[comp.sys.dec] Bad TK52 CompacTape II cartridge tapes

leonh@hhb.UUCP (leon howorth) (03/25/89)

We recently encountered many, sometimes intermittent, problems with a TK70
tape drive on a Microvax 3600 (running VMS 4.7A ). More than 50% of the
new TK52 "CompacTape II" cartridge tapes we tried to INIT resulted in an 
error message:

" Device not in configuration or not available"   

when in fact the device MUA0: was online and available. The same error was
received about 50% of the time when attempting to BACKUP/LIST a backup
tape previously created on that drive. These tapes were new and had never
been used in a TK50 drive (which would ruin them for TK70). Finally, my
DEC Field Service guy found out through his tech. support channels that
cartridges within certain Lot numbers and ranges of Tape numbers have been
judged defective. In fact, they warn that using any of these tapes in an 
otherwise good drive can contaminate the drive and subsequently
contaminate good tapes. The Lot number is either stamped in the center
of the back of the cartridge or it is the leftmost of two
numbers stamped on the top rear of the cartridge. The defective tapes are
those within the following ranges ( letter "x" denotes wildcard
character):

LOT #		TAPE #
-----		-------
9x74x		xx5x
9x74x		xx0x
9x80x		xx09x or xx09xx
9x80x		xx10x or xx10xx
9x8xx		xx57x or xx57xx
9x8xx		xx58x or xx58xx

Leon Howorth, HHB Systems, 201-848-8000 ext. 243
UUCP: ....pyrnj!hhb!leonh

tyers@trlluna.trl.oz (P Tyers) (04/06/89)

In article <179@hhb.UUCP>, leonh@hhb.UUCP (leon howorth) writes:
  Regarding bad batches of DEC TK52 tapes which can damage your drives and
  contaminate other tapes used in the drive.

> The Lot number is either stamped in the center
> of the back of the cartridge or it is the leftmost of two
> numbers stamped on the top rear of the cartridge. The defective tapes are
> those within the following ranges ( letter "x" denotes wildcard
> character):
> 
> LOT #		TAPE #
> -----		-------
> 9x74x		xx5x
> 9x74x		xx0x
> 9x80x		xx09x or xx09xx
> 9x80x		xx10x or xx10xx
> 9x8xx		xx57x or xx57xx
> 9x8xx		xx58x or xx58xx

The DEC publication "DEC STUFF" JANUARY 1989 pp18 has an article by Stephen
Piazza Jnr about these tapes and indicates that DEC will replace free of
charge. The article also describes the coding scheme which leads to the
numbers. You may have some problems in getting access to the mag since it is
an internal DEC publication for field service staff, it seems. Our DECdirect
sales center had heard of neither the bad batch nor DEC STUFF!

Be warned out of recent orders for 40 tapes over the last six months we at
Telecom Research have found 24 tapes from these batches. Hence it may be
expected that many Australian sites are in a similiar situation.  The major
batch seems to be 57 ie the xx57x xx57xx out of the list.

-- 
P Tyers,	           JANET tyers%trlluna.oz@uk.ac.ucl.cs
ACSnet 	tyers@trlluna.oz   UUCP {uunet,hplabs,ukc}!munnari!trlluna.oz!tyers
CSnet	tyers@trlluna.oz   ARPAnet tyers%trlluna.oz@uunet.uu.net
MAIL: Telecom Research Laboratories, P.O. Box 249, Clayton, VICTORIA 3168,AUST