Page 1 of 1
For the want of a 1uF capacitor
Posted: Fri Mar 07, 2014 11:51 pm
by banedon
Hi guys
I've constructed my 6502 and am trying to test it. As part of this I want to single step the CPU (WDC 65C02S) as my oscilloscope isn't good enough to "see" 2MHz.
Now, going by the helpful guide here (
http://www.myheap.com/single-clock-cycle-circuit.html) I can do this. There's just one snag: I don't have any 1uF capacitors and won't be able to get any until late next week.
Is there any other way around this? I.e another method? I have the feeling the answer will be a resounding no, but thought I'd ask anyway

.
Re: For the want of a 1uF capacitor
Posted: Sat Mar 08, 2014 12:03 am
by GARTHWILSON
What do you have that's in the same neighborhood? Other values in the circuit can be adjusted to work with it. There's quite a bit of leeway in timings anyway. It's not critical to hit an exact number.
Re: For the want of a 1uF capacitor
Posted: Sat Mar 08, 2014 12:11 am
by banedon
What do you have that's in the same neighborhood? Other values in the circuit can be adjusted to work with it. There's quite a bit of leeway in timings anyway. It's not critical to hit an exact number.
I've got nothing near it, just the following (these are the markings):
10
22
47
101
102
221
222
472 (blue casing)
473
471K
And a ton of 100nF
Going by the value charts that I've found none of those would do unless set up in parallel - and lots of them
[EDIT] I've just found a 2.2uF electrolytic.
Re: For the want of a 1uF capacitor
Posted: Sat Mar 08, 2014 12:33 am
by GARTHWILSON
The leakage at the input of the Schmitt-trigger inverter is hopefully (and probably) low enough to replace R2 with 470K use a 100nF (which is .1uF) for C1 and get the same results. (The time constant is the same between 47K*1uF and 470K*.1uF.)
Re: For the want of a 1uF capacitor
Posted: Sat Mar 08, 2014 12:58 am
by banedon
The leakage at the input of the Schmitt-trigger inverter is hopefully (and probably) low enough to replace R2 with 470K use a 100nF (which is .1uF) for C1 and get the same results. (The time constant is the same between 47K*1uF and 470K*.1uF.)
That seems to have worked very well - thank you very much!
I'll post a few picys of the machine in my other thread

.