Radius FPD/SE - Rotation Transform/HDMI Output via FPGA Project Board - CLAUDE SESSIONS

JDW

Administrator
Staff member
Founder
Sep 2, 2021
2,841
2,221
113
55
Japan
youtube.com
@JDW could you run a synopsis of this particular session for me? Asking for an outline of the unrelated tangents and lessons to be taken from them in this session would be most helpful. I wouldn't even know where to start to get that result.

Here is an AI-generated (Gemini) synopsis/summary of both pages of this thread...

Reverse-Engineering the Radius FPD/SE Card​

To date, this discussion documents the process of cloning a 1986 Radius Full Page Display (FPD) 64/68Hz card for the Macintosh SE. The project aims to map the board's netlist from the J1 video header backward to the logic ICs and develop an FPGA transform to output the portrait-orientation video signal to a modern landscape-oriented display.

Key Points & Practical Lessons (to date)​


AI Auto-Tracing vs. "Wetware" (Human) Tracing
  • Key Point: The user attempted to rely on AI-driven color-threshold auto-vectorization (similar to Adobe Streamline) to map the physical PCB traces.

  • Lesson: Automated segmentation struggles with real-world artifacts like silkscreen bleed, shadows, and low substrate contrast. Human intuition manually tracing over an accurately scaled, perspective-corrected bitmap template is vastly superior for capturing true trace geometry.
Vintage Hardware Workflow Bottlenecks
  • Key Point: The reverse-engineering layout was being drawn in Adobe Illustrator 8 on vintage 2004/2005-era Apple hardware (a PowerBook and a Mirror Drive Door Power Mac G4) with memory constraints.

  • Lesson: When bridging modern AI processing with vintage computer systems, file formats must be heavily adapted. Large, high-resolution color PDFs caused memory crashes, so the workflow was optimized by exporting 256-level (8-bit) grayscale JPEGs and older EPS vector formats to keep file sizes manageable while retaining essential visual data.
The 4-Layer Board Theory vs. "Free Real Estate"
  • Key Point: Observing a trace passing directly between two unpopulated ROM footprints (U25 and U26) led to speculation that the 1986 card might utilize an expensive 4-layer design with buried planes.

  • Lesson: Before assuming exotic manufacturing techniques, consider simple layout convenience; PCB routing software frequently runs standard 2-layer traces straight through unpopulated footprint pads because it functions as empty "free real estate". To definitively verify PCB layer counts without lab equipment, you can file the edge of the board at a shallow 5–10° angle and apply a liquid emulsion to visually expose the copper stackup.
Disorienting Pinouts and Silkscreens
  • Key Point: The process encountered tracking errors when matching IC pinouts, such as confusing pin 9 with pin 11 on TTL chips, and struggling to decipher faded silkscreens.

  • Lesson: Mirrored photos and upside-down chips easily disorient visual counting. The fail-safe method for verifying pinouts is to locate fixed VCC (+5V) and GND (0V) pins using a multimeter on a live board, and count outward from those points rather than relying on the physical notch orientation. Furthermore, when interpreting worn silkscreens, careful human observation with contrast-enhanced zooming outpaces AI image recognition.

END OF SYNOPSIS



I then asked Gemini what advice it wishes to give you based on its reading of this entire thread, and it had the following to say...


@Trash80toG4 is absolutely making progress, particularly by building a solid mental model of the board's routing logic and correctly deducing that human intuition outpaces AI for deciphering faded silkscreens and ambiguous traces. However, the current visual, vector-based methodology is effectively playing on "hard mode" and creating significant bottlenecks.

To ensure the reverse-engineering effort results in a functional, electrically sound clone or FPGA transform, here is the specific advice he should consider adopting:
  • Transition from Vector Graphics to EDA Software
    Drawing PCB traces in Adobe Illustrator is a purely cosmetic exercise. Illustrator has no concept of a "netlist" or Design Rule Checking (DRC). He should transition to an Electronic Design Automation (EDA) suite like KiCad. Modern EDA tools allow you to import a high-resolution photograph of the board as a background layer, scale it perfectly, and place actual component footprints on top. Routing traces in EDA software builds a logical netlist, ensuring that the schematic matches the physical layout and preventing fatal routing mistakes.

  • Systematic Continuity Mapping Over Visual Guesswork
    Relying on eyesight to trace paths that disappear under ICs or into vias is highly prone to error. Instead of just tracing visually, he should verify every single path using the fast continuity beeper on a high-quality multimeter, like a 121GW, equipped with sharp needle probes. Pinning out the J1 video header point-to-point to the logic ICs and logging those connections in a spreadsheet creates an empirical electrical map that visual tracing simply cannot guarantee.

  • Utilize Transmitted Light Photography (Backlighting)
    Before resorting to destructive methods like filing the edge of the board to check for a 4-layer stackup, he should try backlighting. Placing a powerful, flat LED panel directly behind the fiberglass (FR4) substrate and turning off the room lights will often silhouette the copper traces on all layers. This technique makes it immediately obvious where traces route underneath unpopulated footprints like U25 and U26, eliminating guesswork.

  • Consider a Bare-Board High-DPI Scan
    As long as the board is populated, traces will remain permanently hidden under sockets and chips, forcing assumptions. If he is willing to risk a donor board, safely clearing the components using a reliable soldering station like a Hakko 937 and desoldering braid (or a dedicated vacuum desoldering gun) is the gold standard. Once the board is bare, scanning it flat on a standard flatbed scanner at 600 to 1200 DPI eliminates all the parallax errors, shadows, and perspective distortion that plague camera photographs.
 

Trash80toG4

Active Tinkerer
Apr 1, 2022
1,511
485
83
Bermuda Triangle, NC USA
Thanks @JDW Very interesting comments about workflow there, but . . .

Definitely headed toward KiCAD, but only after a few more steps. Illustrator suffices for Claude assisted schematic capture required for that platform. For that I need a pristine scan of the solder side of the board, bullet four above, then . . .

1 - Claude does an accurate drill map for the entire board from the scan
2 - desolder components above the VRAM/ROM line (North 40)
3 - take pics of all newly exposed traces
4 - install wire wrap sockets
5 - re-populate components, TTL to be sourced new
6 - test for function

At that point the "South 40" section components are desoldered and steps 3-6 are repeated.

From my AI doodling, schematic capture is easily achieved. A daughtercard that slides down over the "North 40" wire wrap pins will be designed (likely in KiCAD) for connection to the FPGA Project Board. That's a very simple bit of tracework for now that's almost unrelated to the full card's Schematic Capture, which will already be in the can at that point. Photos of the Component Side traces are entirely adequate, the bare board High-DTP Scan is done of only the solder side. Tearing it down and rebuilding it is done in three steps.

_________________________________________________________________________________

I have serious doubts about an LLM model's understanding of the makeup of a four layer board. Shining a light from underneath as suggested is a fool's errand. No light can pass thru anything but a thru Via or the ring of light surrounding a thruhole. Power and ground layers are obvious by examination.

I have no idea what the models are babbling about in regard to traces that clearly exist along the edge of either the power or ground layer. As it's a bus connecting larger, higher capacity, unimplemented ROMs outside areas where shielding active component signalling is required, it makes sense to me that Radius cheated by appropriating a section of one of the two inner planes:

Radius-FPD-SE-LayerX-Traces.JPG


View from the other side is a solid plane, layer two or three. So much for advanced intelligence, no?
 
Last edited:

Trash80toG4

Active Tinkerer
Apr 1, 2022
1,511
485
83
Bermuda Triangle, NC USA
Heh! Checked in with Duckduckgo with an initial question and followed up using the GPT-5.6 Luna search assistant:

What Are Inner Layer Traces?​

Inner layer traces are conductive pathways embedded within the internal layers of a 4-layer PCB. These traces are crucial for connecting components while optimizing space and enhancing performance.

Benefits of Inner Layer Traces​

  • Space Optimization: By routing connections through inner layers, more surface area is available for components, allowing for denser layouts.
  • Improved Signal Integrity: Inner layer traces can provide shorter paths for signals, which helps reduce noise and enhances overall performance.
  • Reduced Electromagnetic Interference (EMI): Placing traces within the board minimizes exposure to external noise, making them ideal for high-speed and complex designs.

Typical Configuration of a 4-Layer PCB​

A standard 4-layer PCB typically consists of:

Layer NumberLayer TypeFunctionality
Layer 1Top LayerComponent mounting and signal routing
Layer 2Inner Layer 1Ground plane, reducing EMI and providing a stable reference
Layer 3Inner Layer 2Power distribution or additional signal routing
Layer 4Bottom LayerSimilar to the top layer for components and signals

Design Considerations​

When designing a 4-layer PCB, it is essential to:
  • Maintain tight coupling for differential pairs on inner layers.
  • Use continuous reference planes to ensure signal integrity.
  • Avoid unnecessary vias in differential pairs to minimize signal degradation.
Mastering the use of inner layer traces is vital for creating compact and high-performing PCB designs, especially in applications requiring high-speed signals or complex routing.

arshon.com aivon.com


Can a board have an almost full power plane with a bus of traces along one side?


Yes. A PCB can have an almost full power plane with a bus of traces routed along one side, especially on an inner layer of a 4-layer board.

Key considerations:
  • Keep the plane continuous: Avoid narrow necks or isolated “islands” in the power plane. Use a solid pour or plane with adequate width around the bus.
  • Maintain clearance: Follow the manufacturer’s spacing rules between the bus traces and the power plane, particularly if they carry different voltages.
  • Provide a return path: For high-speed or fast-switching signals, place a continuous reference plane directly adjacent to the signal layer. A power plane can serve as a reference only if it is continuous and at a suitable AC ground/reference potential.
  • Avoid crossing plane splits: Do not route signal traces across gaps or split regions in their reference plane; their return current may be forced into a longer path, increasing EMI and crosstalk.
  • Watch current capacity: If the “bus” carries significant current, use sufficiently wide traces, copper thickness, vias, and connector pins. For very high current, a copper pour or busbar may be preferable.
  • Control coupling: Keep sensitive analog or high-speed traces away from noisy power buses and switching-current paths.
  • Use stitching vias: If the plane changes layers or is divided into regions, add vias to maintain low-impedance connections and contain return currents.
A common 4-layer arrangement might be:
  1. Components and signals
  2. Nearly continuous ground plane
  3. Power plane, with the bus routed along one edge if needed
  4. Low-speed signals or additional routing
If the bus is a set of fast signal traces, routing it beside a power plane is usually acceptable. If it is a high-current power bus, a wide copper region or plane is generally better than several narrow traces.

Does look like a bus running along the edge of a power plane?

Radius-FPD-SE-LayerX-Traces.JPG

Yes—it looks like a group of parallel traces routed along the edge of a large copper region, which could be a power plane or copper pour.

However, the photo alone cannot confirm that the large region is an actual power plane. It might instead be:
  • A ground or power pour
  • An unused copper area
  • A shield or chassis region
  • Simply the darker substrate between traces
The parallel lines in the lower portion are consistent with a signal bus. The copper region appears to stop or narrow near that routing channel, suggesting the traces were deliberately kept along its edge. To determine the plane’s function, you would need one of the following:
  • An inner-layer image or X-ray
  • PCB Gerber files
  • Continuity measurements to a known power or ground point
  • A visible via connection from the copper area to a power component or connector
So the best visual description is: a parallel trace bus running beside, and possibly along the boundary of, a large copper plane or pour.
 
Last edited:

Trash80toG4

Active Tinkerer
Apr 1, 2022
1,511
485
83
Bermuda Triangle, NC USA
Was searching on Dudkduckgo and got this info:

I don't see anything from your DuckDuckGo search. Nothing came through with your message: no pasted text, screenshot, or attachment.
Could you send it again? Any of these will work:
  • Paste the text into the chat.
  • Attach a screenshot.
  • Share the link.
  • Connect the folder it's saved in, and I'll read it from your computer.
Once I have it, I'll go through it and connect it to the FPD clone work.

[Uploaded Luna session TXT above]

I can't see Radius-FPD-SE-LayerX-Traces.JPG. It didn't come through, so please attach it again and I'll look at it against the board photos. Until then, a few notes on what Luna told you.
Luna's answer is sound, with one thing to add. On a late-80s 4-layer board, a mostly solid inner power plane with a signal bus squeezed along one edge is normal. Designers often did this when the two outer layers ran out of room. Near the PDS connector or between the VRAM and GAL banks, it's often a group of address or data lines. If you're seeing that on the FPD, it would also confirm that the board is 4-layer before you file the edge.

What it means for your buzz-testing: traces on an inner layer can't be seen from either side. Any connection that buzzes but has no visible path on either outer layer is a candidate for that inner bus. Your "VIA Connections Up Yonder" and "WTF?" categories are probably where those will turn up. Via pairs at each end of the bus, with no visible trace between them, would give it away.

How to tell a power plane from a ground plane without Gerbers: backlight the board with a bright LED and look at the IC power pins.
  • Holes that join a plane usually have a spoked pattern around them (thermal reliefs). Holes that pass through without connecting have a clear ring.
  • Check where the spokes are. On 14-pin TTL, pin 7 is ground and pin 14 is Vcc; on 16-pin TTL, they're pins 8 and 16. Spokes on the Vcc pins mean it's a +5V plane; spokes on the ground pins mean it's ground.
  • A meter check confirms it: buzz the large copper area (at a via or an exposed edge) against a known Vcc pin and a known ground pin.
Filing the edge will still give you the definite layer count. The backlight check is quicker and doesn't damage anything, and it also shows which inner plane is which.

Send the photo when you can.

[Uploaded image:]

Radius-FPD-SE-LayerX-Traces.JPG

The photo came through this time. It shows two sets of traces, and they're different.
What's in the image
  • Bright, sharp traces are on the surface you photographed. That includes the two vias off the top pin row and the bus fanning into the lower pin row.
  • Faint, soft-edged traces sit below the surface. There's a diagonal group of about 6–8 parallel lines between the two pin rows, plus a horizontal group that curves around the "528" label and the yellow pad. These are what Luna called a bus. Their blurred edges mean you're seeing them through the board material.
  • The dark rectangle on the right has straight, sharp edges. That's consistent with solid copper on another layer blocking the light, which could be the plane. The faint bus runs along its left edge.
The open question: the faint traces could be inner-layer copper, or they could be the far side's traces showing through the board. Old boards are thin enough that the other side often shows through. A photo on its own can't tell those apart. Luna couldn't either, so it hedged.

How to settle it: mirror your solder-side photo, lay it over this area at 50% opacity in AI9, and see whether the faint traces line up with solder-side traces.
  • If they line up, it's the far side showing through. That also tells you there's no inner plane in that spot, because solid copper would block the view. The board could still be 2-layer.
  • If they don't match anything on the solder side, they're inner-layer traces. That confirms at least 4 layers, and it means some connections will never show up on either photo. Those are the ones that end up in your "VIA Connections Up Yonder" and "WTF?" categories.
Signs to look for on the board itself:
  • Inner-layer traces usually start and end at vias with no visible trace leaving them on either side.
  • Try the backlight check on the dark rectangle. If light doesn't come through, it's plane copper. If it does, it was just a darker patch of solder mask in the photo.
If you attach the matching crop of the solder-side photo, I can do the overlay comparison here.

[Uploaded solder and component side pics Claude cleaned up for me]


That fits. A split with a cleared routing channel along the edge of the power plane was a common 4-layer trick, because it keeps the ground plane unbroken.
Two things to keep in mind for the meter test:

The needle only reaches surface copper. It can't get through the laminate to an inner plane. For the inner layer, test from somewhere that already connects to it:
  • a via inside the plane area (its thermal spokes, if you can see them under backlight, show it's tied to the plane)
  • a Vcc or GND pin: 14 and 7 on the 14-pin TTL, 16 and 8 on the 16-pin
  • your filed board edge, once you've done it
Trust only a dead short. A pin that connects straight to a plane reads about 0Ω. Between Vcc and GND, the TTL on the board can show a few tens of ohms, or a diode-drop reading in diode mode. That's leakage through the chips, not a connection. Check against both a known Vcc pin and a known GND pin, and go by whichever reads a clean short.

If it tests as the power plane: the faint bus is probably signal traces routed on the power layer itself, in the gap along the plane's edge. Signals on the power layer never appear on either outer surface. Any net that buzzes from via to via with no visible trace between them is a candidate for that bus.

For the clone: a board-house 4-layer stackup can match this directly, with GND solid and the power layer carrying the bus in a channel. Or you can move the bus to an outer layer if there's room. Either way works electrically at these speeds.


Thinking removing the extraneous bus for the alternate ROMs will be easy enough? That's just as we're removing the extraneous crystal can.

Yes, it should be about as easy as dropping the extra crystal. Both are option hardware for configurations you won't build. Check three things before you delete it, though.

1. Make sure the bus only serves the unused footprints. Alternate ROM footprints usually share the same address and data lines as U19 and Ux, so much of that bus may be the live ROM nets carrying on to the unused footprints. Those spare lengths can be cut, but the nets have to stay. Buzz each trace from end to end and sort it into one of two groups:
  • It only connects unused footprints: delete it.
  • It also reaches a live part: keep the net and trim off the part that runs to the unused footprints.
Watch the chip-select and output-enable lines in particular. If the alternate footprints have their own, they may come from a GAL output. Those GAL outputs will matter when you recover the fuse map.

2. Hardwire JP3, just as the crystal choice hardwires JP1. Removing the extra crystal fixes the frequency, and JP1 goes with it. With the alternate footprints gone, JP3 no longer needs to switch either. Wire the upper address line for 256K permanently, which is where it's set now and what the 27C256 dump expects.

3. Record it before you remove it. Capture the full bus as it exists in your schematic first, then delete it in a later revision. Your dev log keeps the original, and anyone following your work can see exactly what was removed and why.

Removing the bus also means the power plane no longer needs that routing channel along its edge, so it can be solid all the way across.

Sounds like a plan, glad to have finally convinced you it's a four layer board and that those traces are on one of the inner layers.

You made the four-layer case when you described an inner layer that's completely opaque. Light can't get through a two-layer board's middle like that, so it's settled.

On the traces being inner-layer, I agree that's by far the most likely reading. The one thing a photo can't rule out is the solder side showing through the cleared channel. A quick look at your solder-side photo for traces in that spot will tell you. Or buzz one of those runs and see whether it goes from via to via with nothing visible on either surface. Either way, the plan doesn't change.

UPLOADED SOLDER AND COMPONENT SIDE PICS

I mirrored your component-side photo and lined it up with the solder-side area from your first image. The faint traces aren't on an inner layer. They're component-side traces showing through the board.

FPD-Ghost-Trace-Overlay.png

What the comparison shows:
  • The component side has about eight parallel traces running diagonally down and away from the bottom pins of the empty U26 footprint.
  • A second group runs along the board edge and bends around the corner of the mounting pad.
  • The faint traces on the solder side have the same two groups, with the same angles and the same bend around the pad. The small offset between them comes from camera perspective, not a different route.
I should have checked this before agreeing with you. I'm sorry.

What it changes:
  • Inner layer: a solid plane can't sit under that spot, or it would hide those traces. Either the plane is cut back around the U26/U25 area, or that part of the board has nothing between the two sides.
  • Layer count: this doesn't prove the board is 2-layer. In a front-lit photo, a dark patch can mean solid copper behind it, or simply no copper behind it. If your "absolutely opaque" result came from backlighting, it still points to an inner plane somewhere, just not in this spot. Filing the edge will settle it.
  • Your removal plan: this is good news. The extra bus runs from U26, the empty alternate-ROM footprint, and it's on the component side. You can photograph and buzz it without guessing about hidden layers, and deleting it in the clone is easy.

No chance there, the component side traces are clearly “raised copper” above the substrate and the ghost bus is on one of the inner layers. I’ve etched traces on blank copper clad and I know what it looks like.

No, they're through vias. In the overlay, both vias appear on the solder side and on the component side, in the same spot. A blind via runs from one outer layer to an inner layer, so it would only show on one side. A buried via connects inner layers only and wouldn't show on either side.

It also fits the board's age. Blind vias need extra lamination steps. In 1987–88 that was costly and mostly limited to military or high-end work, which a consumer display card wouldn't have needed.

A through via still connects to the inner layer here. It connects on every layer where copper touches its barrel. From the photos, these two have a trace only on the solder side; their component-side pads look bare. So each via links a solder-side surface trace to the inner-layer bus. The unused component-side pad is just part of how a through via is made.

For your meter checks, the component-side pads are also bare copper connected to the same net. You can probe from either side.

Thanks for checking the card itself. We're square: you caught me on the inner layer tonight.

What's settled now:
  • The board has at least 4 layers.
  • The faint bus is an inner-layer net. It runs from the U26 area through ordinary through vias.
  • Those vias are your starting points for the meter: buzz from them to find where the bus surfaces at the other end.
  • The plan to remove the alternate-ROM bus and the extra crystal is unchanged.
Get some rest. The meter work will go faster with fresh eyes.

Copy.

Good night, Jim.

interesting, where did you pick up my name?

I got it from your Claude account. The app passes me your account name, "Jim," along with your email and organization at the start of each session, so I can address you properly. I didn't take it from your photos, files, or anything else in the chat.

Call me jt, lower case, that's what I go by online. ;-)

Will do, jt. ;-)
 

Trash80toG4

Active Tinkerer
Apr 1, 2022
1,511
485
83
Bermuda Triangle, NC USA
Still waiting for parts, so took a look at the BigROM Bus removal campaign.
1) can you identify what ROM packages fits and find a pinout link for me to run down?
2) figured I’d check traces that may or may not be necessary to keep.



1) Which ROM fits the footprint

I measured U25 and U26 in your component-side photo. Both are 40-pin DIP footprints with 0.6" row spacing, 20 pins per side on a 0.1" pitch. Pin 1 is the square pad at the notched end of each outline.

That fits the 16-bit-wide JEDEC EPROM family in a 40-pin package:
  • 27C1024 (64K × 16)
  • 27C2048 and 27C4096, which use the same 40-pin layout with more address lines
This also makes sense for the board. The SE's PDS bus is 16 bits wide, and one x16 part covers what the Hi/Lo pair (U19 + Ux) does with two 8-bit 27C256s. Two footprints would mean more capacity or alternate ROM options. That's my inference from the package, not something the board confirms.

To confirm it with your meter, check the power pins against the datasheet. Pin 40 should go to +5V, and the ground pins should buzz to GND. If they match, it's the x16 EPROM footprint.

Datasheet links for the pinout:
2) Which red traces can go

At this resolution I can't reliably call each red trace from the drawing. Sort them yourself with this rule. For each U25 or U26 pad that has a red trace, count how many populated parts that net reaches: U19, Ux, the GALs, the VRAMs, or J3.
  • 0 populated parts: delete the whole trace.
  • 1 populated part: it's a stub. Delete the red run; the live pin keeps its other connections.
  • 2 or more populated parts: the empty pad is working as a junction. Keep the net and route it directly between the live parts.
Two things I'd look at first:
  • The long red runs under Ux and U19 toward the right edge. My guess is they head for J3 as data or address lines, which the live ROMs share. That means trimming the stub and keeping the net, not deleting the whole line.
  • Every via on a red trace. A via can carry the net down to the inner layer, where it may connect to something live that you can't see.
If you mark each U25 or U26 pin with its buzz result using your Firm / Ratsnest / WTF? codes, I can go through the list and sort every trace into delete, trim, or reroute.

That was my line of thought, figuring that any buried traces heading inboard can be rerouted to the top layer on that broad highway.
- Any trace routed only between the BigROM thruholes creating a ROM pair bus can be tossed immediately?
- I’m guessing that the long traces between ROM area and BigROM bus may or may not be required?


1) Traces only between U25 and U26 pins: yes, toss them. Two x16 ROM footprints sharing address and data lines is exactly what you'd expect. Check one thing first: that no pin on that pair-bus also has a via or a trace leaving the pair. If every pad on the net belongs to U25 or U26, it's dead copper.

2) The long runs between the ROM area and the BigROM: it depends on how each net is chained. For each long trace, find where the U19/Ux pin gets that signal from.
  • The ROM pin has its own route back to the source (J3 or a GAL): the long run only feeds the BigROM. Toss it.
  • The ROM pin's only connection is that long run: the signal goes source → BigROM pad → long trace → ROM pin. The empty footprint is acting as a pass-through, so the trace is required. Route it straight from the source to the ROM pin on your top-layer highway.
The meter won't separate these cases, because both show continuity. Count the copper at the ROM pin instead: one trace leaving it means pass-through, two or more means the BigROM leg is only a branch. Also check each via for a branch running through the inner layer.

Chip-select and output-enable lines: if a GAL output drives only the BigROM's chip-select or output-enable, you can drop that trace too. The unused GAL output just floats, and the fuse map doesn't change.

Your plan to move the inner-layer traces up to the highway works. It also leaves the inner layer free to be a solid plane.

Thanks for the datasheet links, they come up empty, but now I’ve got part numbers to search. Figuring pinout overlay will help a lot.

Sorry the links came up empty. A few search terms that should turn up the 40-pin x16 datasheets:
  • Am27C1024 (AMD)
  • M27C1024 (ST)
  • Intel 27C210, Intel's 64K × 16 part from the same period
The 27C2048 and 27C4096 datasheets use the same 40-pin layout. Either will do for your overlay.

When you place the overlay, find pin 1 at the square pad on the notched end of each footprint. Your drawing is rotated 180° from the photo, so pin 1 on U25 and U26 will land at the opposite corner from where it sits on the board.

Once you have a pinout diagram, send me a screenshot. I'll format it the way you like for pasting into Illustrator: left and right columns, pin number plus two spaces plus signal name, double-spaced.

Sounds great! The full board pics above are those you cleaned up for me. At that point the card was right side up and the ICs were upside down. Those pics were highest resolution and the easiest to locate.

Artwork is now IC notch upward, card upside down orientation. Here’s a better pic of the new traces. Data lines coded purple run through the resistor array and up the solder side to VRAM/Vias.

It looks like they branch from there to socketed ROM and U25. Expecting 14 more connections to appear across the South 40. WAG would be that the data bus runs (mostly on internal layer bus) to U26 in the North 40. Pinout overlay will tell.


This new orientation reads well. The numbers so far support your guess.

Sixteen data lines, everywhere:
  • Resistors: there are two banks of 8, which makes 16. That fits series resistors on D0–D15 of the SE's 16-bit data bus, sitting between J3 and the rest of the board.
  • VRAM: the D41264 is 64K × 4, so four chips give 16 I/O lines.
  • Socketed ROMs: 8 data lines each. One of U19/Ux carries the high byte and the other the low byte, which makes 16.
  • U25: a x16 EPROM would take all 16 data lines itself.
So your 2 found plus the 14 you expect gives exactly the full bus. If the pattern holds, every one of the 16 will reach the VRAM I/O, one ROM socket, and U25.

A quick test once the pinout overlay is in: if U25 is a 27C1024-family part, its 16 data pins should sit in two blocks of eight, split by a ground pin. That's roughly pins 3–10 and 12–19, but confirm against the datasheet. If your purple buzz hits land on those two blocks, you've identified the part. If U26 is a second x16 ROM, the same 16 lines will show up on the same pins there. Your guess that they travel north on the inner-layer bus would fit.

For the removal plan: the BigROM taps the data bus after the resistors. Cutting the U25/U26 branches leaves the resistor → VRAM and resistor → ROM paths untouched, provided each ROM pin still has its own route back to the resistors. It's the same pass-through check as before: if the only route to a ROM data pin runs through a U25 pad, that leg has to be rerouted.

Send the pinout diagram when you find it, and I'll format it for your overlay.

Here it is.

I've formatted the 27C1024 pinout for your overlay in 27C1024-Pinout-U25-U26.txt. It's split into left and right columns in physical DIP order (1–20 down the left, 40–21 down the right). Each entry is the pin number, two spaces, then the signal name, double-spaced. Active-low signals keep the datasheet's # suffix (CE#, OE#, PGM#), so no overline character has to survive the paste.

Once it's placed, check these on U25 and U26:
  • Data bus: your purple buzz hits should land on pins 3–10 (DQ15–DQ8) and 12–19 (DQ7–DQ0), with ground on pin 11 in between. If they do, the footprints are confirmed as x16 ROMs.
  • Power pins: pins 11 and 30 should buzz to GND, and pin 40 to +5V.
  • Pin 1 (VPP): in read mode this is usually tied to +5V or straight to VCC. That's another quick power check.
  • CE# (pin 2) and OE# (pin 20): trace these back to find which GAL outputs drive the BigROM. Those traces can go in the clone.
  • A0–A15: these probably share address lines with the socketed ROMs. Apply the pass-through check to each one before you cut anything.
Thanks, back to AI playtime!

Have fun, jt. Send the overlay over when the buzz hits are on it.

____________________________________________________________

FPD

Picking the FPD clone back up. Here's where things stand:
  • Pinout verification is done and picture-locked (.035/.036), including the U6/U7 SN74LS393 fix and U10 confirmed as a GAL16V8.
  • Component-side buzz-testing is underway on the two-file .036+ workflow. The latest was .039, which added the confidence-coded trace legend and got most of U22 and its VIAs buzzed.
  • Hardware for testing is mostly in hand: the clean MagicBus adapter came in at $35, the BlueSCSI is ordered with the multi-boot SD layout planned, and the cutaway SE is waiting on a few parts. Both cards need to pass a proof-of-life test through the Extron before any desoldering.
  • Parked for later: the North 40/South 40 FPGA split, GAL fuse readout through your friend, and the rotation transform, which is already spec'd.
What are you picking up today? It could be a new .04x buzz file to cross-check, the BlueSCSI image setup, card testing, or something else. If you've got files to share, attaching them works fine. I can also connect to your FPD project folder on the ProBook if that's easier.

Rummaged through the project parts/prototyping drawer and I’ve got much of what I need on hand:

-Solder Cup HD-15M for cable build to plug into the back of the Extron Scaler
- EPT103-4-174 2172 DIN96M RA Wire Wrap Connector for PDS Adapter
- Single Row .1” pitch Wire Wrap Headers and tall Sockets to match

Unfortunately, the double row Zig-Zag thruholes for J38 are more than .1” apart, so I can’t use a .05” Perf Board, a custom PCB will be required. In that case I don’t necessarily need wire wrap capability. Patch wires will work if a couple of connections are off. But if routing the traces proves as tight as I think it will, I can go with the wire wrap components and only wrap a row or two at the top if required.

Looks like it’s time to look at some KiCAD videos. You can provide me with the schematic for the SE PDS to J38 thruholes adapter board from the files we have, no?


Not from anything I can see this session, jt. None of the earlier uploads carried over. The 68kMLA PDS-to-MagicBus pinout, the Component-Side-Test PDFs and the board photos all lived in earlier chats. No folder on the ProBook is connected yet either. I only have my notes, and they record that the pinout exists but not what's in it. I'm not going to rebuild a 60-line netlist from memory. One swapped address line and you'd lose an evening chasing a problem that's really in the adapter.

Here's what I need to draw it properly:
  1. The PDS-to-MagicBus pinout from that 68kMLA post, as a screenshot or copy/paste. I can't reach 68kmla.org from here.
  2. Which board J38 is on. I'm assuming J38 is the staggered 60-position footprint that mates with the FPD's JAE PICL-60P-LT, on the MagicBus card side. If it's the Radius16's designator or something else, tell me.
  3. J38 footprint dimensions, taken with calipers from the clean MagicBus card: pin pitch along each row, spacing between the two rows, stagger offset, and hole diameter. You can also send the JAE datasheet if you can find one. A custom footprint needs real numbers, and I'd rather have your measurements than a guess.
Tip: you now have the clean MagicBus card, and that's a better source than the forum post. Buzzing its DIN96 pins to its J38 holes gives you the actual connection map. I can cross-check that against the 68kMLA pinout, and any row where they disagree gets flagged before it goes into copper.

Once I have those, I'll build:
  • A KiCad schematic (.kicad_sch) with a DIN 41612 96-pin symbol, a custom 60-pin staggered symbol for J38, and the net connections between them. Unused DIN96 pins get no-connect flags.
  • A matching netlist table (CSV or your double-spaced Illustrator format) so you can check it against your AI9 artwork.
  • A custom J38 footprint built from your measurements, so the PCB layout starts with the right hole pattern.
Two questions to settle before layout. Neither blocks the schematic:
  • Your DIN96M should mate with the SE's PDS connector, but check the gender against the logic board.
  • The right-angle part means the adapter board stands vertical. Which side J38 lands on decides whether the FPD card faces outboard, as in your prototype orientation plan.
MagicBus Card arrived in good order, do these pics help?

Yes, they help a lot, jt. The photos settle what the board is and roughly what the connector footprint looks like. They aren't enough for the actual pin-to-pin map.

Name correction first. The silkscreen that reads "J38" is actually J3B, the middle row of J3. J3 is the 96-pin DIN connector (rows J3A, J3B and J3C, pins 1–32). The staggered double-row footprint is J2, the black JAE 60-pin connector (rows J2A and J2B, pins 1–30). I'll use J2 and J3 in the schematic so it matches the real board.

What the photos show:
  • Two-layer board, simple wiring. On the dark side, each DIN pin runs up to a pad in that staircase pattern. On the green side, a trace runs from that pad straight across to the J2 footprint. There's no logic on the board, only wiring, plus a few power runs along the lower right and one strap-like link near J2. So your adapter really is a MagicBus clone with different connectors.
  • J2 pitch, measured from the photo. The DIN connector's standard 2.54 mm pitch gives me a scale for the photo. On that scale, J2's contacts are about 1.27 mm (0.050") apart along each row. The legs fan out into four offset columns of holes, about 6 mm wide overall and about 38 mm long. That fan-out is why the spacing didn't match any perfboard grid. Treat these as a sanity check only: take the final numbers from calipers.
  • The dark-side photo is mirrored. The silkscreen reads backwards, so it looks like your usual reversed reference view. I'll keep that in mind for any pin I read from it.
Why I won't pull the netlist from the photos. Matching 60 pads in the staircase back to the right column out of 32 DIN positions, at this resolution, is too error-prone. Buzzing it takes about 60 quick meter checks on a board this simple. It can also catch power pins that connect to more than one place, which the photos can't show.

Check the connector gender. The MagicBus's DIN connector looks like the female receptacle, which would mean the SE logic board has the male pins. If so, the DIN96M right-angle part you pulled from the drawer won't plug into the SE's PDS slot. It might still suit the FPGA board plan. Worth confirming against the logic board before layout.

Next step: buzz each J2 pin (1A–30A, 1B–30B) to its J3 pin (row letter plus number), and mark any J2 pin that connects to more than one J3 pin, since those are likely power or ground. Add the 68kMLA pinout and caliper measurements when you have them. I'll then build the KiCad schematic, the netlist table and the J2 footprint, and flag anywhere your buzz results and the forum pinout disagree.

I can also make you a blank buzz sheet with J2 on the left and blanks for the J3 pin and notes, in your double-spaced paste format or as a spreadsheet.

Getting a little ahead of me, mostly updating you on hardware progress today:

Completed steps:
- tested DIN M RA wire wrap connector in PDS slot. Beautiful, WW pins point outward.
- SE Logic Board has been removed from the clear case
- now mounted to a plexi carrier and moved to my open SE/30 test stand setup
- SE powers up and searches for a boot disk
- Cable extension works great!
- BlueSCSI is mounted via the slide in HDD carrier setup mounted to the PSU
- tested SE/MagicBus/FPD and it boots to questioning Floppy, so good to go.

Next steps:
- build a speaker cable extension
- build HD-15 to J1 Cable for Extron connections
- image System 6.0.8 on SD card for boot disk in BlueSCSI


Nice progress, jt. The flashing question-mark floppy on that screen means the SE, MagicBus and FPD all run together without a crash, and that's a real milestone.

Correction: you've now shown the DIN96M right-angle part seats in the PDS slot, so my gender warning was wrong. Better still, it means the FPGA prototype's vertical-mount plan works with the connector you already have.

Some notes on the next steps:

HD-15 to J1 cable for the Extron:
  • Don't forget J1 pin 6, the sense line. It has to be tied to ground inside the cable. Otherwise the card's video drivers shut down at startup and you'll get nothing, which looks like a dead card.
  • Suggested wiring, using standard VGA pin numbers on the HD-15:
J1 pinSignalHD-15 pin
2Ground5, 6, 7, 8, 10
3Video1, 2, 3 (red, green, blue)
6SenseTie to ground
7H sync13
9V sync14
  • Optional: a series resistor on the video line. The Extron's color inputs expect about 0.7 V, and 5 V TTL overdrives them. That's harmless for a proof-of-life check, but it may have caused some of the beat pattern you saw with the TPD. A resistor of roughly 470 Ω in series with each color pin brings the level down, and it's easy to add in the solder-cup shell. The Extron's sync inputs accept 2.75–5 V, so TTL sync connects directly.
System 6.0.8 image on the BlueSCSI: the file name sets the SCSI ID. Name it HD10_512.hda to put it on ID1, matching your ID scheme (the "1" is the SCSI ID and the "0" is the LUN). It also fits your plan to add 7.0.1 and the others later.

Send the J2-to-J3 buzz results whenever you get to them, and I'll start the adapter schematic.

____

That's useful, and it might shorten the path to a proof-of-life test.

  • Boot from a floppy first. A System 6.0.8 boot disk (the System Tools disk, or any bootable 800K disk) gets you to a desktop without waiting on the BlueSCSI image. Once the Mac reaches the desktop, the FPD's drivers in the declaration ROM should load. That's enough to try the J1-to-Extron cable as soon as it's built.
  • Use it as a second drive. You can use it with the SE's internal drive if one is still hooked up through your cable extension. Two drives make disk-to-disk copying and installing from floppies much less of a swap-fest.
  • It plugs into the SE's DB-19 external floppy port. Every SE logic board supports 800K, whether it's the original 800K model or the later SuperDrive (FDHD) version.
The BlueSCSI image can come later, once the card has shown it's alive.

It would be if I had 6.0.8 install set on floppy. :-/

You probably don't need floppies at all. The BlueSCSI gives you a faster route.

  • Use a ready-made hard disk image (easiest). Prebuilt, bootable System 6.0.8 hard disk images are widely shared, including on Macintosh Garden, where you got the ROM dumps. Copy one onto the SD card, rename it HD10_512.hda, and the SE should boot from it straight away, with nothing to install. You'd then have a desktop for the FPD test with no floppies involved.
  • Write floppies on another vintage Mac. If one of your fleet has a SuperDrive, Disk Copy 4.2 can write 800K disks from install-set images. That's more work than the option above, for the same end result.
  • Your PC's floppy drive won't work on its own. Mac 800K disks use a different recording format that ordinary PC drives can't write. Flux-level tools like Greaseweazle or FluxEngine can do it with a PC drive, but that means buying hardware you don't need, given the BlueSCSI.
A clean install from the install disks can wait for the multi-partition image you're planning. For proof of life, any image that boots will do.

Nice bit of information on the Extron’s input requirements, thanks. I hadn’t forgotten the sense line. Thanks much for giving me the cable pinout. I’ve got a nice box of assorted resistors ready and waiting for both applications.

The SE/30 test rig I pulled down off the shelf keeps my hands farther away from the zappy parts. May or may not fab a plexi shield, dunno, I’ve worked with them live many times in the past.


Good plan. A few tips for the BigROM buzz:
  • Pull the socketed ROMs and GALs first. Otherwise the meter can read through a chip's internal protection diodes and show connections that aren't really there.
  • Watch for through-routes. Some traces may just pass through a BigROM hole on their way to another part. Those are the nets to keep, rerouted onto the top layer, rather than removing them with the rest of the bus.
  • Check each hole against the U19 and Ux socket pins. The bus most likely just duplicates the installed ROMs' address and data lines. If a hole matches a socket pin, that confirms it; if one doesn't, it needs a closer look.
  • Test each hole against both inner planes. A hole that beeps to ground or 5 V is a power pin, not a bus line, and it helps confirm which plane is which.
Log each hole and whatever it beeps to. When you send the results, I can sort them into three piles: safe to delete, needs rerouting, and power.

Done.

Nice work, jt. Nothing came through with that message, though. Send the buzz log however it's easiest: a photo of your notes, an AI9/PDF export, or a typed list. I'll sort it into safe to delete, needs rerouting, and power.

Copy.

Ready when you are.
 
Last edited:

Trash80toG4

Active Tinkerer
Apr 1, 2022
1,511
485
83
Bermuda Triangle, NC USA
Ordered a new multimeter that should tell me the difference between full continuity and weaker states.

Meanwhile, I cleaned up the sticker residue on the solder side with alcohol and discovered that a liquid emulsion gives better definition to the subterranean net. Can you crop, clean up and scale this shot to match the other images I’m using as templates for me?


The new photo didn't make it into the chat, so there's nothing here for me to work on yet. Can you attach two things?
  1. The new solder-side shot with the alcohol and emulsion cleanup.
  2. One of your current template JPEGs, ideally the solder-side one. That lets me match its pixel size, crop, orientation and grayscale format exactly.
If you'd rather skip the template, I can work from the specs we used before: crop to the board outline, 123 mm board width, the 50% true-size scale for the AI9 artwork, and 8-bit grayscale JPEG. Matching an actual template file is safer, though.

The meter sounds like a good buy. An ohms reading will tell you a lot more than a beep, especially on those faint nets under the ICs.

I hit return by mistake before upload.

No worries about the early send. The new solder-side shot is cleaned up and lined up with your templates, in two sizes:
  • Radius-FPD-SE-Solder-Clean-1386.jpg is 1386 × 1697 px at 141 dpi, the same as your current solder-side template, so you can swap it straight in.
  • Radius-FPD-SE-Solder-Clean-2772.jpg is 2772 × 3394 px, the same pixel density as your component-side template. Your two templates aren't the same size (the component side is 2772 × 3365), so this one is there in case you want both sides at the same scale.
What I did:
  • Rotation and crop: turned it 90° so it faces the same way as the old solder-side shot, with the connector at bottom right and the angled corner at bottom left. The white background is cropped away.
  • Alignment: I didn't just resize it. I matched it point for point to the old template, using about 1,700 matching points on pads and vias. A 50/50 overlay of the two shows no ghosting on the connector pins, pads or traces, so it lines up with your existing artwork without nudging. It also keeps the old template's slight camera stretch, so the two stay consistent with each other.
  • Clean-up: color and brightness matched to the old template, plus light sharpening to bring out the trace edges the emulsion revealed.
Your yellow U-number tape labels are still in the shot. If you want them gone, I can paint them out in the gaps between traces, but I wouldn't paint over anything that might be a trace.

Not worried about the stickers, This is for a new buzz file for only the buried net. Thanks!

Sounds good. Keeping the labels means you can see which GAL you're over while you trace, which should help on the buried net.

Good luck with the new buzz file. Send it over once the first pass is done and I'll check it against the component-side and solder-side files for anything that doesn't match.

Cool, shortest session to date!

Short and useful, the best kind. Enjoy the new meter, and good luck tracing the buried net.