Power On Time Count SMART warning for Fujitsu 20GB [Storage]

Prev: Cancel backup on Buffalo Linkstation
Next: WD MyBook Essential 320GB Speed?

From: Simon on 5 Sep 2008 21:47

Arno Wagner <me(a)privacy.net> wrote
> Simon <192900(a)spam.com> wrote
>> Arno Wagner <me(a)privacy.net> wrote
>>> chrisv <chrisv(a)nospam.invalid> wrote
>>>> chrisv wrote

>>>>> In my experience, 10+ years of lifetime is routine
>>>>> and, really, expected from an electronic device.

>>>> If you want, you can come-over and I'll fire-up my circa 1985 Amiga
>>>> A1000 for you. (But I conceed that the HD is newer - circa 1989 8).

>>> No need, I have an Atari ST that works fine. But
>>> this is not "lifetime". This is "shelf live unoperational".

>> Plenty have had TVs work fine for that long, including me.
>> And that isnt shelf life unoperational, thats daily use.

> And that is a TV, not a HDD and has different engineering parameters.

He said AN ELECTRONIC DEVICE at the top and
clearly more than just hard drives are being discussed.

And you yourself made silly claims about electros, not just hard drives too.

>>> And that Atari ST has some replaced electrolythes,
>>> because I had to fix them to solve a stability problem.

>> And most of us have had TVs that havent needed any electos replaced.

> See above.

See above.

>>>> Alas, my (also) circa 1985 Sony KV25XBR died within
>>>> the last year, after over two decades of heavy use...

>>> Good design then. My (expensive) Sony Vaio died after 2 years of
>>> light use. The cause was chipset overheating due to inadequate cooling.

>>> It just boild down to several things:

>>> - Treat electronics well and they will live longer

>> Treat a properly designed TV normally and it will last a
>> hell of lot longer than your mindlessly silly claim at the top.

> No argument from me. But the TV set comparison is completely besides the point.

Nope, not when you made a completely silly claim about electros and even you should
have noticed that TVs and power supplys have a lot more of those than do hard drives.

>>> - It is statistics. Lifetime is just when failures start to get
>>> more likely. Some things die withing a year, some keep 20 years.
>>> Can still be 5 years lifetime.

>> Not when the vast bulk of TVs do a lot better than 5 years.

> Huh? Did you read the sentence I wrote?

Yep, the lifetime is clearly a lot more than 5 years when the vast bulk of them do a hell of a lot better than 5 years
and when they dont last that long, its usually the components which arent seen in hard drives that fail in that time.

>>> - Not all failures kill a thing. Some do not matter at all.
>>> - Personal experience is not a global predictor.

>> Decent stats are tho.

> Indeed.

And even you should have noticed that most hard drives last a lot longer than the 5 year design life SOME datasheets
specify.

From: fang on 5 Sep 2008 21:49

From: Franc Zabkar on 6 Sep 2008 00:46

On 4 Sep 2008 21:44:49 GMT, Arno Wagner <me(a)privacy.net> put finger to
keyboard and composed:

>Previously Franc Zabkar <fzabkar(a)iinternode.on.net> wrote:
>> My MPF3204AT Fujitsu 20GB HDD's Power On Time Count just triggered a
>> SMART warning after dropping below the threshold of 20.
>
>> The raw value is currently 43763894 seconds, ie 12156 hours.
>
>> OTOH my 120GB Seagate drive is currently at ...
>
>> Power On Hours Count 9 0 99 99 0000000005DDh (1501)
>
>> ... so its expected life appears to be somewhere between 150,100 and
>> 75,050 hours.
>
>> Are these numbers realistic, ie has hard disc reliability really
>> improved that much? I don't think so.
>
>This is not reliability. This is component life under operation.

I don't see the distinction. The end user just needs to know whether
one device can be expected to last longer than another. If it does,
then it's more reliable. He doesn't care whether the difference is due
to design philosophy, or component selection, or the state of
technology.

>It has improved significantly due to better lubrication
>material as has non-operating component life. Here also because
>of the move to ceramic capacitors, that basically live forever,
>while electrolytes die after 3-5 years or so, depending on
>temperature and quality.
>
>But, no, I would say the 7.5/15 years are probably still
>longer than you can realistically expect.

I tried to compare a ST313021A 13GB Seagate HD of around the same
vintage. Unfortunately Seagate's SMART data are confusing as usual.

Here is a sample:

Att Thr Cur Worst Raw
-------------------------------------------------------
Power On Hours Count 9 0 247 1 0000000026C7h
Power On Hours Count 9 0 210 1 000000002810h
Power On Hours Count 9 0 188 1 0000000028D0h

It looks like each point represents about 8.8 hours. A total of 256
points would then equate to about 2260 hours. However the raw figure
represents 10,448 hours.

As for the start/stop count, it appears that the threshold for a SMART
warning must be between 88,020 and 72,496.

Start/Stop Count 4 20 96 96 000000001131h
Start/Stop Count 4 20 96 96 0000000011B3h

However, the datasheet ...

http://www.seagate.com/support/disc/manuals/ata/u8pmb.pdf

.... specifies the number of "contact start-stop cycles" as 50,000.

- Franc Zabkar
--
Please remove one 'i' from my address when replying by email.

From: Arno Wagner on 6 Sep 2008 10:35

Previously Franc Zabkar <fzabkar(a)iinternode.on.net> wrote:
> On 4 Sep 2008 21:44:49 GMT, Arno Wagner <me(a)privacy.net> put finger to
> keyboard and composed:

>>Previously Franc Zabkar <fzabkar(a)iinternode.on.net> wrote:
>>> My MPF3204AT Fujitsu 20GB HDD's Power On Time Count just triggered a
>>> SMART warning after dropping below the threshold of 20.
>>
>>> The raw value is currently 43763894 seconds, ie 12156 hours.
>>
>>> OTOH my 120GB Seagate drive is currently at ...
>>
>>> Power On Hours Count 9 0 99 99 0000000005DDh (1501)
>>
>>> ... so its expected life appears to be somewhere between 150,100 and
>>> 75,050 hours.
>>
>>> Are these numbers realistic, ie has hard disc reliability really
>>> improved that much? I don't think so.
>>
>>This is not reliability. This is component life under operation.

> I don't see the distinction. The end user just needs to know whether
> one device can be expected to last longer than another. If it does,
> then it's more reliable. He doesn't care whether the difference is due
> to design philosophy, or component selection, or the state of
> technology.

True, but the problem here is if these things are not well-defined,
then vendors will lie and sell worse quality with seemingly better
numbers.

So the "component live" is actually the time period where the
steted MTBF holds (except initially). After the component live
time iis over, the MTBF gets worse, usually slowly.

>>It has improved significantly due to better lubrication
>>material as has non-operating component life. Here also because
>>of the move to ceramic capacitors, that basically live forever,
>>while electrolytes die after 3-5 years or so, depending on
>>temperature and quality.
>>
>>But, no, I would say the 7.5/15 years are probably still
>>longer than you can realistically expect.

> I tried to compare a ST313021A 13GB Seagate HD of around the same
> vintage. Unfortunately Seagate's SMART data are confusing as usual.

> Here is a sample:

> Att Thr Cur Worst Raw
> -------------------------------------------------------
> Power On Hours Count 9 0 247 1 0000000026C7h
> Power On Hours Count 9 0 210 1 000000002810h
> Power On Hours Count 9 0 188 1 0000000028D0h

> It looks like each point represents about 8.8 hours. A total of 256
> points would then equate to about 2260 hours. However the raw figure
> represents 10,448 hours.

> As for the start/stop count, it appears that the threshold for a SMART
> warning must be between 88,020 and 72,496.

> Start/Stop Count 4 20 96 96 000000001131h
> Start/Stop Count 4 20 96 96 0000000011B3h

> However, the datasheet ...

> http://www.seagate.com/support/disc/manuals/ata/u8pmb.pdf

> ... specifies the number of "contact start-stop cycles" as 50,000.

That is pretty standard for non-notebook dsrives.

Arno

From: Franc Zabkar on 6 Sep 2008 18:56

On Fri, 05 Sep 2008 07:08:06 +1000, Franc Zabkar
<fzabkar(a)iinternode.on.net> put finger to keyboard and composed:

>My MPF3204AT Fujitsu 20GB HDD's Power On Time Count just triggered a
>SMART warning after dropping below the threshold of 20.
>
>The raw value is currently 43763894 seconds, ie 12156 hours.
>
>OTOH my 120GB Seagate drive is currently at ...
>
>Power On Hours Count 9 0 99 99 0000000005DDh (1501)
>
>... so its expected life appears to be somewhere between 150,100 and
>75,050 hours.

After looking at other SMART reports, it looks like Seagate has
settled on a figure of around 90,000 powered-on hours since its 40GB
models.

ST94019A 40GB (75583 - 90700 hours)
http://www.searchengines.pl/Dlaczego-tak-grzeje--t90712.html
09 Power-On Time Count 0 95 95 4535

ST94011A 40GB (83688 - 95643 hours)
http://paste.ubuntuusers.de/raw/391290/
9 Power_On_Hours 0x0032 093 093 000 6695

ST380011A 80GB (86040 - 89006 hours)
http://www.techsupportforum.com/microsoft-support/windows-xp-support/195291-win-xp-auto-restart-problem.html
09 Power-On Time Count 0 71 71 25812

ST310212A 100GB (82728 - 96517 hours)
http://www.aussiemagna.com/forums/showthread.php?t=31706&page=2
09 Power-On Time Count 0 94 94 5791

ST3120026A 120GB (86042 - 90822 hours)
http://www.computerbanter.com/showthread.php?t=105776
09 Power-On Time Count 0 82 82 16348

ST3120026AS 120GB (86182 - 89374 hours)
http://www.techsupportforum.com/microsoft-support/windows-xp-support/195291-win-xp-auto-restart-problem.html
09 Power-On Time Count 0 73 73 24131

ST3160023A 160GB (87110 - 90113 hours)
http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?p=5709248
9 Power_On_Hours 0x0032 071 071 000 26133

ST3500630A 500GB (80125 - 10683 hours)
http://akshaal.livejournal.com/221903.html
9 Power_On_Hours 0x0032 097 097 000 3205

- Franc Zabkar
--
Please remove one 'i' from my address when replying by email.

First | Prev | Next | Last
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5
Prev: Cancel backup on Buffalo Linkstation
Next: WD MyBook Essential 320GB Speed?