(Topic ID: 219468)

EM Puzzle: Williams 4-player tilt switch. Let's fix it.


By NicoVolta

11 months ago



Topic Stats

  • 139 posts
  • 16 Pinsiders participating
  • Latest reply 11 months ago by CactusJack
  • Topic is favorited by 3 Pinsiders

You

Linked Games

Topic Gallery

There have been 8 images uploaded to this topic. (View topic image gallery).

0Fan-Tas-Tic-Work-12 (resized).jpg
0Fan-Tas-Tic-Work-11 (resized).jpg
0Fan-Tas-Tic-Work-09 (resized).jpg
burns (resized).jpg
fanfail2 (resized).png
Pinball (resized).png
IMG_5971 (resized).JPG
fanfail (resized).png

There are 139 posts in this topic. You are on page 3 of 3.
#101 11 months ago

I know Nic can't do this with games at the museum, but at home I would just disable all tilts.
Problem solved!

#102 11 months ago
Quoted from jrpinball:

Nic has done us a service by pointing out this potential issue. Take it or leave it. If he receives similar flak in the future, he might just decide to keep his findings to himself, rather than sharing them here.

Hopefully he doesn't take my discussion of the problem as criticism. That is certainly not my intent. I just enjoy these kind of puzzles and thinking a problem like this through.

#103 11 months ago

Hi NicoVolta +
on many ONE-Player-Games Williams had "Tilting ends the Game" - but the Big Ben - https://www.ipdb.org/machine.cgi?id=232 has "Tilting ends a ball" - like "the Fan-Tas-Tic it all started with" --- of course Big Ben as an ONE-Player-Game has no Player-Unit - surprise, surprise: Big Ben does NOT have an "Switch mounted on the Tilt-Relay to cut connection to the Score-Drums" - so adding the wire connecting "Lug-Yellow to Lug-W-O-5" (and make an good documentation) makes the Fan-Tas-Tic to use "logic as in a modern ONE-Player-Game" ... Greetings Rolf

#104 11 months ago
Quoted from bingopodcast:

Hopefully he doesn't take my discussion of the problem as criticism. That is certainly not my intent. I just enjoy these kind of puzzles and thinking a problem like this through.

I certainly don't consider your posts to be critical or negative. You are a great asset here, and your opinions and input are to be respected.

#105 11 months ago
Quoted from bingopodcast:

Correct.
Now, what happens should that unit fail to turn and the switch remains engaged? Or it only turns partially. The player units on Williams games use these large conductive areas on the stepper itself. What could that switch be doing with regard to the player unit?

Wouldn't matter. It's only there to make a connection and the circuit is bridged by a score relay switch. If the relay isn't closed, nothing happens either way.

Quoted from bingopodcast:

This returns to one of my earliest points about none of us understanding the purpose of that circuit at a glance and the potential danger of bypassing it without understanding. Vast majority of the time it's probably fine to bypass, much like the switch in normal operation...
Could the player unit itself burn? I dunno. I find it unlikely, but that's one of the only other things in the circuit, and something that hasn't been addressed at all in the comments thus far (that I remember). Williams player units have snowshoes (good for wicking), and big traces... not that they should be getting more than 24V, but if the unit is misadjusted and 24V goes to the wrong place, I suppose the worst that would happen is some blown out bulbs.

Probably not. It might cause two players to get points simultaneously, but I can't imagine two adjacent rivets would have been wired to be dangerous from a partial advance. We'd probably see extensive carbon tracking during normal operation if so... the rivets and wipers are pretty big.

Quoted from bingopodcast:

That switch you're bypassing has a job to do as well. (We just don't understand fully what the job is, or, if we do, it seems to serve no purpose, and the defense of a copy/paste mistake doesn't carry a lot of weight, nor the claim that the 'bean counters' would ignore it forever...). Neither of us needs to leave convinced of the others' position, of course.

No worries. I'm choosing to call it a mistake. It may not be one, but empirically the apparent uselessness of its default condition versus the rather large potential downside doesn't leave much room for generosity.

Quoted from jrpinball:

Jumper the switch temporarily and put the machine through it's paces for a while. I'd tilt it more than occasionally though to check what, if anything this modification has done. If no adverse effects occur, permanently jumper the switch, but note it on the schematic.
Nic has done us a service by pointing out this potential issue. Take it or leave it. If he receives similar flak in the future, he might just decide to keep his findings to himself, rather than sharing them here. He has his head buried in these games more than probably eighty percent of us here, so I consider his contributions to be valuable. Thanks, Nic.

Only 80%? LOL I KID, I KID! Thanks JR... just sharing what I see. I've already decided to solder the fix in place. I've sincerely tried to find a downside... just don't see how it could possibly be better off without it.

Quoted from bingopodcast:

Hopefully he doesn't take my discussion of the problem as criticism. That is certainly not my intent. I just enjoy these kind of puzzles and thinking a problem like this through.

Not at all & me too. EM puzzles are fun. Except bingos. Those I will leave for you... for now.

#106 11 months ago
Quoted from NicoVolta:

Only 80%? LOL I KID, I KID!

Yeah, well I was tempted to say 95 percent!

#107 11 months ago
Quoted from rolf_martin_062:

(I am interested in) Do You want to open an topic "Hard to understand wirings" (or an other / better title) --- we could talk about "WHY is in my JPG the Outhole-Switch (my blue A) wired to Motor-IND-D-Switch --- WHY did Williams not wire "my blue A" simply to "common wire yellow". Greetings Rolf.

I have nothing useful to add to Nic's mystery switch but i can answer Rolf:

As you know "D" is when they desired to drop out the outhole relay. "A" Prevents the outhole process from beginning unless the score motor is at the beginning of a cycle. With it wired directly to the yellow wire, the outhole process could begin mid cycle if the score motor was on the move.

#108 11 months ago
Quoted from NicoVolta:

Probably not. It might cause two players to get points simultaneously, but I can't imagine two adjacent rivets would have been wired to be dangerous from a partial advance. We'd probably see extensive carbon tracking during normal operation if so... the rivets and wipers are pretty big.

I'm talking about a different failure condition - one that falls outside the bounds of normal operation - in concert with this other failure condition. I agree, when the unit is built up and operating as it should, you don't see excessive carbon tracking or burns... but it certainly could if adjusted incorrectly. Drawing double the amount of current through a smaller surface area.

Quoted from NicoVolta:

I'm choosing to call it a mistake.

That's fine - I think, though, that more examination on the purpose of that switch in the games might be useful. I apologize that I haven't had time to do more research myself, but finding the changeover game (which someone else may have posted) would be helpful - then finding the 4P game prior to. That would likely help figure out why the switch was added. And there was some kinda reason at one point in time. Reviewing both schematics should help clarify. I suspect it's not a mistake - I'm just too dense to figure out why not... yet.

Quoted from NicoVolta:

EM puzzles are fun. Except bingos. Those I will leave for you... for now.

Bingos are the best! Fun games, super easy to work on, and lots of fun puzzles. Speaking of, I hope to get down there soon! Join me....

Quoted from jrpinball:

I certainly don't consider your posts to be critical or negative.

Thanks JR - I don't know about the rest of that quote (as pertains to me), but I feel the same way about you.

#109 11 months ago

I believe the crossover point is Big Chief (1965) to A-Go-Go (1966).

From A-Go-Go onward, the layout remained the same until the end of the EM era for Williams.

Whatever the reason, it would have to answer this question: “Why do only 4-player games need to have the power yanked specifically from the score coils while tilted, despite having another switch which does a similar job at the relays?”

#110 11 months ago
Quoted from jrpinball:

Jumper the switch temporarily and put the machine through it's paces for a while. I'd tilt it more than occasionally though to check what, if anything this modification has done. If no adverse effects occur, permanently jumper the switch, but note it on the schematic.
Nic has done us a service by pointing out this potential issue. Take it or leave it. If he receives similar flak in the future, he might just decide to keep his findings to himself, rather than sharing them here. He has his head buried in these games more than probably eighty percent of us here, so I consider his contributions to be valuable. Thanks, Nic.

I'm not giving him flak, I'm just being the devils advocate. I am nowhere near an expert on EM's or any era. I have a few but they have not required major work, lucky for me.
But like the OP said skepticism is healthy. He's skeptical of the design. I'm skeptical that 50+ years later he found an issue that no one else ever did. I think the engineers, ops, techs, and later owners would have found this issue, if it was one. If there wasn't one WMS wouldn't have paid to add the extra part and work.

It's been rationalized that "there wasn't the internet" so Williams, or the public, was never informed when these problems occurred in the field. I can agree with the lack of internet, but WMS would have heard from OPS, and this type of fix (undocumented) would have been seen in games that people have now. Has anyone seen this fix applied to a game they acquired, it does not appear so.

The fact this discussion exists is great.

#111 11 months ago

OK Nic - I think I've solved one mystery, spent a couple of mins reviewing schems:

The purpose of the switch is to prevent erroneous award of EB as designed in A-Go-Go. It blocks the EB relay if not already active through the score drums.

Somewhere between A-Go-Go and Fan-Tas-Tic (quite a few games in the middle), the designers re-drew the EB award/replay award circuit, but it's still doing the same thing - it's just more clear on A-Go-Go's schem because of the old style adjustment jack and placement of the EB relay right beside that circuit.

Keeping that switch closed will allow awards to be earned based on position of the reels even though the game should not allow them to do so. It's a failsafe for the OTHER tilt switch failing. I'm always open to another interpretation, but there's mine.

The engineers did have a purpose for the switch, and, to distill it to its essence, it is to prevent cheating. As with most anti-cheat circuits, they are not readily apparent (at least to me).

Smoke can come out of these games for multiple reasons, as with all pinball, and there's not a way to prevent all of it. As I've mentioned, you are pushing the smokestack further back into the game, but it's still there. Jumpering the male side of the JP would be a more obvious/safer way to change the game. Fuses better still.

#112 11 months ago

The thing is, the replay/extra ball award circuit still has to travel through a score relay switch, so how is cheating even possible?

As a failsafe, it seems like a bad tradeoff. If the second tilt switch failed (stuck closed) during tilt, it would be apparent pretty quickly what the problem is and at least wouldn't melt down the machine. Whereas the consequences of the always-closed switch failing are much more serious. Also, the likelihood of a switch failing to open within a working relay is less likely than one which should stay closed at all times carrying live current to multiple coils.

However, I'm with you. Let's keep digging. I noticed the bonus wheel on A-Go-Go and Fan-Tas-Tic (and associated award relays) don't travel through the second tilt. Seems like an AHA moment! But as always... all points must ultimately travel through the score relays, so they would still be blocked.

And thus, I'm back to the original conclusion again.

Moving the smokestack "further back" is a win in my book. A smidge more reliable? I'll take it. True, there are further degrees of safety which could be followed (jumpering at the head/plugs/fuse installation)... but so it is with everything EM, eh?

#113 11 months ago
Quoted from NicoVolta:

replay/extra ball award circuit still has to travel through a score relay switch, so how is cheating even possible?

I wrote that off for that reason as well - but I'm back to my order of operations theory on the one hand, on the other, perhaps if that switch on the 1000pt relay is misadjusted... I think they were engineering around a possible malfunction elsewhere in the machine and were erring on the side of less payout.

#114 11 months ago
Quoted from bingopodcast:

perhaps if that switch on the 1000pt relay is misadjusted

Well if that were the case, the game would smoke for a different reason, now that I think of it. Not in normal operation, but in tilt, and only with your mod...

#115 11 months ago

Hi NicoVolta +
(You wrote in post-84 about) - well, I am (also) in "camp B" --- Your (post-84) "Older games show the evolution of the tilt relay function. One switch used to be the "catch all"... then another was installed further up the line for the relays - but the old location remained in place" ---Your post-76 "Looks like an absent-minded copy and paste job" --- Your post-7 "Laziness ... cruising on autopilot - copied the 4p layout year-to-year" --- Your post-11 "design oversight that was copied year after year" ---
Hi Marvin - You post in post-110 +/- : "some people want to be sceptical on design ? --- You are sceptical that 50+ years later somebody finds an issue ... engineers, ops, techs ..." ---
Here is what I believe "design oversight or lazyness (we do not care - the pins run and nobody ever will complain": See the JPG - the "original wiring is simply: 'my green stuff is not in the pin - not in the schematics' ". For years all the 4-player-pins played SINGLE-player-games: Useless, not needed - the Player-Reset-Relay fires (remember I talk about ONE-Player-Games) - the Player-Reset-Coil fires (remember I talk about ONE-Player-Games) --- question: Why did they not put-in "my green stuff" - "design oversight or lazyness or costs-saving" ?
Hi "owners of Gottlieb Orbit" - please confirm - sometimes when the "Orbit" steps to next player / next ball: The Ball-Return-Coil (Outhole-Kicker) fires TWO times. Greetings Rolf

0Fan-Tas-Tic-Work-11 (resized).jpg
#116 11 months ago
Quoted from bingopodcast:

Well if that were the case, the game would smoke for a different reason, now that I think of it. Not in normal operation, but in tilt, and only with your mod...

That's an astronomical nitpick, Mr. Baldridge. A maladjusted relay would show issues at the start of every game, even if left original. The fact that it would "also happen in tilt" is moot... because if this is truly some kind of "fallback circuit", it STILL wouldn't help because the tilt relay snaps closed when the ball drains. Thus, the problem would resume immediately afterward.

Do you honestly believe the engineering team thought they should protect against a relay maladjusting itself... only during tilt... and only then requiring the operator to catch and fix the error before the ball drained?

Defending originality in some cases is hard work.

#117 11 months ago

Only requires one switch on the relay to fail. Those relays are exercised more than any other in the game.

Also, the problem would only appear on replay or eb award.

#118 11 months ago
Quoted from bingopodcast:

Only requires one switch on the relay to fail. Those replays are exercised more than any other in the game.

Yes, but again, if "secondary tilt protection" is necessary... why only 4-players and how would it stop malfunctioning during the non-tilted part of the game?

Maladjusted relays are always a risk. All EM platforms can fail when throwing sparks around with relays. Can't be helped. I don't see enough architecture in the tilt circuit alone to prevent it.

#119 11 months ago

Rolf,

So your suggested changes in Green is simply to prevent the game from continuously resetting the Player unit each ball when only a 1 player game is selected?

Pros:

Less where and tear on Player unit reset coil

Cons:

Added cost of
2 leaf switches, plus labor to add them to switch stack during pre-assembly.
A few feet of wire needed to incorporate additions to lower relay board assembly.
Two more switches that can fail causing issues for operators.

Conclusion:

System works fine without said switches and without the added cost or potential failure.
Games were only designed to work reliably for 3 to 5 years. After that, one could say they intended for them to "fail" so they would be replaced with a new purchase. We are lucky that they were so "over engineered" to last that 5 years without major failures that we still have them running today after 30 to 60 years of use.

#120 11 months ago
Quoted from NicoVolta:

Maladjusted relays are always a risk.

Sure, but only in your scenario will a coil burn. I guess both scenarios.

Do you disable replay award in the museum? How about eb? What about match? Match should be ok, would need to check.

Only 4p? Again, you have different units that you run through on a 4p game. Player unit and 4x score reels which allow for replay or eb award. Yes, it's based on position of that unit. Thinking like a cheater, player unit is kinda accessible with a coat hanger for Williams games, huh? Push with the hanger and you can bridge multiple steps easily. Might tingle a bit without tape.

Sounds like you're stuck in on this, so we will have to agree to disagree. There is a purpose to that switch. It cuts off the score relay switch in question when tilted. Also, the replay award calculation circuit.

I don't understand your last question... during the non-tilted portion? When the reels are active, perhaps you hit the replay value as you tilt. As designed, you don't get your credit. As modified, you get your credit, then the replay circuit locks on. Ditto for trip relay for eb, if trip or hold. You're safer to use eb award vs replay with this change.

You can ignore it if you choose, your game, etc. I won't say 'at your peril' because your change is relatively harmless. I don't think it needs an apb. But that's my opinion.

#121 11 months ago
Quoted from Marvin:

But like the OP said skepticism is healthy. He's skeptical of the design. I'm skeptical that 50+ years later he found an issue that no one else ever did. I think the engineers, ops, techs, and later owners would have found this issue, if it was one. If there wasn't one WMS wouldn't have paid to add the extra part and work.

I'll admit, I'm getting a kick out of that possibility ("yay me!"). Of course, I may still be proven wrong and am open to that. All in good fun and learning. But you have to admit this is one heckuva puzzler! It isn't purely theoretical either. A real risk is present here. Unlikely, but with potentially big consequences otherwise.

Quoted from bingopodcast:

Sure, but only in your scenario will a coil burn.

No... what would happen is that a burning coil wouldn't stop burning for those few seconds on the way to the drain. It would never cause anything to burn on its own.

Quoted from bingopodcast:

Do you disable replay award in the museum? How about eb? What about match? Match should be ok, would need to check.

Nope. All enabled.

Quoted from bingopodcast:

Only 4p? Again, you have different units that you run through on a 4p game. Player unit and 4x score reels which allow for replay or eb award. Yes, it's based on position of that unit. Thinking like a cheater, player unit is kinda accessible with a coat hanger for Williams games, huh? Push with the hanger and you can bridge multiple steps easily. Might tingle a bit without tape.

Now there's a new possibility. However, it wouldn't work. Rotating the player unit rotates all of the reel connections. Score thresholds wouldn't transfer to other players by turning it. Would take some sort of elaborate "just so" type of short to accomplish. Even then, the score relay is key, and it wouldn't be closed.

Quoted from bingopodcast:

Sounds like you're stuck in on this, so we will have to agree to disagree. There is a purpose to that switch. It cuts off the score relay switch in question when tilted. Also, the replay award calculation circuit.

Yes, it indeed cuts power to the score coils and extra ball/replay coils. I just don't see why it ever should. Especially considering the potential downside.

Quoted from bingopodcast:

I don't understand your last question... during the non-tilted portion? When the reels are active, perhaps you hit the replay value as you tilt. As designed, you don't get your credit. As modified, you get your credit, then the replay circuit locks on. Ditto for trip relay for eb, if trip or hold. You're safer to use eb award vs replay with this change.

Even as designed, the only way you wouldn't get the credit is if the tilt happened the first millisecond after hitting the target with the ball. Really splitting hairs on this one. 999 times out of 1000 you'd still get the credit... and this is only an issue when tilting *precisely* on the replay! How often does that happen?

If modified, that thousandth-of-a-second miracle replay tilt would be awarded. Just not an issue.

Replay and EB circuits go through the score relay switch. Can't lock on, modified or not. Why is EB safer?

Quoted from bingopodcast:

You can ignore it if you choose, your game, etc. I won't say 'at your peril' because your change is relatively harmless. I don't think it needs an apb. But that's my opinion.

All good. All of this is for learning and bulletproofing anyway. I do feel slightly more secure with the mod in place, considering it failed on-site with no one watching. Could have been worse. At least I'll sleep well knowing it can't happen again. At least, not at the switch... hahaa

#122 11 months ago
Quoted from NicoVolta:

I just don't see why it ever should.

There is a downside, but I've given several possibilities. Other issue might be related to ebs. Don't know if big chief had ebs or not.

Quoted from NicoVolta:

How often does that happen?

If that is the justification, often enough to justify adding a switch.

Quoted from NicoVolta:

thousandth-of-a-second miracle replay tilt would be awarded. Just not an issue.

You underestimate how the machines can be abused. Lift the front legs. No drain! Coil locked. I agree, you'd have other problems then. I'd suspect you have other problems if that NC switch wasn't working too. the coat hanger is a multipurpose tool. It can also push reels...

Eb is safer because it is via a relay meant to hold on. Not so with credit.

#123 11 months ago
Quoted from bingopodcast:

Eb is safer because it is via a relay meant to hold on. Not so with credit.

Right, but how would the credit be any riskier? I mean, EB couldn't hold on either after a tilt.

#124 11 months ago

Yes, it could and would - in both cases - EB has to hold so that you are allowed to play your EB. It is unaffected by tilt. If you got it, you got it.

Same for credits. They are -normally- affected by tilt. Momentary pulse of the stepper is cut off. You're leaving that path active, and forcing it so. I'd have to check and see if there's a switch on the credit unit that is unaffected that would cut power to the coil on step... can't remember off the top of my head.

#125 11 months ago

No cut-off switch on the credit stepper - just bzzzzzzzzz - unless you have your game modified for free play in the typical williams fashion - then you are safe from this particular issue on credit award. Of course, that wasn't contemplated when the games were new.

#126 11 months ago
Quoted from bingopodcast:

Yes, it could and would - in both cases - EB has to hold so that you are allowed to play your EB. It is unaffected by tilt. If you got it, you got it.

Au contraire, my friend. At least on Fan-Tas-Tic, the extra ball relay is wired through the ball index relay... and that is wired through the other switch in the tilt relay. Thus, if the tilt trips, the index trips, and the extra ball hold is broken.

Tilt = buh-bye extra ball

Quoted from bingopodcast:

Same for credits. They are -normally- affected by tilt. Momentary pulse of the stepper is cut off. You're leaving that path active, and forcing it so. I'd have to check and see if there's a switch on the credit unit that is unaffected that would cut power to the coil on step... can't remember off the top of my head.

True, but I'm good with the score relays doing the gatekeeping here. Won't fire or lock without it.

#127 11 months ago
Quoted from NicoVolta:

Tilt = buh-bye extra ball

Really? The schematic shows that the score relays allow it to remain... 3 NC switches and a hold switch on the relay itself. Yes, the ball index switch cuts it off, but only when the ball index drops... due to score. Unless my super-quick read of the schem is wrong - which it very well could be.

#128 11 months ago
Quoted from bingopodcast:

Really? The schematic shows that the score relays allow it to remain... 3 NC switches and a hold switch on the relay itself. Yes, the ball index switch cuts it off, but only when the ball index drops... due to score. Unless my super-quick read of the schem is wrong - which it very well could be.

Tilt relay is also on that circuit path. It's the "other wire" Rolf found earlier... the grey-blu.

#129 11 months ago

Why do I get the feeling this discussion has become a lot like an Immigration / Border security debate? LOL

Personally, I concede that Nic has found a potential problem in the failure of one switch, that, for all OUR purposes, seems to offer no obvious reason for its presence. In hopes of protecting the potential of a melt down of any 1 or 2 of 7 coils, the "mod" seems reasonable to me.

But, back to the actual purpose of the switch. Obviously, the switch is contained on the TILT relay. Therefore, since the existence of the TILT function is to prevent some and many kinds of "Cheating", the addition of the switch had to have been to prevent some form of cheating that was either reported from the field, or "realized" by one of the engineers while reviewing past or current designs. And yet, none of our bright minds, can point a finger at a single apparent, specific, reason. Partly due to how the rest of the circuits involved don't appear to require the same protection. Nor was the "change" implemented on single player games.

In reviewing schematics from Big Chief (4P) through A Go Go (4P) and Casanova (2P), there was an obvious change in how they "Disabled" power in the games in regards to Tilt or the presence of a TILT relay. If you look at a Single Player Game like Hot Line, this was the era when TILTing ended your game. There is no TILT relay, only Game Over and Reset to control power to playfield scoring features. As was mentioned, with Big Chief (as well as many single player games) there was only a single TILT disconnect switch on what I will call the return rail (Common, not the fused power). It would be my theory that it was found this single switch was taxed with too much current to handle everything and may have required frequent cleaning and adjustment. Therefore, as was mentioned previously, the power rails were separated sharing the load between two different branches (Tilt Disconnect was moved to the Power rail (not common) and fed playfield style coils and relays. At some point, someone felt it necessary to add a disconnect to the relays in the head and our switch in question was how they did it. Not thinking through the scenario that Nic has presented that if this switch fails, it allows a score relay hold circuit to energize, thereby energizing other coils should a score drum solenoid not be allowed to move and hit its EOS dropping out the score relay.

I honestly don't think that the design engineers would run "what if" scenarios for the potential failure of every single switch contained in a game (I could be wrong). Obviously, they would look closely over and review anything in regards to extra credits, replays, or unwarranted scoring to protect the interest of the operator. And re-visit a design anytime something was reported from the field.

As to reports from the field, it would have to be a pretty wide spread problem to ever make it back to the factory. If a game failed on location, the tech repaired it. And moved on. Only if the same tech, had to make the same repair over and over again, or over multiple titles, would they probably make the effort to call their distributor or talk to the factory directly.

As to cut and paste design, I have no doubt, this was how it was done. Once a design existed, and it was found to be reliable and cost effective, it would simply be repeated from game to game without change or modification unless something came to light to warrant such a change. Hell, I found this out when I had a Fan-Tas-Tic body with no head. I had a NOS backglass. So, I junked a tattered Jubilee and found there was only the need to add a single wire to an empty Jones Plug pin to make the Jubilee head work 100% as a Fantastic. Even most, if not all of the colors matched up on either side of the jones plugs.

#130 11 months ago
Quoted from NicoVolta:

Tilt relay is also on that circuit path. It's the "other wire" Rolf found earlier... the grey-blu.

More importantly, the Red... haha - I was reading past that to the award circuit, not the hold circuit. The ball index relay doesn't even come into play on a tilt.

I'm with cactusjack that it must've been too taxing to put it all on one switch. Would probably draw a nice big spark. And without ending the game, it could happen on every ball. Of every player.

#131 11 months ago

Appreciate all the thought you guys have put into this. If separating the current draw was the primary goal, I assume it must have been to protect the 4-player stepper unit rivets and wipers... which didn't exist on 2p and 1p games. That's the only architectural difference.

Still, why switch it? The score relay switches divide the circuit between the player unit and tilt switch. Who is to say which portion of the tilt relay would activate/throw sparks first?

#132 11 months ago

(and now I'm going to watch some games from the backbox with people trying to tilt it... field test!)

#133 11 months ago

I think the kind of "Cheating" this was designed to prevent is the kind when you take your fist and wrap in on the front edge of the back box frame, or slap the side panel in an effort to cause the relay(s) or their switches to bounce a bit. At the kind of force we would fear would break a backglass but the general public could care less about damaging. Regular old shaking isn't going to do it.

Maybe the 4 player head is more flimsy and requires the extra electronic protection a single player head does not? I can see the engineers taking off their steel toed work boots and smacking the front edge of the test games in the lab. I do not believe WMS ever put a slam switch in the head like Gottlieb did????

#134 11 months ago

Hi bingopodcast
I do not understand the beginning of Your post-130. See the JPG - a switch drawn two times / on two different places in the schematics --- the "NicoVolta-M&B-Switch". Greetings Rolf

0Fan-Tas-Tic-Work-12 (resized).jpg
#135 11 months ago

Rolf: Working back from the EB relay, the most important thing to note is not the ball index relay, it's the other tilt relay switch which cuts off power to most of the game. I just meant I made a mistake and ignored that important switch. Cutting off power to the ball index is a supplemental way to cut off power to the EB relay, if there is scoring happening at the same time.

#136 11 months ago
Quoted from bingopodcast:

The ball index relay doesn't even come into play on a tilt.

How so? The Ball Index relay is FORCED on by the TILT relay so that even if no scoring has happened on the playfield, the player loses the ball in play (no air ball or free ball re-served).

Rolf, it does seem odd that they would draw the same switch two times on the schematic. But wire colors seem to prove they are actually the same switch. It is much more clear that they drew the switch twice when it comes to troubleshooting either circuit.

#137 11 months ago
Quoted from CactusJack:

How so? The Ball Index relay is FORCED on by the TILT relay so that even if no scoring has happened on the playfield, the player loses the ball in play (no air ball or free ball re-served).

Proof that one should not interpret schematics and work at the same time.

Yeah, I agree it's the same switch since there would otherwise have to be two SPDT switches with the Grey-Blu 3 wire jumpered across, and the manual doesn't show that. Just a convenience thing if you have a ball index relay issue.

--Edit-- oh, now I understand what I meant - I meant as far as the EB relay holding power goes - the ball index doesn't enter into the equation because the hot wire is completely removed from the EB relay by the tilt relay switch.

#138 11 months ago

Hi CactusJack
do You want to see "very confusing drawing of switches" (?) - here https://pinside.com/pinball/forum/topic/crummy-drawing-in-space-mission-schematics .

Do You want to see "three-bladed-Make-and-Make-Switch in reality in the pin" and how Williams shows it in the schematics (do not read the text - look on the bottom of the JPG "switch the way I would like to have it drawn" - then look at "red encircled switches" Spinner-Lane Switches ...) - here https://pinside.com/pinball/forum/topic/grand-prix-lr-bonus-advance-always-pulse-simultaneously#post-4312893 . Greetings Rolf

#139 11 months ago

Rolf,

Both Williams and Bally used the Arrow with "Map Coordinates" to direct you to where the rest of the switch is used. The Schematics would be WAY TOO confusing if they ran lines for every one of the connections. They had been doing it that way for many years. So, for me, it is not "Very confusing". But I can see for a person new to EM troubleshooting, it could be VERY confusing. 1960's Williams schematics are often confusing to me compared to the 1970's ones I grew up with.

I have seen many 3 leaf Make-Make switches. Like your example, often on Spinning Target (Spinnners) and Gottlieb used them on many Roll Over and Targets when the target was used to trip a bank relay AND also needed to score something. It was a way of isolating the two circuits and NOT having to double stack two normally open switches (4 blades). It probably saved a lot of extra wiring too.

Promoted items from the Pinside Marketplace
$ 399.95
825
Machine - For Sale
Victorville, CA
1,000 (OBO)
Machine - For Sale
Philipsburg, PA
$ 7.00
Electronics
APB Enterprises
$ 14.95
Playfield - Toys/Add-ons
ULEKstore
$ 142.00
Playfield - Toys/Add-ons
The MOD Couple
From: $ 42.00
Cabinet - Shooter Rods
ModFather Pinball Mods
$ 25.00
Playfield - Decals
Flashinstinct
$ 22.00
Cabinet - Sound/Speakers
ModFather Pinball Mods
£ 55.00
Lighting - Led
PinballToys
$ 7,999.00
Pinball Machine
Nitro Pinball USA
€ 27.00
Playfield - Toys/Add-ons
YOYOKOPTER MODS
From: $ 9.99
Eproms
Matt's Basement Arcade
$ 7,299.00
Pinball Machine
Classic Game Rooms
$ 48.00
Cabinet - Other
ModFather Pinball Mods
From: $ 20.00
Playfield - Toys/Add-ons
ModFather Pinball Mods
$ 6,995.00
Pinball Machine
Operation Pinball
There are 139 posts in this topic. You are on page 3 of 3.

Hey there! Got a moment?

Great to see you're enjoying Pinside! Did you know Pinside is able to run thanks to donations from our visitors? Please donate to Pinside, support the site and get anext to your username to show for it! Donate to Pinside