I have A2MEGA nad  the same problem, i'm installing RASPIAN next to install Scripta and miner dose'nt work :/ If i use A2 software my miner is up for 3 munutes and hashrate gone down :/ I use   A2 Image Orginal (2014-05-21) user: pi / psw: innosilicon
- InnoSilicon Customized WebGUI RPI Image for A2 Miners (2014-06-18) static ip address 192.168.1.168 psw: innosilicon

And - InnoSilicon Customized WebGUI RPI Image for A2 Miners (2014-06-18) static ip address 192.168.1.168 psw: innosilicon
 on this my machine is up for 5 minutes :/

i use https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=672969.0 Overclock image for A2 Innosilicon by Emdje and my miner for firs 10 sec got 110hasrate next to still donw to 0. :/ WTf?

MinerEU please help us! We buy machnes but we can't mines!


http://zapodaj.net/d70e5a7ee9223.jpg.html

Regards

Tom on these threads you need to stick to your story. Some of these guys are already like rich and have nothing better to do than follow threads really closely.  Focus on the following Tom, then verify it for yourself if you haven't figured it out already.

IMET failed to fill the thermal via's in the asics correctly, period.  The .5 oz copper selected for all the boards (let's gain on the margins boys) charged at quick turn pricing didn't help either. Lack of filling the via's was related to either the amount used or the there lack of/or quality of solder they used as well as lack of know how. This first came from a few different pro's in the industry and was later verified to us by those that same guys which produce the damn asics after examining several of IMET's (off the line) boards which we had kept for these specific purposes. Despite the boards not working, IMET continued to run them because they lead us to believe that these boards could be fixed, because every other fucking day when we brought up "what are we doing with the bad board guys, we heard "don't worry, lets get a good line going first and then we'll get back them" bullshit bullshit. And when your dealing with angry clients, emails that make you want to just end it all, and trolls that look like fucking santa writing anti-semetic shit with your families info, your just hoping for the best at that point. After 200k had be given, the attitude completely changed and their true colors emerged. When they realized their mistake, they did not come clean with it, they proposed other bullshit costly options but mostly suggested we order brand new boards for all the pre-exisiting boards built, basically suggesting to scrap 90 miners worth of boards populated with chips which were bad boards. The few boards which were successful were boards created with a lead based solder but had other problems regarding SMT, lots of tombstones and what nut and rework charges.

We were in a desperate situation, already late and we decided to use them because they were free and promised to get everything done within three weeks. That was Feb 8th, btw. AMT trusted IMET and IMET fucked AMT. Helping AMT get their money back from IMET equals refunds.

We're suing IMET, we'll win, and we'll issue refunds, end of story.  As to when that's happening, we can't say. Legalities can take a while as you all already know. And if IMET knows what's good for them they'll put their head down, write the check and hold on to their business.

Moral of the story. Don't work with overpriced American SMT's that promise the world, get off your ass and fly to china and do it with people that sleep under their SMT's machines. No that's wrong. Moral of the story, don't accept pre-orders for a machine that doesn't exist which produces a currency out of thin air based on a swiss guy's promised deadline who's relying on a Chinese company that they had no control over.  And don't sell to clients which beg for your product over and over for three weeks straight because most likely they'll turn out to be a premeditated nut job that will cause you problems.

Several people have already gotten their miners. It still amazes that only one has come to the forum but what ever. We used an agent to ship, there were some delays in Hong Kong, most miners should be received already or within the next few days or this week.

Yes i did.  That one was not assembled at IMET.  But, mine still had a healthy extra application of thermal paste in places i've never seen it on any other board, EVER.  looked like a total hack job.  

my apologies to IMET.  you guys just did the basics, and shipped them to AMT for the slop application, etc.

anyways, it sucks to see you guys who plopped down thousands of dollars in good faith, still getting jerked around.  hopefully the hammer of justice strikes AMT very soon.

Yes the top sinks were woefully under sized. However, bet the rig you posted as running fine has the same tiny sinks, no?
Just that the final flaming nails in the coffin are the missing thermal bumps on back side of the board that are supposed to complete the thermal contact path to the main heat sink. I refer you to my previous post on this https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=569769.msg7610781#msg7610781

I have sample boards ranging from no thermal bumps at all to most all there. On average I see what is shown in the above post - most missing meaning that there is no way in hell to make decent contact with the main heat sink as the few bumps present act as jacks raising the board up from the sink. Thermal compound no matter how carefully applied (or drunkenly slathered on) will not compensate for the 8mil gap. So much for the 70% of heat flow path.

AMT was not responsible for those bumps. The CM was. If they were not explicitly called out in the BOM from AMT/Bitmine (my copy makes no mention of them nor having filled thermal vias) then either have none or all of them. Period. If you have ever worked with power devices before you *have* to had known that. Given that some/many bumps are there tells me you knew about the thermal loads the A1 has. After that 

Then there is the dpot chip substitution without regard to the core voltage divider reference circuit it controls... Ohm's Law applied to parallel resistances anyone? Frankly, aside from the legal who-did or didn't do-what points, this is all just stomping around in the rotting carcase of a long beaten to death horse.

Stan-O didn't you order a technobit designed AMT miner?

Did IMET produce those boards or just the Bitmain boards?

Electronics solder melts around 185 C (365 F), correct?

so you're actually claiming responsibility for the PCB assembly that looks like it was done by a 3 year.  Thermal paste smeared everywhere.  The guy that did it had to have been drunk, or perhaps a trained chimp.   There were also improperly soldered chips, ie.. non-functioning, and when viewed under magnification, the solder job is obviously the problem.

bold move IMET. 

Tom, why don't you refund us for your faulty hardware so we can refund our clients that want refunds.

IMET, did you manufacture this board?

The one with the burn marks?

http://i.imgur.com/wKyCMsU.jpg

aside from many/most of the backside thermal contact pads having anywhere from 25 to 50% of the thermal contact bumps not being there... Make nice jacks for pushing the board away from the sink.

Folks who still have miners unreturned can easily unbolt the heatsinks and verify this. If the bumps were such a problem to make properly then even a thin copper foil shim would have done the trick.

Just tossing this out there for general information:
http://www.edn.com/electronics-blogs/the-workbench/4421218/PCB-layout-tips-for-thermal-vias

http://circuitcalculator.com/wordpress/2006/03/12/pcb-via-calculator/

http://m.eet.com/media/1200036/XLamp_PCB_Thermal.pdf

Those are examples of standard industry practice reference items for thermal via design. Even if not explicitly specified in 'build-to-print' any CM should:
a. Knowing the thermal needs for the A1 assumed maximum thermal transfer is needed meaning; heavy-plated thermal vias at a minimum preferably filled as well, and a full complement of thermal contact bumps on the bottom of the board that are high enough to go past the gap created by green screen layer to make firm mechanical contact with the main heat sink. btw, that layer creates a 3mil air gap. If there are a few bumps but not a full complement - that gap just got increased to 8-10mil. Thermal compound is not going to make up for that...

b. Flagged the above concerns and asked their customer to verify what is needed to meet industry-standard practice for working with high-power packages. If the customer is unsure then follow Best Practice and overkill the issue.

Then there is the matter of basic Ohms law... If the value of 1 component in a divider network is changed while leaving all others the same - the result (output) from that network is vastly different. To keep the network balanced all components need to be scaled by the same percentage..

I will leave it up to the Peanut Gallery to figure how this applies to us here I will say that a power chip missing over 50% of its expected cooling path combined with getting hit (very briefly) with excessive core voltage is not long for this world... These are all items that any CM with a design team should have found in initial design review and later design change reviews and known how to address properly.

Your previous remarks, posts and comments regarding AMT, our dealings, and just about everything you discussed was a direct breach of contract based on the NDA you signed at the start of our dealings.

Threatening the "mysterious answer" of how to fix the boards for an additional payment you felt was due for a 90% failed production run, was a sleazy thing to do.

Your production is what caused our boards to fail, plain and simple.  We have the original boards and all of them suffer from one specific flaw which after more than one PCB diagnostician analyzed them each came to same conclusion - which is IMET failed to do something vital during their production process. The lack of which caused almost all the modules to fail immediately or shortly there after. Those which lasted through testing did not survive more than a few weeks to a month.

IMET If you care so much about your reputation you'll refund us so that we can refund our clients. Or we'll continue and sue you for a lot more than the refunded amount. You'll also spend about that much during these proceedings especially if we join you in the class action. Think about it.

ON A PUBLIC FORUM 

AS SOON AS IMET ISSUES US A REFUND FOR THE HUNDREDS OF MODULES WE HAVE THAT DO NOT WORK WE WILL REFUND ALL CLIENTS WISHING TO RECEIVE REFUNDS.

WE HAVE PAID IMET OVER 200,000 DOLLARS - THAT'S A LOT OF REFUNDS. 

Getting close.  We only built the PCBs and AMT did everything else.  I don't see anything wrong with the PCBs.  The problem lies in the work that AMT did, and I do have a solution to fix this problem.  Respectfully, I would give AMT the info if they paid their bill for services rendered.

No I get the point. You only built the design that you were giving, except the design was incorrect.

And you know how to change the current design to make it correct except you need to get paid for it.

Not quite.  We built to print and ONLY the PCBs.  I think this is the point that is being missed here.  We did verify that the PCBs worked before going into production.  We delivered good product to AMT, but it was only the PCBs.  The rest of the work was done by AMT so if they put the steering wheel in the trunk and the transmission in the backseat, I had no control and it is out of scope for IMET to correct these problems.   

So what you are saying is, you put the steering wheel in the trunk and the transmission in the backseat but only because that was the design that was giving to you. Looking back at it, we know the car has very well made parts and the parts are installed very well but they are installed in the wrong place.

So let me get this straight.  You had offered to AMT to fix any non-working PCBs, yet they aren't interested?

Are they supposed to fix any non-working units delivered to the customer?  How are they supposed to do this?

Talk about breach of fidiciuary duty.