Seeking schematics/plans for decimal to binary (microswitch/relay)selector/controller

[[email protected]]

Don't be silly. The client makes up their own mind. The trick is give
them the information they need to make a choice that they are happy
with at the time, and will stay happy with for some time to come.


In your opinion - as if it mattered.

One gets satisfied customers by giving them what they want, and
second guessing them by telling them that what they really need and
what you'll provide them with is the Stilton you've selected for
them instead of the Roquefort they really want isn't going to get
you many happy campers.

You don't second guess them - you offer them them Stilton and
Roquefort as alternatives to the Kraft Cheddar they learned about the
school canteen.

Or, BTW, many employment offers.

And 555 experts get job offers from all over the world?

Sure. They are less likely to come back bitching about me not telling
them about a better solution when they find out it exists. But then
again, your customers would not be all that enterprsing to start with.

---
I think the problem isn't one of their being able to determine what
they want, it more like your _not_ being able to determine what they
want and trying to force your decision of what they need down their
throats.
---

Well, you would like to think that.

---
Yes, and you certainly proved that you had no clue that the OP
_wanted_  to be able to switch 31 channels and get a decimal
representation of the hot channel decimally when you unnecessarily
elaborated on that totally useless hexadecimal implementation.
---  

I was perfectly well aware that the OP wanted to select one of 31
channels. It is less clear that they needed - or really wanted - an
eleborate, expensive and complicated decimal display of the channel
number.

Dymo labels look terrible and don't last.

The point isn't that some panel marking methods are cheaper than
others, it's that, basically, your hex "solution" won't yield the
results the OP asked for.
---

No. But it might well serve the purpose.

---
Oh, well...

If I don't go directly from schematic to PCB that's exactly how I do
my prototypes and one-offs.  Vector T-44 terminals hot-pressed into
FR-4 perfboard with 0.025" diameter holes on a 0.1" rectangular
grid.

Components are mounted on the forked side of the terminal and the
connections wire-wrapped on the other side of the board.  For
high-frequency stuff I use single or double sided copper clad
perfboard and spot-face a 0.1" diameter space around the terminals.

Works great.
---

Wire-wrapping isn't all that quick - pushing the device into the
printed circuit board doesn't take long, but making all the necessary
connections takes ages.

---
You grasp at straws, Sloman.

The client described what he wanted to achieve and presented a
couple of ways he thought would get him where he wanted to be.

Your cockamamie hex rotary switch "solution", LOL, cannot by itself
a decimal display make.
---

If the OP actually needed a decimal display - in most cases all that
is necessary is an unambiguous indication of the channel selected and
a hexadecimal number serves the purpose just as well as a decimal
number - it isn't as if the OP wants to do arithmetic with the number
displayed.

 

[John Fields]

Yes - one eye was active for close work and the other when looking
farther away so neither one went "lazy".
Apparently there was distance where both gave much the same
information and I got to use binocular vision enough that it was still
there when I finally got spectacles, despite the opthalmologists
idiotic objections to spectacles for kids.


You comfort yourself with the thought that anything you can't
understand is idiocy.

 

[[email protected]]

---
LOL, it's hardly the receiver's fault if it can't decode gibberish
sent by the transmitter.

--

If I simplified the message enough for you to comprehend it, I'd bore
the bulk of my audience, and there wouldn't be much message left ...
most of the time you really aren't part of the target audience.

 

[John Fields]

Don't be silly. The client makes up their own mind. The trick is give
them the information they need to make a choice that they are happy
with at the time, and will stay happy with for some time to come.

---
OK, the OP has all of the stuff I proposed and by now he must have
read your "contribution", so let's wait and see what he decides he
wants to do. Unfortunately, if he decides in my favor, I'm sure
you'll heap some abuse on him for making that choice since you've
already done so with that slur demeaning his .sig for no reason at
all other than to drag him down.
---

In your opinion - as if it mattered.

---
It must, since you keep replying, trying to convince me (as well as
yourself) that it doesn't.

Like saying it often enough will make it true?
---

You don't second guess them - you offer them them Stilton and
Roquefort as alternatives to the Kraft Cheddar they learned about the
school canteen.


And 555 experts get job offers from all over the world?

---
I can't speak for anyone else, and I don't get job offers, but I do
get design work from clients all over the world.

You, however, vehemently being a 555 adversary, (and certainly not
an expert) seem to have become unemployable.

Cause and effect?

Perhaps you should start brushing up on your 555 skills; you might
at least then qualify for an entry level technician position in one
of the myriad firms which has passed you by.
---

Sure. They are less likely to come back bitching about me not telling
them about a better solution when they find out it exists.

---
Like something other than that hex abortion you proposed, with that
afterthought toggle switch to get you from 15 to 31?
---

But then
again, your customers would not be all that enterprsing to start with.

---
Well, Bill, I have customers and you don't so you really don't have
much of a soapbox to be preaching from. Moreover, you don't know
who my customers are, so you're just pissing in the wind, as usual.
---

Well, you would like to think that.

---
That's exactly what I think, not what I'd "like to think."

Is English not your first language?
---

I was perfectly well aware that the OP wanted to select one of 31
channels.

---
One of 32 channels.
---

It is less clear that they needed - or really wanted - an
eleborate, expensive and complicated decimal display of the channel
number.

Here, since it seems you misunderstood it the first time around, is
the OP's post:

"I am interested in building a "selector" gadget for devices that
take jumpers to select a program, such as this game cartridge where
you have 5 jumpers to select program #0-31 (the jumpers represent
the binary number):

http://www.retroblast.com/Misc/Vectrex.php
http://www.retroblast.com/images/stories/Image/rb_archive/photos/vectrex/Vectrex_Review (4).JPG
http://www.retroblast.com/images/stories/Image/rb_archive/photos/vectrex/Vectrex_Review (12).JPG

The selector would have two 7-segment LEDs that display the
currently selected program number (0-31), and a couple pushbuttons
(+/-) that let you increase/decrease the program #. The device
translates the number into binary and turns on/off the appropriate
switches or relays which are attached to the jumpers on the device
(ie the above game cartridge).

Or I would even like to build a kind of analog to digital converter
device which has a potentiometer (for example 100k) which gets
translated into an 8-bit number (0-255) and 8 switches get
opened/closed that represent the value of the pot. Adding three
7-segment LEDs to display the current value in decimal would be cool
and then it could be used as a "selector" as well.

Does anyone know of any plans or schematics out on the Web to
construct something like these? (For now I just wire switches to the
jumpers.)

Thanks."


Notice that he spells out, rather unambiguously, that he wants a way
to generate a 5 bit binary number manually (in order to select one
of 32 channels addressed in binary) and to represent the selected
channel in decimal notation using two or three seven-segment
displays.

As for the (Digi-Key) cost of the display:

LED DISPLAY, LUMEX LDS-A414RI 1.57 3.14
DISPLAY DRIVER, TI 74HC4511E 0.80 1.60

That comes to $4.74, which I don't think will exactly break the bank
and will give the OP exactly what he asked for/wants.
---

Dymo labels look terrible and don't last.

---
So what?

They're cheap, easily replaceable, and a great deal quicker than
taking the time needed to line up press-on letters so they don't
look amateurish. Plus, once press-on letters are overspayed it's a
done deal so if you don't take care with the layout they'll look
like shit forever.

Dymo label legends look like shit to start out with, and everyone
expects them to, so there's no onus placed on anyone for that.
Plus, they're easy to read and, since you're the one who's bitching
about cost, should realize that they give a lot of bang for the
buck.
---

No. But it might well serve the purpose.

---
So what? It's not what the OP described in his wish list, so
whether it serves the purpose or not is immaterial.

After all, he's currently doing the switching with wire jumpers
which also serve the purpose, but they're not what he wants and are
only a little bit more clumsy than your offering.
---

Wire-wrapping isn't all that quick - pushing the device into the
printed circuit board doesn't take long,

---
It's not printed circuit board, it's FR-4 perfboard.

Here:

http://www.vectorelect.com/Vectorbord.htm
---

but making all the necessary connections takes ages.

---
If you don't know how to wire-wrap and you have bad vision and
don't have the right tools, that's true.

However, that's not the case here.
---

If the OP actually needed a decimal display - in most cases all that
is necessary is an unambiguous indication of the channel selected and
a hexadecimal number serves the purpose just as well as a decimal
number - it isn't as if the OP wants to do arithmetic with the number
displayed.

---
Indeed, and that's exactly what he'd have to do to in order to
decode the hex legends on the switch along with the position of the
MSB toggle switch. Clumsy, at best.

Why can't you get it through that thick goddam skull of yours that
what's important here is to give the OP what he _wants_ instead of
insisting that he be subjected to the vagaries of your determination
of his needs?

From your past (and present) rhetoric it sounds to me like you think
you're uniquely qualified to determine what everyone's needs should
be and you'd like to be the one to dole out that amount.

I can see it now...

The Sloman approved haircut, mode of dress, political ideology, and
meal.

Remind you of anyone?

 

[John Fields]

If I simplified the message enough for you to comprehend it, I'd bore
the bulk of my audience,

---
Which would be a step in the right direction.
---

and there wouldn't be much message left ...

 

[Michael A. Terrell]

If I simplified the message enough for you to comprehend it, I'd bore
the bulk of my audience, and there wouldn't be much message left ...

'Your audience' is waiting by himself in an Interstate Highway rest
room for his next gay sex partner.


--
Service to my country? Been there, Done that, and I've got my DD214 to
prove it.
Member of DAV #85.

Michael A. Terrell
Central Florida

 

[[email protected]]

Perhaps for you.

Your opinion of information you can't understand isn't exactly useful
or interesting.

Another message you obviously didn't understand

 

[[email protected]]

   'Your audience' is waiting by himself in an Interstate Highway rest
room for his next gay sex partner.

Since you've responded to the post, you are - by definition - part of
the audience, as is John Fields.

Obviously, you can speak for yourself, but you may be traducing John.

 

[John Fields]

Perhaps for you.

---
Indeed! The best part of your dismal posts is when they aspire to
boring.
---

Your opinion of information you can't understand isn't exactly useful
or interesting.

---
So you don't like constructive criticism?

No doubt because you consider yourself to be the Crown of Creation
and you think everyone should kow-tow to you no matter how far your
ridiculously inaccurate, self-serving claims of intellectual
superiority go.

 

[[email protected]]

Perhaps you would like to quote one of these "best parts"?

I've not seen any evidence that you comprehend anything more
complicated than the proposition that Texas is not a great place to
live.

On the contrary, I value it. You might try producing some sometimes,
but I wouldn't give up the day job.

No doubt because you consider yourself to be the Crown of Creation
and you think everyone should kow-tow to you no matter how far your
ridiculously inaccurate, self-serving claims of intellectual
superiority go.
---

You flatter me. I don't consider myself intellectually superior to
many people at all - I do consider myself intellectually superior to
you, but then who wouldn't. You may like to think that this claim is
inaccurate, but it is scarcely self-serving - being your intellectual
superior isn't an uncommon distinction. Even Jim Thompson could
probably manage it if he confined himself to electronics.

Possibly - you do take being a dullard to previously unplumbed depths
of dimness. You may not be quite ill-informed enough that other Texans
would go to the trouble of commenting on it, but the world outside
Texas does have the - perhaps egocentric - idea that you ought to know
more about the world than just Texas, in the same way that you ought
to know more about electronics than just plausible applications of the
555.

 

[Michael A. Terrell]

Since you've responded to the post, you are - by definition - part of
the audience, as is John Fields.

Obviously, you can speak for yourself, but you may be traducing John.

Only becasue it was crosposted to a newsgroup where I didn't have you
kill filed, but that is being take....................
--
Service to my country? Been there, Done that, and I've got my DD214 to
prove it.
Member of DAV #85.

Michael A. Terrell
Central Florida

 

[John Fields]

Perhaps you would like to quote one of these "best parts"?

---
Sure. Just look at the terminally insipid "Perhaps for you.", above.
---

I've not seen any evidence that you comprehend anything more
complicated than the proposition that Texas is not a great place to
live.

---
There are none so blind as those who will not see.
---

On the contrary, I value it. You might try producing some sometimes,
but I wouldn't give up the day job.

---
The most recent constructive criticism I offered was showing you why
your rotary hex switch - toggle switch scheme was flawed because it
didn't meet the OP's display criterion and why mine wasn't because
it did.

Your resulting tirade shows that, clearly, you rail against _any_
sort of criticism sent your way, belying the claim that you value
constructive criticism.
---

You flatter me.

---
If you think that, then my claim that you're the one with
comprehension problems seems to be borne out.
---

I don't consider myself intellectually superior to
many people at all - I do consider myself intellectually superior to
you,

---
Well, of course you do. You _have_ to in order to keep your house
of cards from collapsing around you.
---

but then who wouldn't.

---
Hmm... It's not like you could intentionally write a sentence with
two meanings, so I suspect your lack of command of the language led
you astray.

Did you mean: "But then who wouldn't consider themselves
intellectually superior to you?" or: "But then who wouldn't consider
me to be intellectually superior to you.

If the latter, I suspect your wife (knowing you as well as she must)
would fit the bill.
---

You may like to think that this claim is
inaccurate, but it is scarcely self-serving - being your intellectual
superior isn't an uncommon distinction. Even Jim Thompson could
probably manage it if he confined himself to electronics.

---
Shirley, you jest.

As far as intellect goes, Jim could easily outstrip you technically
with his brain tied behind his back and, politically, most any peon
could bring your stupid liberal philosophism to its knees.
---

Possibly - you do take being a dullard to previously unplumbed depths
of dimness.

 

[[email protected]]

---
I can't speak for anyone else, and I don't get job offers, but I do
get design work from clients all over the world.

You, however, vehemently being a 555 adversary, (and certainly not
an expert) seem to have become unemployable.  

Cause and effect?

Probably not - the 555 isn't being designed into new products these
days, outside the bizarre niche market which you exploit.

Perhaps you should start brushing up on your 555 skills; you might
at least then qualify for an entry level technician position in one
of the myriad firms which has passed you by.

I'm inclined to agree that skill in using the 555 would be evidence of
the kind of hobby interest in electronics that one would look for in
candidates for an
entry level technician position. I'm a little too old and a little too
over-qualified to be a candidate for this kind of job, as you'd know
if you had much experience of working in companies big enough to hire
wet-behind-the-ears technicians.


Is it yours? The implication of "you would like to think that" is not
that you are thinking something other than you claim, but rather that
your opinion is one that suits you, with a strong suggestion that a
more objective observer would have a different opinion.

A similar phrase was famously used by Mandy Rice-Davies during the
Profumo scandal in the U.K. in 1963 and variants are often presented
as quotations of what she said.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mandy_Rice-Davies

As an intellectually challenged speaker of a restricted American
dialect of English you might be forgiven for failing to understand
what was meant

<snip>

 

[John Fields]

Probably not - the 555 isn't being designed into new products these
days, outside the bizarre niche market which you exploit.

---
You mean USENET?
---

I'm inclined to agree that skill in using the 555 would be evidence of
the kind of hobby interest in electronics that one would look for in
candidates for an
entry level technician position. I'm a little too old and a little too
over-qualified to be a candidate for this kind of job, as you'd know
if you had much experience of working in companies big enough to hire
wet-behind-the-ears technicians.

---
As I recall, one fairly large company I used to work for,
Racal-Milgo, hired older technicians along with young ones, so your
assumptions are hardly universally correct.
---

Is it yours? The implication of "you would like to think that" is not
that you are thinking something other than you claim, but rather that
your opinion is one that suits you, with a strong suggestion that a
more objective observer would have a different opinion.

---
LOL, by "a more objective observer" surely you mean someone who
would side with you.
---

A similar phrase was famously used by Mandy Rice-Davies during the
Profumo scandal in the U.K. in 1963 and variants are often presented
as quotations of what she said.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mandy_Rice-Davies

 

[[email protected]]

Substantive dialogue? Now that I've persuaded you to buy yourself a
mail-order dictionary, I think I'll bow out.

 

[John Fields]

Substantive dialogue? Now that I've persuaded you to buy yourself a
mail-order dictionary, I think I'll bow out.

---
OK, but just make sure that you exit bowed and walking backwards and
that you don't turn around until you're clear of the building.

As for the lexicon, it's Webster's college dictionary, ISBN
0-679-40110-5 : ISBN 0-679-40110-8 which, BTW, you had nothing to do
with with my purchasing.

If you'd like to interact with those of us who know how to use
American English effectively, I suggest you buy a copy of the
dictionary and learn the nuances of the language.

 

[[email protected]]

---
OK, but just make sure that you exit bowed and walking backwards and
that you don't turn around until you're clear of the building.

As for the lexicon, it's Webster's college dictionary, ISBN
0-679-40110-5 : ISBN 0-679-40110-8 which, BTW, you had nothing to do
with with my purchasing.
Sure.

If you'd like to interact with those of us who know how to use
American English effectively, I suggest you buy a copy of the
dictionary  and learn the nuances of the  language.

Since there is a Complete Oxford Dictionary in my wife's study
(admittedly the microprint version) that would be a little redundant.
You should keep in mind that Noah Webster couldn't spell all that well

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Noah_Webster

which he covered by claiming that his errors were more "American" than
the correct spellings. Your ancestors bought the story and you have
been spelling like yokels ever since. That - of itself - doesn't make
you communications unintelligible. The Elizabethans were prone to
idiosyncratic spelling which didn't stop Shakespeare (or whoever
actually wrote his plays) communicating very effectively, even though
he never signed his own name the same way twice, but social
conventions have changed since then ...

 

[John Fields]

Since there is a Complete Oxford Dictionary in my wife's study
(admittedly the microprint version) that would be a little redundant.

---
Not really. There _are_ differences between your English and my
English, you know.
---

You should keep in mind that Noah Webster couldn't spell all that well

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Noah_Webster

which he covered by claiming that his errors were more "American" than
the correct spellings.

---
Hmm...

It seems you have trouble comprehending American English since,
according to your cite, the changes weren't errors, they were
deliberate efforts made (by a brilliant man, BTW) to clean up the
baroque language we brought with us from England.
---

Your ancestors bought the story and you have
been spelling like yokels ever since.

 

[[email protected]]

---
Not really.  There _are_ differences between your English and my
English, you know.
---


---
Hmm...

It seems you have trouble comprehending American English since,
according to your cite, the changes weren't errors, they were
deliberate efforts made (by a brilliant man, BTW) to clean up the
baroque language we brought with us from England.
---

They would say that, wouldn't they. English spelling is a mess - it
embodies six sets of different rules for representing sounds with
alphabetic characters - and Noah Webster's heart could have been in
the right place when he started tidying up English spelling, but he
ended up changing the spelling of very few words, so American spelling
is just as much of mess as English spelling, albeit a slightly
different mess. If he'd managed to impose a single consistent set of
rules he would have qualified as brilliant - as it is all he did - and
all he probably intended to do - was to make it difficult for U.K.
publishers to sell their dictionaries in the U.S.A.

Sure, but it's still true ...

 

[John Fields]

They would say that, wouldn't they. English spelling is a mess - it
embodies six sets of different rules for representing sounds with
alphabetic characters - and Noah Webster's heart could have been in
the right place when he started tidying up English spelling, but he
ended up changing the spelling of very few words, so American spelling
is just as much of mess as English spelling, albeit a slightly
different mess.

---
Slightly less of a mess, I'd say, since we're not saddled with
those 'ou's and 're's which are really pronounced the way we spell
them.
---

If he'd managed to impose a single consistent set of
rules he would have qualified as brilliant - as it is all he did - and
all he probably intended to do - was to make it difficult for U.K.
publishers to sell their dictionaries in the U.S.A.

---
Well, according to your cite, his dictionary included words which
originated here and weren't included in any English English
dictionary. There are also words which we use differently from you,
like 'bonnet', 'hood', and 'trunk', so using one of your
dictionaries would just have been confusing and rather limiting as
our version of English evolved.
---

Sure, but it's still true ...

---
Well, Bill, according to you, America is nothing _but_ yokels, so
I'm sure you'll understand that I take everything you say with more
than just a grain of salt.

Curiously, even though you also profess great disdain for the
Republic of Texas, your wife took her doctorate here, at the
University of Texas.

Surprising, to say the least, when there must be so many "better"
schools around.