Barracuda LP (no, not a 7200.11, nor a 7200.12)

[Eurgene]

Hi folks,

I suppose I can ask this two question in this topic at least because it is about the method of Unlocking terminal of Seagate, the matter in question here.

There are quite a lot data about Seagate Barracuda 7200.11, some - about ES.2 locked terminals but nothing about procedure of Seagate Barracuda ST31500541AS' terminal unlocking. I am desperate to find any information about unlock pins for my 1,5 TB Seagate ST31500541AS (there are valuable family memories over there ).

Hence the question: How do you think universal could be this approach with "disconnected" (by unscrewing) head connector instead of short cutting (if we don't know where the unlock pins are)?

And one question more: is it harmless to Seagate Barracuda HDD (regardless of model) to undergo this procedure? To what extent this multiply asynchronous disconnections-connections of multiply connectors safe to HDD and data on it?

Many thanks in advance!

Evgeny.

UPD: Initially HDD was referred as ST31500341AS mistakenly. Correct name is ST31500541AS (pls see picture in the post below).

Edited July 12, 2012 by Eurgene

[jaclaz]

There are several things that come into play.

First thing is that you may NOT need to short anything (have you tried with the "plain" disconnecting?)

Second is that we don't know if that specifcic model will "unbrick" with the known set of commands.

Third we dont' know WHY exactly your disk is bricked.

ST31500341AS means "very little".

Post two CLEAR photos of the PCB of your disk (BOTH sides of it) and maybe someone may be able to tell you which pins you can try shorting (read channel).

jaclaz

[Eurgene]

Thank you jaclaz for the quick response,

There are several things that come into play.

First thing is that you may NOT need to short anything (have you tried with the "plain" disconnecting?)

I am not sure what do you mean as "plain" disconnecting. Could you please explain that?

ST31500341AS means "very little". Post two CLEAR photos of the PCB of your disk (BOTH sides of it) and maybe someone may be able to tell you which pins you can try shorting (read channel).

Done! I added photo of the back side of the PCB as well (maybe it could be useful).

Evgeny.

[jaclaz]

I am not sure what do you mean as "plain" disconnecting. Could you please explain that?

The "traditional" unbricking works normally by EITHER:

1. detach the PCB from the hard disk and re-connect it while powered, after some initial commands <- the original method, now superseded for the 7200.11 by one of the following ones
   
2. insulate only the Motor contacts with a slip of paper and remove it when powered, after some initial commands <- on some disks this works, on other you need the following
   
3. insulate only the Head contacts with a slip of paper and remove it when powered, after some initial commands <- on some disks this works, on other you need the previous
   

The issue at hand is that some models or only some units will produce a LED:000000CC message that prevents sending further commands.

To stop the message above and have enough time to issue the commands the shorting of two pins may work.

It is only logical to try FIRST if you get to the LED:000000CC state BEFORE attempting to short the two pins.

Done! I added photo of the back side of the PCB as well (maybe it could be useful).

I would guess that that would count as the "BOTH" in my request .

Your board is a 100535537 REV. A.

From the little I know then your drive is NOT a 7200.11, but a 7200.12 .

From the little info we know:

http://computersciencelabs.blogspot.it/2011/02/seagate-720012-sim-error-firmware-fault.html

http://www.facebook.com/note.php?note_id=152456431478526

there is no need to short pins on this.

jaclaz

[BlouBul]

From the little I know then your drive is NOT a 7200.11, but a 7200.12 .

From the little I know, it is a 5900 Rpm drive http://www.seagate.com/docs/pdf/datasheet/disc/ds_barracuda_lp.pdf

See if anything here helps:

[jaclaz]

Would you agree on a 7200.12 LP?

You know, like :

http://www.hdd-parts.com/barracuda-720012.html

http://www.hdd-parts.com/10113001.html

@Eurgene

Check this also:

http://www.microsofttranslator.com/bv.aspx?ref=Internal&from=ru&to=en&a=http://hddhelp.com.ua/7200-12.htm

jaclaz

Edited July 11, 2012 by jaclaz

[BlouBul]

Would you agree on a 7200.12 LP?

You know, like :

http://www.hdd-parts...uda-720012.html

http://www.hdd-parts.com/10113001.html

I am not convinced

Maybe some 3rd party part suppliers market their PC boards as "Seagate Barracuda 7200.12 ST31500541AS", but it is stated very clearly (from your last link for one)

@Eurgene

Check this also:

http://www.microsoft....ua/7200-12.htm

Earlier this year, Seagate introduced two new series of desktop computing-a logical continuation of the rulers in the form of the Barracuda 7200.12 series and completely new Barracuda LP. If the first more or less clearly, the Barracuda LP-a kind of "child of marketing", which is a hard drive with reduced spindle speed and power consumption.

So AFAICU, the two are mutually exclusive. The 7200.12 spins at 7200 RPM, while the LP spins at the reduced spindle speed of 5900 RPM.

[jaclaz]

Well, as i see it, the LP should be part of the 7200.12 family, but of course there are NO certainties, the usage of "child" for the LP actually reinforces my impression of it belonging to the 7200.12 family.....

The good guys at Seagate have of course far too few neurons connected to actually provide a senceful naming scheme, so it could be *anything*, the model "ST31500541AS" corresponds also to a "normal" 7200.11 7200 rpm disk, so you may be perfectly right, and the LP couls be any of (PSEUDO-NUMBERS):

• 7200.11.1
  
• 7200.12.1
  
• 7200.13
  
• 8745.42sx Mark III
  

jaclaz

[BlouBul]

Well, as i see it, the LP should be part of the 7200.12 family, but of course there are NO certainties, the usage of "child" for the LP actually reinforces my impression of it belonging to the 7200.12 family.....

Ok, maybe I'll settle for the long lost (adopted?) child of the 7200.12 series, totally confused (he hasn't been told of his recently discovered heritage and therefore the identity crisis) and thus still happily spinning at 5900 RPM, but still giving the impression (only due to the long lost family ties discovered and published by the marketing people) of belonging to the 7200.12 family

But I still think Eurgene should rather try the fix for the LP series...

the model "ST31500541AS" corresponds also to a "normal" 7200.11 7200 rpm disk

???

Edited July 11, 2012 by BlouBul

[jaclaz]

But I still think Eurgene should rather try the fix for the LP series...

Sure , no doubt about this, BUT BEFORE that he should see if it actually gets the LED:000000CC state (or *whatever* error) BEFORE attempting to short the two pins, THEN he must know WHICH pins to short, the picture in the thread you referenced is about a board 100617465 REV A, and NOT about the one he has (which is a 100535537 REV A), so we are back to square #1 .

I may produce which pins are to be shorted (if needed) on the 100535537 REV A Board, but if I were Eurgene I wouldn't do anything so d@mn dangerous without further data:

Here:

http://forum.hddguru.com/st31500541as-led-error-pins-short-t23079.html

the model "ST31500541AS" corresponds also to a "normal" 7200.11 7200 rpm disk

???

It was a retaliation against Eurgene's original post.

What was posted:

There are quite a lot data about Seagate Barracuda 7200.11, some - about ES.2 locked terminals but nothing about procedure of Seagate Barracuda ST31500341AS' terminal unlocking. I am desperate to find any information about unlock pins for my 1,5 TB Seagate ST31500341AS (there are valuable family memories over there ).

ST31500341AS

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16822148337

What it is really:

ST31500541AS

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16822148412

Comparison:

ST31500341AS

ST31500541AS

jaclaz

Edited July 11, 2012 by jaclaz

[BlouBul]

http://forum.hddguru...ort-t23079.html

Good find (guess that is why your title is The Finder)

It was a retaliation against Eurgene's original post.

That also got me confused originally...

[jaclaz]

Good find (guess that is why your title is The Finder)

Yep , I earned it, rest assured :

http://reboot.pro/2764/#entry18795

http://reboot.pro/3078/#entry20899

http://reboot.pro/3096/

http://reboot.pro/8710/#entry74627

http://reboot.pro/8840/#entry76073

http://reboot.pro/12527/#entry109689

Now, back to topic, let's see if we can find a compromise, let's call the stupid thingy a

"Barracuda LP" (no, not a 7200.11, and not a 7200.12)

So that I may be able to ask a Mod/Admin to split this thread from post #36 onwards to a new thread aptly titled .....

jaclaz

[Eurgene]

Now, back to topic, let's see if we can find a compromise, let's call the stupid thingy a

"Barracuda LP" (no, not a 7200.11, and not a 7200.12)

Yes, it is "Barracuda LP" and ST31500541AS as follow from the post #38 (picture below is copied from that post)

Sorry, my bad . I had read about 7200.11 fault too much and wrong number seems stuck in my brain .

On the other hand it is obviously that ST31500341AS - is merely 7200.11 (Barracuda 7200.11 Product Overview -Official web-site) but definitely not 7200.12 (Barracuda 7200.12 Product Overview). 1.5 TB Barracuda is ST31500541AS is undoubtedly (Barracuda LP Product Overview - Official Seagate web-site). Anyway, it was my missprint and I ask to accept my apology . Post # 36 edited by me.

Thanks alot jaclaz! http://forum.hddguru...ort-t23079.html is a really nice shot and you entirely deserved your title .

I have couple thoughts about this solution ('ll be posted in minutes). And - thank you again.

[Eurgene]

The "traditional" unbricking works normally by EITHER:

...

Thank you for the axplanation. It means I unerstood you correctly.

The issue at hand is that some models or only some units will produce a LED:000000CC message that prevents sending further commands. To stop the message above and have enough time to issue the commands the shorting of two pins may work

As I have known from the various Internet boards, the 1.5 TB Barracuda is ST31500541AS is just this case. Kind of:

Insulating the contacts to either the motor or the heads (or both) doesn't help in this regard, because Seagate, as it seems, has crippled the electronics on these new drives by making the monitor (and presumably everything else) dependent on something that first has to be read from the platters. In other words, while older disks would communicate on the serial monitor even with the PCB totally disconnected from the motor and the heads, these new drives don't even start to log anything into the monitor until after they've spinned up and read a couple sectors from the platters.

That's why I asked about unlock pins for my 1,5 TB Seagate Barracuda LP.

Anyway. Now it is the time to solder the circuit for connecting to the HDD's monitor. Question is: why do you think on http://forum.hddguru...ort-t23079.html they marked pins to short - on the reverse side if the PCB (despite they had front side photo)? It's strange - if they made shorting on mounted PCB they would remember points on the front side? What for they bring themself to imagine where corresponding contacts are on the opposite side (and probably commit the error) and then forced us to do the reverce procedure?

Another one. I wouldn't like to lose the recorded data therefore payd attention to the post # 20/10/2011 - 14:56 here: Seagate ST31500541AS not communicate through the terminal (translation from Russian): "On the (Barracuda) LP is very likely that the compiler will not identical with the factory one after the conversion. Due to post-process, when defects are introduced directly into the compiler, rather than lists of defects. And most of the information (recorded on HDD) will not be available (for recovery). It is necessary to back "sluzhebku" (technical data, overhead information?) up to not Eat your heart out after then."

Question is: how to back up mentioned above technical data (overhead information?) in orger to restore them if unlock procedure will be destructive to them?

Evgeny.

[jaclaz]

Anyway. Now it is the time to solder the circuit for connecting to the HDD's monitor. Question is: why do you think on http://forum.hddguru...ort-t23079.html they marked pins to short - on the reverse side if the PCB (despite they had front side photo)? It's strange - if they made shorting on mounted PCB they would remember points on the front side? What for they bring themself to imagine where corresponding contacts are on the opposite side (and probably commit the error) and then forced us to do the reverce procedure?

Let's see if the attached images help you (and BTW is a good example how the information is - even when disclosed - actually "retained").

First one is a crop of the image you posted ("under" side) of the PCB.

Can you see the contacts "circled" in yellow?

They are the "head" contacts, four sets of five contacts.

Can you see the two contacts circled in red, they are the read channel. (this should be "common" to "all", the .11 and .12, ES2 and LP)

Since you have to short it, the first occurrence that you can do it "from the upper side" is circled in green.

As you may have noticed, most (BTW nice ) posts indicating where to short only give you the "upper side" of the specific PCB, so you cannot get a "general rule", the given post is an exception, in the sense that they give you the "under side" position (but you have to find yourself what the points are on the "upper side").

The second image attached (also a crop, this time from your second posted image) circles in green/yellow the (hopefully) same two points, but do check them with a multimeter .

Another one. I wouldn't like to lose the recorded data therefore payd attention to the post # 20/10/2011 - 14:56 here: Seagate ST31500541AS not communicate through the terminal (translation from Russian): "On the (Barracuda) LP is very likely that the compiler will not identical with the factory one after the conversion. Due to post-process, when defects are introduced directly into the compiler, rather than lists of defects. And most of the information (recorded on HDD) will not be available (for recovery). It is necessary to back "sluzhebku" (technical data, overhead information?) up to not Eat your heart out after then."

Question is: how to back up mentioned above technical data (overhead information?) in orger to restore them if unlock procedure will be destructive to them?

Nothing you can do (AFAIK) at home, without some dedicated hardware/software (please read as PC-3000 UDMA), mind you I presume that it could be done at home also through far more econoomical means BUT you would need a number of informations and an amount of training that are far beyond your capabilities/knowledge (NO offence intended ) but worst than that far beyond my capabilities/knowledge (and I would guess beyond those of any non-professional).

More or less all the info we "amateurs" get are the crumbs that the guys at hddguru and on a selected number of places, mostly Polish, Russian of Chinese (and thus with the aggraviation of google translate or similar) leave behind them or simply feel - from time to time - exceptionally "good" and give as "charity" to the poors.

The usual caveat applies, it all depends on HOW MUCH you value your data (and are prepared to spend for them) and/or HOW MUCH you like gambling.

Only you can decide if it is the case of forgetting a DIY attempt and pay a pro or risk on an all or nothing bet .

jaclaz