Authors: Hao Zheng Aravind N Murthy Edmund B Fanslau Frank E Talke
Publish Date: 2009/05/07
Volume: 16, Issue: 1-2, Pages: 267-
Abstract
Hard disk drives must be designed to be resistant to operational and nonoperational shock Jayson et al in IEEE Trans Magn 3852150–2152 2002 Numerical and experimental results show that “lifttab separation” and “dimple separation” are two possible failure modes of presently used head suspension assemblies Murthy in PhD thesis Center for Magnetic Recording Research University of California San Diego 2007 In addition “dimple and tongue wear” at the interface of gimbal and dimple are areas of concern in the design and operation of high performance suspensions during shock In this investigation an improved numerical model for nonoperational shock response of a load/unload hard disk drive is implemented by including design parameters of suspension such as dimple preload suspension material dimple height and the surface diameter of the dimple in the model Results for dimple and lifttab separation as well as the maximum impact stress at the dimple region as a function of preload and suspension design parameters will be presentedThe shock response of a hard disk drive HDD is an important design consideration A number of studies have been made in the past to study the nonoperational shock response Allen and Bogy 1996 investigated experimentally the effect of high shock amplitude and short shock duration on a hard disk drive and compared their results with a finite element model using ABAQUS In their model they considered the effect of both the suspension and the hard disk on the shock behavior and defined contact between slider and disk in terms of gap contact elements Edwards 1999 developed a model of a 3½ inch hard disk drive using ANSYS He studied the effect of different shock conditions on the dynamic response of the whole disk drive by varying the contact stiffness of the impact surface Jayson et al 2002 2003 studied the shock response for both nonoperational and operational HDDs corresponding to linear and rotary shock inputs using LSDyna and developed a correlation between rotary and linear shock test Murthy et al 2007 studied the dynamic response of small form factor disk drives with both “thin” and “thick” enclosures due to external vibrations and shock They performed modal and vibration analysis on both models and investigated the relative ontrack and offtrack displacement amplitudes of a slider due to shock and vibration excitation Gao et al 2006 performed nonoperational shock analysis using a multibody dynamic analysis to determine the shock level which causes the slider to lift off from the disk They derived the governing equation for the voice coil motorhead actuator assembly system using a Lagrangian formulation and obtained the shock response of the hard disk drive by including the constraint equations between the slider and the disk surface Luo et al 2007 found that the lift off height of the slider reaches a peak value as a function of pulse width Shi et al 2006 considered a head actuator arm model to analyze the deflection of the tip of the arm relative to the pivot for various input pulse shapes and correlated their experimental results with predictions from numerical simulationsTo improve the performance and to increase the areal storage density load/unload L/UL drives are now widely used Murthy 2007 studied the L/UL process and investigated the effect of shock input as well as suspension and gimbal design on the head disk interface Feliss et al 2007 tested the shock and vibration response of microdrives during linear and rotary shock using a scanning Laser Doppler Vibrometer and compared their results with a finite element model for both nonoperational and operational conditions In a recent study Shu et al 2007 presented the relative displacement between the tip of the actuator arm and the pivot onto which the cantilever arm is fixed as a function of shock amplitude and duration They verified their numerical simulation using a simplified single degree of freedom model and investigated the relationship between maximum relative displacement and frequency ratioThe equivalent radius R in Eq 2 is defined by 1/R = 1/R 1 + 1/R 2 and the equivalent Young’s modulus is given by 1/E = left 1 v 1 2 right/E 1 + left 1 v 22 right/E 2 where R 1 and R 2 E 1 and E 2 υ 1 and υ 2 are the radii the Young’s moduli and the Poisson ratios of the dimple and gimbal respectively
Keywords: