Data recovery and disk repair questions and discussions related to old-fashioned SATA, SAS, SCSI, IDE, MFM hard drives - any type of storage device that has moving parts
Post a reply

Re: WD5000AADS failed

April 2nd, 2013, 16:20

@positivebit
yes, data is important. It's not business data but personal data (mainly photos).
Thanks,

G

Re: WD5000AADS failed

April 2nd, 2013, 16:25

Rom is soldered fine to PCB and compatible.
I have hear some bad noises from heads trying to reach service area, not the first loud noise, but the following.
From my keyboard i can't say more, need to have it in Lab.
Did you really left itthe drive powered on for days trying to clone it?

Re: WD5000AADS failed

April 2nd, 2013, 17:39

We tried to scan the drive with MHDD, I'm attaching a couple of screenshot.
From what I see, it doesn't look very promising...
The first is a SMART report, the second is an attempt to scan...
What do you think?
Thanks,

G
Attachments
20130402_231526.jpg
Scan attempt
20130402_230145.jpg
SMART report

Re: WD5000AADS failed

April 3rd, 2013, 8:08

I am not in true but in my experience, I think heads problems too (as we can see now probably PCB problems and FW problems too)

Heads may be degraded

please contact with a local pro.

Re: WD5000AADS failed

April 7th, 2013, 12:15

Hi guys,
we struggled a bit to find how to make accessible the SATA disk from DOS (IDE emulation was not active in BIOS) but finally we got it, here you the mavrik log attached.
Thank you for your help.

G
Attachments
WD5000AA.LOG
mavrik log
(19.86 KiB) Downloaded 751 times

Re: WD5000AADS failed

April 7th, 2013, 20:00

Nazyura's tool was written for the pre-ROYL drives which had single-byte MOD IDs. The "Header" column is comparing the MOD ID against the ID byte in the header. Since ROYL drives have 2-byte IDs, and since the ID is stored at a different offset, then the "Header" column will always be showing mismatches. These are bogus.

The asterisk in the first column is identifying those MODs which are present on the drive. The others are non-existent.

The 50 and 51 status bytes represent the results of reading the MODs. A "50" represents success, whereas a "51" is an error.

Re: WD5000AADS failed

April 7th, 2013, 20:32

I previously uploaded a free checksum calculator that was written by Pete Disdale:
download/file.php?id=4921

Re: WD5000AADS failed

April 7th, 2013, 21:07

You need to rename the downloaded file to ZIP (sorry about that), then extract the EXE.

Then type ...

chksum2 -32 *.MOD > SA_cksm.log

Re: WD5000AADS failed

April 7th, 2013, 22:15

I'd check relo block module 32.

Re: WD5000AADS failed

April 8th, 2013, 2:24

Nazyura's tools (eg MAVR_R) can read the single-byte MODs (0x00 - 0xFF):
http://nazyura.hardw.net/000006.htm

There are other tools mentioned in the following thread, including a tool which the OP is developing:
viewtopic.php?f=1&t=20346

This page appears to have an MHDD script for recalculating the translator:
http://yura.puslapiai.lt/files/wd/mhdd/index.html

BTW, ISTM that MOD 32 reads OK.

Re: WD5000AADS failed

April 8th, 2013, 8:59

Hi Spildit,
not to mention that my friend (with the failed drive) is located 900 Km far from me, that's the reason we are sometimes "slow" to reply.
Anyway yourself and the other forum guys are really kind to help and share information on such difficult topic.
Once more, thank you.

Gianfranco

Re: WD5000AADS failed

April 8th, 2013, 10:48

Spildit wrote:Well, let's try to regen the translator then...
Check pm.


Bom dia.

I know that you are just trying to be helpful.

But trying to fix firmware issues "in the dark" is a bad idea. You really need to be able to see -- at a glance -- which modules are good and which are not. And you need to have a reliable way to test the heads before you attempt to write, or you may just cause more corruption or even brick a drive. And all that only after you have saved the firmware first.

So a typical sequence might be:

1. Check modules - back up all resources.
2. Check heads
3. Re-write inconsequential module - check result
4. If good, confirm other essential modules OK for translator regeneration

I think that's realistically beyond the scope of DIY stuff, don't you?

Re: WD5000AADS failed

April 8th, 2013, 11:00

People should make experience, once for all, isn't it ?

Re: WD5000AADS failed

April 8th, 2013, 11:05

jono-ats wrote:
Spildit wrote:Well, let's try to regen the translator then...
Check pm.


Bom dia.

I know that you are just trying to be helpful.

But trying to fix firmware issues "in the dark" is a bad idea. You really need to be able to see -- at a glance -- which modules are good and which are not. And you need to have a reliable way to test the heads before you attempt to write, or you may just cause more corruption or even brick a drive. And all that only after you have saved the firmware first.

So a typical sequence might be:

1. Check modules - back up all resources.
2. Check heads
3. Re-write inconsequential module - check result
4. If good, confirm other essential modules OK for translator regeneration

I think that's realistically beyond the scope of DIY stuff, don't you?



I like your post Jono-Ats

if heads are bad: the HDD will be a brick.

Good advice: check modules, backup modules, check heads, check a non important module, if all correct trasn regen.
Last edited by hhddrec on April 8th, 2013, 11:14, edited 1 time in total.

Re: WD5000AADS failed

April 8th, 2013, 12:05

One of these days , sooner or later, you'll discover why we say "di buone intenzioni e' lastricata la strada dell'inferno" = the road to hell is covered by the best intentions :(

Re: WD5000AADS failed

April 8th, 2013, 12:32

I thought you don't work in DR?

Re: WD5000AADS failed

April 8th, 2013, 13:50

Spildit,

Thank you for your gracious reply.

Everyone in the DR business has to start somewhere, and there is a steep learning curve. No one gets knowledgeable or proficient overnight. Nonetheless . . .

I don't know what the law is in your country, but in the USA, you can't be excused from negligence.

Perhaps one of the best "defenses" is to develop and document a best practices approach (my note about rebuilding the translator might be an example).

When we do stuff for the first time, and there is a risk of damage to the client's drive, we will practice on a test case before performing the actual procedure.

In short, it's not right to learn at the cost of other people's data, if it can be avoided. Sometimes it can't be avoided, but risks should be minimized whenever possible.

Re: WD5000AADS failed

April 8th, 2013, 13:59

BlackST wrote:One of these days , sooner or later, you'll discover why we say "di buone intenzioni e' lastricata la strada dell'inferno" = the road to hell is covered by the best intentions :(


Interesting that there is an identical phrase in English.

Is there an Italian equivalent to, "No good deed goes unpunished?"

:-)

Re: WD5000AADS failed

April 8th, 2013, 14:35

jono-ats wrote:
BlackST wrote:One of these days , sooner or later, you'll discover why we say "di buone intenzioni e' lastricata la strada dell'inferno" = the road to hell is covered by the best intentions :(


Interesting that there is an identical phrase in English.
Is there an Italian equivalent to, "No good deed goes unpunished?"


Yes : "fai del bene e vai in galera" = if you do be good / do something good, you'll likely go to jail :mrgreen:

Re: WD5000AADS failed

April 15th, 2013, 16:35

Hi guys,
we scanned the drive to read modules with MAVR_R. I attached the results, can you please have a look?
Another question: is there anybody in the forum that can help with this drive in Campania(Italy)?
We are obviously interested in getting help from a pro, but at a reasonable price for a family.
Attachments
HDWD (1).LOG
log
(15.87 KiB) Downloaded 746 times
hd wd (1).rar
modules read 1
(3.26 MiB) Downloaded 556 times
Post a reply