Rohde Schwarz R&S UPL Audio Analyzer Renovation.
That’s always a good idea to have a backup on hand.
The files are still recreated from the EEPROM when the files are not found (new hdd/format).
But still, better be safe than sorry.
I also made a backup of the diagnostic menu parameters in case i would ever need to re-enter them.
That’s always a good idea to have a backup on hand.
The files are still recreated from the EEPROM when the files are not found (new hdd/format).
But still, better be safe than sorry.
I also made a backup of the diagnostic menu parameters in case i would ever need to re-enter them.
Floppies are still OK to use for small tasks. I keep them in a tin can just to be sure.
Just to see how they cope, kept some near a tweeter (5cm) and above a woofer (15cm) and they still work fine with no disk errors.
Going to use the CF Card on the motherboard to performe a clone of the HDD, not sure how this will work.
Just to see how they cope, kept some near a tweeter (5cm) and above a woofer (15cm) and they still work fine with no disk errors.
Going to use the CF Card on the motherboard to performe a clone of the HDD, not sure how this will work.
Last edited:
I stopped bothering with cloning. The installation of dos and UPL goes fast anyway. Cal files are copied from EEPROM. So other than personal files you can backup there’s not much else to backup.
You don’t want to know how many times i did this routine in production environments where units stopped responding and after a reinstall they magically worked again. Granted the hdd was probably starting to fail at that point.
With the new motherboard you can hook up the analyzer to the network and via ftp load files from and to it. Goes much faster than floppies or even emulator for that matter.
Cheers,
Bart
Rohde Schwarz R&S UPL Audio Analyzer Renovation.
However having said that. That was mainly due to slow HDD and lack of IDE adapters and tools.
Now that i’m using CF cards, i am backing up images a lot more frequently since the process has now become extremely easy and fast (my image backup or restore takes 10 seconds).
But still it’s mainly to get the baseline of a freshly installed system, not to preserve CAL files or backups. I have those backed up separately.
Cheers,
Bart
However having said that. That was mainly due to slow HDD and lack of IDE adapters and tools.
Now that i’m using CF cards, i am backing up images a lot more frequently since the process has now become extremely easy and fast (my image backup or restore takes 10 seconds).
But still it’s mainly to get the baseline of a freshly installed system, not to preserve CAL files or backups. I have those backed up separately.
Cheers,
Bart
I have DOS 6.22 Floppies
Haven't heard those sounds for more than 15 years. Let me enjoy
That sweet floppy sound... ;-)
Enjoy!
Right, so my whole edit post failed.
HDD Smart data seems OK. Power on count is not reliable. Starts from 0 with every reboot.
HDD Read speed 2MB/s
HDD Write speed: 2MB/s
avg Read / Write speed: 0.9MB/s
avg Seek: 12.6ms
avg Access: 21.6ms
Guessing the interface between the HDD and the CPU motherboard is the main culprit.
~ ~ ~
Bart, you said there is no way to use the CF on the motherboard for UPL duties?
~ ~ ~
HDD Smart data seems OK. Power on count is not reliable. Starts from 0 with every reboot.
HDD Read speed 2MB/s
HDD Write speed: 2MB/s
avg Read / Write speed: 0.9MB/s
avg Seek: 12.6ms
avg Access: 21.6ms
Guessing the interface between the HDD and the CPU motherboard is the main culprit.
~ ~ ~
Bart, you said there is no way to use the CF on the motherboard for UPL duties?
~ ~ ~
Last edited:
Just had a quick go at windows 3.11 but it also does not seem to run the UPL out of the box and would require some tweaking.
Unfortunatley my knowledge of these OS's is far too limited.
Would love to some progress by others, especially with network working
Good luck,
Bart
þ Average Seek Time: 12.8 ms
þ Maximal Seek Time: 23.6 ms
þ Track-To-Track Seek Time: 6.0 ms
þ Average Access Time: 21.3 ms
Read (MBytes/sec.) Write (MBytes/sec.)
þ Linear Speed At Track 1: 2.0 2.0
þ Linear Speed At Track 787: 2.0 2.0
þ Average Linear Speed: 2.0 2.0
þ Min. Linear Speed: 2.0 2.0
þ Max. Linear Speed: 2.0 2.0
þ Max. Cache Read Speed: Not Determined
þ Random Read Speed: 0.9 MBytes/sec.
þ Maximal Seek Time: 23.6 ms
þ Track-To-Track Seek Time: 6.0 ms
þ Average Access Time: 21.3 ms
Read (MBytes/sec.) Write (MBytes/sec.)
þ Linear Speed At Track 1: 2.0 2.0
þ Linear Speed At Track 787: 2.0 2.0
þ Average Linear Speed: 2.0 2.0
þ Min. Linear Speed: 2.0 2.0
þ Max. Linear Speed: 2.0 2.0
þ Max. Cache Read Speed: Not Determined
þ Random Read Speed: 0.9 MBytes/sec.
I never got it to work as a boot device.
However i had suspicious CF cards at the time.
Better to try it with a good CF card.
Spent last hour reading about the HDD accessing.
At the moment I am experimenting with some DMA drivers. HDD speeds are not changed, however I got 64MB/s cache speed, from the previous NOT SUPPORTED.
Can't be sure, might be Placebo, but the FFT at 8192 seems to be faster at refreshing. And the speed which the interface loads.
At the moment I am experimenting with some DMA drivers. HDD speeds are not changed, however I got 64MB/s cache speed, from the previous NOT SUPPORTED.
Can't be sure, might be Placebo, but the FFT at 8192 seems to be faster at refreshing. And the speed which the interface loads.