https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TBiFGhnXsh8

>inb4 buy an ad
I just found it interesting and wanted to share.
Also, I suggest reading the comments.

Btw, do you faggots like this kind of content? There is a lot of similar stuff on youtube and elsewhere that I could post from time to time. Actual technology, and not just computer-related stuff.

>>106217383 (OP)
I just saw that this morning. Holy shit that guy is nuts.
I guess the chemistry isn't as intense as I thought it would be but still. What a crazy project. I think this is the first channel I subscribed to half way through the first video I saw.

>>106217393
Actually, there are some comments saying he got the materials and their application wrong:
>I am pretty sure the magnetic material that you used is part of the problem. You don't give a lot of detail on what exactly you used, but in the video you say "black iron oxide" so I infer you used magnetite, Fe3O4. That is not the correct material to use. I did some research not long ago into magnetic materials used in the period, and even recreated some magnetic material after poring through some research papers and patents from the 1950s to 70s. The magnetic material used on floppy disks is a type II or III material (as defined for magnetic tapes) so either a cobalt-doped gamma-Fe2O3 or a chromium dioxide-based material. Magnetite is not correct as it doesn't have the required saturation flux and coercivity. I have in fact recreated in my basement lab a type II material, a cobalt-doped gamma-Fe2O3 ferrite which would be appropriate for that. It's not difficult but it requires patience and precision. And a few tools, including an electric oven that can go to at least 850 degrees Celsius.

> @sneugler and in addition, the magnetic particles need to be of a fairly precise and uniform size, and for that they need to be mechanically processed and sorted. (to elaborate: the mechanical processing can be done by ball milling, and the sorting by differential sedimentation)

>Yeah floppy discs are more complex than it seems. There's also the molecule-thin lubricant layer that allows the heads to not get sanded down during the life of the drive. Applying thin, uniform, consistent films one on top of each other was an entire field of knowledge onto itself.

Still, a very interesting project. I love these kinds of videos.
I hope the guys considers the comments, tries again and succeeds. Judging by how he seems to have ignored those comments, I'm not sure about that, though.

>>106217383 (OP)
Can you make a 6 TB floppy disk?

>>106217810
I guess you could build a stack of them. Should take you some time and repetitive effort, but it could work

>>106217504
I wonder if it is easier to make a CD disc

>>106217383 (OP)
at some point in the video he says it's impressive that the technology for floppy disks and drives was created during the 1960s. something about appreciating the precision tools required to produce a working disc during that time period. sixty five years later and now the process can be done at a home workshop with a few thousand dollars of gear, available without jumping through too many hoops. of course there are many other examples of high-tech advancement, and the tools being ubiquitous now when once they were tightly controlled and rare.

>>106218575
yeah. let's not even talk about sensors and other electronics devices
yet you still read the occasional retard in this board calling 3D printers useless.

>>106217504
>cobalt-doped gamma-Fe2O3
That does make a lot more sense. Still for a first try it's extremely impressive. I hope he iterates.

>>106218780
}>That does make a lot more sense
Can you elaborate on this? I had never even heard of gamma-Fe2O3 lmao

Also, I hope this starts a trend with other tech youtubers (Applied Science & friends) to try and replicate computer tech.

>>106218913
most computer related stuff is actually harder than you'd think to make at home, even early stuff life vacuum tubes, floppy disc/hard disc media, transistors, etc.
like, '60s/'70s tech may seem primitive today, but at the time it took a whole industry to produce them. not to say you should just give up without trying though, his floppy disc barely worked, but it's a great attempt and he will have learned a lot about them. it's easy to see a magnetic film disc and think it's simple, until you try to replicate it yourself and find it's actually a reasonably advanced material

here's another channel with a young guy who made IC's at home. not a task for the faint of heart
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC7E8-0Ou69hwScPW1_fQApA

>>106217383 (OP)
I would've talked about floppy disks had you people not censored and deleted my thread like you always do

I didn't watch the op video, but I was starting a similar project myself a few years back, but I gave up.

>>106219813
I was starting with modeling the disc. Second goal was transplanting the magnetic material from a working disc and third phase was making my own magnetic material. I was learning how to model and it was pretty hard.

>>106219813
>>106219843
Any chance you could share your accumulated knowledge and models/drawings?

>>106219864
I'll post some of the stuff here.

For a basic overview find:
Secret Life of Machines 0205 The_Video_Recorder

For more complex magnetic tape doping:
Kreiselmaier_Pigmentation_of_Magnetic_Tapes

>Magnetic tape is made basically like this. Take a Mylar film, remove the static electricity. Put an (extremely and precise) thin layer of slurry on it. The slurry has a precise ratio of iron oxide and resin in it. These mixes were often proprietary. Then dry the film in an oven. Finally put lots of pressure (using chrome weights) to make the magnetic material dense. Density depending on the application. This leaves you with a shinny smooth brown (resin) Mylar film with a coating of iron oxide.

>A DIY version is putting iron oxide (rust) on sticky tape (sellotape/cellophane tape or others). You can actually record audio on to this as seen on an old episode of the Secret Life of Machines (205 The Video Recorder).

>High capacity floppies had a few different tricks to get their size. The superdisk used lasers to assist head accuracy, while the zip drive and the bernoulli box used heads more similar to hard drives. Interesting in that they did not use mylar film, but a PET film, likely for strength needed because they are pushed harder. Hard drives were mainly designed to overcome the floppy limits of friction, heat, and material data density.

>>106219813
>>106219843
>>106219878
Man, that's cool

>>106219897
>>106219909
Great.
This guy used the heating bed of his CNC machine to flatten the PET film and to dry the coating.

>>106218146
You would need an injection molding machine, I don't think any current 3D printers can pull that off (yet)
I'm not sure if it would be easier or harder, given that CDs also have a thin protective film
Probably harder if you could make the basic floppy disc (the film would likely be equally difficult on both)

>>106217383 (OP)
>Why aren't you making your own floppy disks?
because I'm poor and I don't have room and energy to do that

>>106220034
I just finished his video. He made some mistakes, mainly from a lack of research. First problem was using PET film instead of mylar. PET is harder and was used later for higher density discs. Second issue is he was making circles. That's not what they did. They made big films, then punched out circles. Of course the worst is his recipe is really bad and the heating/compressing isn't going to work. Here is a quote to understand that better:

>The thickness of this layer depends on the size of the disk and the type of density. For instance, the layer thickness is 110 microinches for 8-inch, high-density diskettes and 35 microinches for 3 1/2-inch high density disks. The coating for standard density diskettes is thicker than that for high density diskettes and is less coercive, meaning that it has less magnetic force.

35 microinches he can't achieve like he was. It is tiny! Also thickness as the quote said changes magnetic density, hence why his results magnetically were all over the place. The varying density equals varying magnetic field strength.

>>106219878
thanks

OP here. I wish this thread got moved to >>>/diy/ so the knowledge won't get wasted here... Plus people there might have some fun

>>106220139
That's great stuff. Could you post it on >>>/diy/ ?

>>106220172
I was posting it on /diy/ when I was doing it years ago, but it didn't get much interest.

>>106217383 (OP)
I have different hobbies and no time to learn them all

>>106218780
>>106217504
related quote:

>Along the way, the text mentions that the platters in a diskette (the disk itself) are made of mylar, a kind of plastic, and are coated with either iron oxide or cobalt oxide, which are compounds sensitive to magnetism. You may want to know that higher density (capacity) diskettes tend to use cobalt oxide, while lower density (capacity) diskettes used iron oxide. Drives that use the higher capacity (storage capability) diskettes must use stronger magnetic fields to affect those cobalt particles. This is part of the reason why you should not try to buy cheaper, lower density diskettes and format them for higher densities. The devices that use them behave in different ways, and the stronger magnetic fields meant for cobalt oxide disks will cause the iron oxide disks to "bleed" information from one track into another.

I wonder if it would be easier to make a 5 1/4 inch floppy? Knowing what's inside a 1541 drive, I don't think you would even have to make the outer sleeve, just make the magnetic media and finagle it into place before clamping it down.

>>106220332
it is very thin, you could only hope to 3D print it like you would a phone case. I think 3.5 inch is just easier to 3D print. Also the USB to 3.5 floppy drives are still being made. But of course anyway making a floppy disc I guarantee the next thing they do is make a drive!

Bigger difference is those used a hole in the material to show you where the beginning of the track was.

>>106217393
> when you have such a shit education, electromagnetism looks like wizardry
embarrassing

>>106220332
> I don't think you would even have to make the outer sleeve
you need the rigidity to stop the disk flopping about and the head would also warp the shape. the inner of the sleeve collects dirt and dust off the surface. kinda very important.

>>106220390
>>Bigger difference is those used a hole in the material to show you where the beginning of the track was.
and timing.

>>106217383 (OP)
Why would I want to? It seems like a cool thing to do for a YouTube science video, but like it's useless nowadays.
Tape storage is way better.

>>106217383 (OP)
would be cooler if someone figured out how to manufacture a floppy drive, especially 8" and 5.25" drives

>>106220390
i wouldn't print a 5 1/4 in floppy, i'd get some thin plastic sheet, cut out the shape and fold it like a very flat box. i don't know exactly how they're made, but last time i held one i'm pretty sure the edges are literally just folded. it's more of a sleeve than a case, only without an open end

>>106222011
for fun.
also because it's within reach of a home tinkerer. like you'd have basically no chance of making a hdd disc at home, an ssd... maybe, if you're willing to fill a garage with photolithography equipment to make a nand chip with a handful of cells in it

>>106222011
>>106223365
-- actually making an audio compact cassette may be the most practical. the media doesn't have to be as good, and you can just adjust the data rate to suit since there's no single standard for storing digital data on cassette tape

i feel like sdcard could be cool if they just added an unnecessary moving part to them.
the slidey bits of 3.5inch floppies and minidiscs are what give them that great feel.

>>106223416
sd cards do have a sliding write protection switch like floppies

>>106223450
it works in the same way, too. literally just sliding piece of plastic that doesn't do anything electrical at all. it's position either pushes or doesn't push a switch in the reader itself. in the case of floppies there's several such holes for a drive to determine what kind of floppy it is, for sd cards only the write protect is relevant as it's a managed digital format. i.e. the reader doesn't need to know how to handle the flash inside, the sd card contains it's own flash controller, the sd card only needs to speak the SD protocol. a floppy is more raw, just a disc covered in magnetic material, no logic.

>>106223515
yes, but it doesn't feel good and you don't have to touch it every time you use it. the slide cover on floppies and minidiscs had great tactility - like fidget spinners. they should add one of those because it would feel cool.

>>106223679
you were never supposed to play with/slide the cover on a floppy disc by hand. sure, people did it anyway, but idk. i am the type to find something to 'fidget' with, but i don't recall doing it very often with a floppy disc, probably because of the fear of damaging it

>>106223707
i was mostly a CD lad, but the few short years with floppies i can't remeber a 3.5 ever going bad on me. 5 inchers i think did a couple of times. i think i just fidgeted with 3.5's because they lived in my drawers for at least a decade after i had use for one so i would just flick em.

>>106217383 (OP)
Usually I like this kind of content but when I tried watching this video I found this guy to be annoying.