IMHO the dual Sata-Hat is a lousy product because:

#1

a) The mounting distance between the two sata connectors is much too small for two 3.5" disks. There would have been plenty of space on the board!

b) The manufacturer wasted money on an unnecessary switch which disables both disks. This prevents booting from these disks because no way to manipulate that switch has been published. (Individually powering down each disk would be possible by hdparm commands and needs no special switch).

c) There seem not to exist any publication of the schematics of that board. This makes it impossible to understand it’s workings.

d) The documentation of v. 1.2 is lousy because working of the 12V supply is not well enough explained.

e) The ATX power pins seem of no use because not all 4 pins are appropriately connected.

I hope that Seedstudio takes notice of this unfortunate situation and promptly delivers the missing information.

#2

Sometimes i realy do not understand people that buy something without reading the informations first.

When I look at the wiki, the board is not intended for a directly connected 3.5 “HDD. You should only plug 2.5” devices directly onto it and they fit perfectly.
For 3.5 "HDDs you need adapter cables.

Booting from the HAT is not supported and is also discussed very often here in the forum. Therefore, a switch shouldn’t be a problem worth discussing.

It is clearly stated how much power you need (12V / 5A for example for 4x 3.5 "HDD). Everything else can be calculated by yourself and is also dependent on the HDD. But you should always offer a little more than is absolutely necessary.

The ATX connection does not have to be completely soldered because only the 12V line is required. If I understand the labeling correctly, only the 12V and 2x Ground and an NC (Not Connected) are indicated.

The schematic is really the only thing I miss something. Especially since this is available for almost every product.

But unfortunately your post seems to me like that of someone who had no desire to inform himself beforehand and is now disappointed. Too bad.

But that this is only your humble opinion, you are entitled to it at any time.

2 Likes
#3

My conclusions about the lousy product do not at all depend upon what I had read or not read before buying.

Moreover I can not understand why you suggest to make these calculations…

Your statement about the ATX connector is plain wrong.
So after all, none of my 4 points gets disproved

#4

The wut? Pal, you have only one point. You can’t read. And with this we can’t do anything.

As it was said, you need to have at least some fundamental reading skill to work with any system. I.e. you ignored description of product and now saying that product is not what you imagined. Do you see the problem? If not let put it other way.

You imagined orange and bought banana and now complaying that banana that you bought and is not orange, that you imagined. See the similitaty between this two situations?

If you still don’t get it, say what is your primary language, I will try to translate it for you

1 Like
#5

switch which disables both disks

This is because for 4 disks, we must turn on them in order so that the disk sda-sdd can match the actually connector SATA 1 to 4. If you can control the gpio at boot time, you can boot from the disk.

https://wiki.radxa.com/Dual_Quad_SATA_HAT#PINOUT

22 | GPIO_RST1 | reset SATA1/2

37 | GPIO_RST2 | reset SATA3/4

#6

Dear Dante4
As an ancient poet from Rome named Dante you of course are entitled to see today’s world in a different mode.

But according to politeness and common sense you are not entitled to crazy fantasies about me and mangling orangePi with bananaPi :smiley:

#7

Sorry jack but your argumentation

This is because for 4 disks, we must turn on them in order so that the disk sda-sdd can match the actually connector SATA 1 to 4

is wrong.
The following is correct, but unfortunately I do not see how this could be achieved in the SPL code…

If you can control the gpio at boot time, you can boot from the disk.

#8

A) that’s because it is the same board as for the quad sata. As mentioned: Nowhere is stated that you can plug-in 3.5 disks directly. Use 2.5 inch disks. They’re also often less power gready.
B) If you look at the included Python code you know witch gpio pilots the sata bridge chip and turns on the disks. If you want to hack the board you need to do some effort yourself.
C) Why would a manufacturer by default publish a schematic? When you buy a Desktop PC motherboard do you complain similarly? If you find it impossible to understand it’s workings but are keen on knowing how it works: You need to give it some effort. Order a few boards more (as you will probably fry some) and do some reverse engineering.
D/E) What’s to document? Or you use the 12V DC barrel, or you use the ATX connector from which only the 12V will be used.
No rocket science… if it is to you: stick with pre-assembled stuff where you have yourself no access to the hard-software so you don’t have to care about it’s workings

2 Likes
#9

OMG @pompopom
A) Is it too difficult for you to image that on exactly the same board size the connectors for dual hat could be placed sufficiently apart to accommodate two 3.5" disks??
If you can tell me the product # of 2.5" disks with 10 TB size I will be glad to check that :wink:

B) Have I ever said that I do not know the pins? Have you got any answer to my argument that the two switches are wasted money???

C) Many good manufacturers do automatically publish schematics as it does help understanding. So your nitpicking is of absolutely no help.

D/E) Everything is to be documented. See above sentence…

#10

I’m not going into discussion with a troll. Waste of time.

3 Likes
#11

@LinAdmin
That sounds to me like a wish list.
So, instead of saying “the dual Sata-Hat is a lousy product because:”, that is kind of pejorative, you could have said something like “How to make the dual Sata-Hat great”, much nicer, and hope for the next version.

2 Likes
#12

@thejoedoe
Your are the first who understood my text :upside_down_face: and I will not deny that a polite wording might be more effective.

However, I thought that a provocative text might result in the manufacturer somehow defending it’s design. With only 65 views within 3 days I gave up all my hopes for a better product.

#13

@pompopom: Exactly my thoughts…