Draper Expert Diagnostic and Electronic Touch Screen Service Tablet

Published:  13 June, 2019

The Draper Expert automotive range now includes a new wireless Diagnostic Tablet. It covers 48 vehicle manufacturers, including American, Asian and European vehicles. The device offers complete OBDII diagnostic functions, and comes with 12 months of free updates. The tablet will quickly read and clear diagnostic trouble codes, making it suitable for MOT tasks as well as servicing requirements as well as advanced electronic maintenance and diagnostics. Technicians can record selectable multi-channel, real-time diagnostics information for subsequent analysis. It can also be customised to print detailed diagnostics reports for customers featuring a company name, logo and contact information. It is also a fully functioning Lenovo Android tablet, so technicians can take photos and record videos with sound. The tablet comes supplied with a carry case, ID Vehicle to VCI adaptors, USB power cable, 230V to USB plug and Wireless Bluetooth DBS connector.
www.drapertools.com

Related Articles

  • Snap-on: Vehicle system scan reports 

    The complete vehicle system scan reports offered by car diagnostic tools from Snap-on help technicians to get into good practices and give their customers peace of mind. Running a pre-scan before any vehicle work is done means any hidden issues can be located and the customer can be made aware of them from the outset. The pre-scan code identification helps speed the diagnosis and repair, and when it is followed by a post-scan after work is finished, the report confirms that all concerns were dealt with properly. Snap-on offers pre- and post-scan reports for technicians who own Snap-on diagnostic scan tools, including ZEUS, VERUS, MODIS, SOLUS and ETHOS families.
    diagnostics.snapon.co.uk/vsr

  • And the worst MOT tester in the UK is… YOU 

    To save money and raise efficiency, the DVSA has turned to automation. They no longer need an army of Vehicle Examiners wandering from MOT bay to MOT bay. Instead they are collecting data all the time.
        
    Let’s say I am the boss and my business is low on revenue. I beat up the manager and he in turn influences the tester to fail everything coming through the door. The customer is now stuck with no MOT and I have some simple high yield repairs.
        
    Here’s where it gets interesting. The DVSA computer is monitoring individual tester behaviour and looking at averages. The pattern is really easy for a computer at the DVSA to see because it’s just not possible that lots of cars fail on the same items every day.  The DVSA’s fix is to target garages where data shows they are hunting for work and send in a VE to crosscheck. He needs only to wait nearby until our tester issues his favourite fails and then arrive to retest the car.
        
    We all, as testers, now have access to our TQI. Lots of testers that I speak to have the sentiment that this data is all rubbish but, here is the rub. The DVSA have a team of very capable data processors looking at this data and writing algorithms that alert them to trends that need investigation.

    Take my example of one of my longest-serving testers and allow the DVSA computer to tell me every car that he has tested in the last two weeks of November for the last seven years and add in that we only want to know about cars tested after 4:30pm. We find only one car; a Y reg (2001) BMW 320i convertible, always tested after 5pm with a longest test time of thirty-two minutes and shortest of twenty-seven. Guess what, it’s my guy’s brother-in-law’s car!
        
    For me the horror is that the car has never failed an MOT. It’s also never been in the workshop for any repairs. It looks absolutely dogged out and is on around 180,000 miles. Worst still my guy has never once even advised anything on this car. The VE would assume  Barry’s guy is prepared to let things slide at the end of the day, so maybe he plans to visit me after 5pm on a Thursday.

    Conflicting vehicle locations
    This is a fun story from a close and trusted friend. My guy is at a DVSA IVA check and overhears a conversation by a couple of Vehicle Examiners. It goes like this; VE no.1 is suspicious of an MOT bay offering fraudulent MOT tests. He parks down the road from an MOT bay in Kent and checks which vehicle is logged on and being tested. He takes the registration number of the vehicle in question and calls the DVLA, identifies himself and asks if the vehicle has been seen on the DVLA camera system anywhere in the last half hour. The car was last seen on the M25 twelve minutes ago near Watford in Hertfordshire over 70 miles away.
      
    So, our VE is in Kent and the car is in Hertfordshire. If this works today in a manual sense how long will it be before computers can do this to every single test? Talk about an easy way to stop fraudulent MOTs, just using computers that the government already own.



  • Quality street  

    The MOT has gone through change over the past few years. There have been changes in the way the MOT tester and the MOT Centre Manager become eligible to operate a Vehicle Testing Station (VTS) through the qualifications that are available through various national and local training organisations,  through to the MOT tester having to manage their own Annual Training and the Annual Assessment.

    In combination with the revised MOT Inspection Manual (aligning to the European Directive) being implemented during May 2018, some confusion may exist in this ever changing sector.

    The VTS has several people roles that exist, one major role; the Authorised Examiner (AE) or Authorised Examiner Designated Manager (AEDM) being the person having the ultimate responsibility within the business.

    A new VTS and those  changing their approved status will need an AE/AEDM to hold the Level 3 Award in MOT Test Centre Management prior to the VTS becoming approved by DVSA. Most training providers will deliver the MOT Centre Manager qualification. Part of the qualification is that the person understands how to operate a Quality Management System (QMS) for the purposes of the VTS. This has been identified as an area that most people struggle with within the qualification.

    To implement an effective QMS program, the business must initially internally agree the standards that they set. The results are then collected and reported into the QMS. Any problem should have a corrective action. This should be written with an indication the people responsible to carry out the action along with a completion date. If the same problem repeats, then a plan should be developed to improve the situation, and put into action.

    The following highlights a few areas that where the QMS needs to focus.

    Training
    The AE should ensure all staff (employees and contractors) fully understand their responsibilities. This enables them to carry out their job accurately and remain compliant with the necessary requirements.

    The MOT tester should ensure that they meet the requirements of the MOT tester Annual Training and Annual Assessment. This year the annual training includes updating their knowledge of the MOT Inspection Manual which was introduced in May 2018. Most MOT testers will be familiar with the revisions and updates to the MOT Inspection Manual, either through specific training prior to the changes or reviewing the Inspection Manual during its implementation stages.

    The AE should also ensure that the MOT testers that carry out tests at the VTS, are compliant with the requirements. Failure to do so will result in the MOT tester unable to test vehicles. It should be noted that some MOT testers that have not met the requirements have taken many weeks to become reinstated as an MOT tester as a result of non compliance which could reduce business income.

    At present there is no requirement for the MOT Centre Manager to comply with the updating of their MOT knowledge but this could change in the near future.

    Procedures
    The AE should ensure that everyone involved in the MOT testing process within their business has access to key information, especially focusing on MOT test logs and MOT Test Quality Information (TQI).

    TQI can be accessed by both the AE and also the MOT tester, reviewing the MOT test data applicable to their role. The data can indicate both strengths and weaknesses with the MOT testers and the VTS, it is therefore important that this data is regularly reviewed to identify any anomalies within the data and implement an ‘action plan’ to correct any deficiencies, therefore both the MOT tester and the AE have a responsibility in this area.

    MOT TQI was highlighted as a requirement for the MOT tester annual training/annual assessment. It is therefore suggested that the MOT Centre Manager also updates their knowledge on Test Quality Information (TQI) and also MOT test logs.

    The AE should ensure that the relevant people know procedures for the reporting of equipment defects/problems, the equipment maintenance and any equipment calibration requirements within the specified dates as indicated by the MOT Testing Guide. The AE must ensure that any appropriate records (calibration certificates) are kept and the records are held securely.
    The AE should always ensure that the equipment is maintained and calibrated correctly, if a problem is detected (yes things do go wrong) preferable before a breakdown occurs then a clear process should be identified and the rectification of the equipment recorded.

    Assurance
    The MOT tests which are carried out at the VTS must always have the correct result, the security of data, information and passwords are maintained which will lead to the reduction in risk of MOT fraudulent activity. The protection of data used in the MOT process needs to comply with the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) which was also introduced in May 2018 replacing the Data Protect Action (DPA) that previously covered the data. The AE has a duty to ensure this has been complied with.
    The process should also include a Quality Control process of the MOT tester to ensure that they produce satisfactory results, and to identify any future weaknesses in their MOT test procedures.

    The MOT Testing Guide (updated earlier this year) indicates that a QC check needs to be performed on an MOT tester every two months. Best practice would indicate that the QC process is completed on each MOT tester more frequently such as every month. The QC check should be recorded and kept in-line with the requirements. The QC report should indicate the strengths and weaknesses of each individual (not just indicating the MOT tester is OK) with an ‘action plan’ (further training etc) on how to reduce the weaknesses. The next month Quality Control report should then indicate how the MOT tester has performed against the ‘action plan’. This could help to reduce the VTS risk score, improving MOT tester performance but also increase business performance.
    Performing and recording quality control checks within an MOT business can be time consuming and often gets forgotten. The person carrying out the MOT QC must be carried out by an approved DVSA MOT tester. The QC can be achieved within the MOT testing team providing more than one MOT tester is engaged (one MOT Tester is nominated as the QC) or alternatively a service that an outside agency could provide. A Vehicle Testing Station with only one MOT tester could have a reciprocal arrangement with a nearby similar business by carrying out the QC check on each other.

    Improvement
    An effective QMS used within the VTS should identify any weaknesses that could put the station at risk. Once a weakness has been identified the business should develop an action plan to improve within the area of weakness. This will typically lead to an improvement.

    All these points will help to achieve a low VTS risk score. The MOT centre manager should read and understand the various documents provided free by the DVSA on how to carry out a VTS risk assessment and to hopefully reduce the VTS risk score.
    The AE can find out more on the qualification by contacting a recognised training provider delivering the MOT Centre Manager Qualification, this will help them better understand the requirements of a Vehicle Testing Station and the various MOT Testing documents and standards associated with MOT testing. Many of these requirements have been revised over the last few years, and it is a requirement for the AE to constantly update their knowledge to remain current. Remember the MOT Testing Guide was revised in early 2018 and many AEs do not have knowledge of the new requirements.

  • JLM Academy launches with DPF Doctor founder Darren Darling at the helm 

    The JLM Academy officially opened its doors on Saturday (20 July). The brainchild of Darren Darling, founder of The DPF Doctor Network, the new Academy is fielding a top-drawer roster of industry trainers, including Darren and Andy Savva, a.k.a The Garage Inspector.

  • 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.


Search

Sign Up

For the latest news and updates from Aftermarket Magazine.


Poll

Where should the next Automechanika show be held?



Calendar

Click here to submit an event

Facebook


©DFA Media 1999-2019