Repeatable runout compensation using a learning algorithm with scheduled parameters

Information

  • Patent Grant
  • 6437936
  • Patent Number
    6,437,936
  • Date Filed
    Friday, January 21, 2000
    24 years ago
  • Date Issued
    Tuesday, August 20, 2002
    22 years ago
Abstract
A method and apparatus for compensating for written-in repeatable runout in a disc drive is provided. Compensation values are determined through an iterative learning process in which parameters of the learning process such as learning gain, servo loop gain, etc. are functions of the iteration number. The learning process also employs a nominal double integrator model of an actuator of the disc storage system. The learning process is also a function of a zero-phase low-pass filter.
Description




FIELD OF THE INVENTION




The present invention relates generally to disc drive data storage systems. More particularly, the present invention relates to compensation for errors in servo systems.




BACKGROUND OF THE INVENTION




Disc drives read and write information along concentric tracks formed on discs. To locate a particular track on a disc, disc drives typically use embedded servo fields on the disc. These embedded fields are utilized by a servo subsystem to position a head over a particular track. The servo fields are written onto the disc when the disc drive is manufactured and are thereafter simply read by the disc drive to determine position. A multi-rate servo system samples the position of the head relative to a particular track at a particular sampling rate and adjusts the position of the head at a rate that is a multiple of the sampling rate by estimating the position of the head between the measured position samples.




Ideally, a head following the center of a track moves along a perfectly circular path around the disc. However, two types of errors prevent heads from following this ideal path. The first type of error is a written-in error that arises during the creation of the servo fields. Written-in errors occur because the write head used to produce the servo fields does not always follow a perfectly circular path due to unpredictable pressure effects on the write head from the aerodynamics of its flight over the disc, and from vibrations in the gimbal used to support the head. Because of these written-in errors, a head that perfectly tracks the path followed by the servo write head will not follow a circular path.




The second type of error that prevents circular paths is known as a track following error. Track following errors arise as a head attempts to follow the path defined by the servo fields. The track following errors can be caused by the same aerodynamic and vibrational effects that create written-in errors. In addition, track following errors can arise because the servo system is unable to respond fast enough to high frequency changes in the path defined by the servo fields.




Written-in errors are often referred to as repeatable runout errors because they cause the same errors each time the head moves along a track. As track densities increase, these repeatable runout errors begin to limit the track pitch. Specifically, variations between the ideal track path and the actual track path created by the servo fields can result in an inner track path that interferes with an outer track path. This is especially acute when a first written-in error causes a head to be outside of an inner track's ideal circular path and a second written-in error causes the head to be inside of an outer track's ideal circular path. To avoid limitations on the track pitch, a system is needed to compensate for repeatable runout errors.




The present invention provides a solution to this and other problems and offers other advantages over the prior art.




SUMMARY OF THE INVENTION




The present invention offers a method and apparatus for compensating for written-in repeatable runout in a disc drive which solves the aforementioned problems. In one aspect, repeatable runout (RRO) errors in a disc drive having a servo loop for positioning a head relative to a track on a disc surface of a rotating disc using compensation values. Compensation values can be determined through a learning process which uses a nominal value (P


n


) of an actuator of the disc drive. In another aspect, the learning process is an iterative process and the learning gain is a function of a learning iteration number. In another aspect, a gain of the servo loop is a function of a learning iteration number. In yet another aspect, the learning process includes a zero-phase low-pass filter.











BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE DRAWINGS





FIG. 1

is a plan view of a disc drive of the present invention.





FIG. 2

is a top view of a section of a disc showing an ideal track and a realized written-in track.





FIG. 3

is a block diagram of a learning process for a servo loop in accordance with the present invention.











DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF ILLUSTRATIVE EMBODIMENTS





FIG. 1

is a plan view of a disc drive


100


that includes a housing with a base plate


102


and a top cover


104


(sections of top cover


104


are removed for clarity). Disc drive


100


further includes a disc pack


106


, which is mounted on a spindle motor (not shown). Disc pack


106


can include a plurality of individual discs which are mounted for co-rotation about a central axis. Each disc surface has an associated head gimbal assembly (HGA)


112


which is mounted to disc drive


100


for communication with the disc surface. Each HGA


112


includes a gimbal and a slider, which carries one or more read and write heads. Each HGA


112


is supported by a suspension


118


which is in turn attached to a track accessing arm


120


known generally as a fixture, of an actuator assembly


122


.




Actuator assembly


122


is rotated about a shaft


126


by a voice coil motor


124


, which is controlled by servo control circuitry within internal circuit


128


. HGA


112


travels in an arcuate path


130


between a disc inner diameter


132


and a disc outer diameter


134


. When the head is properly positioned, write circuitry within internal circuitry


128


encodes data for storage on the disc and sends an encoded signal to the head in HGA


112


, which writes the information to the disc. At other times, the read head in HGA


112


reads stored information from the disc and provides a recovered signal to detector circuitry and decoder circuitry within internal circuitry


128


to produce a recovered data signal.





FIG. 2

is a top view of a section


198


of a disc showing an ideal, perfectly circular track


200


and an actual track


202


. Section


198


includes a plurality of radially extending servo fields such as servo fields


204


and


206


. The servo fields include servo information that identifies the location of actual track


202


along disc section


198


.




Any variation in the position of a head away from circular track


200


is considered a position error. The portions of track


202


that do not follow circular track


200


create written-in repeatable runout position errors. A position error is considered a repeatable runout error if the same error occurs each time the head passes a particular circumferential location on the disc. Track


202


creates a repeatable runout error because each time a head follows the servo fields that define track


202


, it produces the same position error relative to ideal track


200


.




Under the present invention, a head attempting to write to or read from track


202


will not follow track


202


but instead will more closely follow perfectly circular track


200


. This is accomplished using a compensation signal that prevents the servo system from tracking repeatable runout errors resulting from the irregular shape of track


202


.




As described in the Background section, one of the major head positioning error sources is the repeatable disturbance caused by spindle motor and written-in error during servo writing (WI-RRO, i.e., the Repeatable Runout (RRO) written in by the Servo Track Writer). Another error source is the non-repeatable disturbance caused by sources such as spindle ball bearing defects, rocking modes, disk vibration and so on. A number of methods have been proposed to address repeatable disturbances. These methods can be categorized into two groups. In the first group, such as AFC (adaptive feedforward compensation), errors are rejected by feedforward terms generated outside the main feedback loop. A disadvantage of these methods is their intensive computational load, especially when the rejection of multiple disturbances is required. In the second group, error rejection signals are generated inside the feedback loop. One method is internal-model-based repetitive control. This has been demonstrated to be effective in rejecting repeatable disturbances in hard disk drives. However, this approach tends to amplify non-repeatable disturbances which are at frequencies between those of the repeatable disturbances.




To address WI-RRO, a possible approach is referred to as the Zero Acceleration Path (ZAP) concept which is often referred to as Repeatable Runout Compensation. It is a non-adaptive feedforward technique to compensate the WI-RRO in front of the feedback controller C(s). This is different with AFC (adaptive feedforward compensation) technique for rejecting RRO induced by the spindle motor. In AFC the compensation occurs after the feedback controller C(s).




To understand the ZAP concept, consider FIG.


2


. The track


202


represents the track center after the servo write process. Because of the various disturbances which occurred during the servo writing process, the track center is not ideally smooth and is difficult to follow by the actuator. This will result in a repeatable Position Error Signal (PES). However, if an appropriate correction amount is subtracted from the position measurement signal at each servo sector/sample, the original zigzag path becomes smooth, i.e. the track center becomes a perfect circle such as track


200


. If the non-repeatable position disturbances are ignored, this perfectly circular track center can be followed with “zero actuator acceleration” (ZAP) technique.




The improvement achieved by the ZAP concept depends on the accuracy of the correction values that are subtracted from the position measurement samples at respective sectors. The ZAP correction value versus sector for each track is a deterministic profile which can also be regarded as a deterministic time function when the spindle motor velocity is kept constant. Determining this profile is actually a curve identification problem in a dynamic system, which in turn can be regarded as an optimal control or dynamic optimization problem.




Several different techniques can be used to extract the deterministic WI-RRO profiles, or to compute the correction values. However, typical procedures involve complicated calculations, and require many revolutions for each track. Therefore, a practical and inexpensive implementation of the ZAP concept has been difficult. The challenge is to find a practically implementable method to determine the ZAP profile. The computations should be easily implementable in a cheaper processor, and satisfactory accuracy should be achieved within


10


revolutions.





FIG. 3

is a simplified block diagram of a servo control system


300


in accordance with one embodiment of the invention. Control system


300


includes a servo controller


302


identified as C(z). Actuator


304


is modeled as P(s) and a nominal model of the actuator


306


is modeled as P


n


(s). ZAP compensation values are determined in accordance with a learning updating law


308


. The simplified block diagram of

FIG. 3

shows servo controller system


300


. One difference comparison to other techniques is the use of the nominal model P


n


(s) of the voice coil motor (actuator) VCM for ZAP profile learning. In

FIG. 3

, the position disturbance signal which is superimposed on the actual head position Y


head


, has a repeatable (d


w


) component and a non-repeatable (d


n


) component. The updating law for ZAP profile learning is given by:








d




ZAP




k+1


(


t


)=


d




ZAP




k


(


t


)+γ


k


ZPF(ω


k




,z,z




−1


)[PES


k


+P


n


(s)


u




fh


]  EQ. (1)






where d


ZAP




k


(t) is the ZAP profile at the k-th learning iteration for sector number t; γ


k


is the learning gain at the k-th learning iteration; ZPF(ω


k


,z, z


−1


) is a zerophase low-pass filter with a cut-off frequency ω


k


scheduled for the k-th learning iteration; PES


k


is the positional error signal at the k-th learning iteration, P


n


(s) is the nominal VCM (actuator) model which is a double-integrator with a nominal gain available from measurement and u


fh


is the control signal sent to actuator


304


.




In order to minimize the effect of non-repeatable runout (NRRO) on the ZAP learning performance when the SNR (signal to noise ratio: i.e., variance ratio of RRO over NRRO) is small, it is preferable to use the averaged PES


k


and u


fh


of several revolutions in EQ. (1). However, when servo controller is well designed and the SNR is high, such an averaging process is not required.




When the NRRO component is dominant, the temperal trend in u


fh


should be removed using de-mean, de-trend block


310


. Also, the mean in PES


k


should be removed with block


310


before it is sent to block


306


.




One aspect of the present invention includes the recognition that improved learning can be achieved using EQ. (1) in which various parameters are “scheduled”, that is, the parameters change the values as a function of a learning iteration number. For example, the cutoff frequency of the zero-phase low pass filter (ZPF) can change as a function of k, the learning iteration number. For example, the cutoff frequency can change from low values (for example, several multiples of the bandwidth frequency of the servo loop) to a value of approximately the Nyquist frequency of the system. In another aspect, the gain, γ


k


, of the servo loop can change as a function of the learning iteration number. For example, the gain of the servo loop can change from a smaller value to a larger value for subsequent iterations. These are referred to as “scheduled parameters.” Preferably, the learning gain of EQ. (1) changes as a function of the learning iteration number. For example, the learning gain can be adjusted such that EQ. (1) initially learns the low frequency content of the written-in repeatable runout.




With the present invention, the ZAP profile can be learned in accordance with a learning update law. Preferably, the unknown but deterministic repeatable (WI-RRO) can be regarded as a virtual control input. By trying different virtual control inputs, different tracking errors, i.e., PES's are recorded. For a present trial input, i.e., d


ZAP




k+1


(t), the learned value is composed of previous control effort d


ZAP




k


(t) and the resulting tracking error PES


k


. In general, the learning updating law can be written as:












d
ZAP

k
+
1




(
t
)


=

l


(



d
ZAP
k



(
t
)


,






PES
k



(
t
)


,






u
fh
k



(
t
)



)



,




EQ.  (2)













where l(•) is a learning operator in a general form. The following linear form can be used:











d
ZAP

k
+
1




(
t
)


=



d
ZAP
k



(
t
)


+


l


(


PES
k



(
t
)


)


.






EQ.  (3)













In runout compensation, it can be shown that:











PES
k

=


1

1
+


P


(
s
)




C


(
z
)







[

r
-

d
n
k

-

d
w

-

d
ZAP
k


]



,




EQ.  (4)













where r is set point which can be considered as 0 (see

FIG. 3

) without loss of generality.




By iterating EQ. (4), the following is obtained:










PES

k
+
1


=



1

1
+


P


(
s
)




C


(
z
)







[

r
-

d
n

k
+
1


-

d
w

-


d
ZAP
k



(
t
)


-

l


(


PES
k



(
t
)


)



]


=



(

1
-

l

1
+
PC



)



PES
k


-


1

1
+
PC





(


d
n

k
+
1


-

d
n
k


)

.








EQ.  (5)













Next, denote ρ(ω) by:











ρ


(
ω
)


=

1
-


l

1
+
PC




(

)




,




EQ.  (6)













where ρ(ω) represents the learning rate as shown below. By iterating EQ. (4), one obtains:











PES

k
+
1


<




ρ

k
+
1




(
ω
)




PES
0


-



1
-


ρ

k
+
1




(
ω
)




1
-

ρ


(
ω
)






1

1
+
PC





d
^

n




,




EQ.  (7)













where {circumflex over (d)}


n


is an upper bound of d


n




k+1


−d


n




k


, i.e., {circumflex over (d)}


n


>d


n




k+1


−d


n




k


, ∀t,k. The convergence condition is obtained with:











ρ
ω

=


ρ


(
ω
)


=


1
-


l

1
+
PC




(

)



<
1



,







ω
<


ω
s

/
2



,




EQ.  (8)













where ω


s


is the sampling frequency. Similarly, starting from EQ. (3), it can be shown:










d
ZAP

k
+
1


=





ρ

k
+
1




(
ω
)




d
ZAP
0


-


(

1
-

ρ


(
ω
)



)






j
=
0

k





ρ
j



(
ω
)




d
n

k
-
j





-


(

1
-


ρ

k
+
1




(
ω
)



)



d
w





-

d
w







EQ.  (9)













From EQ. (9), it can be shown d


ZAP




k


converges to −d


w


, the WI-RRO, as long as ρ


ω


<1. Without any priori information, d


ZAP




0


should be normally set to 0.




With the ZAP concept, it is preferable to find an iterative learning operator l(•) such that PES can be reduced to a desirable level in only a few learning iterations. When ρ


ω


a in EQ. (8) is zero, the learning converges in only one iteration. This implies that the ideal learning operator should be chosen as:











l


(

)


=

1
+


P


(
s
)




C


(
z
)





,







ω
.






EQ.  (10)













However, this is not realistic since there are always uncertainties in a disc drive system. Through the use of scheduled parameters of the invention, improved learning can be achieved. Preferably, the learning gain of the present invention is scheduled to initially learn low frequency RRO. In the present invention, referring to

FIG. 3

, the learning operator is written as:










l


(

)


=


γ
k





ZPF


(


ω
k

,
z
,

z

-
1



)




[

1
+



P
n



(
s
)




C


(
z
)




]


.






EQ.  (11)













In one aspect, the open loop gain of the servo loop is “scheduled” during learning. Using scheduling parameters during ZAP profile learning can give additional benefits in improving the learning performance. The following provides an in-depth discussion on servo-loop-gain scheduling.




By adjusting K


a


, the servo loop gain, during the ZAP learning process, the learning performance can be improved. Suppose at the k-th iteration, (K


a


)


k





k


K


a




*


where K


a




*


is the nominal K


a


obtained from a system K


a


-table (from outer to inner diameter). According to the learning updating law of EQ. (1), the learning rate is given by









ρ
=


ρ


(
ω
)




&LeftBracketingBar;

=


&LeftBracketingBar;

1
-


γ
k



ZPF


(


ω
k

,
z
,

z

-
1



)





1
+


P
n


C



1
+
PC




(

)



&RightBracketingBar;

.








EQ.  (12)













As discussed above, from EQ. (12) r


k


and Ω


k


are used for conditioning the learning rate ρ(ω) over a frequency range of interest. Now, define the sensitivity functions












S
k



(

)


=


1
/

(

1
+


α
k


PC


)




(

)



,




EQ.  (13)








S
n
k



(

)


=


1
/

(

1
+


α
k



P
n


C


)





(

)

.






EQ.  (14)













Suppose that the ZAP learning process is started with a smaller α


k


and then increased α


k


as the number of learning iterations increases, i.e.,










α
k

>


α

k
-
1


.





EQ.  (15)













For servo control systems:












S
n
k



(

)


<


S
n

k
-
1




(

)



,




EQ.  (16)








S
k



(

)


<



S

k
-
1




(

)


.





EQ.  (17)













It is true that at a low frequency band:











S
k



(

)


<



S
n

k
-
1




(

)


.





EQ.  (18)













This is an significant feature, which can be used to condition the learning rate. Here, the learning rate is given by:









ρ
=


&LeftBracketingBar;

ρ


(
ω
)


&RightBracketingBar;

=


&LeftBracketingBar;

1
-


γ
k



ZPF


(


ω
k

,
z
,

z

-
1



)






S
k



(

)




S
n

k
-
1




(

)





&RightBracketingBar;

.






EQ.  (19)













The loop gain scheduling is achieved by setting the loop gain before PES/u


fh


data collecting. Too aggressive a reduction in K


a




*


may not bring the expected improvement. However, using α


1


=−3 dB and α


2


=−2 dB typically provides improved learning.




Phase advance scheduling can be used to address mismatch between P


n


C(jω) and PC(jω), i.e.,










ρ
=


&LeftBracketingBar;

ρ


(
ω
)


&RightBracketingBar;

=

&LeftBracketingBar;

1
-


γ
k



z
m



ZPF


(


ω
k

,
z
,

z

-
1



)





1
+


P
n


C



1
+
PC




(

)



&RightBracketingBar;



,




EQ.  (20)













where the phase advance step m is another scheduled parameter. This is particularly useful when total number of iterations is large. However, scheduling this parameter may not be particularly advantageous in ZAP profile learning because it is normally desirable to use as few as possible iterations during learning process.




In order to address high frequency noise problems, signal averaging and parameter scheduling are used. The convergence bound of PES in EQ. (4) can be reexamined. EQ. (6) can be written as:










PES

k
+
1


=




ρ

k
+
1




(
ω
)




PES
0


-


1

1
+
PC





{


d
n

k
+
1


-



ρ
k



(
ω
)




d
n
0


-


(

1
-

ρ


(
ω
)



)






j
=
0


k
-
1






ρ
j



(
ω
)




d
n

k
-
j






}

.







EQ.  (21)













Note that 1/(1+PC), the sensitivity transfer function, is actually a high-ass filter which means that







d
n

k
+
1


-



ρ
k



(
ω
)




d
n
0


-


(

1
-

ρ


(
ω
)



)






j
=
0


k
-
1






ρ
j



(
ω
)




d
n

k
-
j















in EQ. (21) can be amplified at very high frequencies. This problem exists in all iterative learning methods. Frequency domain trade-off is required and suitable filtering is essential. However, better result is still achievable when d


n


has some special characteristics along the time (sector) axis as well as iteration number (revolution number) axis. For example, if d


n


has some repetitiveness or near zero-mean over multiple iterations (revolutions), the effect of d


n


can be reduced to an acceptable level using an algebraic averaging method over a number of revolutions. High-frequency amplification still exists but may not be very significant during just a number of initial iterations. The number of revolutions required in ZAP profile learning depends on SNR (the ratio of variance of RRO over NRRO). If the SNR is high, one revolution per iteration may be sufficient for the initial learning iteration(s). Typically, due to SNR and the high-frequency amplification considerations, the scheduling of parameters in the learning process can be successfully employed such that the practical constraints are met and improved compromises are made between learning rate and accuracy.




The present invention includes an apparatus and method for compensating for repeatable runout (RRO) errors in a disc drive


100


having a servo loop


300


for positioning a head


112


relative to a track


200


on disc surface of a rotating disc


198


. In the invention, a servo position value is retrieved from the disc


198


which is indicative of head


112


position relative to track


200


. Compensation ZAP values are retrieved from a table of compensation values and the servo position value is compensated based upon the retrieved compensation value. In one aspect, the compensation values are determined through a learning process which uses a nominal P


n


of an actuator of the disc drive


100


. In an iterative learning process, the learning gain γ


k


is a function of a learning iteration number. Similarly, the iterative learning process is a function of a servo loop gain which is a function of an iteration number. The learning process can also include a zero-phase low-pass filter in which the cut-off frequency can be a function of an iteration number.




It is to be understood that even though numerous characteristics and advantages of various embodiments of the present invention have been set forth in the foregoing description, together with details of the structure and function of various embodiments of the invention, this disclosure is illustrative only, and changes may be made in details, especially in matters of structure and arrangement of parts within the principles of the present invention to the full extent indicated by the broad general meaning of the terms in which the appended claims are expressed. For example, other learning algorithms or techniques can be used that implement the present invention without departing from the scope and spirit of the present invention.



Claims
  • 1. A method for compensating for repeatable runout (RRO) errors in a disc drive having a servo loop for positioning a head relative to a first track on a disc surface of a rotating disc, comprising:(a) retrieving a servo position value from the disc surface indication of head position relative to the track; (b) retrieving a compensation value dZAP from a table of compensation values; (c) compensating the servo position value with the compensation value dZAP; wherein the compensation values are determined through an iterative learning process which uses a nominal Pn of an actuator of the disc drive; and (d) providing the compensated servo position value to a controller which controls the actuator of the disc drive so that the head travels along a path that is generally more circular than the first track.
  • 2. The method of claim 1 wherein Pn is a nominal VCM transfer function, ,a double integrator with a lumped gain.
  • 3. The method of claim 1 wherein the learning process is further a function of a servo loop gain which is a function of an iteration number.
  • 4. The method of claim 3 wherein the servo loop gain increases with each iteration from a value lower than the nominal value.
  • 5. The method of claim 1 wherein the learning process is a function of a zero-phase low-pass filter.
  • 6. The method of claim 5 wherein a cutoff frequency of the zero-phase low-pass filter is a function of an iteration number.
  • 7. The method of claim 6 wherein the cutoff frequency of the zero-phase phase low-pass filter increases with each iteration number.
  • 8. The method of claim 1 wherein the learning process is an iterative learning process and the learning process is a function of a learning gain which is a function of iteration number.
  • 9. The method of claim 8 wherein the learning gain is selected such that low frequency values are initially learned.
  • 10. The method of claim 1 wherein the learning process includes a step of mean removing.
  • 11. The method of claim 1 wherein the learning process includes removing a trend.
  • 12. A disc storage system implementing the method of claim 1.
  • 13. A disc storage system, comprising:a disc configured to rotate and including a disc surface having a track thereon; a transducing element configured to read and write information on the disc; an actuator configured to move the transducing element radially across the disc surface; a servo loop including a controller configured to control movement of the actuator in response to an error signal and a compensation value so as to compensate for repeatable runout (RRO) error, the compensation value derived through an iterative learning process which uses a nominal Pn of the actuator, the compensation value and the error signal applied to the controller which controls the actuator of the disc drive so that the head travels along a path that is generally more circular than the first track.
  • 14. The disc storage system of claim 13 wherein Pn is a nominal voice coil motor (VCM) transfer function comprising a double integrator with a lumped gain.
  • 15. The disc storage system of claim 13 wherein the learning process is further a function of a servo loop gain which is a function of an iteration number.
  • 16. The disc storage system of claim 15 wherein the servo loop gain increases with each iteration from a value lower than the nominal value.
  • 17. The disc storage system of claim 13 wherein the learning process is a function of a zero-phase low-pass filter.
  • 18. The disc storage system of claim 17 wherein a cutoff frequency of the zero-phase low-pass filter is a function of an iteration number.
  • 19. The disc storage system of claim 13 wherein the learning process is an iterative learning process and the learning process is a function of a learning gain which is a function of iteration number.
CROSS-REFERENCE TO CO-PENDING APPLICATION

This application claims priority benefits from U.S. provisional patent application Ser. No. 60/145,499, filed Jul. 23, 1999, and entitled “A ZAP COMPENSATION ALGORITHM USING SCHEDULED PARAMETERS (SP)”.

US Referenced Citations (134)
Number Name Date Kind
3725764 Oswald Apr 1973 A
3863124 Pierce et al. Jan 1975 A
3914541 Elliott Oct 1975 A
4030132 Iftikar et al. Jun 1977 A
4103314 Case Jul 1978 A
4135217 Jacques et al. Jan 1979 A
4149199 Chick et al. Apr 1979 A
4217612 Matla et al. Aug 1980 A
4314295 Frandsen Feb 1982 A
4329712 Lang May 1982 A
4355266 Pearson Oct 1982 A
4371960 Kroiss Feb 1983 A
4396961 Prasad et al. Aug 1983 A
4414589 Oliver et al. Nov 1983 A
4456934 Wedman et al. Jun 1984 A
4485418 Bremmer Nov 1984 A
4497047 Fujiie et al. Jan 1985 A
4513333 Young et al. Apr 1985 A
4524397 Bond Jun 1985 A
4562494 Bond Dec 1985 A
4575776 Stephens et al. Mar 1986 A
4605977 Matthews Aug 1986 A
4616276 Workman Oct 1986 A
4620244 Krause Oct 1986 A
4620252 Bauck et al. Oct 1986 A
4633345 Keener Dec 1986 A
4636885 Yamada et al. Jan 1987 A
4677602 Okano et al. Jun 1987 A
4679103 Workman Jul 1987 A
4697127 Stich et al. Sep 1987 A
4697213 Kitamura Sep 1987 A
4706250 Patel Nov 1987 A
4727533 Erbert Feb 1988 A
4764860 Takao Aug 1988 A
4786990 Overton et al. Nov 1988 A
4788608 Tsujisawa Nov 1988 A
4791599 Hethuin et al. Dec 1988 A
4803572 Haruna et al. Feb 1989 A
4816938 Cowen et al. Mar 1989 A
4822139 YshiZumi Apr 1989 A
4878135 Makino et al. Oct 1989 A
4897840 Weiss et al. Jan 1990 A
4924165 Kohno May 1990 A
4947272 Yokozawa Aug 1990 A
4956831 Sarraf et al. Sep 1990 A
4965782 Mathews Oct 1990 A
5046060 Chow et al. Sep 1991 A
5055731 Nihei et al. Oct 1991 A
5056074 Tateishi et al. Oct 1991 A
5062023 Squire Oct 1991 A
5073885 Ito et al. Dec 1991 A
5081552 Glaser et al. Jan 1992 A
5089757 Wilson Feb 1992 A
5122718 Sawata Jun 1992 A
5146372 Cronch et al. Sep 1992 A
5155422 Sidman et al. Oct 1992 A
5161077 Jabbari Nov 1992 A
5164863 Janz Nov 1992 A
5185681 Volz et al. Feb 1993 A
5189578 Mori et al. Feb 1993 A
5197058 Bell, Jr. et al. Mar 1993 A
5198948 Stover et al. Mar 1993 A
5204793 Plonczak Apr 1993 A
5216559 Springer Jun 1993 A
5233487 Christensen et al. Aug 1993 A
5241433 Anderson et al. Aug 1993 A
5247501 Hashimoto et al. Sep 1993 A
5257149 Meyer Oct 1993 A
5274511 Ikeda Dec 1993 A
5287225 Jorgenson Feb 1994 A
5287234 Suzuki Feb 1994 A
5299026 Vincett et al. Mar 1994 A
5303105 Jorgenson Apr 1994 A
5305160 Funches et al. Apr 1994 A
5311378 Williams et al. May 1994 A
5367513 Bates et al. Nov 1994 A
5379171 Morehouse et al. Jan 1995 A
5400201 Pederson Mar 1995 A
5404253 Painter Apr 1995 A
5416658 Sega et al. May 1995 A
5444582 Suzuki Aug 1995 A
5444583 Ehrlich et al. Aug 1995 A
5455724 Suzuki et al. Oct 1995 A
5465182 Ishikawa Nov 1995 A
5465183 Hattori Nov 1995 A
5521773 Suzuki et al. May 1996 A
5521778 Boutaghou et al. May 1996 A
5523902 Pederson Jun 1996 A
5535072 Witt et al. Jul 1996 A
5539714 Andres Jr. et al. Jul 1996 A
5541784 Cribbs et al. Jul 1996 A
5550685 Drouin Aug 1996 A
5553086 Sompel et al. Sep 1996 A
5576909 Dierkes et al. Nov 1996 A
5585976 Pham Dec 1996 A
5602689 Kadlec et al. Feb 1997 A
5608586 Sri-Jayantha et al. Mar 1997 A
5610487 Hutsell Mar 1997 A
5610777 Dang et al. Mar 1997 A
5638230 Kadlec Jun 1997 A
5646797 Kadlec et al. Jul 1997 A
5648738 Welland et al. Jul 1997 A
5675450 Kadlec Oct 1997 A
5677809 Kadlec Oct 1997 A
5680272 Kadlec et al. Oct 1997 A
5684650 Kadlec et al. Nov 1997 A
5706265 Bang Jan 1998 A
5708581 Martinez Jan 1998 A
5754354 Tomita et al. May 1998 A
5774294 Fioravanti Jun 1998 A
5774297 Hampshire et al. Jun 1998 A
5793559 Shepherd et al. Aug 1998 A
5796535 Tuttle et al. Aug 1998 A
5796542 Szeremeta Aug 1998 A
5815332 Suzuki et al. Sep 1998 A
5822147 Kisaka Oct 1998 A
5825578 Shrinkle et al. Oct 1998 A
5826338 Chilton et al. Oct 1998 A
5828515 Kim Oct 1998 A
5835300 Murphy et al. Nov 1998 A
5835302 Funches et al. Nov 1998 A
5844743 Funches et al. Dec 1998 A
5854722 Cunningham et al. Dec 1998 A
5883749 Park Mar 1999 A
5886846 Pham et al. Mar 1999 A
5898286 Clare et al. Apr 1999 A
5926338 Jeon et al. Jul 1999 A
5940239 Lee et al. Aug 1999 A
5949605 Lee et al. Sep 1999 A
5949608 Hunter Sep 1999 A
5956201 Pham et al. Sep 1999 A
5969494 Kang Oct 1999 A
5978169 Woods Nov 1999 A
6310742 Nazarian et al. Oct 2001 B1
Foreign Referenced Citations (8)
Number Date Country
3900683 Jan 1989 DE
0 130 248 Jan 1985 EP
0 540 114 May 1993 EP
0 549 814 Jul 1993 EP
2 060 217 Apr 1981 GB
WO 9106096 May 1991 WO
WO 9306595 Apr 1993 WO
WO 9745833 Dec 1997 WO
Non-Patent Literature Citations (11)
Entry
Recording Properties of Multilayered Thin Film Media, by D.C. Palmer, K.E. Johnson, E.Y. Wu, and J.V. Peske, IEEE Transactions On Magnetics, vol. 27, No. 6, Nov. 1991, pp. 5307-5309.
Evolution of The Soft Error Rate Model, by P. Hardy and D.J. Malone, IEEE Transactions On Magnetics, vol. 27, No. 6, Nov. 1991, pp. 5313-5315.
Error Rate Performance of Experimental Gigabit Per Square Inch Recording Components, by T.D. Howell, D.P. McCown, T.A. Diola, Y. Tang, K.R. Hense, and R.L. Gee, IEEE Transactions On Magnetics, vol. 26, No. 5, Sep. 1990, pp. 2298-2302.
A Track Density Model for Magnetoresistive Heads Considering Erase Bands, by J.K. Lee and P.I. Bonyhard, IEEE Transactions On Magnetics, vol. 26, No. 5, Sep. 1990, pp. 2475-2477.
Demonstration Of 500 Megabits Per Square Inch With Digital Magnetic Recording, by Roy A. Jensen, Joost Mortelmans, and Robin Hauswitzer, IEEE Transactions On Magnetics, vol. 26, No. 5, Sep. 1990, pp. 2169-2171.
IBM's Next Generation Magnetoresistive Heads, 1987.
Magnetoresistive Read Magnetic Recording Head Offtrack Performance Assessment, by P.I. Bonyhard and J.K. Lee, IEEE Transactions on Magnetics, vol. 26, Nov. 1990, pp.2448 -2450.
Design Issues For Practical Rigid Disk Magetorsistive Heads, by P. I. bonyhard. IEEE, Transactions On Magnetics, vol. 26, No. 6, Nov. 1990, pp. 3001-3003.
TMR and Squeeze at Gigabit Areal Densities, by Patrick C. Arnett and Don McCown, IEEE Transactions on Magnetics, vol. 28, No. 4, Jul. 1992, pp.1984-1986.
Window-Shifting Mechanism In Data Separator, IBM Technical Disclosure Bulletin, vol. 30, No. 6, Nov. 1987.
“Automated Tuning concepts for Iterative Learning and Repetitive control Laws” by R. Longman et al., Proceedings of the 37th IEEE Conference on Decision and Control, pp. 192-198, (Aug.1998).
Provisional Applications (1)
Number Date Country
60/145499 Jul 1999 US