Firmware/parameters/counter storage

Collapse
X
 
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
  • John Kaufmann
    Trusted Tech
    Site Contributor
    100+ Posts
    • Sep 2013
    • 100

    Firmware/parameters/counter storage

    Are BizHub operating firmware, adjustment parameters and component life counts all stored in the same Service EEPROM (NVRAM)? [If it matters to the answer, the question is practically directed to the C652/C552/C452/C360/C280/C220 generation, but I think this kind of architectural issue is probably a constant across the BizHub line.]
  • emujo
    Field Supervisor
    2,500+ Posts
    • Jun 2009
    • 3009

    #2
    Re: Firmware/parameters/counter storage

    storage place is the same, just the name of the device is different...used to be NVRAM, now it's the SSD board. Emujo
    If you don't see your question answered in the forum, please don't think it's OK to PM me for a personal reply...I do not give out firmware and/or manuals.

    Comment

    • John Kaufmann
      Trusted Tech
      Site Contributor
      100+ Posts
      • Sep 2013
      • 100

      #3
      Re: Firmware/parameters/counter storage

      Originally posted by emujo
      storage place is the same, just the name of the device is different...used to be NVRAM, now it's the SSD board.
      Thanks. Yes, for the series in question it's called NVRAM (in the Service manual), or Service EEPROM in the Theory of Operations manual.
      The question was whether the same chips are used for all three functions: Operating firmware, parameter storage and counter storage.

      The question arose when I had to move a finisher (FS-527 with SD-509 saddle stitcher) from C280 to a C360, which left the saddle stitch adjustment parameters (registration, staple and fold positions) on the C280, and needing to be transferred to the C360. That, in turn, got me to thinking about where those parameters are physically stored, as well as the other storage requirements, for firmware and life counters.

      For the component life counters, in particular, those EEPROM chips don't seem to make sense, because they need to be block-written, as opposed to word-at-a-time Random Access Memory - so those EEPROM chips don't seem to be good candidates for constant updates. Do you know anything about that, or where I could learn more?

      I appreciate your reply,
      John

      Comment

      Working...