Part two The good and THE GREAT

In the second part of his series, Ian Gillgrass shows how following the diagnostic process can turn a good technician into a great

Published:  26 March, 2018

In part one, we looked at the start of the ‘diagnostic process.’ The first steps were customer questioning, confirming the fault and knowing the system and its function. These help the technician to build the ‘big picture’ necessary to repair the vehicle correctly.
In this article we will look at the next four steps.

Step 4: Gather evidence
It is easy to overlook this step as many technicians think of it as the overall ‘diagnosis.’ However, once the technician understands the system, gathering evidence will provide key information. This step is normally best carried out with the use of test equipment that does not mean the dismantling of systems and components.

Many technicians have their own favourite tools and equipment but this list can include (but not limited to)
the following:
Scan tool – It is always best practice to record the fault codes present, erase the codes, and then recheck. This means codes which reappear are still current. Remember that a fault code will only indicate a fault with a circuit or its function. It is not always the component listed in the fault code that is at fault

Oscilloscope – An oscilloscope can be used for a multitude of testing/initial measuring without being intrusive. Some oscilloscope equipment suppliers are looking at systems within high voltages hybrid/electric vehicle technology. The waveforms produced by the test equipment can be used when analysing the evidence and may indicate that a fault exists within a system. An understanding of the system being tested will be necessary to understand the information. This may even include performing sums so all those missed maths lessons at school may come back to haunt you. It may take time to become confident analysing the waveforms, so be patient

Temperature measuring equipment – This can include the use of thermal imaging cameras. Most systems that produce energy/work will also produce some heat. The temperatures produced vary from system to system. Examples include everything from engine misfires to electrical components, as well as air conditioning system components and mechanical components such as brake and hub assemblies. The possibilities are endless and results can be thought provoking.

Emission equipment – By measuring the end result, an exhaust gas analyser can show you if the engine is functioning correctly. The incorrect emissions emitted from the exhaust help indicate a system fault or a mechanical fault with the engine

Technical service bulletins – Many vehicle manufacturers produce technical service bulletins (TSBs) that are generated by a central point (usually a technical department) from the information that is gathered from their network of dealers. Some of these may be available to the independent sector either through the VM or through a third party – It’s always worth checking if these exist. They may indicate a common fault that has been reported similar to that the technician is facing. Some test equipment suppliers may provide TSBs as part of a diagnostic tool package

Software updates – Many vehicle systems are controlled by a ECU. Most vehicle manufacturers are constantly updating system software to overcome various faults/  customer concerns. Simply by updating the software can fix the vehicles problem without any other intervention of repairing a possible fault. This is where having a link to a vehicle manufacturer is vital in repairing the vehicle

Hints & tips – Most technicians will have a link or access to a vehicle repair forum where they can ask various questions on vehicle faults and may get some indication of which system components are likely to cause a vehicle fault

Functional checks – Vehicle systems are interlinked and typically share information using a vehicle network. The fault may cause another system to function incorrectly, so it is vitally important that the technician carries out a functional check to see if the reported fault has an effect on another system. By carrying out this check the technician again is building the big picture

Actuator checks – Most systems today are capable of performing actuator tests. The technician can perform various checks to components to check its operation and if the system ECU can control the component, often reducing the time to the diagnosis, by performing this task the technician can identify whether it is the control signal, wiring or component or it is sensor wiring. This function can be used in conjunction with serial data to see how the system reacts as the component functions

Serial (live) data – The technician can typically review a vehicle system serial data through a scan tool. Having live data readings to refer to can help you review the data captured. Using actuator checks and viewing the serial data can also help the technician to identify a system fault

Remember to record all the evidence gathered so it can be analysed during the next step in the diagnosis. We can’t remember everything. If the technician needs to contact a technical helpline they will ask for the actual readings obtained recoding the data gathered will help.

Step 5: Analyse the evidence
Analysing evidence gathered during the previous steps can take time. The technician needs to build the big picture from all the evidence gathered during the first few steps. You need to analyse the information gathered, and decide on what information is right and wrong.

This step may rely on experience as well as knowledge on the product. You should take your time – don’t be hurried. Time spent in the thinking stages of the diagnosis can save time later. Putting pressure on the technician can lead to errors being made. It may be necessary to ask the opinion of other technicians. If the evidence is documented it may be easier to analyse or share between others.

Step 6: Plan the test routine
After analysing the evidence gathered it’s now time to start to ‘plan’ the best way to approach to the task or tasks in hand.

The technician should plan their test routine, decide on what test equipment should they use, what results are they expecting, if the result is good or bad  and which component should they test next.

Document the plan – this enables you to review decisions made at this stage in the next step. The technician may not always get it right as there may be various routes to test systems/components. The test routine may have to be revisited depending on the results gathered during testing. Documenting the test routine will provide a map.  Also, don’t forget to list the stages, as this is something that could be incorporated into an invoicing structure later.

The technician should indicate on the routine what readings they expect when they carry out the system testing. This can be generated by their own knowledge/skill or the expected readings may come from vehicle information which they have already sourced. If the information is not known at the time the test routine is planned, then the test routine may highlight what information is required and what test equipment is needed. You shouldn’t be afraid to revisit the plan at any time and ask further questions on which direction the tests should take. If the plan is well documented and the technician becomes stuck at any point, they can pause the process and revisit later. Also the information can then be shared with various helplines that support workshop networks.

Step 7: System testing
The technician then follows their pre-determined plan, if it is documented they can record the results of the test(s) as they follow the routine.

Many technicians tend to go a little off-piste when they get frustrated. Having the routine documented can keep the technician on track and focused on the result. If the routine is followed and the fault cannot be found the technician may have to go back to the analysing the evidence or planning the test routine. The technician shouldn’t be scared of going back a few steps, as I said previously analysing the evidence takes practice and can be time consuming, not to be rushed.
    
Summing up
Remember to follow the process. It is easy to be led off track by various distractions but don’t try to short circuit the process. Some steps may take longer than first thought to accomplish than others. Some distractions may be outside of your control, and it may be necessary to educate others. Practice, practice, practice. Refine the process to fit in with your business and its practices, the business could align its estimating/cost modelling to the process, being able to charge effectively and keeping the customer informed at each stage of the process.

Coming up...
In the next article I will be looking at the next four steps which are; Step 8: Conclusion (the root cause), Step 9: Rectify the fault and Step 10: Recheck the system(s). The last article in this series will indicate the final three steps and how to fit them all together in order to become a great technician and perhaps succeed in Top Technician or Top Garage in 2018.



Related Articles

  • Engine management: Past and future  

    I have long accepted that nothing stands still for long in this industry. Just when you think you have a grasp of the subject something is sure to upset it. Nothing illustrates this more than powertrain diagnostics. Initially this was called fuel injection, and later became engine management. Now I’m afraid it’s even more complex.
    I find myself fortunate to have been there at the beginning; Bosch l Jetronic, a 25 pin ECU with if I recall correctly, only 13 pins occupied. No serial diagnostics, no specific tools. So why was I fortunate? Consider my reflection on diagnostics back in the late 1970s and see if they are still applicable today.

    Firstly, you had to understand what the system had to achieve, what components it had at its disposal, what role they played and how they interacted within that system.

    The next challenge was measurement values; what to expect under a variety of conditions, and what equipment was required to access this information. This all seems so straightforward now, but in those days it was a little like Columbus sailing across the ocean. He knew it was wet, he needed a boat, he knew which way west was, despite this being blasphemy in the eyes of the Pope, and so set off without a clue as to what was out there.

    Hardly a logical diagnostic process, however I was writing the rule book and did understand the meaning of the words test don’t guess. So, what’s changed that undermines these basic principles?

    Acessibility
    With even the most basic of vehicles now relying on a level of technology that makes accessibility almost impossible, OE manufacturers totally forbid any intrusion within the wiring loom and I am sure this explains the why design and manufacture precludes access as a high priority. However, we are brave, and have the Starship Enterprise at our disposal for our journey of discovery.
    The problem is one of integration. Systems don’t function in isolation any more, and Columbus now has to map the Americas and Australia at the same time. In order to conduct an accurate assessment of a function it must be in its natural environment and be observed when functioning normally.

    Complexity
    This is not restricted to a physical state. It also includes software, algorithms, and predictive response, correction or adaptive action. Systems now change their mode of operation based on environmental influences, affected by a very wide range of changing influences. Cylinder select or dynamic stability comes to mind. The driver selects an option from a long list of choices, engine, transmission, and chassis. I used to say that for a function to occur it must have a command followed by response. In today’s world,  the command may be a software decision followed by a constantly changing response, stratified and homogenous fuelling, infinitely changing camshaft timing and variable valve lift to name a few.

    Test options
    Manufacturers are driven by non-intrusive process dictated by guided diagnostics. Pre-determined test plans more often or not end with a pass or fail result, foregoing any data reveal.  Is this due to a control of process and cost, or a mistrust in their techs? Actual evaluation of circuits, voltage, current or complex profile is getting ever more difficult. Attachment of gauges in order to measure pressure and flow is often restricted by sealed transit hoses or internal ducting within castings. Serial data has become so much, more powerful and trustworthy, however it does not and will not replace the functions available from an oscilloscope. Specialist mechanical tools and assembly techniques prohibit casual examination, due to cost or the ever more common single fitment parts.

    Data extraction
    This may lie in a multitude of directions; Physical extraction, camshaft timing, fuel quantity per stroke via the serial port or fuel pressure rise time via the scope. We are forced to monitor not just a physical value, but not how the PCM is adjusting or adapting a value. How do we know the parameters of operation when VMs are removing more and more data in favour of the pass-fail flags from a software automated test profile?

    SENT
    Rieve gauche, no not a walk along the Left Bank, but a completely new protocol for data and diagnostic transmission. SENT has been developed specifically for automotive applications, rather than being a black-market hooky copy from other engineering developments. SENT stands for single edge nibble transmission, and is a uni-directional out-only data line to the PCM. SENT is essentially a serial interface, used predominantly with throttle position, air mass and temperatures. The basic unit of time is the tick, with a minimum data unit nibble. 0Data transmission speeds over fast or slow channels, where bitrate can also vary: 1xtick= 3us. In essence it is very similar to a single channel can transmission, where the function includes synchronisation, calibration, CRC and checksum.
    How am I to challenge the authenticity of data? For example, sensor error may come from power or ground discrepancies, range error, environment influences, calibration error or simply a genuine condition fault. Its design is of course intended to provide an autonomous diagnostic platform via the serial port, excluding any assessment by the techs.

    Full circle
    What does this mean for the industry? I suspect it will go full circle back to the 1970s, when part swapping was the norm for Christopher Columbus frauds.

  • Brexit and BER: IMPACT 

    What are the possible outcomes of Brexit for the UK aftermarket and should we be concerned?

  • LAST CHANCE TO ENTER TOP TECHNICIAN 2019  

    Techs wanting to take part in Top Technician 2019 have until 23.59 tomorrow (Friday 4 January) to take the round one quiz, or risk missing out on the competition this year.

  • Pro-Align becomes sponsor of Top Technician/Top Garage 2018  

    Pro-Align has signed up as a sponsor for Top Technician and Top Garage 2018.

  • Pico becomes sponsor for Top Technician/Top Garage 2018 

    Pico Technology has become a sponsor of Top Technician and Top Garage 2018.

Most read content


Search

Sign Up

For the latest news and updates from Aftermarket Magazine.


Poll

Where should the next Automechanika show be held?



Facebook


©DFA Media 1999-2019