appendix new

Appendix 5.3: Concluding Presentation Slides for Handled Projects

Figures for the presentations are censored and detailed and technical discussions on the presentation is excluded due to the confidentiality of the company which is protected by the non-disclosure agreement as signed and attached in this report.

Hence, only the trend of result outcome is presented in this report with brief explanation.

Appendix 5.3.1: Concluding Slide for Project Handled as mentioned in 2.6.1.

* By prediction End disks (74-75) are supposed to have higher FSW on side B, however this contradicts with the results observed.

*By prediction end disk # 74-75 has more rolled-off edges on side B (the exposed surface), however this contradicts with the results observed.

P value > 0.5 significant difference

Presentation Slide is kept in engineering share folder in HGST for future reference.

Appendix 5.3.2: Concluding Slide for Project Handled as mentioned in 2.6.2.

Effect of Annealing

Decreases flatness significantly. Decreases FSW, becomes less wavy. (Due to better adhesion after heat treatment?) ODRC becomes more negative, (more ski jump) Higher XRC TMS, Microwaviness, Nanowaviness, Ni thickness almost unchanged. Overall all parameters shows comparable trend

Examples of Optiflat Images:

Images are compared and studied for justification and reports. Different colour intensity represents the difference in surface waviness.

Appendix 5.3.3: Concluding Slide for Project Handled as mentioned in 2.6.3.

Second zincate layer provides a smoother and more uniform, fine layer. Hence significant decrease in TMS roughness is observed after zincate 2 (~4 times lower)Reason: zinc from zincate 1 attributed to the diffusion between zinc deposit from the 1st zincate and Al substrate. Zincate 1 produce thin uniform oxide film, passivation was suppressed. Thus, at second zincate stage, oxide film uniformly dissolves, so displacement reaction between dissolution of Al and deposition of zinc ends in a short time, hence second zinc layer is highly uniform.

FSW of disks at stages zincate 1 and 2 are unknown due to inability to measure using optiflat.(surface is too rough to be measured, unclear fringes, calibration fail)

From TMS roughness, from prediction surface is rough upon zincating. However, second zincate provides a smoother coverage

Ni thickness is although measured but it does not carry significant representation as disks are not plated with nickel yet. ** mention parameters are unknown for stages at zincate 1 and 2 due to machine’s limitation

Appendix 5.3.4: Concluding Slide for Project Handled as mentioned in 2.6.5.

Project KIV waiting for machine calibration.