(Topic ID: 307721)

Bally 2518 Display Interrupt Gen Question

By Brentd27

2 years ago



Topic Stats

  • 6 posts
  • 5 Pinsiders participating
  • Latest reply 1 year ago by barakandl
  • No one calls this topic a favorite

You

Linked Games

No games have been linked to this topic.

    #1 2 years ago

    Bit of a technical curiosity question here: Why was a Mylar cap used for C16 in the display interrupt generator section of the 2518 as opposed to ceramic, electrolytic, etc.? Would Mylar be for greater frequency stability over ceramic or electrolytic?

    #2 2 years ago

    Many early designs used what was either easily available or the most cost effective.

    An electro isn't really suitable in this application but most other types could have been used and in fact could be subbed in if needed.

    #3 2 years ago

    Both stability and tolerance.

    Back in 'those' days - both electrolytics and ceramics had terrible tolerances and could be off as much as +80%.
    Mylars were and still are commonly in the 5 to 10% range.

    Ceramics could be bought in this tighter tolerance but back in 1970/1980s, they were terribly expensive.
    Today's ceramics have improved tremendously in both stability and tolerance and good ones such as COG/NPOs can be used. But these will cost you more than a simple mylar for that value.

    Electrolytics still have terrible tolerances and are not meant for use in such timing circuits. And not many sources for electrolytics in that small of a value anyways.

    #4 2 years ago

    Well, C16 is a .1uF 100V so sourcing (present day at least) wouldn't be an issue. I figured it was a tolerance/stability issue, but at the same time, they chose to use a 555 instead of a crystal. I guess, at the time, it was a matter of "stable enough" and the combo achieved that. All of my electronics experience is self-taught, and I'm still earning the finer details. I generally know when to use ceramics and electrolytics, but still learning the other types.

    5 months later
    #5 1 year ago

    I'm researching this right now and came across this thread. I'm pretty sure Brentd27 is correct. I was present in the lab when these parts were selected but at 21 fresh out of school I didn't know enough to ask why that type of cap was selected. It had to do with tolerance, availability, and price.

    #6 1 year ago

    If you hold a class Z ceramic, or whatever the cheapest most basic type, the capacitance value starts to drift pretty substantially just from the heat of your hand.

    That said I experimented with a cheap X7R 50v ceramic by samsung at C16 and the display interrupt speed did not drift much (15-20hz I think it was) even at the extreme ends of temp that these games would be operated at. The display interrupt does not have to be too precise except maybe in a couple of the really busy games like Mr/Mrs pac you find a sweet spot for the display interrupt or else lamps and displays flicker. Even then you have at least a 20hz window which would be within the worst case tolerance when using an X7R in what I tested.

    Caps have probably got a lot better since the late 70s. If bally built that circuit now-a-days I figure a NP0 or C0G type would be specified there instead of the poly chicklet looking cap.

    Reply

    Wanna join the discussion? Please sign in to reply to this topic.

    Hey there! Welcome to Pinside!

    Donate to Pinside

    Great to see you're enjoying Pinside! Did you know Pinside is able to run without any 3rd-party banners or ads, thanks to the support from our visitors? Please consider a donation to Pinside and get anext to your username to show for it! Or better yet, subscribe to Pinside+!


    This page was printed from https://pinside.com/pinball/forum/topic/bally-2518-display-interrupt-gen-question and we tried optimising it for printing. Some page elements may have been deliberately hidden.

    Scan the QR code on the left to jump to the URL this document was printed from.