If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
New HDD, has corrupted Data - AGAIN
Ok, As most of you know, I had a partition go bad on one of my drives
and I lost much of the data on it, because I did not have a current backup. I got rid of that hard drive, even after a re-format showed it to be usable and not have bad sectors. This is an old IBM brand computer from about 2001. which originally came with Windows 2000. I've upgraded this machine many times and have used it for years. I do have Win2000 dual bootable on it, but 95% of the time I boot and use Win98se. (I have this crossposted to the XP group because of the lack of activity on the Win98 group). Anyhow, after that partition got damaged, I unplugged that second hard drive (Slave drive) and just used the first drive (bootable one). The first drive is a 120gb with four partitions. The second drive was also a 120gb with three partitions. The partition that went bad, was the G: partition (first partition on second HDD). I have not had any problems with the first HDD at all. After removing that defective second HDD, I put it aside hoping to recover data from it, and I plugged a 160gb HDD into the second IDE connector and partitioned it. It did not take long for that second drive to give me error messsages showing data corruption. I did not have much on that drive, so I just copied it to space on the first HDD. I did however, suspect that was because I know that Win98 does not allow drives larger than 120gb (actually 132gb). I bought another 120gb drive, and just recently installed it. I had not yet put my original data back on it, nor my rebuilt data from G: (which I all have on en external USB drive). This new drive was partitioned into three partitions again. (G: H: I. The G: pattition was still empty. The H: partition I was using for downloading, and contained about 25 downloads, mostly just small .JPG files and a few .PDF files. The I: partition contained a copy of my Agent newsreader which I copied there, as a backup, while I was changing some of Agent's settings. Yesterday I was defragging the first drive's partitions, when I decided to defrag the H: partition, since I had moved around some of the downloaded files. DEFRAG told me this partition had errors and I needed to run Scandisk. Scandisk reported crosslinked files between the DOWNLOAD folder and the RECYCLED folder. (Note, I DO NOT use the Recycled folder, I have it set to immediately delete files. I ran NORTON DISK DOCTOR (rather than Scandisk) to fix this, and it did fix it, but then said that the RECYCLED folder existed but had no space on the HDD. I could not delete the Recycled folder. Since I had already copied all my downloads to another place (as a backup), I just reformatted that H: partition. For the heck of it, I ran DEFRAG on the I: partition (which only contained a backup of my AGENT folder. -Once again, I got a notice to run Scandisk, which showed duplicates of ALL these files in the RECYCLED folder. And said it contained crosslinked files. Since I did not need that backup of Agent anymore, I just reformatted that partition too. Why is this second HDD getting all corrupted? This is a new drive, and I also replaced the IDE cable with a new one (with 80 wires, rather than the old one that had 40 wires). I'm starting to wonder if the motherboard itself is failing (or at least the built in IDE board portion of it). I do have the drive jumpers set properly, to MASTER on the first HDD and to SLAVE on the second drive. I have run two HDDs on this computer for years with no problems. Now it seems I can not run a second SLAVE drive. Any ideas what might be causing this? |
Ads |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
New HDD, has corrupted Data - AGAIN
Flaky cable ? Replace.
Flaky connector on the controller ? Switch to a different port. Noisy power supply ? Replace. Have another drive port ? Then switch. Overheating ? Fan not getting air over this drive ? Bad Karma ? |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
New HDD, has corrupted Data - AGAIN
On Sat, 16 Dec 2017 12:50:51 -0800, FreeMan wrote:
Flaky cable ? Replace. I just did... Flaky connector on the controller ? Switch to a different port. If this was the case, I dont think the first drive would work either. Noisy power supply ? Replace. ????? Have another drive port ? Then switch. That is where the CD drive is plugged in. Overheating ? Fan not getting air over this drive ? Drive is not even in the case, it's outside of it Bad Karma ? I dont believe in this sort of thing. One thing I did notice. The jumper on the First drive is set to CS (cable select), not to Master (Master uses NO jumper). I'm wondering if the second drive should also be set to CS, instead of SLAVE. Or maybe I should use the actual Master and Slave jumpers??? I never understood how that CS works, or why it's even an option. Older drives never had that setting. Maybe it's just anoither way to **** things up... It kind of seems senseless anyhow. I know the second drive comes first on the cable, but the plug itself is the same wiring. How the hell can the computer KNOW which drive is which. The only difference is about 5" more length to the wires. |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
New HDD, has corrupted Data - AGAIN
wrote:
Ok, As most of you know, I had a partition go bad on one of my drives and I lost much of the data on it, because I did not have a current backup. I got rid of that hard drive, even after a re-format showed it to be usable and not have bad sectors. This is an old IBM brand computer from about 2001. which originally came with Windows 2000. I've upgraded this machine many times and have used it for years. I do have Win2000 dual bootable on it, but 95% of the time I boot and use Win98se. (I have this crossposted to the XP group because of the lack of activity on the Win98 group). Anyhow, after that partition got damaged, I unplugged that second hard drive (Slave drive) and just used the first drive (bootable one). The first drive is a 120gb with four partitions. The second drive was also a 120gb with three partitions. The partition that went bad, was the G: partition (first partition on second HDD). I have not had any problems with the first HDD at all. After removing that defective second HDD, I put it aside hoping to recover data from it, and I plugged a 160gb HDD into the second IDE connector and partitioned it. It did not take long for that second drive to give me error messsages showing data corruption. I did not have much on that drive, so I just copied it to space on the first HDD. I did however, suspect that was because I know that Win98 does not allow drives larger than 120gb (actually 132gb). I bought another 120gb drive, and just recently installed it. I had not yet put my original data back on it, nor my rebuilt data from G: (which I all have on en external USB drive). This new drive was partitioned into three partitions again. (G: H: I. The G: pattition was still empty. The H: partition I was using for downloading, and contained about 25 downloads, mostly just small .JPG files and a few .PDF files. The I: partition contained a copy of my Agent newsreader which I copied there, as a backup, while I was changing some of Agent's settings. Yesterday I was defragging the first drive's partitions, when I decided to defrag the H: partition, since I had moved around some of the downloaded files. DEFRAG told me this partition had errors and I needed to run Scandisk. Scandisk reported crosslinked files between the DOWNLOAD folder and the RECYCLED folder. (Note, I DO NOT use the Recycled folder, I have it set to immediately delete files. I ran NORTON DISK DOCTOR (rather than Scandisk) to fix this, and it did fix it, but then said that the RECYCLED folder existed but had no space on the HDD. I could not delete the Recycled folder. Since I had already copied all my downloads to another place (as a backup), I just reformatted that H: partition. For the heck of it, I ran DEFRAG on the I: partition (which only contained a backup of my AGENT folder. -Once again, I got a notice to run Scandisk, which showed duplicates of ALL these files in the RECYCLED folder. And said it contained crosslinked files. Since I did not need that backup of Agent anymore, I just reformatted that partition too. Why is this second HDD getting all corrupted? This is a new drive, and I also replaced the IDE cable with a new one (with 80 wires, rather than the old one that had 40 wires). I'm starting to wonder if the motherboard itself is failing (or at least the built in IDE board portion of it). I do have the drive jumpers set properly, to MASTER on the first HDD and to SLAVE on the second drive. I have run two HDDs on this computer for years with no problems. Now it seems I can not run a second SLAVE drive. Any ideas what might be causing this? When you got the new 120GB drive (the one with G,H,I on it), did you clean if off after connecting it ? At least on WinXP, you have "diskpart" command. Which runs from an Administrator group account. You can select a disk, then issue a command of "clean all", which overwrites every sector. A second way to clean a new disk, is to use "dd". http://www.chrysocome.net/dd dd --list # Gives details about your disks, and # hints at the labels to use dd --list 2 list_of_disks.txt # Record in a text file, the details # of your disks. The program writes to # STDERR, which is FID number 2 of a # command line program. (200KB or so) http://www.chrysocome.net/downloads/dd-0.6beta3.zip Once you have the size information for the device, you craft a command for it. Let's take my smallest drive as sample material for this. In Disk Management, my disks go 0,1,2. The third disk is 2, and the identifier here is also "2". I confirm, by comparing the sizes of disks I see in disk management, with the disk numbers and sizes here, that I'm absolutely sure about what identifier to use for the command. If you make a mistake, you can do a lot of damage with "dd.exe". It doesn't ask you to confirm anything, it doesn't warn you in any way about what you're going to be doing. \\?\Device\Harddisk2\Partition0 --- Partition 0 is the pointer to link to \\?\Device\Harddisk2\DR2 the entire disk. Fixed hard disk media. Block size = 512 size is 500107862016 bytes --- The size of the entire disk \\?\Device\Harddisk2\Partition1 link to \\?\Device\HarddiskVolume1 Fixed hard disk media. Block size = 512 size is 20974431744 bytes 19.53GB partition \\?\Device\Harddisk2\Partition2 link to \\?\Device\HarddiskVolume2 Fixed hard disk media. Block size = 512 size is 14435366400 bytes 13.44GB partition \\?\Device\Harddisk2\Partition3 link to \\?\Device\HarddiskVolume3 Fixed hard disk media. Block size = 512 size is 44794874880 bytes 41.72GB partition \\?\Device\Harddisk2\Partition4 link to \\?\Device\HarddiskVolume4 Fixed hard disk media. Block size = 512 size is 419900544000 bytes 391.06GB partition The size of the disk, can be factored by small integers. From memory, I happen to remember a "convenient" size for this disk is 221184 byte commands. 221184 / 512 = 432 sectors (an evenly divisible sector-related size) (256KB is a ballpark target for a size, on an older HDD) (Setting the size to 512 bytes only, makes it slooow.) 500107862016 / 221184 = 2261049 chunks So the number does divide evenly into the size of the disk as well. (I use the Linux program factor.exe to factor the number and figure out what a reasonable size might be.) OK, so now comes the fun part. I want to do two things: 1) Remove any existing data. 2) "Probe" the disk, doing realistic write operations. If there is something wrong with the geometry of the disk, there is an HPA or DCO, there is a disturbance in the force, I want the command to detect something is wrong. In an Administrator command prompt, I can try dd if=/dev/zero of=\\?\Device\Harddisk2\Partition0 bs=221184 Now, normally the command would have "count=2261049" to make the command do a fixed amount of writing. However, we want the command to keep writing, until it runs out of disk drive. If we do it this way dd if=/dev/zero of=\\?\Device\Harddisk2\Partition0 bs=221184 then after a couple hours, the command stops and spits out a couple lines. We hope the two lines are exactly 2261049, and the command has figured this out the hard way, by writing each sector. If the command reports some other number of completed chunks, that means there is an "issue" with the setup. The value of the numbers printed out, will hint at what the issue is. Is it the 137GB disk limit ? Is it a 64GB disk limit ? What limit did we hit ? Or, did the disk pass, and we wrote exactly 2261049 chunks of 221184 bytes each ? Your drive is smaller than mine, and you will have a different set of numbers. You'll have to work out a value for the blocksize. If you need help, just paste the same sort of section that I did, into a post, and I can cook up a command for you. The dd.exe program only has one bug. If you erase USB sticks with the program, the program does not successfully detect the end of a USB key. Thus, you cannot use this sort of "probing" command with a USB stick... dd if=/dev/zero of=\\?\Device\Harddisk2\Partition0 bs=221184 Instead, with a USB stick, you have to write a precise quantity of bytes, using the count field too. dd if=/dev/zero of=\\?\Device\Harddisk2\Partition0 bs=221184 count=2261049 That way, it doesn't do anything disconcerting, like "write past the end" of the USB stick. That kinda scared me, the first time it happened. Anyway, that's a little test case I use occasionally, when surpassing canonical capacity limits on computers. I used to test disk capacity by copying files over and over again, but that gets really old fast. Having a command to use up all the bytes, is a lot simpler. Paul |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
New HDD, has corrupted Data - AGAIN
|
#6
|
|||
|
|||
New HDD, has corrupted Data - AGAIN
On Sun, 17 Dec 2017 06:57:37 +0000, "J. P. Gilliver (John)"
wrote: In message , writes: On Sat, 16 Dec 2017 12:50:51 -0800, FreeMan wrote: [] Noisy power supply ? Replace. ????? I think he meant electrically noisy. Some power supplies don't provide as smooth a 5V and 12V as you might hope - spikes or dips. Can in theory make drives (and anything else) malfunction. _Probably_ not your cause; difficult to confirm without an oscilloscope. (If you have a known good power supply of sufficient capacity, you can always try it.) Have another drive port ? Then switch. That is where the CD drive is plugged in. Overheating ? Fan not getting air over this drive ? Drive is not even in the case, it's outside of it Does it run warm at all? Both drives get slightly warm. That's just normal. I have not mounted a hard drive inside the case for at least 15 years.I put a large very oversized power supply in this case, so the cover wont fit anyhow. I like having the drives where I can easily swap them. The only drives that are mounted in the case are the floppy and CD drives. Bad Karma ? I dont believe in this sort of thing. One thing I did notice. The jumper on the First drive is set to CS (cable select), not to Master (Master uses NO jumper). I'm wondering if the second drive should also be set to CS, instead of SLAVE. Or maybe I should use the actual Master and Slave jumpers??? Have you still got what used to be the other drive (IIRR it was a CD drive that failed) to see how that is jumpered? Anyway, if your first drive is set to CS, and you have a CS cable, then it sounds like the second one should be too. Can you see any setting in the BIOS that indicates which selection method it is using? I've personally never had a machine that used other than master and slave jumpers. Yep, it looks like the old drive was set to SLAVE. However, I just changed the new one to CS and copied a bunch of stuff to it from my first drive. Then I deleted some stuff and copied a whole bunch of small clipart pics to it, and then deleted some of them, and after that I copied a huge ISO file to it, which is almost 1gb in size. After all of that, I defragged that drive with no problem. It appears that it needs to be set to CS. Maybe that was the whole problem. I'll copy more stuff to it and delete other stuff and see if it keeps working properly now. So far, so good! I ma tempted to try the actual Master and Slave settings with the jumpers and see if that works. I dont know if one way is better than the other, or not? Does anyone know which jumper setting is the best? I never understood how that CS works, or why it's even an option. Older drives never had that setting. Maybe it's just anoither way to **** things up... It kind of seems senseless anyhow. I know the second drive comes first on the cable, but the plug itself is the same wiring. How the hell can the computer KNOW which drive is which. The only difference is about 5" more length to the wires. If the cable truly has the same connections on all three connectors, then I can't see how it's selecting either. I know floppy drive cables had a twist in the cable. Yep, floppy cables do have a twist, but not these IDE Hard drive cables. So how that CS works is beyond my comprehension. I do know that for awhile I had the Master drive on the first connector and Slave on the last connector. THAT IS WRONG, but it was that way for a year or more and worked fine. Maybe it dont much matter which cable comes first, but according to several articles, the last connector goes to the first drive (which seems backwards). |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
New HDD, has corrupted Data - AGAIN
On Sat, 16 Dec 2017 22:38:48 -0500, Paul wrote:
When you got the new 120GB drive (the one with G,H,I on it), did you clean if off after connecting it ? No, I just plugged it in, used Partition Magic to partition it, and formatted them (P.M. does the formatting too). At least on WinXP, you have "diskpart" command. Which runs from an Administrator group account. You can select a disk, then issue a command of "clean all", which overwrites every sector. Since this drive is running Win98, I dont think I have any of that stuff. What is the point of cleaning it? It should be blank, and if not, this is not a secret government operation containing all the codes to launch the nukes worldwide.... About the only controversial or secret stuff might be a few pics of cows with their tits showing, and a pic of God smoking some whacky weed.... Besides that, I've probably re-formatted every partition at least 4 times now, because of these problems. If that didn't clean the drives, what will.... |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
New HDD, has corrupted Data - AGAIN
|
#10
|
|||
|
|||
New HDD, has corrupted Data - AGAIN
J. P. Gilliver (John) wrote:
No, as the article explains, if you only have one drive, and it was connected to the middle connector, you'd have an unterminated stub of cable, which isn't good electrically (reflections and so on). Apparently for the 40 as opposed to 80 cables that _was_ the case, as they just left out line 28 to the second connector (i. e. master was on the middle connector). I like to draw pictures for people. For a single IDE drive, it *always* goes on the end, like this. Mobo X --------------+--------+ | | Master Cable_Select (if 80 wire, CS is allowed) When you add a second drive, it can be like this. Or, you can run CS on both drives, if you are using an 80 wire cable (with that twist in it). I didn't want to junk up the diagram, by adding CS to the table for both drives. Mobo X --------------+--------+ | | Slave Master Master with Slave (some brands have a distinction on the jumpers) Do *not* do this, as the end of the cable constitutes a stub and causes excess reflections and corrupted data. Mobo X --------------+--------+ | | Oopsy ULooz Even in the best of circumstances, the signals on that cable look horrible. The signals look more horrible in that last case. One of the things that SATA does, is banish those bad design ideas... to the pit. With point to point SATA, there are no more simulation nightmares for engineers to look at. Someone (of course) can still make a SATA cable out-of-spec, but the field reports seem to be pretty good. Almost as if most of the rolls of raw cables come from one cable plant, and that helps keep the process "honest". You should not bend a SATA cable until it kinks, as that causes unpredictable results to your data. You could get away with it, or not. Don't crush the excess SATA cable and tightly wrap duct tape around it. Bad. If you have too much SATA cable, buy a shorter one from the store and try again. HTH, Paul |
#11
|
|||
|
|||
New HDD, has corrupted Data - AGAIN
On Sun, 17 Dec 2017 13:01:49 +0000, "J. P. Gilliver (John)"
wrote: In message , writes: On Sun, 17 Dec 2017 06:57:37 +0000, "J. P. Gilliver (John)" wrote: [] Yep, it looks like the old drive was set to SLAVE. However, I just changed the new one to CS and copied a bunch of stuff to it from my first drive. Then I deleted some stuff and copied a whole bunch of small clipart pics to it, and then deleted some of them, and after that I copied a huge ISO file to it, which is almost 1gb in size. After all of that, I defragged that drive with no problem. It appears that it needs to be set to CS. Maybe that was the whole problem. I'll copy more stuff to it and delete other stuff and see if it keeps working properly now. So far, so good! I hesitate to ask, but when you say "the old drive" above, do you mean the CD drive that failed years ago, or do you mean the HD-that-was-G/H/I whose failure started this whole saga? If the latter, I wonder if setting that to CS might have cured the original problem )-:! There is no CD drive involved in any of this. In fact the CD drive in this computer died years ago. I really dont have any need for one on my Win98 machine. I have the Win98 install files right on the HDD. I dont play games or anything that needs a CD. I do have a CD player on my XP machine, but rarely use it. But I would need it to reinstall XP, and once and awhile I copy a music CD and turn it into MP3 songs for my MP3 player. If I want to listen to CDs, I have a regular CD player on my stereo. Anyhow, I was referring to my old 2nd drive / Slave (G: H: I. I ma tempted to try the actual Master and Slave settings with the jumpers and see if that works. I dont know if one way is better than the other, or not? Does anyone know which jumper setting is the best? Does anyone know whether using master/slave jumpering with a cable on which CS works might cause problems? I never understood how that CS works, or why it's even an option. Older [] If the cable truly has the same connections on all three connectors, then I can't see how it's selecting either. I know floppy drive cables had a twist in the cable. Yep, floppy cables do have a twist, but not these IDE Hard drive cables. So how that CS works is beyond my comprehension. I do know that for Maybe there's an internal break in one line - so the cable from the mobo to the first connector is 80 way, but between them is 79 or 78 way? (I take it there's nothing obvious like one of the connectors having one of its holes blanked.) This is a brand new cable. Of course anything can be defective. Ah, I've just looked: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parallel_ATA#Cable_select says it is done using pin 28 - often just by omitting the contact from the middle (slave, grey) connector, so you'd have to look extremely hard to see it! It also says line 28 is only used so the drives know which they are, not for control by the mobo, so if the drives are jumpered as master and slave anyway, it is ignored (and that doesn't have to be master at the end). So you can try it if you want. When the controller says "master drive, please respond", both drives receive the command, but only one of them responds - either because it is jumpered as master, or because both are jumpered as CS and one of them knows it is master. (Apparently also "drive 0" and "drive 1" - apparently "master" and "slave" don't actually appear in the specification.) Which does suggest that having one drive "hard jumpered" and the other as CS _could_ cause problems, depending on position on the cable. Ok, that explains it.... awhile I had the Master drive on the first connector and Slave on the last connector. THAT IS WRONG, but it was that way for a year or more and worked fine. Maybe it dont much matter which cable comes first, but according to several articles, the last connector goes to the first drive (which seems backwards). No, as the article explains, if you only have one drive, and it was connected to the middle connector, you'd have an unterminated stub of cable, which isn't good electrically (reflections and so on). Apparently for the 40 as opposed to 80 cables that _was_ the case, as they just left out line 28 to the second connector (i. e. master was on the middle connector). I better understand this now. I know I have the cable right now, and since I changed that jumper to CS, it looks like everything works fine now. (At least so far). I have copied and deleted files and defragged and scandisked, and ran Norton Dick Doctor. I even ran scandisk from Dos. Everything checks out ok. I sort of am wondering if the problem on my old slave drive may have been caused by the jumpers being incorrectly set, but I had them drives that way for at least 2 years. I'd think that would have shown up a lot sooner. |
#12
|
|||
|
|||
New HDD, has corrupted Data - AGAIN
On Sun, 17 Dec 2017 14:02:20 -0500, Paul wrote:
J. P. Gilliver (John) wrote: No, as the article explains, if you only have one drive, and it was connected to the middle connector, you'd have an unterminated stub of cable, which isn't good electrically (reflections and so on). Apparently for the 40 as opposed to 80 cables that _was_ the case, as they just left out line 28 to the second connector (i. e. master was on the middle connector). I like to draw pictures for people. For a single IDE drive, it *always* goes on the end, like this. Mobo X --------------+--------+ | | Master Cable_Select (if 80 wire, CS is allowed) When you add a second drive, it can be like this. Or, you can run CS on both drives, if you are using an 80 wire cable (with that twist in it). I didn't want to junk up the diagram, by adding CS to the table for both drives. Mobo X --------------+--------+ | | Slave Master Master with Slave (some brands have a distinction on the jumpers) Do *not* do this, as the end of the cable constitutes a stub and causes excess reflections and corrupted data. Mobo X --------------+--------+ | | Oopsy ULooz Even in the best of circumstances, the signals on that cable look horrible. The signals look more horrible in that last case. One of the things that SATA does, is banish those bad design ideas... to the pit. With point to point SATA, there are no more simulation nightmares for engineers to look at. Someone (of course) can still make a SATA cable out-of-spec, but the field reports seem to be pretty good. Almost as if most of the rolls of raw cables come from one cable plant, and that helps keep the process "honest". You should not bend a SATA cable until it kinks, as that causes unpredictable results to your data. You could get away with it, or not. Don't crush the excess SATA cable and tightly wrap duct tape around it. Bad. If you have too much SATA cable, buy a shorter one from the store and try again. HTH, Paul I have no problem with SATA drives. I dont think they would work for Win98 though. One thing about them, I dont understand why the data cable has so few wires compared to the IDE cables, and even more puzzling why the power connectors have all those pins, when there is still only 5V 12V and a copule grounds needed (4 wires). Why do they have all them pins? Why didnt they just use the common 4 pin connecters they have used for years. All that did is make power supplies more complicated and the need to buy adapters to use older power supplies. That "dd" thing sounds too much like Linux command line **** to me. I dont touch that ****.... I'd rather run scandisk, chkdsk, or Norton Disk Doctor (NDD). Ndd runs faster than scandisk, so I normally run that. Scandisk took 13 hours to scan a 40gb drive, Ndd takes 4 or 5 hours to do the same. I do question how much drives are abused by running all this stuff. Like, how much life is taken away from drives by beating the crap out of them with these sector by sector tests? This is not like normal use, this is extreme abuse. Some of those tests are made so they can be run 10x or even more. Not only would that make my computer unusable for several days, but probably eliminates 50% of the drive's lifespan. |
#13
|
|||
|
|||
New HDD, has corrupted Data - AGAIN
wrote:
I have no problem with SATA drives. I dont think they would work for Win98 though. One thing about them, I dont understand why the data cable has so few wires compared to the IDE cables, and even more puzzling why the power connectors have all those pins, when there is still only 5V 12V and a copule grounds needed (4 wires). Why do they have all them pins? Why didnt they just use the common 4 pin connecters they have used for years. All that did is make power supplies more complicated and the need to buy adapters to use older power supplies. The SATA 7 pin data uses TX+,TX-,RX+,RX-, and those are differential serial connections. The data travels serially, a bit at a time, like a modem. Only it happens at 6Gbit/sec, which is "faster than your microwave oven". It's a signal at microwave frequencies. So that's how they squeezed down the data cable, by going serial. USB uses this approach too. USB3 uses TX+,TX-,RX+,RX- . This document is 3.6MB and it has a picture of what the SATA data signal looks like, at 6Gbit/sec. And it isn't even an eye diagram picture - the picture is standalone ones and zeros. Page 4 has the picture. http://download.tek.com/datasheet/4HW_19377_15_0.pdf ******* The SATA connector is designed for SATA backplanes. It's usage in desktop computers is an afterthought. The hard drive was supposed to slide into a hole in a chassis, and the back of the drive mates with a backplane connector that "sticks out" of the backplane PCB board. And via hotswap, on a server you could add or remove drives while the server remained powered and running. ******* The 15 pin power is 5 groups of 3 pins each. A pin carries 1 ampere of current. Three pins carry 3 amps. And 3 amps is just enough for the +12V source, to run the hard drive motor. At one time, some hard drives would draw 3 amps for the first ten seconds, until the spindle was up to speed. So the contact count for power, was made generous enough to run existing hard drives. Actual current flow measurements, show drives now being "all over the place" with regard to the level of current flow at startup. I don't think I found any samples I tested, drawing the whole 3 amps. The groups on the power connector are 3.3V, 5V, 12V, GND, GND The expectation is, a design might use two of three power sources, so only two ground groups are needed. A conventional disk drive uses 5V, 12V, GND, GND and so there are just enough grounds to match the current flow level on the supply pins. Paul |
#14
|
|||
|
|||
New HDD, has corrupted Data - AGAIN
|
#15
|
|||
|
|||
New HDD, has corrupted Data - AGAIN
|
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|