What is this?

Fluke Model 90 µP Microprocessor Board Tester

Showed up on e-gay recently. The description talks about in circuit
testing, but does not specify the cpu type. Wonder if it is usefull.

Any comments?

Mike

Text of auction reads:

The Fluke Model 90
     µP Board Tester is a hand-held, easy-to-operate, tester used to
diagnose faults in microprocessor-based devices. The tester is a Direct
     Memory Access (DMA) device emulator that connects to the microprocessor
in the UUT (Unit Under Test). The microprocessor does not
     have to be removed from the circuit. The tester forces the DMA and WAIT
lines on the UUT bus, taking control of the bus from the UUT's
     microprocessor. Power is supplied by either the +5 volt line at the UUT
microprocessor or by and (optional[not included]) external power
     supply. No connection is required to the UUT other than the
microprocessor clip. The Fluke 90 performs the following:

          Bus Test to determine if any bus line is stuck high or low, or
shorted to other bus lines.
          Memory Test to determine if RAM can be written and read and if ROM
contains the proper bit pattern.
          I/O Test to determine if I/O addresses can be written and read.
          QuickTrace(tm) to identify the signal name of an address, data, or
control signal line and allows the type
          of signal line to be tracked in the UUT.
          Detect selected events on the UUT bus by setting and enabling
Break-Point, Frame-Point, and
          SYNC/Trigger Interface functions.
          Loads the UUT memory over the Remote Communications Interface.
          Dumps the contents of the UUT memory to a remote terminal or
computer via the Remote Communications Interface.

> -----Original Message-----
> From: James Marous [SMTP:JMarous@midmark.com]
> Sent: Friday, January 14, 2000 12:53 PM
> To: 'TechToolsList@flippers.com'
> Subject: RE: Signature Analyzers
>
> On the subject of KK units.... I have a KK ROM tester, no documentation,
> it
> just has 2 rows of machine pin sockets on the top and inputs for the sig
> analysis connections. I always assumed is just calculates sigs on the
> ROMs,
> but I never really knew, or used it for that matter. Anyone know about
> this one?
>
> I also picked up a Bugtrap DRAM tester on Fleabay for $10, works great.
> Does everything down to 4116s... It is configurable for the timing and
> everything. Works great for me, as my current eprom burner/chip tester
> doesn't handle triple power supply parts. If you get a chance to grab
> one,
> I would definitely go for it. I think it's the Bugtrap model 8000.
>
> James
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Kev [mailto:KKlopp@EROLS.COM]
> Sent: Friday, January 14, 2000 3:20 PM
> To: TechToolsList@flippers.com
> Subject: Re: Signature Analyzers
>
>
>
>
>
> > For some dumb reason I have several of them, I have the HP 5004 and
> 5006,
> a
> > bug trap sig analyzer and a Kurz Kasch model. All are basically about
> the
> > same, at least as much as I use them. Honestly, I find I seldom use
> > signature analysis. About the only time it really comes in handy is
> working
> > on vector mathboxes. But it's nice to have it for well documented
> projects,
> > like the cinematronics boards.
> >
> > James
>
> Gosh I thought I was the only "dummy" with 3 sig analyzers in the house.
>
> I've got the Bugtrap (My personal favorite)
> Kurz Kash
> and the Cat Box.
>
> If anyone is interested in the KK box I'll sell it or trade it. I've also
> go the KK eprom copier & several modules if anyone has any need for that
> (read vintage equipment).
>
> My use of a SA?
>
> Well I was fighting enough with Bally pinball boards MPU 17 & 35 that I
> went
> thru & did some SA.
>
> I started to do Pac-Man but the buffering circuits complicates SA
> implimentation. I have used the SA on Pac-Man to catch funky 74ls161's in
> the timing section. This is a rare case where a using an O-scope the way
> I
> do (probe, see if the signal is full range & looks "normal") would not
> have
> found the faulty 74ls161, since the outputs were toggling & appeared to
> work, they just were not correct.
>
> I have unsuccefully SA a Battlezone Math box before.
>
> The SA is an okay tool, it will be more powerful the more people document
> &
> share Signatures. I'd take an O-scope of a SA any day but the SA is
> cheaper
> and depending on your focus not a bad tool.
>
> Kev
> mowerman@erols.com
> http://www.erols.com/mowerman
Received on Wed Jan 19 10:40:04 2000