Help hard drives keep clicking and dying

[w_tom]

The numbers McSpreader (should have) provided from Intel specs would
be fine IF measured were the actual voltage. But because of how meters
work, minimum voltages are 3.23, 4.87, and 11.7. The OP has a failure.
He has provided voltage numbers that explain that failure. Those with
some experience (those who rather than only read spec sheets) recognize
that 11.655 and 5.12 are symptoms of a power supply problem. A problem
that can be observed with more (expensive) equipment or with experience
designing power supplies. McSpreader (and another who proves his
manhood with insults and four letter words) don't have any such
experience. It shows in the technical supporting facts they have
posted.

Meter numbers suggest a power supply that cannot provide sufficient
power on 12 volts and may also have excessive ripple voltage. Also
provided is how to confirm disk drive integrity using only one disk on
that system, verifying voltages with only one drive, and then using
manufacturer's hardware diagnostic to confirm disk drive hardware
integrity.

Strongly recommended is to ignore McSpreader and other firebrands who
did not do this stuff for a few decades. McSpreader does what any Rush
Limbaugh fan would do to prove their superiority. Wrong... Wrong...
Wrong .. and not one supporting technical fact. Those minimum
numbers 3.23, 4.87, and 11.7 are when using the standard 3.5 digit
multimeter. McSpreader, et al would have known that with sufficient
experience.

 

[Rod Speed]

The numbers McSpreader (should have) provided from Intel
specs would be fine IF measured were the actual voltage.

Any decent meter measures them fine.

But because of how meters work, minimum voltages are 3.23, 4.87, and 11.7.

Not a ****ing clue, as always.

The OP has a failure.

Must be one of those rocket scientist ****wits.

He has provided voltage numbers that explain that failure.

Like hell they do. In spades with the Seagate that doesnt
work in an external case where other drives work fine.

Those with some experience (those who rather than only read spec sheets)
recognize that 11.655 and 5.12 are symptoms of a power supply problem.

Just another of your pathetic little pig ignorant fantasys.

A problem that can be observed with more (expensive)
equipment or with experience designing power supplies.

Just another of your pathetic little pig ignorant fantasys.

McSpreader (and another who proves his manhood with
insults and four letter words) don't have any such experience.

Been doing it for DECADES now thank, ****wit.

It shows in the technical supporting facts they have posted.

You in spades, ****wit.

Meter numbers suggest a power supply that
cannot provide sufficient power on 12 volts

Wrong when the ATX spec allows a minimum voltage of 11.4
and in fact a minimum voltage of 10.8 at peak 12 volt current.

and may also have excessive ripple voltage.

You've just plucked that out of your arse, as always.

Also provided is how to confirm disk drive integrity using only
one disk on that system, verifying voltages with only one drive,

No need, the 12V rail is well within specs.

and then using manufacturer's hardware
diagnostic to confirm disk drive hardware integrity.

It wont even see the Seagate, ****wit.

Strongly recommended is to ignore McSpreader and other
firebrands who did not do this stuff for a few decades.

Guess which stupid pig ignorant prat has just got
egg all over its pathetic little face, as always.

McSpreader does what any Rush Limbaugh fan would
do to prove their superiority. Wrong... Wrong... Wrong ..

He does what anyone with a clue does, point out
the areas where you are just plain wrong.

and not one supporting technical fact.

You in sapdes.

Those minimum numbers 3.23, 4.87, and 11.7
are when using the standard 3.5 digit multimeter.

Thanks for that completely superfluous proof that you have
never ever had a ****ing clue about anything at all, ever.

McSpreader, et al would have known that with sufficient experience.

Thanks for that completely superfluous proof that you have
never ever had a ****ing clue about anything at all, ever.

 

[Arno Wagner]

The numbers McSpreader (should have) provided from Intel specs would
be fine IF measured were the actual voltage. But because of how meters
work, minimum voltages are 3.23, 4.87, and 11.7.

Huh?? I have been doing electrinucs for several decades, an I have
no idea what you are talking about. Unless you assume a meter
with 2.5% tolerance in the wrong direction? Given that the error has
a Gaussian distribution, this is very unlikely. In addition, given
that the error should affect both measurements in the same
direction, I see your point even less.

I think that without looking at the spec of the DMM in question,
nothing is obvious here...

The OP has a failure.
He has provided voltage numbers that explain that failure. Those with
some experience (those who rather than only read spec sheets) recognize
that 11.655 and 5.12 are symptoms of a power supply problem.

I must have too much experience then, since I cannot recognize
any problem here. True, they did use either a too small core
(assuming there is more load on 12V than on 5V) or too little
copper in the 12V winding. But given that 12V is actually a
10% tolerance value, it should still work fine.

A problem
that can be observed with more (expensive) equipment or with experience
designing power supplies. McSpreader (and another who proves his
manhood with insults and four letter words) don't have any such
experience. It shows in the technical supporting facts they have
posted.

Oh, McSpreader sounds a lot like Rod. And he does not post any facts.
But I did.

Meter numbers suggest a power supply that cannot provide sufficient
power on 12 volts and may also have excessive ripple voltage. Also
provided is how to confirm disk drive integrity using only one disk on
that system, verifying voltages with only one drive, and then using
manufacturer's hardware diagnostic to confirm disk drive hardware
integrity.

The measurements suggest a cheap PSU, that was not built with
care. They do not suggest a broken PSU at all.

Strongly recommended is to ignore McSpreader and other firebrands who
did not do this stuff for a few decades.

Well, I did.

McSpreader does what any Rush
Limbaugh fan would do to prove their superiority. Wrong... Wrong...
Wrong .. and not one supporting technical fact. Those minimum
numbers 3.23, 4.87, and 11.7 are when using the standard 3.5 digit
multimeter. McSpreader, et al would have known that with sufficient
experience.

Again: What are you talking about?

Arno

 

[McSpreader]

...minimum numbers 3.23, 4.87, and 11.7...

Incorrect numbers supported by such 'facts' as: "...because of how
meters work..." and "...sufficient experience..." and "...using the
standard 3.5 digit multimeter..." etc, etc.

Still wrong, no supporting facts, still waffling.

The correct numbers are 3.14V, 4.75V and 11.4V, as stated in section
3.2.1 of the ATX PSU Design Guide, which can be found here:

http://tinyurl.com/a6kfp

[which points to here:
http://www.formfactors.org/developer/specs/ATX12V_PSDG_2_2
_public_br2.pdf ]

 

[Paul Rubin]

Incorrect numbers supported by such 'facts' as: "...because of how
meters work..." and "...sufficient experience..." and "...using the
standard 3.5 digit multimeter..." etc, etc.

Still wrong, no supporting facts, still waffling.

Have you ever worked on something like this? You might get a nice
reading on a slow-acting DC multimeter but see total crap if you look
at that voltage with an oscilloscope. I think w_tom knows what he's
talking about.

 

[Frazer Jolly Goodfellow]

Have you ever worked on something like this?

Yes. A lot.

You might get a
nice reading on a slow-acting DC multimeter but see total crap
if you look at that voltage with an oscilloscope.

Possibly, but that's not the point; The discussion is about what
you'd read on a DC voltmeter. Please explain why *you* would expect
11.7V to be the minimum expected reading for a nominal 12V supply
with +/- 5% tolerance.

I think w_tom knows what he's talking about.

You have provided no evidence to support that view.

 

[Rod Speed]

Have you ever worked on something like this?

Yep, and for longer than that w_tom wanker has too.

You might get a nice reading on a slow-acting DC multimeter
but see total crap if you look at that voltage with an oscilloscope.

Pity we were discussing 3.5 digit multimeters.

I think w_tom knows what he's talking about.

Nope, if the power supply is within specs ripple wise,
the reading you get with a 3.5 digit multimeter is fine
when comparing it with the ATX voltage ranges allowed.

AND he complete ****ed up with his claim about the 12V rail
too, its allowed to be within 10% at maximum load on that rail.

 

[McSpreader]

Meter numbers suggest a power supply that cannot provide
sufficient power on 12 volts and may also have excessive ripple

voltage.

How did you deduce potential 'excessive ripple' from a single DC
voltmeter reading?

 

[w_tom]

Arno Wagner did not read what was posted. For example, when 5 volts
reads 4.87 on the meter, then that voltage may be repeatedly dropping
below 4.75. But I am only restating what Arno was supposed to have
read before posting. 11.655 on a meter means the power supply may be
dropping repeatedly below 11.4 volts. It explains failures seen by the
OP. Voltage measurements (posting all the numbers) with only one drive
connected would confirm that problem.

Arno - learn to read what was posted from decades of experience before
hyping your speculation. Stop posting your grossly wrong information
directly traceable to insufficient knowledge and experience. 3.23,
4.87, and 11.7 are minimum numbers as read by the meter. Those numbers
are completely in agreement with specs that I probably read long before
Arno was born.

 

[w_tom]

We look on an oscilloscope. A defective power supply with 300
millivolts of ripple voltage meant voltage varied from 4.55 to 4.85.
What did the volt meter report? That will be obvious to those with
experience. The volt meter reported 4.85 volts. Meanwhile system was
failing because voltage was repeatedly below 4.75 volts.

The Original Poster should take note of many who posted denials and
yet do not even know how meters so often measure voltage.

Again, spec numbers of 3.1, 4.75, and 11.4 means the meter must
report numbers above 3.23, 4.87, and 11.7 volts. No mystery here.
Just many posters in denial and who never did power supply design work.

At 11.655 and with the 5 volts at 5.12, then those numbers imply a
power supply problem; reason for intermittent disk drive failure. A
problem more apparent if same numbers are taken with only one disk
drive connected.

Amazed that only a few here have a grasp of how to use a meter. No
wonder so many shotgun to fix computers.

 

[Rod Speed]

We look on an oscilloscope. A defective
power supply with 300 millivolts of ripple voltage

You aint established that its a defective power supply at all, wanker.

You've just plucked that number out of your arse and it doesnt
substantiate the reading you need to see on a 3.5 digit multimeter
to indicate that the power supply is not defective.

meant voltage varied from 4.55 to 4.85. What did the volt
meter report? That will be obvious to those with experience.

Never ever could bullshit its way out of a wet paper bag.

The volt meter reported 4.85 volts.

Which is well within the ATX spec, ****wit.

Meanwhile system was failing because
voltage was repeatedly below 4.75 volts.

Nope, because it had excessive ripple, ****wit.

The Original Poster should take note of many who posted denials
and yet do not even know how meters so often measure voltage.

Or he might have enough of a clue to realise that everyone has
noticed you have your head completely up your arse, as always.

And if that isnt obvious, all he has to do is read more of your drivel
and the responses to it using groups,google to prove that in spades.

Again, spec numbers of 3.1, 4.75, and 11.4 means the meter
must report numbers above 3.23, 4.87, and 11.7 volts.

Not a ****ing clue, as always. The ATX spec is the AVERAGE voltage, ****wit.

No mystery here.

Yep, everyone has noticed that you have never
ever had a ****ing clue about anything at all, ever.

Just many posters in denial and who never did power supply design work.

Guess which pathetic little pig ignorant ****wit has
just got egg all over its pathetic little face, yet again ?

At 11.655 and with the 5 volts at 5.12, then
those numbers imply a power supply problem;

Like hell they do.

reason for intermittent disk drive failure.

Have fun explaining why the Seagate STILL doesnt
work in an external housing that runs other drives fine.

A problem more apparent if same numbers
are taken with only one disk drive connected.

You dont know that either.

Amazed that only a few here have a grasp of how to use a meter.

Not amazing at all that every single individual has rubbed
your nose in your complete pig ignorance, as always.

No wonder so many shotgun to fix computers.

You need one applied to your head.

 

[Rod Speed]

Arno Wagner did not read what was posted.

Yes he did.

For example, when 5 volts reads 4.87 on the meter, then
that voltage may be repeatedly dropping below 4.75.

Pity that the ATX spec is for the AVERAGE voltage, including ripple.

But I am only restating what Arno was supposed to have read before posting.

You're repeating your pig ignorant drivel.

11.655 on a meter means the power supply
may be dropping repeatedly below 11.4 volts.

Pity that that is still within specs if the ripple is only 100 mv.

And you've ****ed up the maths even if it wasnt.

It explains failures seen by the OP.

No it doesnt. In spades with the Seagate that doesnt
work in an external housing that handles other drives fine.

Voltage measurements (posting all the numbers) with
only one drive connected would confirm that problem.

No it wouldnt, it would prove you have your
head completely up your arse, as always.

Arno - learn to read what was posted from decades
of experience before hyping your speculation.

Yours is the pig ignorant drivel.

Stop posting your grossly wrong information directly
traceable to insufficient knowledge and experience.

You in spades.

3.23, 4.87, and 11.7 are minimum numbers as read by the meter.

Wrong, as always.

Those numbers are completely in agreement with
specs that I probably read long before Arno was born.

The ATX specs aint been around that long, ****wit.

 

[Arno Wagner]

Have you ever worked on something like this? You might get a nice
reading on a slow-acting DC multimeter but see total crap if you look
at that voltage with an oscilloscope. I think w_tom knows what he's
talking about.

I disagree. If he had said "not enough data", I would be willing to
agree. But not to a "definitely bad PSU" verdict (yes, I have an
oscilloscope and know how to use it), since the voltages may point to
a substandard design (fewer windings on the 12V line of the
transformer than sensivle to save a bit on the copper cost), but they
do not indicate a bad PSU.

Arno

 

[Arno Wagner]

We look on an oscilloscope. A defective power supply with 300
millivolts of ripple voltage meant voltage varied from 4.55 to 4.85.

Aha! An assumption about ripple! And how do you know how much
ripple the OPs PSU has?

What did the volt meter report? That will be obvious to those with
experience. The volt meter reported 4.85 volts. Meanwhile system was
failing because voltage was repeatedly below 4.75 volts.

More likely the 300mVpp ripple were too much. BTW, if that is the
customary Vpp rating, then that would be 4.70V ... 5.00V, since ripple
is customare stated as peak-to-peak ("Vpp"), unlike an AC rating,
which is typically measured as rms-value or absolute peak value
against ground. (RMS-value gives the effective voltage when
calculation power to an ohmic load. 230V mains has 325V peak and
650Vpp).

Ripple and DC voltage ranges are treated separately. If either is not
met, the drive may fail. The approach to add and subtract the ripple
is naive and wrong, since ripple causes different/more problems than
lowering and heightening the voltages.

Just out of curiosity, I looked up acceptable ripple for ATX.
Turns out that the maximum is 120mVpp for the +12V line.
This is consitent with some HDD datasheets I looked into.
If the PSU has 300mVpp, it is defect.

The Original Poster should take note of many who posted denials and
yet do not even know how meters so often measure voltage.

Haha! Of course a DC meter measures an average. And this is
not a defect as your "so often" seems to imply. This is exactly
what a DC voltmeter is designed and expected to do. For the
ripple you use an oscilloscope.

Again, spec numbers of 3.1, 4.75, and 11.4 means the meter must
report numbers above 3.23, 4.87, and 11.7 volts. No mystery here.
Just many posters in denial and who never did power supply design work.

Unfortunately this is not even true with your assumption about the
ripple. And you still have not addressed that +12V has an acceptable
tolerance of 10%. The ATX standard uses some flowery language here
(... under high load ...), but the fact is that it used to be 10%
tolerance (unconditionally) and most (all?) disks are only expecting
10% tolerance.

So with your assumptions, taking 300mVpp ripple, you need to have a
lowwe voltage of 12V * 0.9 = 10.8V. Subtract 150mV negative ripple
component and this is 10.95V. Add 1% meter tolerance, and you get
11.06V minimal measurement. Still significantly below what the
PS measured!

Even assuming you do not know how ripple is stated and actually
mean 600mVpp (a value at which the output filter capacitor may start
to smoke...), and a 3% meter tolerance for an analog meter,
you get 11.44V, which is lower than the measurements of the OP.

At 11.655 and with the 5 volts at 5.12, then those numbers imply a
power supply problem; reason for intermittent disk drive failure.

Not at all. See above.

A problem more apparent if same numbers are taken with only one disk
drive connected.

Amazed that only a few here have a grasp of how to use a meter. No
wonder so many shotgun to fix computers.

I think you have not established that you know what you are talking
about. Quite to the contrary in fact. So far I see dangerous
semi-knowledge....

I agree that most people, educated or otherwise, do not know how to
use a meter because they do not usually need to know. Not really their
fault. But at the moment you are accusing the wrong people...

Note that I bever said there could not be an other problem with the
voltages. But the DC averages are fine and do only point to a
lower-quality PSU, not a broken one.

I do however completely agree that the observed failure mode
of the OP strongly points to a problem with the PSU.

Arno

 

[Arno Wagner]

Arno Wagner did not read what was posted. For example, when 5 volts
reads 4.87 on the meter, then that voltage may be repeatedly dropping
below 4.75. But I am only restating what Arno was supposed to have
read before posting. 11.655 on a meter means the power supply may be
dropping repeatedly below 11.4 volts. It explains failures seen by the
OP. Voltage measurements (posting all the numbers) with only one drive
connected would confirm that problem.

Arno - learn to read what was posted from decades of experience before
hyping your speculation. Stop posting your grossly wrong information
directly traceable to insufficient knowledge and experience. 3.23,
4.87, and 11.7 are minimum numbers as read by the meter. Those numbers
are completely in agreement with specs that I probably read long before
Arno was born.

So, now I get the "you cannot read, you have no experience, you
are speculating and I am much older and experienced" treatment?
Sorry, not getting into a "my credentials are better than yours,
so I _must_ be right" contest.

Side note: You do know that the original PC PSU specifications are
not valid anymore?

Arno

 

[w_tom]

Arno looked up acceptable ripple voltage having finally grasped what
was posted so many times previously. Numbers he should have know when
this discussion first started. Ripple voltage should not exceed 120
mv. Therefore when power supply is failing (even overloaded), then
ripple voltage increases. Arno tells us that ripple voltage was not
excessive when meter reading suggests otherwise. Well that 'exampled'
power supply now with 300 mv of ripple measures 4.8 volts. Why 300 mv?
Because power supply is failing. According to Arno, that reading is
completely normal when he cites 4.75 volts as acceptable. Arno ignores
how meters operate and why ripple voltage increases - becomes too
great. Meanwhile, a voltage below 4.87 suggested a defective power
supply.

In the OP's case, 11.655 also suggests a defective supply for same
reasons. A conclusion that is confirmed by a voltage measurement when
disk drives are removed. Also suggesting a failure is excessively low
12 volts while 5 volts is unusually high - 5.12.

Arno now says the OP must use an oscilloscope. Bull. Arno again
displays lack of experience. Yes, we often used an oscilloscope when
it was available. Therefore we learned how meters work. Many here
clearly don't have that experience and therefore deny acceptable
numbers. An oscilloscope does nothing for the OP. Numbers such as
3.23, 4.87, and 11.7 take into account both excessive ripple voltage
AND how meters work. The OP does not need a scope. Taking the same
measurements of all voltages (purple, red, yellow, and orange wire)
with disk drives removed will confirm the problem. OP was informed by
one who did this stuff for a few decades - at the design level. Number
of contrary replies demonstrates how many just know - did not first
obtain experience - or even use an Oscope.

Arno confused the reader by claiming the power supply is working
normally - assumes that ripple voltages are normal in a failing supply.
Meter suggests otherwise. Arno makes ripple voltage assumptions so as
to not admit to 'measured limits' - 3.23, 4.87, and 11.7 volts. Meter
is suggesting a power supply so overloaded as to be defective - and to
output excessive ripple voltage.

Arno agrees the power supply is suspect. One voltage apparently
cannot provide sufficient power and/or has excessive ripple voltage.
Either way, that would explain disk drive problems. Meter in but a
minute can quickly identify failures if correct spec numbers are used -
as I have provided. Just because a meter reports the Intel spec number
does not say a power supply is functioning properly. And that
unusually high 5 volts in combination with excessively low 12 volts
further suggest a problem.

Two factors define why a disk drive is failing intermittently (and
therefore now must be tested with a disk drive hardware diagnostic).
One: 11.655 volts is too low. Two: 5 volts is unusually high when the
12 volts is so low. That is what my original post stated when but a
few others also warned the majority of their technical errors. Notice
we had a classic example of the large majority being so wrong. In
computer newsgroups, a clear majority don't even have basic electrical
knowledge. 11.655 volts suggests the power supply is failing - in
direct contradiction to what a majority without sufficient experience
so voraciously denied.

 

[w_tom]

I disagree. If he had said "not enough data", I would be willing to
agree. ...

What was posted repeatedly? The next step was to remove all but maybe
one drive and take voltage numbers again. Also the unusually high five
volts was another fact that suggested defective supply. There was
plenty of data in the OP's original posts to say a power supply is not
functioning correctly - in direct contradiction to what most posted -
AND that a failing supply would cause disk drive problems.

Measure voltage with only one drive connected. If that voltage is
sufficient, then execute comprehensive disk drive diagnostic to find
any defects created by that low voltage. That was also posted
repeatedly. Provided was where to look for the failure AND how to
solve the failure. 11.655 volts is too low in direct contradiction to
a majority who obviously have insufficient experience and knowledge.

But again, did you first read with care? "not enough data" and how
to get that additional data was included in those earlier posts. Those
earlier posts were accurate then and stand uncorrected now. 11.655
volts is too low for the 12 volts and would explain Chris Milne's
intermittent disk drive problems.

 

[Rod Speed]

Arno looked up acceptable ripple voltage

You did get that bit right.

having finally grasped what was posted so many times previously.

Pity YOU ****ed up completely on that ripple. The multimeter
measures the average voltage and its the average voltage that
the ATX specs state, NOT the minimum voltage with ripple added.

Numbers he should have know when this discussion first started.

It aint relevant to the voltage measured with a multimeter, cretin.

Ripple voltage should not exceed 120 mv.

Pity that the ripple isnt measured with the multimeter, cretin.

Therefore when power supply is failing (even
overloaded), then ripple voltage increases.

Irrelevant to your stupid pig ignorant claim
about what the multimeter reading should be.

Arno tells us that ripple voltage was not excessive
when meter reading suggests otherwise.

Thanks for that completely superfluous proof that you have
never ever had a ****ing clue about anything at all, ever.

ALL you know is that the DC reading is WITHIN THE ATX SPECS.

Well that 'exampled' power supply now with 300 mv of ripple measures 4.8 volts.

No it doesnt. You dont know what the ripple is from the multimeter
reading. You have to use an oscilloscope to see what the ripple is,
as the ATX specs state very unambiguously indeed.

Why 300 mv? Because power supply is failing.

You dont know that.

According to Arno, that reading is completely
normal when he cites 4.75 volts as acceptable.

So does the ATX spec, ****wit.

Arno ignores how meters operate

The multimeter reading does NOT change when the ripple goes to 300mV, cretin.

and why ripple voltage increases - becomes too great.

You dont know that the ripple voltage has increased, cretin.

Meanwhile, a voltage below 4.87 suggested a defective power supply.

Wrong, as always.

In the OP's case, 11.655 also suggests a defective supply for same reasons.

Wrong, as always.

A conclusion that is confirmed by a voltage
measurement when disk drives are removed.

The only way to decide if the ripple voltage is out of specs
is to measure the ripple voltage with an oscilloscope, cretin.

And hard drives arent that sensitive to ripple on the 12V rail ANYWAY.
Because that rail is used to drive the rotation motor and they dont
care about even 300mV of ripple. The ATX spec specifys 150mV
of ripple because of what else the 12V rail is used for in PCs.

Also suggesting a failure is excessively low
12 volts while 5 volts is unusually high - 5.12.

Wrong, as always. Plenty of power supplys regulate them separately.

Arno now says the OP must use an oscilloscope.

So does the ATX spec, funny that.

Bull. Arno again displays lack of experience.

You do in spades.

Yes, we often used an oscilloscope when it was
available. Therefore we learned how meters work.

You clearly never did. Even if the ripple has increased to 300mV
that would NOT produce the voltage you claim BECAUSE THE
METER READS THE AVERAGE VOLTAGE AND THAT WONT
CHANGE WHEN JUST THE RIPPLE VOLTAGE DOUBLES.

Many here clearly don't have that experience
and therefore deny acceptable numbers.

We all realise that JUST changing the ripple
will NOT affect the multimeter reading.

An oscilloscope does nothing for the OP.

Neither does a multimeter measuring the DC voltage, ****wit.

Numbers such as 3.23, 4.87, and 11.7 take into account
both excessive ripple voltage AND how meters work.

Nope, you dont have a ****ing clue about how multimeters work.

The OP does not need a scope.

Its the only way to see what the ripple level is.

Taking the same measurements of all voltages (purple, red, yellow,
and orange wire) with disk drives removed will confirm the problem.

Wrong, as always.

OP was informed by one who did this stuff for a few decades - at the design level.

We all appear to have done that too, ****wit.

And actually have enough of a clue to realise what a multimeter reads too.

Number of contrary replies demonstrates how many just know
- did not first obtain experience - or even use an Oscope.

You in spades.

Arno confused the reader by claiming the power supply is working
normally - assumes that ripple voltages are normal in a failing supply.

You dont even know that it is a failing supply.

Meter suggests otherwise.

Wrong, as always.

Arno makes ripple voltage assumptions

YOU made the assumption of a 300mV ripple for
which you dont actually have a shred of evidence.

so as to not admit to 'measured limits' - 3.23, 4.87, and 11.7 volts.

Nothing to 'admit' to, you've never had a clue about how meters work.

Meter is suggesting a power supply so overloaded as
to be defective - and to output excessive ripple voltage.

You can keep chanting that drivel till the cows come
home if you like, changes absolutely nothing at all.

Arno agrees the power supply is suspect.

Lying, as always.

One voltage apparently> cannot provide sufficient
power and/or has excessive ripple voltage.

You dont know that either, and hard drives dont
care much about ripple on the 12V rail ANYWAY.

Either way, that would explain disk drive problems.

Nope, hard drives dont care about a that
purported 300mV ripple on the 12V rail.

Meter in but a minute can quickly identify failures if
correct spec numbers are used - as I have provided.

Wrong, as always. And you STILL havent explained how
come the Seagate doesnt work in an external enclosure.
Its clearly dead, ****wit.

Just because a meter reports the Intel spec number
does not say a power supply is functioning properly.

Yes, but your stupid pig ignorant claim that you can work out
what the ripple is from the DC meter reading is just plain wrong.
BECAUSE IT MEASURES THE AVERAGE VOLTAGE, ****WIT.

And that unusually high 5 volts in combination with
excessively low 12 volts further suggest a problem.

Wrong again. And the FACT that the Seagate doesnt work in
an external enclosure shows that it isnt a power supply problem.

Two factors define why a disk drive is failing intermittently (and
therefore now must be tested with a disk drive hardware diagnostic).
One: 11.655 volts is too low. Two: 5 volts is unusually high when the
12 volts is so low. That is what my original post stated

Pity it was always pure drivel and STILL DOESNT EXPLAIN WHY
THE SEAGATE DOESNT WORK IN AN EXTERNAL ENCLOSURE.

when but a few others also warned the majority of their technical errors.
Notice we had a classic example of the large majority being so wrong.

It you that has proven that you dont have a ****ing clue
about how multimeters work. Or anything else at all either.

In computer newsgroups, a clear majority
don't even have basic electrical knowledge.

You clearly dont.

11.655 volts suggests the power supply is failing

Like hell it does when JUST an increase in
the ripple wont change the DC reading, ****wit.

- in direct contradiction to what a majority without
sufficient experience so voraciously denied.

Thanks for that completely superfluous proof that you have
never ever had a ****ing clue about anything at all, ever.

 

[Rod Speed]

Arno Wagner wrote:

What was posted repeatedly?

You pig ignorant drivel that proves in spades that you have
never ever had a ****ing clue about anything at all, ever.

The next step was to remove all but maybe
one drive and take voltage numbers again.

No need when the Seagate wont even work in an external enclosure.

Also the unusually high five volts was another fact that suggested
defective supply. There was plenty of data in the OP's original
posts to say a power supply is not functioning correctly -

Another pig ignorant lie.

in direct contradiction to what most posted - AND
that a failing supply would cause disk drive problems.

Wrong when hard drives dont care about 300mV of ripple on the 12V line,
even if that ripple is there, and there isnt a shred of evidence that it is.

Measure voltage with only one drive connected. If that
voltage is sufficient, then execute comprehensive disk drive
diagnostic to find any defects created by that low voltage.

Not even possible when the drive is invisible even in an external enclosure.

That was also posted repeatedly.

Yep, you're actually so stupid that you havent even noticed that
the Seagate doesnt even work in an external enclosure, SO THE
PROBLEM CANT BE THE RIPPLE ON THE POWER SUPPLY.

<rest of your terminally silly shit flushed where it belongs>

 

[Arno Wagner]

What was posted repeatedly? The next step was to remove all but maybe
one drive and take voltage numbers again. Also the unusually high five
volts was another fact that suggested defective supply.

What unusually high +5V?

There was
plenty of data in the OP's original posts to say a power supply is not
functioning correctly - in direct contradiction to what most posted -
AND that a failing supply would cause disk drive problems.

Measure voltage with only one drive connected. If that voltage is
sufficient, then execute comprehensive disk drive diagnostic to find
any defects created by that low voltage. That was also posted
repeatedly. Provided was where to look for the failure AND how to
solve the failure. 11.655 volts is too low in direct contradiction to
a majority who obviously have insufficient experience and knowledge.

But again, did you first read with care? "not enough data" and how
to get that additional data was included in those earlier posts. Those
earlier posts were accurate then and stand uncorrected now. 11.655
volts is too low for the 12 volts and would explain Chris Milne's
intermittent disk drive problems.

And it seems you have still not understood why you are wrong on
this. 11.65V is not too low. Stop claiming this and finally
have a look into the ATX standard and then get your damn math
right!

Arno