Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/5/84; site gondor.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!cbosgd!ukma!psuvm.bitnet!psuvax1!gondor!okunewck
From: okunewck@gondor.UUCP (Philip E. OKunewick)
Newsgroups: net.rumor
Subject: Re: Catastrophic failures
Message-ID: <2040@gondor.UUCP>
Date: Tue, 18-Mar-86 12:42:10 EST
Article-I.D.: gondor.2040
Posted: Tue Mar 18 12:42:10 1986
Date-Received: Wed, 19-Mar-86 05:36:10 EST
References: <2019@gondor.UUCP> <15400002@ti-csl>
Reply-To: okunewck@gondor.UUCP (Philip E. OKunewick)
Organization: Pennsylvania State Univ.
Lines: 28

In article <15400002@ti-csl> tgralewi@ti-csl writes:
>
>   On the same lines as the "120 test", I once knew a repair tech that
>had a "perfect" system for finding the problem when a machine blew fuses.
>He kept putting larger and larger fuses in until something else blew.

This one isn't quite as foolish as it sounds.  A smoking component is
very easy to find and replace.  I would rather see something pour out
thick black smoke than go intermittently.  The intermittent problems
usually result in MULTIPLE service calls.

The only problem with smoked components is that it's usually a power
supply that smokes.  This is usually accompanied by a voltage drop
(no big deal) or a surge (Oh, S***!).  The surges cause things to go
intermittent.

Smoked components can be fun, though - especially when you didn't cause
them.  We had numerous calls from customers screaming "OUR MACHINE IS
ON FIRE!", when in reality it was just a little bitty thing pouring out
smoke.  (They CAN fill a room with smoke, though.)  Then you get to walk
in all cool and collected in the midst of a "crisis".

We also had an occasional gag where, when one tech reassembled a repaired
power supply and turned on the power, (probability of repeat failure = high)
another standing behind him would clap his hands once.  This usually
scared the bejabbers out of 'em.

                                                ---Duck