How hard is to build a processor? - Page 3

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?



Quoted text here. Click to load it
The hardware for this is in the current issue of Circuit Cellar.
Different programming needed....
--
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

6 months would be sufficient,
probably shorter periods too.

the earths's axial wobble, and orbital precession, are probably going
to make it impossible do it in less than a week.
 
OTOH if you can see the stars and planets at night that would help a
lot...





Re: How hard is to build a processor?



Quoted text here. Click to load it

In terms of the project I've got in mind, people are really
over-thinking this.....  I'll be very surprised if the shadow ends up
distinguishing the day with better than a couple-of-days precision
anyway.

That said, two days won't follow *exactly* the same path:  a fall day's
shadow is going to be between two spring days' shadows, and so forth.
--
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?


Arrrgh -- I misread what you were saying, so my response didn't make
much sense.

But, I still don't expect a point to necessarily correspond to two
date/time pairs.  Time is continuous, but days aren't.  There will be a
gap between any two days' shadow tracks (probably smaller than the
fuzziness of the shadow caused by diffraction but there all the same).
Unless two tracks exactly overlay for some meaningful part of the
tracks, a given track can only intersect other days' tracks at a finite
number of points points.
--
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

The solstice is not a day it is an instant,
and it does not happen same the date and wall time every year.

most years have no days equidistant from the solstice.

therefore noon (or any other hour) on most days will duplicate the same
elevation of the sun above the horzon.



Re: How hard is to build a processor?


Quoted text here. Click to load it

Sounds like a cool idea.
Would need this sort of correction :
http://www.swanstrom.net/sundial/gnomon.htm

which means it could take a couple of days to 'train',
in order to be certain.

 For the best precision, you'd probably do a simple sliding-data-
match, where maybe the last 7? days of readings, are moved along to a
point of least-errors.
(and maybe a cloudy-day default, where it just increments the day ?

 I don't see why you think you can't get 'correct day'
precision out of this ?

 Pushing the actual-time precision is likely to be
more challenging ?
-jg

Re: How hard is to build a processor?



Quoted text here. Click to load it

Possibly in March or September, but absolutely not in July or
December, just look at the graph.

A 7 day period would be sufficient to figure out, if it is March or
September by checking the direction of the solar movement.
 
Quoted text here. Click to load it

That is trivial. The apparent solar diameter is 30 arc minutes and
since the sun moves 15 degrees each hour, it only takes 2 minutes to
move its own diameter, thus the actual noon can be determined with
much better precision.

In order to get the solar mean time noon, you also need to know the
approximate date to apply the equation of time.



Re: How hard is to build a processor?


Hi Rick,

rickman wrote:
Quoted text here. Click to load it

AMD published a lot of app notes and manuals that really catered
to the 2900 family of devices.  In my Great Databook Purge, they
are among the few items that I kept!  (along with Mick 'n' Brick,
of course!)

Quoted text here. Click to load it

I plan on cheating:  detecting the "displayed time" and using
that in a feedback loop to control the pump speed.  It would
probably need to be a terribly overdamped control system
given all the other "cruft" between the pump and the
"display".

Quoted text here. Click to load it

Yes, that's my approach.  We don't have enough rainfall to
"self wind".  I suspect it would be very difficult to keep
enough water in the system to span the gaps between rains!
(or, if you could keep enough water, trying to keep that water
"clean" of algae, etc. over that long of a time period).

We get *lots* of sun so PV seems to be an essential part
of any solution.

Quoted text here. Click to load it

Ah, I don't plan on displaying the time in such a "traditional"
format.  :>  I don't want folks to recognize it as a timepiece
unless they *know* how to "read" it.  Instead, it will just
look like a kinematic sculpture...

Quoted text here. Click to load it

<grin>  Yup.  In my case, the problem is figuring out what
*will* work "on paper" before investing lots of time building
something that just turns out to be a nonfunctional eyesore.

Synchronizing a scuplture


(Changed title, trimmed irrelevant groups.)

D Yuniskis wrote:

Quoted text here. Click to load it

     Look into shape-memory alloy wire. See

    "(Amazon.com product link shortened)"

Run a current through that, and it contracts slightly. Not much.
Then obtain or build a pendulum clock, and use the shape-memory
wire to change the supported length of the pendulum.  You'll
only get 1-2% change, but that's all you need to fine-tune
the thing.

                John Nagle

Re: Synchronizing a scuplture


On Sat, 27 Feb 2010 12:11:32 -0800

Quoted text here. Click to load it

Muscle wire's a pain to work with.  In free air you wind up needing to
run a pretty decent amount of current to replace the heat you lose to
natural convection.  Even more so if you've got a breeze.

How about the pendulum drives a small DC motor/generator?  That lets
you both monitor the frequency and give it little kicks to keep it
on course.  With good bearings it shouldn't take much energy to
overcome the losses.

--
Rob Gaddi, Highland Technology
Email address is currently out of order

Re: Synchronizing a scuplture


Hi John,

John Nagle wrote:
Quoted text here. Click to load it

The appeal/beauty of using something like a water source
is that folks don't see "discrete motion" in it --  though
recognize that it *is* moving.

E.g., a gear turning is less "magical" than water flowing.
Especially as adjusting the flow rate can be virtually
imperceptible.  Anything that moves quickly (perceptibly)
defeats the purpose.  If, OTOH, you look at something...
then look at it again 5 minutes later and have to *work*
to figure out what has changed (and *how*), then you're
never quite sure that it actually *did* change.

I.e., someone would have to invest a fair bit of effort to
figure out:
1) that it does move
2) that it moves predictably
3) that it is a timepiece
4) *how* to tell the time based on that

It would be impossible (impractical) to hide the fact that there
is a pump recirculating the water.  But, it's relatively easy to
hide the feedback loop so it appears (to mere mortals) to be
"magic"  :>

For example, I use a pocketwatch as a compass and always
confuse the hell out of observers trying to deduce the "trick"
from the 10 second observation.  Leave people with puzzles to solve
so it makes the experience more memorable.  :>

Re: How hard is to build a processor?



Quoted text here. Click to load it
There's a heap of stuff on the Apollo 11 computer, including instructions to
actually build one, and large chunks of source code for the monitor. It's
fascinating to see such sophisticated code from an era when few of todays
accepted standards were in place.

According to the website, the Apollo 11 machine was made entirely with early
3-input Nor gate ICs, thousands of them, and core memory. The construction
technique was wirewrap, with the backplane encapsulated.



Site Timeline