• Please review our updated Terms and Rules here

Seagate ST412 10MB MFM drive in 5160 IBM XT recently died with 1701 & 1705

D

DrAlis

Experienced Member
Joined
Nov 11, 2021
Messages
221
This pretty ST412 has worked well in my vintage collection and been running for maybe 20h uptime last year without any issues.

Well, come last week I get the terribly unspecific 1701 at boot. It seems intermittend at first but meanwhile permanent. (I have had a 1701 a couple of time with other ST412 and never was able to bring one back to life so far with simple measures such as lube or caps...)

Ok, so I run IBM advanced diagnostics and get a 1705 after it fails in the test. Googling that leaves me with "1705 Record not found". Pfff... what does that mean? Speedstor tests the contoller ok and fails everything else. I haven't messed with cables etc. so what does that leave me with? Spinning Lube gone bad? Head crash? Track 0 sensor?

As ususal, thank you for your ideas :)
 
I would grab speedstor and see if the drive is bad first. When's last time it was formatted?
 
DrAlis said:
Speedstor tests the controller ok and fails everything else. I haven't messed with cables etc. so what does that leave me with? Spinning Lube gone bad? Head crash? Track 0 sensor?
Click to expand...
You cannot discount (partial) controller failure yet. When Speedstor 'tests' the controller, it is asking the controller to do a self test. The controller cannot possibly test every aspect of itself.

Given your situation, when I think of the probabilities of controller failure, cable failure, and drive failure, I'm going to pace my bet on the drive.

1. Something to quickly look at. Refer to [here]. That connection to the drive needs to be good.

2. What controller is it?

DrAlis said:
Speedstor tests the controller ok and fails everything else.
Click to expand...
Try running the RAYXTMFM tool at [here].
See the example screen output there.
Does RAYXTMFM show that the drive is reporting as 'ready' ?
 
Thanks Modem7. It is an original IBM controller rev. 1. I have not seen them fail so far. But you have seen more for sure :) I have a spare controller so I will attempt switching controllers (but this will buy me a low level format for sure, right?) Machine has not been moved so my bet is on the drive (but which part) and connections should not degrade sitting.Feels like something mechanical degraded. Will also look into rayxtmfm. I need to get it on disk though.The ST412 was running alongside an XTIDE but now if I boot of the CF card, the ST412 is nowhere visible: not in checkit or diagnostic or speedstor. i need to remove the xtide for the diagnostic software to find the ST412. but mind that both were found and coworked fine weeks ago. :)
 
DrAlis said:
Thanks Modem7. It is an original IBM controller rev. 1. I have not seen them fail so far. But you have seen more for sure :) I have a spare controller so I will attempt switching controllers (but this will buy me a low level format for sure, right?)
Click to expand...
If that "spare controller" is one of the three variations of the 'IBM Fixed Disk Adapter' shown at [here], then yes, in that all three variations lay down the same 'low-level format'. I know because I have all three variations, and have swapped all three about without having to low-level format the drive again.

For that controller, I list possible causes of the 1701 error at [here].

DrAlis said:
... and connections should not degrade sitting.
Click to expand...
But something that is very easy to check.

DrAlis said:
Machine has not been moved so my bet is on the drive (but which part) and connections should not degrade sitting.Feels like something mechanical degraded.
Click to expand...
Semiconductor devices can fail at the 'snap of ones fingers'. And they do not always fail when the device is operating. Need to keep an open mind.

DrAlis said:
The ST412 was running alongside an XTIDE but now if I boot of the CF card, the ST412 is nowhere visible: not in checkit or diagnostic or speedstor.
Click to expand...
Although, CheckIt may be looking for a logical hard drive (e.g. DOS partition) rather than a physical hard drive. I haven't looked. CheckIt is not something I would use for hard drive problems.

DrAlis said:
i need to remove the xtide for the diagnostic software to find the ST412.
Click to expand...
With both IBM Fixed Disk Adapter and XT-IDE controllers present, it will come down to whether the ST-412 is mapped as physical hard drive 0 (physical drive 80h) or physical hard drive 1 (physical drive 81h).
Complicated by the fact that the XTIDE Universal BIOS has the ability to swap the mapping.

By default, RAYXTMFM targets physical hard drive 0, but if needed, will target hard drive 1 if the /hd1 command line switch is used.

Even if RAYXTMFM shows that the ST-412 is not reporting as 'ready', the MFM controller swap is still required in case the drive is in fact reporting as 'ready', but a failure in the controller results in the controller not being able to register the 'ready'. FYI. Note that a multimeter can be used to see if the drive is reporting as 'ready' - see [here].
 
Ok thanks I will get Rayxtmfm ready and my spare controller when taking it apart. Any advise on what to look for on the actual 412 drive, as we both agreed it is the most probable issue creator?
 
Yes it spins. And the rayxtmfm results are in. looks like the drive isn't ready. i kind of feel i don't hear as much stepper sound as i used to so this will be my first stop when i open it in the next days.
 

Attachments

  • 2F80499A-C9E2-4592-8491-6924BA23CDC2.jpeg
    2F80499A-C9E2-4592-8491-6924BA23CDC2.jpeg
    3.6 MB · Views: 10
  • 8D86E729-30DD-4B9E-9D69-80CDFB9C37F7.jpeg
    8D86E729-30DD-4B9E-9D69-80CDFB9C37F7.jpeg
    4 MB · Views: 10
  • 79B34E5D-EE27-4567-A1DE-AACB65989F55.jpeg
    79B34E5D-EE27-4567-A1DE-AACB65989F55.jpeg
    3.8 MB · Views: 10
DrAlis said:
Any advise on what to look for on the actual 412 drive, as we both agreed it is the most probable issue creator?
Click to expand...
Of course, that is 'jumping the gun'.

If RAYXTMFM indicates that the drive is not reporting as 'ready', then because we know your configuration is good (cabling, drive-select, termination), and you will have changed over the controller, then there can be many causes as to the lack of 'ready'. Some things I would look at:
- Verify , at the drive, that the drive is not reporting as ready.
- Change of control cable (carries the READY signal), just in case.
- Use a multimeter to verify that the +5V and +12V on the drive is good. I would do the measurement somewhere on the PCB.
- Re-seat (multiple times) all connections within the drive.
- Use an oscilloscope to measure the index pulses from the index sensor. Waveform from a quality perspective. Frequency of pulses to determine if the spindle is 'coming up to speed'. Stability.
- Change of aluminium electrolytic caps.
 
DrAlis said:
i kind of feel i don't hear as much stepper sound as i used to so this will be my first stop when i open it in the next days.
Click to expand...
We posted at the same time.

Due to contamination, I suggest that opening up the drive chamber be a last resort thing. Note that, as an example, if the drive's self test is not seeing the spindle reach adequate speed (i.e. therefore, heads may not be floating above the platter surface), the self test is unlikely to proceed to move the heads.
 
Will do. Rather than opening up I was hoping to give the stepper a manual workout. it sits accessible on the side if i remember. but chanced are i scratch up the disk if it aint spinning, right?
 
DrAlis said:
Will do. Rather than opening up I was hoping to give the stepper a manual workout. it sits accessible on the side if i remember.
Click to expand...
Yes, per [here].

DrAlis said:
but chanced are i scratch up the disk if it aint spinning, right?
Click to expand...
Yes, a possibility. It's why you see stickers like 'Do not rotate interrupter' on old drives.

With the drive powered, expect some physical resistance, because the coils in the stepper will be energised.
 
modem7 said:
Yes, per [here].


Yes, a possibility. It's why you see stickers like 'Do not rotate interrupter' on old drives.

With the drive powered, expect some physical resistance, because the coils in the stepper will be energised.
Click to expand...
hey modem7 btw you definitely deserve an award for minuszerodegrees. it is megacool and without it i am confident many people would not even bother with 5150s etc. got me started at least. you really got it all covered there. such a helpful site. chapeau!
 
on topic: do you think a drop of fine oil on the outside part of the axle as in the pictures will reach the bearings? i dont feel lucky enough to disassemble the drive if controllers and measures dont help.

off topic: i got a 5150 with the latest ibm bios and only 2 of 4 ram banks populated and i get no issues which i did not expect due to the bug
 
DrAlis said:
off topic: i got a 5150 with the latest ibm bios and only 2 of 4 ram banks populated and i get no issues which i did not expect due to the bug
Click to expand...
I just now pulled out a 16KB-64KB type motherboard, fitted with the 10/27/82 BIOS. With only two RAM banks populated, and SW1 set for banks 0+1, and SW2 set for 32 KB (1=on,2=on,3=on,4=on,5=on), I saw the POST error of '1054 201'

According to my 10/27/82 BIOS notes:
For a 64KB-256KB type motherboard with only two banks populated, and SW1 set for banks 0+1, and SW2 set for 128 KB (1=on,2=off,3=on,4=on,5=on), expected is the POST error of '2055 201'

If you don't you have the correct switch settings on SW1/SW2 for two bank operation, that would explain things. Of course, the lack of an error message doesn't mean that 'all is happy under the hood'.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top