Help hard drives keep clicking and dying

[Frazer Jolly Goodfellow]

... 11.65 on a meter suggest voltages were dropping below 11.4.

... 5 volts rising higher to 5.12 also suggests this same
problem.

Revealing the factual detail that supports your reasoning and the
mathematics behind your assertions would *very easily* win you the
argument and expose Arno and the rest as the incompetent naysayers
you imply they are.

So, why do you hold back? Go for it, you've nothing to lose!

 

[Arno Wagner]

Revealing the factual detail that supports your reasoning and the
mathematics behind your assertions would *very easily* win you the
argument and expose Arno and the rest as the incompetent naysayers
you imply they are.

So, why do you hold back? Go for it, you've nothing to lose!

I think he cannot. But I will be watching, just in case he
does post something....

Arno

 

[James Brown]

Too stupid to be be a marketing person or sales clerk?

Not that so much as being too obnoxious. No operation
with a clue would actually employ anyone that hopeless.

Do you think that is possible?

No, too stupid isnt.

Well, he basically avoid anything that exposes him.

He avoids any question that doesnt too.

And does not answer to explanations why he is
wrong. And re-iterates his original statements.
And calls everybody that challenges him incompetent
without giving any proof. Quite transparent....

No time now, but I think I will do this soon.

Hope you have a strong stomach |-)

 

[Rod Speed]

Revealing the factual detail that supports your reasoning and the
mathematics behind your assertions would *very easily* win you the
argument and expose Arno and the rest as the incompetent naysayers
you imply they are.

So, why do you hold back? Go for it, you've nothing to lose!

He's got everything to lose, what little credibility he might have
left with those like Rubin who dont understand the basics.

 

[Alexander Grigoriev]

It integrates the input voltage for the fixed time, than discharges the
capacitor with calibrated current, counting the time it takes to go down to
0. I would not call 0.1% _very_ precise, though.
Integrator-counter type ADC also allow to filter any 50 and 60 Hz AC
component away, if the input integration time is chosen as N*0.1s.

 

[Arno Wagner]

It integrates the input voltage for the fixed time, than discharges the
capacitor with calibrated current, counting the time it takes to go down to
0. I would not call 0.1% _very_ precise, though.

Well, considering the effort spent....
But you are correct, that you can get 0.01% (woth 4+1/2 digits)
still for reasonable money.

Integrator-counter type ADC also allow to filter any 50 and 60 Hz AC
component away, if the input integration time is chosen as N*0.1s.

It is quite an ingenious design.

Arno

 

[w_tom]

Revealing the factual detail that supports your reasoning and the
mathematics behind your assertions would *very easily* win you the
argument and expose Arno and the rest as the incompetent naysayers
you imply they are.

So, why do you hold back? Go for it, you've nothing to lose!

Why 'win' over those who somehow already know - especially when
the nay-sayer did not know how a meter works? This is first year stuff
that any 'computer expert' should already know. Teaching it to
rude posters is not the objective.

Objective is the OP - not nay-sayers who offer no solutions. 'OP
provided' numbers are classic of a power supply that is failing - 11.65
and 5.14 volts. Sufficient details of why comes from experience,
basic knowledge such as how multivoltage power supplies work, all
numbers from those Intel spec sheets (not just myopically cited DC
voltages), and how meters work. One even misrepresents how better RMS
type multimeters work due to technical ignorance. And still he does
not understand why an RMS voltage is insufficient information. He even
assumes measurements only up to 1 kHz is an RMS meter. He does not
even know ripple frequencies? Again, lack of most basic knowledge.
Even when voltage falls below 11.4 (the previous example), an RMS meter
(inaccurately described by Arno) could still read 11.5 volts. According
to Arno, that reading means supply is OK - when voltage is excessively
below 11.4. Computer failing due to a defective power supply - and
Arno (et al) still attacks and argues an Intel number rather than
comprehend what really exists.

OP's voltages suggest why his disk drive is failing. Using OP's
numbers - which are typical of a failing supply - then two actions were
recommended. First solution was to measure those voltages with all
drives removed. Second was to reestablish drive integrity with
manufacturer diagnostics. Nay-sayers also did not understand relevance
in those paragraphs and why those actions were relevant to the OP's
numbers. Teaching nay-sayers basic electronics is not the objective.
If they wanted to learn, then they would not, instead, attack the
messenger. They even ignored ripple voltage to somehow know more?
Just another reason why they had to 'attack the messenger' to win.

Winner provided the OP with further actions to find and eliminate his
problem. OP provided voltage numbers that explain his failures.
Others with a history of shotgunning somehow know otherwise? Why 'win'
over 'computer experts' who don't even use a multimeter, whose
speculation somehow become fact, and who don't even understand how
better RMS meters operate? Voltage numbers for a failing power supply
are below 3.23, 4.87, and 11.7 volts. These numbers are consistent
with Intel specs, how meters measure voltages, how power supplies fail,
and come from a few decades of professional experience.

 

[Arno Wagner]

Why 'win' over those who somehow already know - especially when
the nay-sayer did not know how a meter works? This is first year stuff
that any 'computer expert' should already know. Teaching it to
rude posters is not the objective.

Far too obvious. Try another coverup.

Arno

 

[John Turco]

He's been challenged on several occasions to declare his interest in
surge protection and/or power supplies and each time avoids the question
with his usual dishonest top-posting.

Anyone unaware of w_tom's history: a google groups search on his
activities, searching for w_tom and w_tom1, will prove entertaining as
it'll demonstrate the extent of his imbecility.

Hello, Mike:

I first stumbled upon "w_tom" in during 2001.
He was preaching about the need for "'whole house' surge protection,"
as I recall.

Then, as now, many other posters argued with him. ;-)


Cordially,
John Turco <[email protected]>

 

[John Turco]

He's never said what the w stands for either. Bet its wanker.

Hello, Rod:

Personally, I always think of "watts," for some odd reason. <g>


Cordially,
John Turco <[email protected]>

 

[Rod Speed]

Rod Speed wrote

Hello, Rod:

Personally, I always think of "watts," for some odd reason. <g>

I'd have you publicly flogged for that, if you hadnt enjoyed that so much the last time.

 

[Mike Tomlinson]

I first stumbled upon "w_tom" in during 2001.
He was preaching about the need for "'whole house' surge protection,"
as I recall.

"preaching" describes his unique posting style well - it's akin to
religious fervour, and like many religious extremists, he won't accept
that he might be wrong or that others have a valid viewpoint.

 

[Arno Wagner]

"preaching" describes his unique posting style well - it's akin to
religious fervour, and like many religious extremists, he won't accept
that he might be wrong or that others have a valid viewpoint.

A fair summary. And he avaoids any type of discussion. Even after
obvious flaws in his reasoning have been demonstrated conclusively.

Arno

 

[Folkert Rienstra]

A fair summary.

As a preaching linux zealot yourself you probably are the right one to
comment, babblebot.

And he avaoids any type of discussion.

Isn't that what that huge killfile of yours is also for, babblebot?

Even after obvious flaws in his reasoning have been demonstrated conclusively.

He probably has a killfile that contains the same people that are in yours,
so he is just as oblivious of critique as you usally are, 'ostrich' babblebot.