Topics

A device marking database?


ian may
 

In the "Fake 1802 processors" thread
Lee wrote:
>I have a dozen or more vintage 1802's. I'll have to start writing down the codes on them as well (front and back).

I'm prepared to try and build some sort of data base for 1802 package markings. While something that produced a picture of the top and bottom of a device when you clicked a marking code would be nice, it is likely well outside my capabilities and would use a lot of the group's storage space.

I'm thinking of a spreadsheet and some accompanying pictures of devices that show changes in the markings. Here are some data types I have thought of (not in any order):
1) Manufacturer RCA, HARRIS, INTERSIL, SSS AND HUGHES. If the purpose of the data base is to pick fake devices I don't think including SSS and Hughes would be worthwhile (I don't have any of their parts does anybody else?).
2) Provision for 3 lines of text for the top side markings and 3 lines for the bottom side markings. Does anyone have devices with more than 3 lines?
3) Package type ceramic or plastic perhaps indicated by "D" and "E" or just rely on the part number in one of the 3 top side lines to determine this?
4) Whether there are any mold eject pin marks. While I have previously found dots and arrows in these marks, since I have no idea what they mean I suggest this entry be just yes or no.
5) The initials of the person that owns that chip for possible follow up.
6) The underside markings are not unique. I have at least 2 groups of 4 chips that are the same. I'd suggest only one entry for these 2 groups.
7) Perhaps some code from the chip owner so they can identify a part more easily.

Is there anything else you can think of that might be worth including? Is there something on my list that you think shouldn't be included? What should be in the first column (top line of bottom marking)?
Cheers, Ian.


joshbensadon
 

Ian,

That sounds like a great idea.  I can send you pictures of all my chips.  I'm not sure if more than 3 lines are needed, I guess you'll find out with pictures.
I believe most of my chips are not fake, there are some that came in devices I bought for which I don't know for certain.  But most of the chips I've had since the 80's.  

Cheers,
Josh



From: cosmacelf@groups.io <cosmacelf@groups.io> on behalf of ian may via groups.io <fps16xn3@...>
Sent: Sunday, August 16, 2020 9:05 AM
To: cosmacelf@groups.io <cosmacelf@groups.io>
Subject: [cosmacelf] A device marking database?
 
In the "Fake 1802 processors" thread
Lee wrote:
>I have a dozen or more vintage 1802's. I'll have to start writing down the codes on them as well (front and back).

I'm prepared to try and build some sort of data base for 1802 package markings. While something that produced a picture of the top and bottom of a device when you clicked a marking code would be nice, it is likely well outside my capabilities and would use a lot of the group's storage space.

I'm thinking of a spreadsheet and some accompanying pictures of devices that show changes in the markings. Here are some data types I have thought of (not in any order):
1) Manufacturer RCA, HARRIS, INTERSIL, SSS AND HUGHES. If the purpose of the data base is to pick fake devices I don't think including SSS and Hughes would be worthwhile (I don't have any of their parts does anybody else?).
2) Provision for 3 lines of text for the top side markings and 3 lines for the bottom side markings. Does anyone have devices with more than 3 lines?
3) Package type ceramic or plastic perhaps indicated by "D" and "E" or just rely on the part number in one of the 3 top side lines to determine this?
4) Whether there are any mold eject pin marks. While I have previously found dots and arrows in these marks, since I have no idea what they mean I suggest this entry be just yes or no.
5) The initials of the person that owns that chip for possible follow up.
6) The underside markings are not unique. I have at least 2 groups of 4 chips that are the same. I'd suggest only one entry for these 2 groups.
7) Perhaps some code from the chip owner so they can identify a part more easily.

Is there anything else you can think of that might be worth including? Is there something on my list that you think shouldn't be included? What should be in the first column (top line of bottom marking)?
Cheers, Ian.