seagate 2GB st2000dm001 dead

[fzabkar]

Before you said this ...

I called again to the tech service for clarify me, they said:

First:
My HDD with old PCB and with the rom bios: no current to HDD.

Later:
My HDD with new PCB donor and without my rom bios: current to HDD without clicking sounds.
My HDD with new PCB donor and with my rom bios: no current to HDD. That's why they think the problem is rom bios.

Another test:
My HDD with similar PCB and with similar rom bios: current to HDD but windows does not recognize it, of course.

Now you are saying this ...

my eeprom seems works well ...

How do you know that your EEPROM is OK? Just measuring its voltages is not enough.

[anelito]

Ok,

can I do another test to eeprom? the PCB? the disc?

thanks

[anelito]

the voltages fzabkar asked of original PCB without eeprom, following the schedule in modified pics attached.

1 0
2 1.77
3 1.77
4 1.77
5 0.9
6 0.94
7 0.94
8 0
9 0
10 0
11 5
12 5
13 5
14 0

the pcb is heated.

Attachments

unknown_2.jpg (17.34 KiB) Viewed 15812 times

ST2000DM001_regs_2copia.jpg (47.42 KiB) Viewed 15812 times

[fzabkar]

It appears that the Vio supply (2,3,4) is OK (1.8V), so that would rule out an overvoltage as a reason for the EEPROM's "failure".

The MCU's primary Vcore supply (0.94V) appears to be OK also.

The absence of the secondary Vcore (8,9,10) and the preamp's negative rail (1) would be consistent with a missing EEPROM, since this would contain the code that would enable the MCU to control these supplies by way of commands to the motor controller.

In short, I don't see any external reason why the EEPROM would have failed. I suspect that it may have been killed during the transfer to the donor PCB, but that would be difficult to establish without seeing it and attempting to dump its contents. It is also not clear whether the motor controller is still functional. It would be vulnerable to an overvoltage on the +5V supply.

Your next step would be to find a way to save the contents of the EEPROM to a file, but you would need a device programmer for this purpose. If the EEPROM cannot be read, then a DIY solution would no longer be feasible.

[michael chiklis]

I'm wondering if the rom chip is original or not.
I recently had a case where a customer sent his drive to me after that he has sent it to a DR company because they have charged him 890 € for just a pcb issue!!!!!
viewtopic.php?f=1&t=29113

He refused their quote, for this reason he send it to me. I have found a different type of rom on his pcb (not compatible with that pcb) because DR company have changed it to the purpose of making recovery more difficult to other DR.
This is what can happen in italy if you don't accept thieves quote!
Luckily they have copied the rom code in that incompatible rom chip so i was able to copy it on proper type of rom chip, soldering it on a donor pcb and recover data.

I'm wondering if something of similar has happened to you too or even worse.
Can they have erased or corrupt the rom purposely? I hope not because in this case would be quite impossible to recover data.

Did they send you the quote for data recovery?
Have you refused the quote?

Maybe they have been honest with you but incompetents, in this case probably they have erased the rom by pressing write button on the eprom for mistake, or they have done bad soldering on pins chip.
Can we see a good pic of your rom chip?

[anelito]

I think the EEPROM is the original. They swaped it on my face. I did not see anything unusual.

I´ve got a price like similar tech services about PCB donor + EEPROM swap.

I show you a macro pic of the new PCB with my old eprom, as soon as possible.

It may be useful to measure the new PCB (with eeprom) voltages fzabkar asked?

thanks

[fzabkar]

It may be useful to measure the new PCB (with eeprom) voltages

Yes, I would do that. I would also try to obtain a serial terminal log.

[anelito]

the macro pics of my new PCB donor with eeprom.

thanks

Attachments

[fzabkar]

Something looks wrong.

Apart from the extremely bad soldering job, the date codes on the donor PCB's ICs (1217, 1219) are a closer match for the date code on the ROM (1220) than the date codes on the patient PCB's ICs (1228, 1224).

Do you have the donor's ROM IC?

[anelito]

the voltages fzabkar asked of new PCB Donor with eeprom, following the behind schedule.

1 0.03
2 1.81
3 1.81
4 1.81
5 0.96
6 0.96
7 0.96
8 1.01
9 1.01
10 1.01
11 5
12 5
13 5
14 0.02

the 8-9-1 are different from the first measures.

[anelito]

Something looks wrong.

the date codes on the donor PCB's ICs (1217, 1219) are a closer match for the date code on the ROM (1220) than the date codes on the patient PCB's ICs (1228, 1224).

what is the problem with matching date codes?

could you be more explicit?

thanks

[fzabkar]

ICs typically have YYWW or YWW (Year / Week) date codes. For example, "1228" means that the IC was manufactured during the 28th week of 2012. The range of date codes is not great (1220 versus 1228, ie 8 weeks difference), and normally I wouldn't be bothered about it, but in your case there is a legitimate concern as to whether the ROM is original. Many manufacturers have a "just in time" philosophy which means that they don't hold parts in stock for very long, so one would expect that the date codes would be closely matched. This "anomaly" is something that I would investigate, but I wouldn't be surprised if everything turns out to be OK.

[michael chiklis]

I confirm that this is a very bad soldering job.
You need a better technician, who did this job doesn't have enough skills with SMD soldering!

I can do this job for you, hoping that the rom chip is not damaged.

[hhddrec]

Hola Anelito.
como ya te han comentado la soldadura es muy mala, los mejor es que contactes con Michael que esta en Italia el te lo podrá hacer a un precio bajo supongo.

---------------------
Hi anelito,

as said you this soldering is very bad. contact with Micahel in italy he can make it you you.
i think low quotation

[anelito]

ICs typically have YYWW or YWW (Year / Week) date codes. For example, "1228" means that the IC was manufactured during the 28th week of 2012. The range of date codes is not great (1220 versus 1228, ie 8 weeks difference), and normally I wouldn't be bothered about it, but in your case there is a legitimate concern as to whether the ROM is original. Many manufacturers have a "just in time" philosophy which means that they don't hold parts in stock for very long, so one would expect that the date codes would be closely matched. This "anomaly" is something that I would investigate, but I wouldn't be surprised if everything turns out to be OK.

ok, thanks but my old PCB had eeprom 1220 and ICs 1228 and 1224. The donor has 1217 and 1219.

It seems that donor PCB was built before, according to the explanation of fzabkar.

thanks+

[michael chiklis]

Anelito send me his drive

This is terminal log:

Code:

Flash boot code checksum failure!
SEA4 Boot ROM 2.0 (05/03/2010)
Copyright Seagate  2010

Not able to read the rom on board with my eprom programmer.
If i try to read it via terminal boot mode i get all 0000

I unsoldered the rom chip and i was able to read the content with my eprom programmer (if rom is outside the pcb it's possible to read it).

ROM.rar

(246.09 KiB) Downloaded 827 times

[michael chiklis]

I will try to write ROM on a new donor pcb!

[fzabkar]

The ROM code would suggest that it should be a 256KB chip. However, your ROM dump is 512KB. The second half of the ROM is a copy of the first half, so it appears that the wrong chip has been selected. ISTR that you had a similar identification problem with your programmer once before.

BTW, here are the serial number, manufacture date and model number:

Z1E1A6LF
08102012
ST2000DM001-9YN164

[michael chiklis]

You are right Frank, i correct now the rom dump file.

ROM size correction.rar

(180.99 KiB) Downloaded 751 times

I think this drive should have 512KB rom, not 256KB. Something is wrong with the rom then...

[michael chiklis]

I found a very similar rom dump on this thread
viewtopic.php?t=29204&f=1&start=0#p201915

it's 512KB rom dump (second half is the copy of the first half)