Switch to full style
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

st1000dl002

December 8th, 2016, 15:09

ST1000dl002
Barracuda LP
PN 9TT153-570
FW CC98
some times it showing in bios only
not shows in windows
I checked with terminal
heads
F3 T>/7X

Head 00 Resistance 00D7
Head 01 Resistance 0160
Head 02 Resistance 0119

Re: st1000dl002

December 8th, 2016, 22:50

Most likely taking care on sysfile 93 + hardware imaging will do

Re: st1000dl002

December 9th, 2016, 2:54

jermy wrote:Most likely taking care on sysfile 93 + hardware imaging will do

Can you explain me please?

Re: st1000dl002

December 9th, 2016, 3:02

Type "F" at level T and post the output.

Re: st1000dl002

December 9th, 2016, 8:43

fzabkar wrote:Type "F" at level T and post the output.

Sir I attached F3 T> F level output
Attachments
F.TXT
(75.32 KiB) Downloaded 875 times

Re: st1000dl002

December 9th, 2016, 14:09

I believe that issuing the following commands (at level T) will achieve the same end as jermy is suggesting.

    F,"READ_SPARING_ENABLED",0,22
    F."WRITE_SPARING_ENABLED",0,22
    F,"OFFLINE_SPARING_ENABLED",0,22
    F,"DAR_ENABLED",0,22
    F,"DISABLE_IDLE_ACTIVITY",1,22
    F,"BGMS_DISABLE_DATA_REFRESH",1,22
    F,"ABORT_PREFETCH",1,22
    F,"READ_LOOKAHEAD_DISABLED_ON_POWER_UP",1,22
    F,"READ_CACHING_DISABLED_ON_POWER_UP",1,22

You might like to read the following thread before proceeding.

Seagate F3 Arch - Patching the 093 sysfile :
http://www.hddoracle.com/viewtopic.php?f=59&t=1842

After making the changes, I would dump the full set of parameters again. then compare them against your first F list.

Re: st1000dl002

December 10th, 2016, 0:24

Sorry, I think that should have been ...

    F"READ_SPARING_ENABLED",0,22
    F."WRITE_SPARING_ENABLED",0,22
    F"OFFLINE_SPARING_ENABLED",0,22
    F"DAR_ENABLED",0,22
    F"DISABLE_IDLE_ACTIVITY",1,22
    F"BGMS_DISABLE_DATA_REFRESH",1,22
    F"ABORT_PREFETCH",1,22
    F"READ_LOOKAHEAD_DISABLED_ON_POWER_UP",1,22
    F"READ_CACHING_DISABLED_ON_POWER_UP",1,22

Re: st1000dl002

December 10th, 2016, 6:49

prasadsv wrote:Head 00 Resistance 00D7
Head 01 Resistance 0160
Head 02 Resistance 0119


Apparently, head 0 is not completely ok. I prefer to check it by testing sysfile 181 before any attempts to fix SA.

Re: st1000dl002

December 10th, 2016, 11:27

Martin wrote:
prasadsv wrote:Head 00 Resistance 00D7
Head 01 Resistance 0160
Head 02 Resistance 0119


Apparently, head 0 is not completely ok. I prefer to check it by testing sysfile 181 before any attempts to fix SA.

with what command?

Re: st1000dl002

December 10th, 2016, 15:29

Martin wrote:
prasadsv wrote:Head 00 Resistance 00D7
Head 01 Resistance 0160
Head 02 Resistance 0119


Apparently, head 0 is not completely ok. I prefer to check it by testing sysfile 181 before any attempts to fix SA.

I attached sysfile181

Re: st1000dl002

December 11th, 2016, 2:07

prasadsv wrote:
Martin wrote:
prasadsv wrote:Head 00 Resistance 00D7
Head 01 Resistance 0160
Head 02 Resistance 0119


Apparently, head 0 is not completely ok. I prefer to check it by testing sysfile 181 before any attempts to fix SA.

with what command?


Just RW test. What kind of tool do you use?

Re: st1000dl002

December 11th, 2016, 7:10

Martin wrote:
prasadsv wrote:
Martin wrote:
prasadsv wrote:Head 00 Resistance 00D7
Head 01 Resistance 0160
Head 02 Resistance 0119


Apparently, head 0 is not completely ok. I prefer to check it by testing sysfile 181 before any attempts to fix SA.

with what command?


Just RW test. What kind of tool do you use?

I have only TTL adoptor using through hyper terminal
It's not detecting in bios too(sometimes) no detection in windows
after waiting long time
Iam getting
Rst 0x20M
(P) SATA Reset

ASCII Diag mode

F3 T>

Re: st1000dl002

December 11th, 2016, 7:30

Spildit wrote:
fzabkar wrote:Sorry, I think that should have been ...

    F"READ_SPARING_ENABLED",0,22
    F."WRITE_SPARING_ENABLED",0,22
    F"OFFLINE_SPARING_ENABLED",0,22
    F"DAR_ENABLED",0,22
    F"DISABLE_IDLE_ACTIVITY",1,22
    F"BGMS_DISABLE_DATA_REFRESH",1,22
    F"ABORT_PREFETCH",1,22
    F"READ_LOOKAHEAD_DISABLED_ON_POWER_UP",1,22
    F"READ_CACHING_DISABLED_ON_POWER_UP",1,22



+

F3 T>F"RWRecoveryFlags",00,22
F3 T>F"BGMSFlags",00,22
F3 T>F"PerformanceFlags",043C,22
F3 T>F"MediaCacheControl",00,22

I nothing happens

Re: st1000dl002

December 11th, 2016, 17:41

Spildit wrote:Post terminal LOG.

Are you willing to pay something for the recovery ?

hdd SENT TO U?

Re: st1000dl002

December 11th, 2016, 17:59

prasadsv wrote:
Spildit wrote:Post terminal LOG.

Are you willing to pay something for the recovery ?

hdd SENT TO U?

FOR aLL COMMANDS U MENTIONED i'M GETTING
OUTPUT
(D) SATA Reset

Re: st1000dl002

December 13th, 2016, 18:21

Spildit wrote:And of course plug the drive to TTL on the computer that you will send Teamviewer ID.


Today I open the drive I have seen heads bended up. It has only one head on each arm
Nothing happens on platter surface

Re: st1000dl002

December 13th, 2016, 18:27

Spildit wrote:
prasadsv wrote:
Spildit wrote:And of course plug the drive to TTL on the computer that you will send Teamviewer ID.

Today I open the drive I have seen heads bended up. It has only one head on each arm


Did you replace them ? Can you image the drive now ?

I told you .... if you were to continue you would mess up the drive for sure....

I have to find donor
Can I use heads from bad sector drives?

Re: st1000dl002

December 13th, 2016, 18:40

This is how I feel for Spildit just reading this thread:

giphy.gif
giphy.gif (935.58 KiB) Viewed 7940 times


Sadly a little information in the wrong hands is a very dangerous thing to play around with.

Re: st1000dl002

March 24th, 2017, 17:03

Spildit wrote:
prasadsv wrote:Can I use heads from bad sector drives?


If you are sure that the "Bad sectors" are not caused the inability of the head to read .... And if you are sure that the heads were not damaged by the bad sectors .....

:? :? :? :?

I would start by using a proper drive that you are sure to be working fine and not some junk drives to save costs ....

But at this point your client is already screwed i guess .... Starting to think that it was a BAD idea to advice you in the first place.

If you couldn't do the recovery you should have told your client to send the drive to another place or to outsource it yourself.

It's no longer safe to proceed any further.


Finaly i got same drive and replaced heads
Got all data (5gb loss in windows partion ) easily
Post a reply