Oh hell, just bought another calculator - Page 1
Forum section: electronics / general

author: tggzzz
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: June 04, 2023, 10:24:05 am
content: Ah, but what is it?  A few hints are in order...I paid roughly the same price as an HP35 cost when it was introduced. Fairly rare; there were far more HP35s produced. Older than an HP35. But is bigger than an HP35 and was in production for significantly longer.I certainly wasn't going to have it posted, so I retrieved it myself from the auction house. I've already tantalised denizens of another forum, so I'd appreciate it if they didn't spoil the fun here Probably the biggest calculator, short of an old mainframe computer, that has ever existed or will ever exist. There are several in the attached picture.

author: Phil_G
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: June 05, 2023, 03:17:08 pm
content: Note the Cray-1 prototype in the bottom-left corner...

author: artag
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: June 06, 2023, 06:32:25 pm
content: I can see a bunch of mechanical calculators there that fit the description but don't know them well enough to identify. Busicom ? Addo ?I'm curious about the tall poles dotted around the room. They look like light-poles (the coloured slice things you get on customer-operated tills and automated production machines.If you're into mechanical calculators I do have a few. I'd like to obtain one that I haven't been able to find - an Odhner accounting machine. It's a multiple-register adding machine with a typewriter carriage and a programming bar that defines which register is affected based on the location of the carriage. A mechanical spreadsheet.I spotted you at an online auction the other day but I don't recall an adding machine in it. Did you get the TDR ?

author: IanB
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: June 06, 2023, 06:39:26 pm
content: Some many years ago (circa 1980) I encountered some desktop calculators with nixie tube displays. I don't recall if they had any mechanical parts, or if they were entirely electronic. I think they were electronic.I have also encountered motorized mechanical calculators. Instead of manually turning the handle N times, there was an electric motor that did it automatically.

author: MK14
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: June 06, 2023, 06:52:10 pm
content: This thread is reminding me of the following, which almost opened up a giant black hole.

author: tggzzz
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: June 06, 2023, 10:10:24 pm
content: Don't think small, e.g. the mechanical calculators mentioned. Think bigger.Muchbigger.As for the Cray prototype, noted. But in that picture thecomputerswere using thecalculators. Seriously!

author: MK14
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: June 07, 2023, 01:11:22 am
content: Quote from: tggzzz on June 06, 2023, 10:10:24 pm140kg of desk sized, relaycomputercalculator?https://www.firstversions.com/2015/06/casio-calculator.htmlFrom about 1954 to 1959, and the picture you supplied in the opening post, seems to be 1959 ("The marble hall", Norwich union).The following link, seems to mention some of the calculators, used for calculating the premiums, over the years:https://avivaarchive.medium.com/working-out-the-premiums-calculating-machines-9d6ccdd9151e

author: artag
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: June 07, 2023, 02:13:33 am
content: Quote from: tggzzz on June 06, 2023, 10:10:24 pmSure, the computers are the men and women sitting at the tables. They have some mechanical calculators available but if those aren't the ones you mean, i guess there's some other item that used the term. Don't know what that is. The tables of paperwork ?

author: ebastler
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: June 07, 2023, 08:15:07 am
content: Quote from: tggzzz on June 06, 2023, 10:10:24 pmBrand starts with an "M", I guess... Are the models shown in your picture (and hence the one you bought) still purely electro-mechanical?

author: tggzzz
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: June 07, 2023, 08:39:20 am
content: Quote from: ebastler on June 07, 2023, 08:15:07 amNo, and no

author: tggzzz
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: June 07, 2023, 08:44:54 am
content: Quote from: MK14 on June 07, 2023, 01:11:22 amNope. But I do have a couple of component used in the world's oldest operating computer. Well worth seeing, if you get the chance! Since you are in the UK, it will be less difficult than for most of the denizens of this forum.QuoteYes indeed; the NU reference was indeed A Big Hint.But which one?Ooh, this striptease is fun

author: ebastler
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: June 07, 2023, 08:58:02 am
content: Quote from: tggzzz on June 07, 2023, 08:44:54 amYes, that's the route I took too. Which led me tohttps://avivaarchive.medium.com/working-out-the-premiums-calculating-machines-9d6ccdd9151e, where your picture is shown about halfway down the page, with the following commentary:QuoteDid they get that wrong, or are there further machines in the picture?

author: tggzzz
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: June 07, 2023, 09:07:44 am
content: Quote from: ebastler on June 07, 2023, 08:58:02 amThere are many (as in 0, 1, 2, many) other calculators in that particular picture.Don't ignore the other Big Hint I gave

author: ebastler
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: June 07, 2023, 09:31:41 am
content: If we are looking for the biggestelectronic desktopcalculator, the Anita Mk 8 might qualify. They were supposedly used at Norwich Union too, but I can't spot any in the picture?

author: tggzzz
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: June 07, 2023, 09:44:48 am
content: Quote from: ebastler on June 07, 2023, 09:31:41 amI didn't know about Anita Mk8 calculators. I think they have become my prime example of why I dislikeskeuomorphicinterfacesClearly being cryptic has a pleasing benefit: I've learned something I didn't even know I didn't know. A great example of my favourite word and concept: serendipityThanks!

author: MK14
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: June 07, 2023, 10:44:37 am
content: The Hewlett-Packard 9100A is pretty big, as well, all 40 pounds of it.https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hewlett-Packard_9100A

author: ebastler
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: June 07, 2023, 11:35:34 am
content: Quote from: MK14 on June 07, 2023, 10:44:37 amThat's cheating, there is a printer sitting on top of the calculator in the picture!

author: MK14
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: June 07, 2023, 11:54:26 am
content: Quote from: ebastler on June 07, 2023, 11:35:34 amWell, given all the so called hints, some of which I've put bold on. There perhaps are way too many mentions of HP calculators, so I chose a somewhat similar vintage one, and a pretty big one.But you are right. Including the printer, could be a step too far. But even without, it is still a big calculator.Quote from: tggzzz on June 04, 2023, 10:24:05 am

author: ebastler
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: June 07, 2023, 12:04:20 pm
content: Quote from: MK14 on June 07, 2023, 11:54:26 amInclude the HP 9101A memory expansion for a really chunky total package!https://www.hpmuseum.net/display_item.php?hw=912

author: tggzzz
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: June 07, 2023, 12:09:35 pm
content: Quote from: MK14 on June 07, 2023, 10:44:37 amI saw one of those for sale at a hamfest last year. Someone physically bigger than me was determined to buy it. Half of me thinks that was for the best.

author: MK14
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: June 07, 2023, 12:11:43 pm
content: Quote from: ebastler on June 07, 2023, 12:04:20 pmThat's the size of some of the early mini-computers, such as later PDP-11's.Yes, that probably would be cheating and/or turn the name of the device into a computer, rather than a calculator, as the extra 2.5kB (very approx), is moving into computer territory.Although, that HP 'calculator', could be called a computer, depending on ones definitions.

author: tggzzz
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: June 07, 2023, 12:12:38 pm
content: Quote from: MK14 on June 07, 2023, 11:54:26 amFar too small, yet far too heavyPeople need to look at what Ihaven'tsaid

author: MK14
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: June 07, 2023, 12:14:34 pm
content: Quote from: tggzzz on June 07, 2023, 12:09:35 pmYes, probably for the best.Although an amazing piece of technology for the time period (late 1960's), it probably would take a massive amount of work to get (and keep) it working.

author: tggzzz
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: June 07, 2023, 12:19:13 pm
content: Quote from: MK14 on June 07, 2023, 12:11:43 pmThe brass nameplate is explicit: "X calculator".HP sold the HP9845 series as calculators, so their customers' purchase requisitions wouldn't invoke the corporate immune system along the lines that computer=>IT=>special rooms/departments.

author: ebastler
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: June 07, 2023, 12:19:25 pm
content: Quote from: MK14 on June 07, 2023, 12:11:43 pmHP did advertise the 9100A as a "personal computer" in 1968, supposedly one of the first documented uses of the term:https://web.archive.org/web/20151004045031/http://archive.wired.com/wired/archive/8.12/mustread.html?pg=11http://www.hpmuseum.net/upload_htmlFile/PrintAds/Ad1968_9100A_PowerfulComputingGenie-23.jpg

author: tggzzz
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: June 07, 2023, 12:20:48 pm
content: Quote from: MK14 on June 07, 2023, 12:14:34 pmMy concern was more that it would take a massive amount of work just to get it upstairs and onto my workbench. Work in J, that is.

author: iMo
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: June 07, 2023, 01:11:43 pm
content: Would be great to see the teardown - as it is built around transistors, no chips inside (wiki)..

author: ebastler
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: June 07, 2023, 01:17:58 pm
content: If only we knewwhichcalculator tggzzz has acquired and might be planning to tear down...

author: tggzzz
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: June 07, 2023, 03:00:42 pm
content: Quote from: ebastler on June 07, 2023, 01:17:58 pmGetting it into position for use takes ~30s. Complete teardown another 30s, reassembly another 60s (a little longer to avoid damage). I tore it down while still in the auction houseCleaning: I'm trying to find a way to that safely, but accept it would probably be unwise to try.I've seen pictures of some devices up for auction where the surface looks like a RIFA in dangerous condition. In such cases, I cannot think of any solid or liquid (or gas!) that could be used without ruining it. Even so, such devices are almost certainly usable. You can get reproduction instruction books on fleabay for £10 (no, not from ArtekMedia!)Auction price? I've seen estimates from <100 to >2000 "pesos" (i.e. given that range, the currency is unimportant). The 2000pesos one looks like it was produced maybe 30% into the production run. Mine was about 70% into the production run.There aretwoon display in TNMoC; they inspired me to obtain mineCouldn't find room (or money for electricity!) for their Elliott 803, Witch, ICL 2906, though.Final hint for now... Two dimensions are often quoted, but I think the larger is a cheat. Even so, the smaller quoted dimension isfarlarger than anything mentioned by anybody in this thread

author: ebastler
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: June 07, 2023, 03:40:30 pm
content: Ahh -- I think I got it now. The RIFA reference gave it away... So we are talking purely mechanical, right? And they came stock with that angled mount, which they appear to also be sitting on in the Norwich Union picture?

author: tggzzz
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: June 07, 2023, 04:43:42 pm
content: Quote from: ebastler on June 07, 2023, 03:40:30 pmYou've got it!I wonder whether other people will fill in the details.I wonder whether >12m/40ft long will helpHence the original hint "probably the biggest calculator, short of an old mainframe computer"

author: JDubU
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: June 07, 2023, 05:16:08 pm
content: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fuller_calculatorhttps://www.tnmoc.org/slide-rules-calculators?rq=calculator

author: MK14
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: June 07, 2023, 05:24:57 pm
content: Quote from: tggzzz on June 07, 2023, 12:20:48 pmYes, that makes sense (too heavy). Also, some of the really old parts can get harder and harder to get hold of.

author: tggzzz
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: June 07, 2023, 05:45:23 pm
content: Quote from: JDubU on June 07, 2023, 05:16:08 pmYup. Too easy

author: tggzzz
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: June 07, 2023, 05:51:44 pm
content: Time for some SFW porn, split into two posts since there are 11 images.The name, logo, and serial number, 9763/~14000, made in 1949.Here's the calculator unfurled...... and ready for use ...

author: tggzzz
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: June 07, 2023, 05:58:07 pm
content: The obligatory teardown...There are three sliders which have move, to remain fixed, and not being abraded with use. That's non-trivial to guarantee! I've removed the top/inner brown slider, exposing how Fuller managed to achieve that: felt pads.Some constants that ought not to be useful ...... and some that are...There are three variantstype 1 is for insurance brokerage calculations. Hence many being seen in the previous photos of the Norwich Union marble hall.type 2 adds extra scales for sines and logs which add some precisionthe "Fuller-Bakewell" calculator incorporates suggestions made by Mr W. N. Bakewell I.C.E. that make it more useful for engineers and surveyors: cosines squares, and sines multiplied by cosinesMine is clearly a type 1, but it also has the log scale, in the form of a linear scale split across the brass finger (two more sig figs) and the rotating cylinder (two less sig figs)This is obviously a type 1.As for accuracy, as with all logarithmic scales, there is better resolution and accuracy for numbers nearer 1 than 10. Given Zipf's Law,arguablythat isn't as irritating as might be thought. For most of the scale, it is accurate to 5 sig fig, but at the high end it is more realistically 4 sig fig.Here's pi2, 9.86960

author: IanB
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: June 07, 2023, 06:09:56 pm
content: Quote from: tggzzz on June 07, 2023, 05:58:07 pmMight be amusing to ask who knows what a "Cwt." is?Possibly unfamiliar to the younger generation or anyone from the North American continent.

author: tggzzz
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: June 07, 2023, 06:37:04 pm
content: I suppose I ought to justify some of my obtuse hints...Fairly rare; there were far more HP35s produced.~14000 Fuller calculators were produced in totalOlder than an HP35.Mine is 1949But is bigger than an HP35... Probably the biggest calculator, short of an old mainframe computer, that has ever existed or will ever existThe scale is 500inches long, i.e. 41ft 8inches or 12.7m. Some people, e.g. the inventor, double those figures on the basis that a 10" slide rule has the centre slider, and so can be up to 20" long when that is extended. I think that is marketing speak from 1878....and was in production for significantly longer.Invented 1878, the HP35 instantly made it obsolete in 1973, so a ~94 year production run. HP35 eat your heart outBut I do have a couple of component used in the world's oldest operating computer.Dekatrons, as used for storage and computing in the WITCH:https://www.tnmoc.org/witchGo see it!I've seen pictures of some devices up for auction where the surface looks like a RIFA in dangerous conditionThe scale is paper underneath something, presumably resin secreted by a female insect.For example, but I've seen worse!Auction price? I've seen estimates from <100 to >2000 "pesoshttps://www.sothebys.com/en/buy/auction/2019/history-of-science-and-technology-including-fossils-minerals-and-meteorites/a-fullers-spiral-cylindrical-slide-rule-calculator

author: tggzzz
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: June 07, 2023, 06:48:27 pm
content: Quote from: IanB on June 07, 2023, 06:09:56 pmWell, there's a hint in the "C"Of course, being Americans, their "short" Cwt is smaller than our "Imperial" Cwt. That extends up to the "short ton" and "long ton".

author: IanB
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: June 07, 2023, 07:24:54 pm
content: Quote from: tggzzz on June 07, 2023, 06:48:27 pmCuriously, American custom tends not to make use of aggregate units. So for example you would see feet used exclusively for distance (no yards). Or in engineering perhaps inches, but not feet. It was a culture shock when I saw road signs saying "Exit 1000 feet" where in Britain I am used to signs like "Layby 400 yds".

author: IanB
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: June 07, 2023, 07:42:42 pm
content: On the subject of this thread, I have not heard of or seen a Fuller Calculator before today. So this thing is rather fascinating.

author: tggzzz
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: June 07, 2023, 08:43:23 pm
content: Quote from: IanB on June 07, 2023, 07:42:42 pmLong long agoin a galaxy far far awayI heard an old joke along the line of...At school and as an undergrad, I used a 10" slide rule.Doing my PhD I used a 20" slide rule.As an industrial researcher, I used a 25ft slide rule.When a professor, I used a 6" slide rule.So I've long know of their existence, but only recently bothered to investigate them.

author: SiliconWizard
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: June 07, 2023, 09:34:45 pm
content: That is vintage computing!

author: ebastler
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: June 07, 2023, 09:47:04 pm
content: Yes, I forgot to say: Thank you for the little quiz, tggzzz, and for reminding me of the Fuller calculators. I had come across them years ago, but had forgotten all about them. And, in the context of this quiz, was biased too much towards electro-mechanical or electronic devices, prompted by the more obvious contemporary calculators in the picture you had shared.It is remarkable that slide rules were still in use in parallel with those digital calculators for so long -- even in environments like the one pictured, where space and budget were obviously available to provide the digital tools of choice. But for trigonometric functions and logarithms, slide rules ruled!I am surprised that an insurance company like Norwich Union needed all that trigonometry though. Does anyone have specifics about the use cases?

author: tggzzz
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: June 07, 2023, 10:59:02 pm
content: Quote from: ebastler on June 07, 2023, 09:47:04 pmYou're welcomeIt has been fun.I enjoy jolting people's out of their unnecessarily narrow preconceptions - and enjoy being jolted myself. In that vein, you gave me a new Awful Warning example of skeuomorphic interface designI presume the insurance company used the type 1 with all the handy conversion factors, not the type 2 that was more oriented to surveying.

author: artag
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: June 08, 2023, 03:14:42 pm
content: I hadn't heard of the Fuller calculator either .. though I did ask about the ' tall poles dotted around the room.'.What I do have is an Otis King cylindrical slide rule which also has a wrapped scale, though only 66 inches. Is it fundamentally the same thing ?To be fair to HP, the 35 might have had a shorter production run but it was obsoleted by their own designers producing a successor, many times over. It was the changing manufacturing capability that caused it to be improved rather than a completely new technology replacing it.

author: tggzzz
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: June 08, 2023, 05:04:14 pm
content: Quote from: artag on June 08, 2023, 03:14:42 pmYou did indeed. And I chose not to comment. But I did hint that people should look at what I wasn't sayingQuoteIt appears to be. I did think of buying one, but bigger isbetterin this caseStrangely, I have an Otis King instruction leaflet on thin paper. Legible except for one page which has some "smears" or "pressure" marks.QuoteCounterpoint is that Fuller's concept was so remarkable that it remained in production for almost a century. Not many scientific/commercial instruments manage that.

author: IanB
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: June 08, 2023, 05:53:56 pm
content: Quote from: tggzzz on June 08, 2023, 05:04:14 pmI was in the last year at my school that was taught how to use a slide rule (and where our parents were asked to buy one as school equipment).I do recall there was a large scale demonstration slide rule for teaching with. It was about 8 ft long and a foot wide, so that the whole class could see it. I think that is a little bigger than your example here.

author: tggzzz
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: June 08, 2023, 06:05:57 pm
content: Quote from: IanB on June 08, 2023, 05:53:56 pmI too learned to use four fig tables, and I still have my school slide rule.The scale on the Fuller calculator is 500inches, i.e. i.e. 41ft 8inches or 12.7m. So the Fuller is about 5* biggerThere is the 1878 book "Spiral Slide Rule: Equivalent to a Straight Slide Rule 83 Feet 4 Inches Long, Or, a Circular Rule 13 Feet 3 Inches in Diameter" by George Fuller. I think the "83ft" is technically correctandmisleading. That's ~150 years ago: advertising puff isn't a new phenomenon

author: ebastler
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: June 08, 2023, 06:31:43 pm
content: Quote from: tggzzz on June 08, 2023, 06:05:57 pmFollowing that argument, I propose to measure the size of other computers by adding the length of all the wiring in an analog computer, or measuring the length of the torsion delay line wire in a Diehl or Monroe desktop calculator, or of all the PCB traces in a desktop PC.I think we should stick with outside dimensions, which are impressive enough for the Fuller calculator. Not sure whether the classroom demonstration slide rule counts here, since its size was not driven by the technical requirements of implementing the computing technology.

author: CatalinaWOW
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: June 08, 2023, 07:38:29 pm
content: Congratulations on your new toy. An interesting idea that I had never come across before. I was looking all over your picture for the abacus, based on your claim of an extremely long production run.

author: tggzzz
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: June 08, 2023, 08:07:50 pm
content: Quote from: ebastler on June 08, 2023, 06:31:43 pmIn the context you snipped, it is clear I was comparing the length of one slide rule with another.Apart from that, comparing two very different technologies with each other is always fraught and arguable.There is no doubt that the defining dimension of the Fuller calculator is 500 inches. What the defining dimension of a modern computer is, is a matter of some debate

author: ebastler
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: June 08, 2023, 08:26:39 pm
content: Quote from: tggzzz on June 08, 2023, 08:07:50 pmWell, in the opening post you characterized the Fuller as "probably the biggest calculator, short of an old mainframe computer, that has ever existed or will ever exist", so youwerecomparing it to calculators based on other technologies. Hence my proposal how those should be measured for a fair competition.Or the more serious suggestion to just look at the outside dimensions when comparing the size of calculators built with different technologies.

author: nfmax
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: June 08, 2023, 08:38:34 pm
content: And there was me, thinking you might have bought a Henge…

author: tggzzz
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: June 08, 2023, 08:44:35 pm
content: Quote from: CatalinaWOW on June 08, 2023, 07:38:29 pmGlad you enjoyed the misdirectionISTR hearing of competitions between someome with an abacus and someone with an electronic calculator. In some cases the abacus won decisively.

author: tggzzz
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: June 08, 2023, 09:10:51 pm
content: Quote from: nfmax on June 08, 2023, 08:38:34 pmCan't. My house is full, and my garden wouldn't be big enough for anything more than a model. Must admit I'm wondering about an electronic (c.f. mechanical) analogue computer, though. It would make a nice conversation piece in the lounge.But on the way back from picking the calculator up from the auction house, Ididwalk inside a tomb (again), see "the tallest prehistoric human-made mound in Europe" (not supposed to climb it, boo hiss), and visit the largest stone circle in the world.The latter is much more peasant than Stonehenge; while I have greatly enjoyed eating a picnic on the stones, nowadays it is an unpleasant place. And Stanton Drew circle is much nicer now. not Hetty Pegler's Tump; you have to crawl into that.

author: tggzzz
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: June 08, 2023, 09:38:50 pm
content: Quote from: ebastler on June 08, 2023, 08:26:39 pmIndeed, but that would be a cardinal sin: boringI would consider the memory inside a Monroe Epic 3000 calculator as being large, possibly even larger than the Fuller calculator.http://www.vintagecalculators.com/html/calculator_memory_technologies.htmlThere are other cylindrical slide rules, e.g.http://tinas-sliderules.me.uk/Slide%20Rules/CylindricalSlideRules.html