces@febo.com [mailto:volt-nuts-bounces@febo.com] On
Behalf Of J. L. Trantham
Sent: Monday, November 07, 2011 7:37 PM
To: 'Discussion of precise voltage measurement'
Subject: Re: [volt-nuts] 3458A - To Modify or Not To Modify?
Steve,
Got em. U132 image is TOTALLY different from mine and much more of what I
expected.
I re-read U132 and it is somewhat different every time I read it. Sounds
like it is 'toast'.
Joe
-----Original Message-----
From: volt-nuts-bounces@febo.com [mailto:volt-nuts-bounces@febo.com] On
Behalf Of Steve
Sent: Monday, November 07, 2011 7:20 PM
To: Discussion of precise voltage measurement
Subject: Re: [volt-nuts] 3458A - To Modify or Not To Modify?
Joe,
On the way!
Steve
On Nov 7, 2011, at 7:14 PM, "J. L. Trantham" jltran@att.net wrote:
Steve,
I would love to see them.
Joe
-----Original Message-----
From: volt-nuts-bounces@febo.com [mailto:volt-nuts-bounces@febo.com] On
Behalf Of Steve
Sent: Monday, November 07, 2011 6:07 PM
To: Discussion of precise voltage measurement
Subject: Re: [volt-nuts] 3458A - To Modify or Not To Modify?
Joe,
I have the images from the chips in my 3458A. They had '94 dates so a few
months ago I unsoldered them, read them, installed machined-pin sockets
burned new chips, and the meter came up with no problems. I hope to send
to Loveland soon. I'm on the road for the week but have asked a fellow ham
to send me a copy of the files as we did the reading and burning at his
place.
Steve
Sent from my iPad
On Nov 7, 2011, at 5:23 PM, "J. L. Trantham" jltran@att.net wrote:
Bill,
I don't know if I have damaged my 'cal' DS1220Y or not. The two
had files that looked like what I was expecting when I read them. On the
DS1220Y, the original read on my BP-1600 gave an over current warning and
shut down. The chip was a bit warm from the unsoldering and, perhaps,
was it. I then moved it from my BP-1600 to an Advin MVP and it read
promptly. I then re-read it on the BP-1600 and it read promptly. So,
know. Would be nice to find an image to compare with just to get an idea
about what it should look like.
That chip had a date code of 9713 and the two DS1230Y's were 9703.
In any event, new sockets and chips are on the way. If I have lost my
calibration constants, I would anticipate that the meter is still
which is what I am hoping for. Then, once it gets back from Agilent, I
be able to harvest the data from the new chips, archive it, and be in
business the next time the chips fail. Then, again, my current chip may
still be OK.
Joe
-----Original Message-----
From: volt-nuts-bounces@febo.com [mailto:volt-nuts-bounces@febo.com] On
Behalf Of Bill Gold
Sent: Monday, November 07, 2011 11:31 AM
To: volt-nuts@febo.com
Subject: Re: [volt-nuts] 3458A - To Modify or Not To Modify?
Joe:
When I removed my original NVRAM, put in the sockets and then installed
the original NVRAM I got a few error messages when I turned the meter
on. I don't remember exactly what the complaint was but it involved a
calibration constants missing and the calibration password missing. My
initial guess was that the batteries were gone and desoldering the NVRAM
just finished the process. The date codes on the NVRAM was 1989 so I was
just running on borrowed time anyhow.
I don't have a ROM programmer anyhow so I just installed the new NVRAM
and did a full calibration to my local standards. I really don't care
traceability to NIST anyhow. What I have here is close enough for what I
do.
I have tried to find out what material is used for the pins of the
is but no such luck from the Maxim/Dallas package datasheets. My guess
would be the usual tin plate. Yes, gold against tin isn't the best idea,
but it is better than tin against tin. You are simply not going to find
these NVRAM with gold plated pins so you have no choice. I forget
the gold migrates into the tin or the tin migrates into the gold. When
specified the plating of the "fingers" of our PC Boards, we used nickel
the copper and then 60u of gold over the nickel. This gave the best
for constant insertion and removal of the PC Boards from the mother board
sockets, which were gold plated. We produced expensive ATE for Discrete
Semiconductors, in the range of $100k to $200k each, so we wanted
absolutely, positively good contact all the time and no failures due to
repeated removal and insertion.
IMHO you are on the right track. Let's see what happens when you
finally get the Loveland calibration.
Bill
volt-nuts mailing list -- volt-nuts@febo.com
To unsubscribe, go to
https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/volt-nuts
and follow the instructions there.
volt-nuts mailing list -- volt-nuts@febo.com
To unsubscribe, go to
and follow the instructions there.
and follow the instructions there.
Steve,
Once I get my new chips and install the sockets, I'll burn one with your
image and see what happens. If I am correct, I suspect it will work fine
but not be accurate. I'll also do a simple 'cal' with my 10K resistor (good
to a few ohms) and 10 VDC reference (good to about 20 uV I think) and see
what happens as well.
Thanks for the images. I really appreciate your help.
Joe
-----Original Message-----
From: volt-nuts-bounces@febo.com [mailto:volt-nuts-bounces@febo.com] On
Behalf Of J. L. Trantham
Sent: Monday, November 07, 2011 7:37 PM
To: 'Discussion of precise voltage measurement'
Subject: Re: [volt-nuts] 3458A - To Modify or Not To Modify?
Steve,
Got em. U132 image is TOTALLY different from mine and much more of what I
expected.
I re-read U132 and it is somewhat different every time I read it. Sounds
like it is 'toast'.
Joe
-----Original Message-----
From: volt-nuts-bounces@febo.com [mailto:volt-nuts-bounces@febo.com] On
Behalf Of Steve
Sent: Monday, November 07, 2011 7:20 PM
To: Discussion of precise voltage measurement
Subject: Re: [volt-nuts] 3458A - To Modify or Not To Modify?
Joe,
On the way!
Steve
On Nov 7, 2011, at 7:14 PM, "J. L. Trantham" <jltran@att.net> wrote:
> Steve,
>
> I would love to see them.
>
> Joe
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: volt-nuts-bounces@febo.com [mailto:volt-nuts-bounces@febo.com] On
> Behalf Of Steve
> Sent: Monday, November 07, 2011 6:07 PM
> To: Discussion of precise voltage measurement
> Subject: Re: [volt-nuts] 3458A - To Modify or Not To Modify?
>
> Joe,
>
> I have the images from the chips in my 3458A. They had '94 dates so a few
> months ago I unsoldered them, read them, installed machined-pin sockets
and
> burned new chips, and the meter came up with no problems. I hope to send
it
> to Loveland soon. I'm on the road for the week but have asked a fellow ham
> to send me a copy of the files as we did the reading and burning at his
> place.
>
> Steve
>
> Sent from my iPad
>
> On Nov 7, 2011, at 5:23 PM, "J. L. Trantham" <jltran@att.net> wrote:
>
>> Bill,
>>
>> I don't know if I have damaged my 'cal' DS1220Y or not. The two
DS1230Y's
>> had files that looked like what I was expecting when I read them. On the
>> DS1220Y, the original read on my BP-1600 gave an over current warning and
>> shut down. The chip was a bit warm from the unsoldering and, perhaps,
> that
>> was it. I then moved it from my BP-1600 to an Advin MVP and it read
>> promptly. I then re-read it on the BP-1600 and it read promptly. So,
> don't
>> know. Would be nice to find an image to compare with just to get an idea
>> about what it should look like.
>>
>> That chip had a date code of 9713 and the two DS1230Y's were 9703.
>>
>> In any event, new sockets and chips are on the way. If I have lost my
>> calibration constants, I would anticipate that the meter is still
> 'calable'
>> which is what I am hoping for. Then, once it gets back from Agilent, I
> will
>> be able to harvest the data from the new chips, archive it, and be in
>> business the next time the chips fail. Then, again, my current chip may
>> still be OK.
>>
>> Joe
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: volt-nuts-bounces@febo.com [mailto:volt-nuts-bounces@febo.com] On
>> Behalf Of Bill Gold
>> Sent: Monday, November 07, 2011 11:31 AM
>> To: volt-nuts@febo.com
>> Subject: Re: [volt-nuts] 3458A - To Modify or Not To Modify?
>>
>>
>> Joe:
>>
>> When I removed my original NVRAM, put in the sockets and then installed
>> the original NVRAM I got a few error messages when I turned the meter
back
>> on. I don't remember exactly what the complaint was but it involved a
few
>> calibration constants missing and the calibration password missing. My
>> initial guess was that the batteries were gone and desoldering the NVRAM
>> just finished the process. The date codes on the NVRAM was 1989 so I was
>> just running on borrowed time anyhow.
>>
>> I don't have a ROM programmer anyhow so I just installed the new NVRAM
>> and did a full calibration to my local standards. I really don't care
> about
>> traceability to NIST anyhow. What I have here is close enough for what I
>> do.
>>
>> I have tried to find out what material is used for the pins of the
> NVRAM
>> is but no such luck from the Maxim/Dallas package datasheets. My guess
>> would be the usual tin plate. Yes, gold against tin isn't the best idea,
>> but it is better than tin against tin. You are simply not going to find
>> these NVRAM with gold plated pins so you have no choice. I forget
whether
>> the gold migrates into the tin or the tin migrates into the gold. When
we
>> specified the plating of the "fingers" of our PC Boards, we used nickel
> over
>> the copper and then 60u of gold over the nickel. This gave the best
> results
>> for constant insertion and removal of the PC Boards from the mother board
>> sockets, which were gold plated. We produced expensive ATE for Discrete
>> Semiconductors, in the range of $100k to $200k each, so we wanted
>> absolutely, positively good contact all the time and no failures due to
>> repeated removal and insertion.
>>
>> IMHO you are on the right track. Let's see what happens when you
>> finally get the Loveland calibration.
>>
>> Bill
>> _______________________________________________
>> volt-nuts mailing list -- volt-nuts@febo.com
>> To unsubscribe, go to
>> https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/volt-nuts
>> and follow the instructions there.
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> volt-nuts mailing list -- volt-nuts@febo.com
>> To unsubscribe, go to
> https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/volt-nuts
>> and follow the instructions there.
>
> _______________________________________________
> volt-nuts mailing list -- volt-nuts@febo.com
> To unsubscribe, go to
> https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/volt-nuts
> and follow the instructions there.
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> volt-nuts mailing list -- volt-nuts@febo.com
> To unsubscribe, go to
https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/volt-nuts
> and follow the instructions there.
_______________________________________________
volt-nuts mailing list -- volt-nuts@febo.com
To unsubscribe, go to
https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/volt-nuts
and follow the instructions there.
_______________________________________________
volt-nuts mailing list -- volt-nuts@febo.com
To unsubscribe, go to
https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/volt-nuts
and follow the instructions there.
S
Steve
Tue, Nov 8, 2011 2:00 AM
Joe,
Does sound like toast... Bummer.
Steve
On Nov 7, 2011, at 7:37 PM, "J. L. Trantham" jltran@att.net wrote:
Steve,
Got em. U132 image is TOTALLY different from mine and much more of what I
expected.
I re-read U132 and it is somewhat different every time I read it. Sounds
like it is 'toast'.
Joe
-----Original Message-----
From: volt-nuts-bounces@febo.com [mailto:volt-nuts-bounces@febo.com] On
Behalf Of Steve
Sent: Monday, November 07, 2011 7:20 PM
To: Discussion of precise voltage measurement
Subject: Re: [volt-nuts] 3458A - To Modify or Not To Modify?
Joe,
On the way!
Steve
On Nov 7, 2011, at 7:14 PM, "J. L. Trantham" jltran@att.net wrote:
Steve,
I would love to see them.
Joe
-----Original Message-----
From: volt-nuts-bounces@febo.com [mailto:volt-nuts-bounces@febo.com] On
Behalf Of Steve
Sent: Monday, November 07, 2011 6:07 PM
To: Discussion of precise voltage measurement
Subject: Re: [volt-nuts] 3458A - To Modify or Not To Modify?
Joe,
I have the images from the chips in my 3458A. They had '94 dates so a few
months ago I unsoldered them, read them, installed machined-pin sockets
burned new chips, and the meter came up with no problems. I hope to send
to Loveland soon. I'm on the road for the week but have asked a fellow ham
to send me a copy of the files as we did the reading and burning at his
place.
Steve
Sent from my iPad
On Nov 7, 2011, at 5:23 PM, "J. L. Trantham" jltran@att.net wrote:
Bill,
I don't know if I have damaged my 'cal' DS1220Y or not. The two
had files that looked like what I was expecting when I read them. On the
DS1220Y, the original read on my BP-1600 gave an over current warning and
shut down. The chip was a bit warm from the unsoldering and, perhaps,
was it. I then moved it from my BP-1600 to an Advin MVP and it read
promptly. I then re-read it on the BP-1600 and it read promptly. So,
know. Would be nice to find an image to compare with just to get an idea
about what it should look like.
That chip had a date code of 9713 and the two DS1230Y's were 9703.
In any event, new sockets and chips are on the way. If I have lost my
calibration constants, I would anticipate that the meter is still
which is what I am hoping for. Then, once it gets back from Agilent, I
be able to harvest the data from the new chips, archive it, and be in
business the next time the chips fail. Then, again, my current chip may
still be OK.
Joe
-----Original Message-----
From: volt-nuts-bounces@febo.com [mailto:volt-nuts-bounces@febo.com] On
Behalf Of Bill Gold
Sent: Monday, November 07, 2011 11:31 AM
To: volt-nuts@febo.com
Subject: Re: [volt-nuts] 3458A - To Modify or Not To Modify?
Joe:
When I removed my original NVRAM, put in the sockets and then installed
the original NVRAM I got a few error messages when I turned the meter
on. I don't remember exactly what the complaint was but it involved a
calibration constants missing and the calibration password missing. My
initial guess was that the batteries were gone and desoldering the NVRAM
just finished the process. The date codes on the NVRAM was 1989 so I was
just running on borrowed time anyhow.
I don't have a ROM programmer anyhow so I just installed the new NVRAM
and did a full calibration to my local standards. I really don't care
traceability to NIST anyhow. What I have here is close enough for what I
do.
I have tried to find out what material is used for the pins of the
is but no such luck from the Maxim/Dallas package datasheets. My guess
would be the usual tin plate. Yes, gold against tin isn't the best idea,
but it is better than tin against tin. You are simply not going to find
these NVRAM with gold plated pins so you have no choice. I forget
the gold migrates into the tin or the tin migrates into the gold. When
specified the plating of the "fingers" of our PC Boards, we used nickel
the copper and then 60u of gold over the nickel. This gave the best
for constant insertion and removal of the PC Boards from the mother board
sockets, which were gold plated. We produced expensive ATE for Discrete
Semiconductors, in the range of $100k to $200k each, so we wanted
absolutely, positively good contact all the time and no failures due to
repeated removal and insertion.
IMHO you are on the right track. Let's see what happens when you
finally get the Loveland calibration.
Bill
volt-nuts mailing list -- volt-nuts@febo.com
To unsubscribe, go to
https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/volt-nuts
and follow the instructions there.
volt-nuts mailing list -- volt-nuts@febo.com
To unsubscribe, go to
and follow the instructions there.
and follow the instructions there.
Joe,
Does sound like toast... Bummer.
Steve
On Nov 7, 2011, at 7:37 PM, "J. L. Trantham" <jltran@att.net> wrote:
> Steve,
>
> Got em. U132 image is TOTALLY different from mine and much more of what I
> expected.
>
> I re-read U132 and it is somewhat different every time I read it. Sounds
> like it is 'toast'.
>
> Joe
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: volt-nuts-bounces@febo.com [mailto:volt-nuts-bounces@febo.com] On
> Behalf Of Steve
> Sent: Monday, November 07, 2011 7:20 PM
> To: Discussion of precise voltage measurement
> Subject: Re: [volt-nuts] 3458A - To Modify or Not To Modify?
>
> Joe,
>
> On the way!
>
> Steve
>
>
>
> On Nov 7, 2011, at 7:14 PM, "J. L. Trantham" <jltran@att.net> wrote:
>
>> Steve,
>>
>> I would love to see them.
>>
>> Joe
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: volt-nuts-bounces@febo.com [mailto:volt-nuts-bounces@febo.com] On
>> Behalf Of Steve
>> Sent: Monday, November 07, 2011 6:07 PM
>> To: Discussion of precise voltage measurement
>> Subject: Re: [volt-nuts] 3458A - To Modify or Not To Modify?
>>
>> Joe,
>>
>> I have the images from the chips in my 3458A. They had '94 dates so a few
>> months ago I unsoldered them, read them, installed machined-pin sockets
> and
>> burned new chips, and the meter came up with no problems. I hope to send
> it
>> to Loveland soon. I'm on the road for the week but have asked a fellow ham
>> to send me a copy of the files as we did the reading and burning at his
>> place.
>>
>> Steve
>>
>> Sent from my iPad
>>
>> On Nov 7, 2011, at 5:23 PM, "J. L. Trantham" <jltran@att.net> wrote:
>>
>>> Bill,
>>>
>>> I don't know if I have damaged my 'cal' DS1220Y or not. The two
> DS1230Y's
>>> had files that looked like what I was expecting when I read them. On the
>>> DS1220Y, the original read on my BP-1600 gave an over current warning and
>>> shut down. The chip was a bit warm from the unsoldering and, perhaps,
>> that
>>> was it. I then moved it from my BP-1600 to an Advin MVP and it read
>>> promptly. I then re-read it on the BP-1600 and it read promptly. So,
>> don't
>>> know. Would be nice to find an image to compare with just to get an idea
>>> about what it should look like.
>>>
>>> That chip had a date code of 9713 and the two DS1230Y's were 9703.
>>>
>>> In any event, new sockets and chips are on the way. If I have lost my
>>> calibration constants, I would anticipate that the meter is still
>> 'calable'
>>> which is what I am hoping for. Then, once it gets back from Agilent, I
>> will
>>> be able to harvest the data from the new chips, archive it, and be in
>>> business the next time the chips fail. Then, again, my current chip may
>>> still be OK.
>>>
>>> Joe
>>>
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: volt-nuts-bounces@febo.com [mailto:volt-nuts-bounces@febo.com] On
>>> Behalf Of Bill Gold
>>> Sent: Monday, November 07, 2011 11:31 AM
>>> To: volt-nuts@febo.com
>>> Subject: Re: [volt-nuts] 3458A - To Modify or Not To Modify?
>>>
>>>
>>> Joe:
>>>
>>> When I removed my original NVRAM, put in the sockets and then installed
>>> the original NVRAM I got a few error messages when I turned the meter
> back
>>> on. I don't remember exactly what the complaint was but it involved a
> few
>>> calibration constants missing and the calibration password missing. My
>>> initial guess was that the batteries were gone and desoldering the NVRAM
>>> just finished the process. The date codes on the NVRAM was 1989 so I was
>>> just running on borrowed time anyhow.
>>>
>>> I don't have a ROM programmer anyhow so I just installed the new NVRAM
>>> and did a full calibration to my local standards. I really don't care
>> about
>>> traceability to NIST anyhow. What I have here is close enough for what I
>>> do.
>>>
>>> I have tried to find out what material is used for the pins of the
>> NVRAM
>>> is but no such luck from the Maxim/Dallas package datasheets. My guess
>>> would be the usual tin plate. Yes, gold against tin isn't the best idea,
>>> but it is better than tin against tin. You are simply not going to find
>>> these NVRAM with gold plated pins so you have no choice. I forget
> whether
>>> the gold migrates into the tin or the tin migrates into the gold. When
> we
>>> specified the plating of the "fingers" of our PC Boards, we used nickel
>> over
>>> the copper and then 60u of gold over the nickel. This gave the best
>> results
>>> for constant insertion and removal of the PC Boards from the mother board
>>> sockets, which were gold plated. We produced expensive ATE for Discrete
>>> Semiconductors, in the range of $100k to $200k each, so we wanted
>>> absolutely, positively good contact all the time and no failures due to
>>> repeated removal and insertion.
>>>
>>> IMHO you are on the right track. Let's see what happens when you
>>> finally get the Loveland calibration.
>>>
>>> Bill
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> volt-nuts mailing list -- volt-nuts@febo.com
>>> To unsubscribe, go to
>>> https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/volt-nuts
>>> and follow the instructions there.
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> volt-nuts mailing list -- volt-nuts@febo.com
>>> To unsubscribe, go to
>> https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/volt-nuts
>>> and follow the instructions there.
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> volt-nuts mailing list -- volt-nuts@febo.com
>> To unsubscribe, go to
>> https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/volt-nuts
>> and follow the instructions there.
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> volt-nuts mailing list -- volt-nuts@febo.com
>> To unsubscribe, go to
> https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/volt-nuts
>> and follow the instructions there.
>
> _______________________________________________
> volt-nuts mailing list -- volt-nuts@febo.com
> To unsubscribe, go to
> https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/volt-nuts
> and follow the instructions there.
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> volt-nuts mailing list -- volt-nuts@febo.com
> To unsubscribe, go to https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/volt-nuts
> and follow the instructions there.
S
Steve
Tue, Nov 8, 2011 2:09 AM
Joe,
I'm happy to be able to help, that's what the hobby is all about! It would be interesting to see how far off your meter appears to be when using the data from my chip. I wonder if Loveland keeps any data on the cal constants. It would be interesting to see the range of values over 10's or 100's of units.
Steve
On Nov 7, 2011, at 7:41 PM, "J. L. Trantham" jltran@att.net wrote:
Steve,
Once I get my new chips and install the sockets, I'll burn one with your
image and see what happens. If I am correct, I suspect it will work fine
but not be accurate. I'll also do a simple 'cal' with my 10K resistor (good
to a few ohms) and 10 VDC reference (good to about 20 uV I think) and see
what happens as well.
Thanks for the images. I really appreciate your help.
Joe
-----Original Message-----
From: volt-nuts-bounces@febo.com [mailto:volt-nuts-bounces@febo.com] On
Behalf Of J. L. Trantham
Sent: Monday, November 07, 2011 7:37 PM
To: 'Discussion of precise voltage measurement'
Subject: Re: [volt-nuts] 3458A - To Modify or Not To Modify?
Steve,
Got em. U132 image is TOTALLY different from mine and much more of what I
expected.
I re-read U132 and it is somewhat different every time I read it. Sounds
like it is 'toast'.
Joe
-----Original Message-----
From: volt-nuts-bounces@febo.com [mailto:volt-nuts-bounces@febo.com] On
Behalf Of Steve
Sent: Monday, November 07, 2011 7:20 PM
To: Discussion of precise voltage measurement
Subject: Re: [volt-nuts] 3458A - To Modify or Not To Modify?
Joe,
On the way!
Joe,
I'm happy to be able to help, that's what the hobby is all about! It would be interesting to see how far off your meter appears to be when using the data from my chip. I wonder if Loveland keeps any data on the cal constants. It would be interesting to see the range of values over 10's or 100's of units.
Steve
On Nov 7, 2011, at 7:41 PM, "J. L. Trantham" <jltran@att.net> wrote:
> Steve,
>
> Once I get my new chips and install the sockets, I'll burn one with your
> image and see what happens. If I am correct, I suspect it will work fine
> but not be accurate. I'll also do a simple 'cal' with my 10K resistor (good
> to a few ohms) and 10 VDC reference (good to about 20 uV I think) and see
> what happens as well.
>
> Thanks for the images. I really appreciate your help.
>
> Joe
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: volt-nuts-bounces@febo.com [mailto:volt-nuts-bounces@febo.com] On
> Behalf Of J. L. Trantham
> Sent: Monday, November 07, 2011 7:37 PM
> To: 'Discussion of precise voltage measurement'
> Subject: Re: [volt-nuts] 3458A - To Modify or Not To Modify?
>
> Steve,
>
> Got em. U132 image is TOTALLY different from mine and much more of what I
> expected.
>
> I re-read U132 and it is somewhat different every time I read it. Sounds
> like it is 'toast'.
>
> Joe
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: volt-nuts-bounces@febo.com [mailto:volt-nuts-bounces@febo.com] On
> Behalf Of Steve
> Sent: Monday, November 07, 2011 7:20 PM
> To: Discussion of precise voltage measurement
> Subject: Re: [volt-nuts] 3458A - To Modify or Not To Modify?
>
> Joe,
>
> On the way!
>
PK
Poul-Henning Kamp
Tue, Nov 8, 2011 8:55 AM
So, don't
know. Would be nice to find an image to compare with just to get an idea
about what it should look like.
Mail me a copy of the file, and I'll check it for you.
--
Poul-Henning Kamp | UNIX since Zilog Zeus 3.20
phk@FreeBSD.ORG | TCP/IP since RFC 956
FreeBSD committer | BSD since 4.3-tahoe
Never attribute to malice what can adequately be explained by incompetence.
In message <73D0BA35599F4A68A42F83CA139ED97F@S0028384766>, "J. L. Trantham" wri
tes:
>So, don't
>know. Would be nice to find an image to compare with just to get an idea
>about what it should look like.
Mail me a copy of the file, and I'll check it for you.
--
Poul-Henning Kamp | UNIX since Zilog Zeus 3.20
phk@FreeBSD.ORG | TCP/IP since RFC 956
FreeBSD committer | BSD since 4.3-tahoe
Never attribute to malice what can adequately be explained by incompetence.
