Replacement cases

[flashjazzcat]

I would have picked 'Identical to original in every respect but moulded using modern, non-yellowing plastic compounds' were the option available.

[Mathy]

Hello Tickled_Pink

 

5 hours ago, Tickled_Pink said:

If the shield was necessary, rather than have it attached to the motherboard in some way, would it make any difference if it was actually attached to the inside of the case? That would provide enough clearance for add-ons, or would there be some kind of signal leakage because it wouldn't fully shroud the components?

 

Would be nice if it would be possible to somehow spray paint the "shield" to the inside of the case.  That way the shield would be as big as the case and not be in the way of anything.

 

Sincerely

 

Mathy

 

 

 

[_The Doctor__]

it was not uncommon to have metallic mesh that was adhered with a conductive paint of sorts inside some cabinets etc. not unlike fiberglass layering...

[+CharlieChaplin]

I need some 1400XL and 1450XLD replacement cases.

.

.

.

Okay, I do not own 1400XL or 1450XLD, but those cases would still be nice.

(And maybe some 1600XL, 1850XLD cases too.)

[Vyvyan B.]

  

17 minutes ago, _The Doctor__ said:

it was not uncommon to have metallic mesh that was adhered with a conductive paint of sorts inside some cabinets etc. not unlike fiberglass layering...

 

Faraday tape:

Edited January 19, 2023 by Vyvyan B.

[_The Doctor__]

Yep, just like in my other post in the speaker thread, but you can buy bulk rolls, sheets of it or real metal mesh, and adhere that, it won't fall in and cause shorts or spitzen sparks when using the stiff mesh type.

 

Edited January 19, 2023 by _The Doctor__

[+mytek]

18 hours ago, flashjazzcat said:

You'd be surprised. Not only MyIDE, but I can specifically remember the behaviour of the first generation SIDE cartridge changing (i.e. improving when it came to IO errors with certain CF cards) when the bottom shield was re-attached to the machine. This was way back in 2011 or so, of course. Inexpertly, I assume that since the shield is attached to GND, it improved grounding in some way and thus influenced signal level transitions, but the person who recommended I reattach the shield in the instance I recall (Candle) would doubtless be able to explain it better.

Interesting, never knew that, so I stand corrected in part. Although I did specifically mention only the top shield would or could be left off. However I am surprised that the bottom shield would make a difference to the actual operation of the system. If it does in some situations, then I feel your observation about it possibly improving the ground path might be more the reason than anything to do with shielding the device from outside interference. if you think about it, there's so much stuff in close proximity that is being switched at bus speed, and enclosing all of it under a common RF shield really doesn't seem like it would make matters better. In most cases the RF shielding is there for FCC concerns, and to stop the computer from interfering with stuff other than the computer.

 

18 hours ago, Tickled_Pink said:

If the shield was necessary, rather than have it attached to the motherboard in some way, would it make any difference if it was actually attached to the inside of the case? That would provide enough clearance for add-ons, or would there be some kind of signal leakage because it wouldn't fully shroud the components?

There is a paint that can act as an RF shield, which I've seen sprayed inside plastic enclosures (my Atari SC1224 was done like that). Not sure what it's called, but it's usually a reddish-brown color. So yes it appears perfectly legitimate to have shielding directly on the inside surface of the enclosure

 

Modern Silver Conductive Paint