Jump to content

Have a trouble with randomally disconected HD


Recommended Posts


@CrazyDoctor: Your first step should be to find yourself a lucky charm!

I've never ever seen any one user so unlucky with HDDs as you are (you've got at least 6 problematic HDD's in just 3 months, if I'm not mistaken), judging from the number of HDD-problem threads you've started of late! :whistle:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@CrazyDoctor: Your first step should be to find yourself a lucky charm!

I've never ever seen any one user so unlucky with HDDs as you are (you've got at least 6 problematic HDD's in just 3 months, if I'm not mistaken), judging from the number of HDD-problem threads you've started of late! :whistle:

Hi dencorso,

You are absolutely right about the threads.

The two first were mine, the others are of friends or family that are familiar with my hard drives and asked me to try and help them with their drives, after I succeded to recover mine.

Edited by CrazyDoctor
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...

Hi all,

I have seagate 1.5 7200.11 HD which disconect itself after 10-30 seconds.

I can see the drive in the bios after I turing on the computer, I can see full detatils of it but after the second restart the HD does not recognize at all!

In the windows I can see the drive as a letter but non of the data recovery softwares could get access into the drive. I can't image the drive, I can't scan it and any data recovery software pump me a messege that "No media is connecting" (or something like that).

I successed to have a report from seatools diagonstic for dos that the hard drive is over then 70c (not true, I feel it). I tried to solve the hit problem by 2 HD coolers on each side but nothing. still the same symptom.

What else I can do, beside give it to a DR company who will charge me alot of money.

I have knowledge about data recovery and I have some tools that I built on my one. And also I succeed to recovery not a few hard drives before.

So, what can I do?

Best Regards,

Link to comment
Share on other sites

How come I have the feeling I've read this question before? :whistle:

Why post requests ("Spam the board") when you're not using any of the information

given and just start the same thing over and over again? :unsure:

It's getting a bit annoying :angry:

Hi VideoRipper, sorry for that!

I really tried all the information that I got there without any success so I thought to try a new way (somehow I thought that that topic is irrelevant anymore so I opend a new one).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Count to ten before opening a new thread. And actually use the help received, or you'll start to be ignored. Threads merged. Since VideoRipper already said what had to be said, I only have to add: consider yourself warned!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Count to ten before opening a new thread. And actually use the help received, or you'll start to be ignored. Threads merged. Since VideoRipper already said what had to be said, I only have to add: consider yourself warned!

OK, I got the point right after the things of VideoRipper.

Won't happen again.

Any suggestions for my drive?

I did every suggest that you gave but the drive still disconect itself.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Any suggestions for my drive?

I did every suggest that you gave but the drive still disconect itself.

No you did not (or you completely failed to grasp the message).

I will try to write it slowly, y.o.u.r . d.r.i.v.e . i.s:

Main Entry: broken

Part of Speech: adjective

Definition: not working

Synonyms: busted, coming unglued, coming unstuck, defective, disabled, down, exhausted, fallen apart, faulty, feeble, gone, gone to pieces, gone to pot, haywire, imperfect, in disrepair, in need of repair, in the shop, inoperable, kaput, not functioning, on the blink, on the fritz, on the shelf, out, out of commission, out of kilter, out of order, out of whack, ruined, run-down, screwed up, shot, spent, unsatisfactory, weak, wracked, wrecked

THERE IS NO WAY you will have it fully operational again, your only hope is to try and recover whatever data you can in the short lap of time it remains connected, than try again with another bit.

The amount of data you can recover can range from 0% (zero percent) to 100% (one hundred percent), depending on an incredible number of different factors that may affect the drive, or the recovery procedure.

Never assume you will be getting 100%.

Data recovery is a win/lose game, sometimes you win, sometimes you lose, you should get used to it. :(

Hard disk repair (for anything EXCEPT TEMPORARY REPAIR in order to attempt recovery of data) is a no-win game, no matter how well you play (and right now you don't appear like a good player ;)) you will lose :ph34r:.

jaclaz

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...

FORGET about sector 0.

FORGET about HDD Regenerator.

FORGET about ANYTHING else but the tool I suggested:

http://www.boot-land.net/forums/index.php?showtopic=7783&hl=

http://www.datarescue.com/photorescue/v3/drdd.htm

What happens if you try to use it?

Aren't you EXACTLY in this situation?:

http://www.datarescue.com/photorescue/v3/drdd.htm

jaclaz

jaclaz, I seem to have a similar problem. I tried the DR DD program in the forward and reverse direction.

Now I have 300gb and 550gb .dd files. How do I get the data from the .dd files?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If I understand correctly you can mount that image to your filesystem :unsure:

Don't know how to do this on Windows, but under Linux it can be done with:

mount -t ntfs-3g -ro loop /media/hdaX/recovered.img /mnt/temp -f

Greetz,

Peter.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

jaclaz, I seem to have a similar problem. I tried the DR DD program in the forward and reverse direction.

Now I have 300gb and 550gb .dd files. How do I get the data from the .dd files?

Made out of WHAT? :w00t:

I need to have some info AT LEAST on:

  1. WHAT was the source.
  2. HOW the two images were created (meaning the addresses of the two chunks - if coming from the same drive)
  3. Operating system you are using/have access to

See if this better conveys the idea:

http://homepages.tesco.net/J.deBoynePollard/FGA/problem-report-standard-litany.html

Right now we are at the "I'm ill, doctor. Help!" stage.

@videoripper

The command you posted - like the similar equivalent ways under windows - only make sense if you have an "intact" image of a whole drive or single partition, otherwise you will have just a bunch of binary data without sense.

IF the image is actually presumed to be the "complete" image of a drive, it makes sense ANYWAY, in ANY OS, to have a look at it in TESTDISK before anything else:

http://www.cgsecurity.org/wiki/TestDisk

jaclaz

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Alright some info...

Drive is an ST31000340AS SD15 and my OS is Win7 x64. I have access to a Mac, but if you're referring to Linux or Unix I guess I can leran and setup a dual boot.

Prior to these problems I did the BSY fix and updated the firmware. Everything seemed fine until the data was transferring onto another drive. The computer became sluggish and then froze.

Upon start-up windows wanted to repair the drive and I promptly canceled. BTW is it ever a good idea to let windows do the repair?

Testdisk finds the drive and partition(everything is really sluggish with this drive btw), but when I try to list the files it says "no file found, filesystem seems damaged".

You can see the drive in MyComputer, but when you try to click on it it says "E:\ is not accessible. The file or directory is corrupted and unreadable."

Computer management lists the disk as a RAW.

Ok now the DRDD fiasco. There were a lot of these..."Read error at xxxxxxx : Data error (cyclic redundancy check)."

I tried running DRDD as a test on a working drive for a total of 1Gb and the outcome is also a .dd file so I assume it's the proper format.

I don't want to touch it until your advice. Thanks for your time.

Edited by SkylineRB26DETT
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes, the dd format is simply a RAW format, i.e. a byte-by-byte (actually sector by sector) copy of the source.

The general idea (in theory - it depends if you can "afford" it) is to make a whole dd image.

Then make a copy of it.

Then attempt to fix the copy.

To simplify, lets say that you have a (rather smallish ;)) disk drive with just 100 sectors and imagine that - for any reason - sectors 49 ,52 and 53 cannot be read/accessed.

With most imaging programs the image is taken sequentially starting from sector 1.

When the program "hits" sectors 49 cannot access it and freaks out and stops working/responding.

With DRDD you start imaging forward and as soon as sector 49 is reached, it stops, giving you a "from1to48.dd" kind of file.

Then you start imaging backwards from 100 downwards and as soon as sector 53 is reached it stops, giving you a "from54to100.dd" kind of file.

At this point you try jumping over a number of sectors, in this case you try with just 1 and try a forward image from 50 onwards, you will have a "from50to51.dd" kind of file.

So:

  • from1to48.dd
  • -> <-you create a 1 sector file filled with 00 (from49to49.dd)
  • from50to51.dd
  • -> <-you create a 2 sector file filled with 00 (from52to53.dd)
  • from54to100.dd

You join together the files and you have an image with some "holes" that you CANNOT recover, but all the rest is OK.

Now you throw at the joined image (or, better at a copy of it) all the recovery software you have access to and see what can be done in the directions of both filesystem oriented recover ( Testdisk, chkdsk, etc. ) and of file recovery (Photorec, ScroungeNTFS, etc.).

The idea is that a failing drive should be in use only for the shortest possible amount of time as it may well develop larger areas of errors.

Using DR DD you may want to image the drive in "sections", in order to (for example if there is a heating problem) be able to image a "section" and then let it cool before taking a snapshot of next section.

TESTDISK (and any other recovery program) should be run on the image AND NOT on the failing drive.

How big was the "ST31000340AS SD15"?

If it was a 500 Gb drive, possibly partitioned in a single HUGE partition, to work "comfortably" you will need temporarily two (or, better, three) 750 Gb disks to store the partial and "full" images.

If it was a 1 Tb drive, you may be "short of space" with another two 1 Tb drives, and you will need two 1.5 Tb ones. :ph34r:

(this may be of use to learn why it is usually NOT a good idea to have disks with a single "huge" partition)

Testdisk can analize the image "offline".

The image can be mounted with drivers like Ken Kato's VDK or MS VSS ones in order to run on them other utilities, like chkdsk.

jaclaz

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.


×
×
  • Create New...