Re: Arrrrrrrgggg!

[Tom Droege <tdroege@veriomail.com>]

Chris and all,

I am not planning on building a "new" card.  But there may be something 
even easier than what I am planning to do, so if there is I am interested.

When you say "start scan" over the serial IF to the Mark IV, it shortly 
starts sending parallel bytes at an average rate of .4 MBytes per 
second.  There are 8 data lines and a strobe.  The strobe goes from high to 
low.  There are also a couple of control lines.  The Mark IV always puts 
out 16 MBytes.

Seems to me that any fast parallel port could handle this.

The control lines are not really needed.  Once the computer starts to see 
data coming in on the parallel port, it knows to expect exactly 16 
MBytes.  So the "Block Done" signal is not really needed.  Since the 
computer sends the "start Scan" it knows when to look for data on the 
parallel port.

So here would be my preferred way to go:

1)  Use an existing parallel port that is byte wide and needs a negative 
strobe.

2)  Like one only with inverters, level shifters, line drivers etc.. to 
meet an existing standard.  Note that I have no way to send control 
characters from the Mark IV.  So the interface needs to be able to just 
field a string of bytes.

3) If I have to go to a serial link, steal an existing design.  This is the 
present plan.  My neighbor has developed such a design and can modify it to 
my needs relatively easily.  This not only give me a design but a neighbor 
who is an expert to make it work.

Note that I did not consider 1) from the beginning because I did not want 
to be involved in system software.  Once I give up on that, 1) should be 
attempted.

I notice that there is a parallel port on all present computers.  How fast 
is it.  Can you just drive bytes into it when the computer is expecting them?

Hmmmm!   Here is a nice project for you Chris.   Just make an adaptor that 
connects the byte output DB-25 cable of the Mark IV into a computer 
parallel port.  You have the hardware and the drawings.  Is this 
possible?  It just might be the simplest possible solution.  As I say, I 
did not want to do this before since computers were a lot slower (20x) when 
I started this project and I did not want to get involved in system software.

Tom Droege

At 11:23 AM 8/14/01 -0700, you wrote:
>Tom Droege wrote:
> >
>
> > Meanwhile, I will hope that the memory cards that are now working will keep
> > working until we can get a new system in place.
> >
> > The PCI card would have a limited FIFO and some control program that would
> > write what it receives directly to memory.  Bill has already done a similar
> > project at 1000 times the bandwidth we need so it should be possible.
> >
> > Software writers might consider how such a card affects their designs.
>
>Tom,
>
>Please _don't build_ a new card.  There are plenty of standard interfaces
>that meet your needs.  You just need to pick one that can handle your pixel
>rate at 16 bits per pixel.
>
>I'd pick an older standard that has been around for years. I think the best
>thing to use is bit synchronous serial over a differential cable.
>For example RS-422 or RS-530.  Data rates can go up to 10Mbps with very
>long cables.  Also there is software to drive these cards for most OSes.
>I have even seen RS-422 PC cards that fit in notebook computers.  (Using
>a notebook to control a Mark IV camera would be great.)
>
>On the Mark IV you'd need to add a high speed synchronous chip.
>You could look at using the 16850 UART which has a 128 byte FIFO
>built in.  There are also PCI cards with 16850 chips in them.
>These will do 1.5 Mbps.
>
>Zilog makes some nicer parts like the Z16C32 which will do
>up to 20Mbps and take care of CRC codes in the hardware.
>http://www.zilog.com/products/partdetails.asp?id=Z16C32
>
>Here is a serial PCI that uses this Zilog chip.
>http://www.ieci.com.au/products/comm/pci_route56.shtml
>I thhink this is exactly what is needed but 16850 based
>products will cost less.  For example
>http://www.avlab.com.tw/product/p001.htm
>
>There are also multi-port rs-422 cards with 2, 4 or more
>serial ports per card.  This would allow one PC to control
>multiple Mark IV cameras
>
>THe other way to go would be to put a small computer between the
>Mark IV and the PC.  By small I mean a PC104 sized or even one
>built on a SIMM form factor.  This small computer would have both
>a fast parallel port and some standard link such as Ethernet.
>The control PC would then see Ethernet.
>
>As for the effect of any of this on the PC's control software
>I don't see a problem.  If the software runs on Linux or Windows,
>either way the I/O is done by operating system level device drivers
>which "hide" the hardware from the control software.
>
>--
>    Chris Albertson
>    chrisalbertson90278@yahoo.com
>    Redondo Beach, California
>    home: 310-376-1029
>    cell: 310-990-7550