How hard is to build a processor? - Page 2

Do you have a question? Post it now! No Registration Necessary

Translate This Thread From English to

Threaded View
Re: How hard is to build a processor?





Don McKenzie wrote:

Quoted text here. Click to load it

It is trivial to build a processor. This type of project is a semester
work for a student. It is hard to make commercially viable processor,
though.

VLV
But you have to add to that all the software to make it do something....
starting with a boot loader...



Re: How hard is to build a processor?


 >
Quoted text here. Click to load it

... and there's the rub!  :>

I designed a processor some years ago.  A friend was responsible
for writing the code for it.

*Nothing* worked! :<  This was completely unexpected as we were
both very competent in our individual responsibilities.

We soon realized that I had designed the instruction set expecting
"word" addresses (memory was 16b wide and only accessible *as* 16-bit
words -- hence it seemed *obvious* that addresses would be of "words")
whereas he had assumed *byte* addresses.  :<  Simple fix.  Took
all of the drama out of the event!  ;-)

I've seen other silly issues like this confound the initial
startup of custom processors:  e.g., confusion over which
way the stack grows, whether the SP points to the last *used*
location on the stack or the next *available*, etc.  They are
almost always "fun" problems to solve as they usually are
easy to find and have dramatic consequences once found!

Re: How hard is to build a processor?


Quoted text here. Click to load it

In the early 80's it was common to build "custom" processors
out of 2900 bit-slice components.  There was an excellent text
(and some good AMD appnotes) devoted entirely to this (Mick 'n'
Brick? yellow dust jacket).

In grade school, I build a combination (burglar) alarm using
(bistable?) inter-latching relays for the code store.  With
a fire department klaxon as the annunciator (you *really*
didn't want to get the combination wrong!  :> )

In high school, I built a two-player (offense + defense) football
(left-pondian football, that is :> ) game out of analog computers
(integrators, adders), DTL and VOM's (to display: "down", field
position, yards gained/lost on the play and yards 'til first down)
but that just ran at "DC".  It was also quite large (4' x 8'
sheet of plywood to hold all the bits) and, thus, impractical
to preserve.

Many years ago, I built a "digital clock" out of relays.  But,
it was very noisey and cost a fortune to keep replacing the
incandescent lamps used in the "7 segment" displays.

Now, I am much more fascinated by electro-mechanical *mechanisms*.
I have been working on a kinetic "sculpture" to act as a timepiece
in the back yard.  A tribute to Rube Goldberg -- with the exception
that it must run *continuously* (most of his contraptions were
"one-shot" devices).  But, in order to keep *good* time, I need
to "close the loop".  Doing so without being noticed means
using some "non-discrete" device that you can control.  I.e.,
something like a liquid whose rate of flow can be varied without
a critical observer being able to *easily* determine that this
is happening.  Living in the DSw poses a problem using water as
it evaporates too fast (replenishing it from the domestic water
supply would be "cheating"  :< ).  I also need to locate some
larger solar panels so the device has no connection to the electric
utility.

I would also like to build a "Jetson's" style doorbell (though
programmable) to replace the electronic version I made some years
ago.  But, apparently, the design of tubular bells is more art
than science (and, mistakes can be costly).  So, I have a lot
more research to do.  :<

"Toys"  <grin>

Re: How hard is to build a processor?


Quoted text here. Click to load it

Yes, Mick and Brick.  An absolutely outstanding book on datapaths. and
microprogramming; it was all based on 2900-series, but the concepts
mapped to everything.
--
As we enjoy great advantages from the inventions of others, we should
be glad of an opportunity to serve others by any invention of ours;
We've slightly trimmed the long signature. Click to see the full one.
Re: How hard is to build a processor?


Quoted text here. Click to load it

Yup!  I read Mick and Brick cover to cover and learned a lot from it.
I never built anything with bit slice other than on paper.  But I have
a lot of respect for those who did.  I even used a "high end"
workstation once that was a suped up 68000 made out of bit slice.  I
think it had a marketing window of 15 minutes before Moto came out
with a 680xx or something much faster than the 68000.


Quoted text here. Click to load it

I have thought about how to make a time piece that is actually
regulated by the flow of water.  It would be hard to get this to be
accurate, but I havae some ideas on how to make it fairly good.  I am
in the mid-east US, so we normally have lots of rain.  I have thought
about ways to make it "self-winding".  One is to simply catch rain
from the roof and keep the top reservoir full.  Another would be to
use wind power to pump water from the lower reservoir to the top.
That would be doubly cool.  It might even allow the clock hands to be
in front of the windmill blades!

But this project is way off in the distance.  I have many other things
to do first.

Rick

Re: How hard is to build a processor?


The clock/calendar I hope to build over the next year or so will be
solar.  The shadow of a post uniquely determines both date and time, if
you look at both angle and length....
--
As we enjoy great advantages from the inventions of others, we should
be glad of an opportunity to serve others by any invention of ours;
We've slightly trimmed the long signature. Click to see the full one.
Re: How hard is to build a processor?


Hi Joe,

Joe Pfeiffer wrote:
Quoted text here. Click to load it

Hmmm... is that (really) true?  Or, don't you end up with
*two* date,times for each angle,length?  E.g., won't the
angle,length be the same for HH:MM on the day before and
after the Summer Solstice?  Or, close enough to make it
near impossible to differentiate? (dunno, I find thinking
in 3D on astronomical scales difficult  :> )

Like me, at least you'll have plenty of Sun to play with! (NM)

Re: How hard is to build a processor?



Quoted text here. Click to load it

Yes, I should have said "just about unique."  I wouldn't be at all
surprised to find out the variation with date won't be possible to
distinguish more accurately than a couple of days, too.

Quoted text here. Click to load it

I like living down here!
--
As we enjoy great advantages from the inventions of others, we should
be glad of an opportunity to serve others by any invention of ours;
We've slightly trimmed the long signature. Click to see the full one.
Re: How hard is to build a processor?


Quoted text here. Click to load it


I'm not sure where I got this image in my mind, but I seem to recall
that the motion of the end of the shadow at a given time each day
moves in a figure eight over the course of the year.  Ok, I got over
my laziness and googled it.  This is called the "analemma" and is
caused by the tilt of the Earth's axis and the elliptical orbit around
the sun.  This still does not make the position at all times and days
unique, but it does help a bit (and hurt since it becomes a lot more
complex to label).

Rick

Re: How hard is to build a processor?


On Fri, 26 Feb 2010 23:06:50 -0700, D Yuniskis

Quoted text here. Click to load it

The elevation of the sun varies very little close to the solstice,
about the solar diameter (0.5 degrees) at +/-8 days from solstice and
only about 12 arc secs at +/- 1 day from the solstice.

Various tropospheric refractions can alter the apparent elevation. The
refraction is worst close to horizon, so the winter solstice will be
worse. Trying to determine sunrise and sun set times is even worse,
since average refraction is just slightly less than one degree and can
vary quite a bit from day to day (even mirages).

The solar elevation changes rapidly close to the equinoxes (about the
solar diameter/day), so this is the best time to determine the date.

Determining the local solar time is easy, just determine when the sun
transmits the meridian (i.e is directly in the South in Northern
hemisphere). Some local clocks are required to divide the time until
the next solar transit into 24 hours. The time between two transits is
not usually 86400 (atomic) seconds, but varies slightly according to
the equation of time (which is due to the elliptical orbit of the
Earth).

Averaging these variation over the year, you can calculate the mean
solar time, in which the day is exactly 86400 seconds long.

Waiting for a year to determine the mean solar time or using a
sufficient accurate local frequency standard, you can determine, if
the actual solar day is longer or shorter than 24 hours, which may
help some ambiguity problems in the elevation measurements.
 
Determining the date is much harder due to the refractions, but
averaging over a sufficient number of measurements (days), this should
give relative accurate results at the equinoxes.

Once you know the mean solar time and know your longitude, you know
the time at the zone meridian (0, 15, 30, 45 ... degrees E/W). Knowing
your latitude, you can determine in which country you are in and hence
which time zone is actually used at that area. Finally by knowing your
date, will allow you to calculate, if daylight saving time should be
used :-).


Re: How hard is to build a processor?


Quoted text here. Click to load it

yes.


that may happen for some dates of some years :)


Re: How hard is to build a processor?


Quoted text here. Click to load it

Actually, it happens for every day of every year other than the
solstices.  The two solstices (actually a day or two on either side
depending of the season) has the lowest or highest path across the
sky, so no other day will have quite in that same path.  But every
time of every other day (excluding a few seconds at the start and end
of the day when one day has sunshine and the other does not) will
match a time of two days, between spring to fall and one between fall
to spring.  The path of the sun may not be the same on those two days,
but each point will map to two different times and days.

Rick

Re: How hard is to build a processor?


Quoted text here. Click to load it

So (thinking in terms of a *truly* unique hack), if you *watched*
the motion over the course of a particular day (e.g., 'yesterday'),
could you *uniquely* determine that day?

Re: How hard is to build a processor?


Quoted text here. Click to load it

Given lattitude and longitude (or equivalent) and sufficiently good
instruments, and the right data and skills, yes.



Re: How hard is to build a processor?


Quoted text here. Click to load it

So, a *device* that watched these things could deduce date/time (?)
How much more would it have to do to deduce location (or, at least,
latitude)?  Probably just watch for a longer period of time?

Re: How hard is to build a processor?


Quoted text here. Click to load it

I can't say this for certain, but I believe the combination of length
of day and elevation of the sun at the zenith is a unique combination
for each day of the year and latitude.  So I think you can get your
latitude the same day.  But I'm not sure you don't have the same two
day ambiguity.  Otherwise I think the combination is unique.  Even the
North-South issue can be resolved because of the eccentricity of the
Earth's orbit making things a little different in the two
hemispheres.  But you may also be foiled beyond the artic/anartic
circles where the sun never sets.  Then you only get one parameter,
the elevation at the zenith.  But you might be able to make up for
that by measuring the time between the sun at due east and due west...
other than at the poles where there is no east or west... ;^)

Rick

Re: How hard is to build a processor?




rickman wrote:

Quoted text here. Click to load it

It is close but not exact. The earth's orbit is not an exact number of
days. For the calendar's purpose we accumulate errors and adjust
the calendar. These adjustments are every 4 years and sometimes
on the century. There are other errors that have an impact on the
observations depending on the required accuracy.

I saw a sundial on a beach near Kobe Japan that had elaborate
error correcting instructions that was probably good to a second
after ten minutes of calculations. There were a lot of factors involved
it accounted for earths orbital period

Quoted text here. Click to load it

Above the arctic circle the sun 24 hour path is tilted but there are other
factors that are significant. For a couple weeks around June 21 the
sun never sets as far as 80 miles or so south of the arctic circle.
Most of this is due to the optic effects of the atmosphere.  Even above
the arctic circle actual and observed position of the sun has significant
differences.

Regards,

w..
--
Walter Banks
Byte Craft Limited
We've slightly trimmed the long signature. Click to see the full one.
Re: How hard is to build a processor?


Hi Walter,

Walter Banks wrote:
Quoted text here. Click to load it

I always thought a cool hack would be a motorized sundial.
(i.e., the motorization being a cleverly hidden aspect)
E.g., with nice, evenly spaced markings -- and a motor to
rotate the whole assembly such that the shadow fell
"where it should" (on this nicely marked indicator).

It;s the sort of thing that would elicit comment *only*
from someone who *knew* it was "quite impossible" to
work as it *suggests* it works...

(obviously, I like things that mess with people's heads  :> )

Re: How hard is to build a processor?


Quoted text here. Click to load it

The fish-hook here is in the careful wording of
"and sufficiently good instruments, and the right data and skills,
yes"

So a smarter question, could be what is practical ?
- and using what measurement systems ?

I found this revealing page, which has real datapoints,
and a practical location (ie less than ideal)

http://www.austintek.com/astro/analemma/analemma.html

Most revealing are the nice dots-on-the-door
http://www.austintek.com/astro/analemma/images/4215.door_from_inside_rotate =
.jpg

and the red arcs, are snapshots of the actual path,
~4wks - note they include a dot on alternating sides
of the analemma, as the 12 arcs interlace.

 This site below shows the analemma actually moves yr-yr, so that's
more data to track ;)

http://myweb.tiscali.co.uk/moonkmft/Articles/EquationOfTime.html

-jg


Re: How hard is to build a processor?


On Tue, 09 Mar 2010 10:20:08 -0700, D Yuniskis

Quoted text here. Click to load it

By observing when the sum passes the meridian, one cloud free week in
the spring and one in the autumn should give a quite good resolution
for the latitude, provided that some internal time reference is
capable of measuring the number of days between the measuring periods
with at least +/-12 hour accuracy. During one week long period the sun
moves south and on he other it moves north.

Of course, there is the north/south hemisphere ambiguity, but with
additional sensors to the left and right of the meridian line should
help solve this ambiguity. After all, in order to detect meridian
passing you would have to align the device towards true north.

A camera with at least 150 degree field of view pointing directly
upwards towards zenith, should be able to detect the orientation,
latitude, date and local solar time within a year of observations.
  

Site Timeline