CHAPTER 1
combat systems, subsystems, and individual equip- ment manuals) is an integral part of the PMS. These manuals provide the necessary information for under- standing, operating, and maintaining combat systems. Shipboard maintenance falls into three categories: (1) maintenance within the capability of ship person- nel (organizational level); (2) maintenance requiring assistance from outside the ship (intermediate level), such as tender or fleet technical support centers; and (3) maintenance requiring port facilities (depot level), such as shipyard maintenance. Since the objective of the PMS is to perform maintenance at the organiza- tional or intermediate level, it does not reflect depot- level maintenance. Combat systems readiness requires efficient maintenance. The key to this capability is an organized system of planned maintenance that is designed to ensure the maximum operational readi- ness of the combat systems. This section describes the PMS objective, the maintenance scheduling and data system, and the inte- grated maintenance. PMS OBJECTIVE The PMS objective is to maximize operational ef- ficiency of all equipment and to reduce downtime, maintenance man-hours, and maintenance costs. Al- though the PMS provides methods and resources to accomplish each objective, it is not self-sufficient and does not replace the initiative of maintenance super- visors nor does it reduce the necessity for technically competent personnel. Recording and providing feed- back of maintenance and personnel data allow con- tinuing management analysis for the improvement of maintenance methods and personnel management. Full use of the planning methods, along with the ac- ceptance and cooperation of technicians, supervisors, and management personnel, produces a maintenance system with the inherent confidence, reliability, and capability to help achieve maximum combat systems readiness. A sampling of data gathered from the fleet shows conclusively that those ships that adhere to their PMS schedules maintain a significantly higher state of ma- terial readiness with no greater maintenance man- power usage than those ships that do not adhere to their PMS schedules. The primary ingredients of the PMS program are 1. 2. 3. 4. comprehensive procedures for planned main- tenance of the combat systems, subsystems, and equipment; system fault-isolation procedures; maintenance task performance scheduling and control; and methods, materials, tools descriptions, and personnel required for maintenance. Adherence to the PMS program will produce 1. 2. 3. 4. improved confidence in system maintenance, reduced testing time, elimination of redundant testing resulting from uncoordinated testing, and detection of most malfunctions during sched- uled maintenance events. MAINTENANCE SCHEDULING The normal flow of events that maintenance man- agers use in developing an integrated maintenance schedule is shown in figure 1-1. This figure shows maintenance management responsibilities and the sequence of events that flow from the department master and work-center PMS record books through the scheduling aids to test execution, unscheduled maintenance, and reporting. 1-2
Figure 1-1.—Block diagram of the Planned Maintenance System. 1-3
The maintenance control board contains the cycle schedule and the current and subsequent quarterly schedules. The board summarizes the status of current and planned combat systems preventive maintenance. It is updated weekly by the division officer for all deferred and completed maintenance items. This subsection describes the maintenance index page and the cycle, quarterly, and weekly schedules. Maintenance Index Page The maintenance index page (MIP) contains a brief description of the requirements on the main- tenance requirement card for each item of equipment, including the periodicity code, the man-hours in- volved, the minimum required skill level, and, if ap- plicable, the related maintenance requirements. The MIPs for all equipments in a department are main- tained in the department’s master PMS record, the record that is used by the department head to schedule maintenance on the PMS schedule forms. Each work center has a work-center PMS record that contains the MIPs applicable to that work center. Weekly Schedule The weekly schedule is a visual display that is normally posted in the working area of each mainte- nance group. The maintenance group supervisor uses the weekly schedule to assign specific personnel to perform maintenance on specific equipment. Assign- ments include system and equipment tests and service procedures. MAINTENANCE DATA SYSTEM The Maintenance Data System (MDS) has three functions. It provides a means of (1) recording main- tenance actions, (2) processing the recorded data to define important facts about maintenance and equip- ment, and (3) retrieving information for analysis. Significant data identified by the system include the reason the malfunction occurred and the manner in which it was discovered, the man-hours expended, the exact equipment affected, any delays in repair, the reasons for delays, and the types of maintenance personnel required. Recording Maintenance Actions Cycle Schedule The cycle schedule is a visual display of pre- ventive maintenance requirements based on the ship’s current overhaul cycle. It is used by department heads to assist in the quarterly planning of non-PMS-related activities, such as inspections and training. Quarterly Schedule The quarterly schedule, planned from the cycle schedule, is a visual display of the ship’s employment schedule. It is prepared by department heads in co- operation with division officers and maintenance group supervisors. The schedule shows the current status of preventive maintenance for each group and assigns specific requirements in conjunction with the ship’s operational schedule. Maintenance personnel should record (document) certain shipboard maintenance actions and corrective maintenance on specific categories of equipment at the time the maintenance actions are performed or deferred. Information is recorded and submitted to the MDS for input on the Ship’s Maintenance Action Form (OPNAV 4790/2K). Processing Recorded Data and Analyzing Information The MDS data-processing facilities collect, store, and analyze maintenance information inputs into the system. The MDS yields a data path concerning equipment maintainability and reliability, man-hour usage, equipment alteration status, material usage and costs, and fleet material condition. Various automated 1-4
reports are produced periodically for ships, repair activities, unit commanders, and type commanders. These automated reports include current ship’s main- tenance project files, work requests, and preinspection and survey deficiency listings. INTEGRATED MAINTENANCE Combat systems maintenance is based on a con- cept of performing a comprehensive schedule of tests at three mutually supporting levels: (1) combat sys- tems, (2) subsystems, and (3) equipment. These integrated tests are structured to challenge all combat systems fictions, parameters, and characteristics on a scheduled periodicity against specified tolerances. Successful performance of the tests as scheduled should provide a high level of confidence in the func- tional operability of the combat systems equipment. Integrated maintenance requirements are estab- lished through engineering analysis based on the study of all factors having a significant effect on maintenance. The analysis defines system and equip- ment functions and establishes tolerances in terms of system parameters for determining acceptable system operations. The integrated maintenance procedures are intended to provide minimum preventive maintenance coverage of combat systems. The procedures are writ- ten to establish specific controlled conditions that challenge the fictions under test. In some cases, test efficiency and format restrictions make it difficult to determine the intent of a test from its procedural steps; therefore, the procedural sequences must be followed explicitly. Improvising or shortcutting pro- cedural sequences often leads to incorrect trouble- shooting or masking of actual faults. The integrated maintenance concept is consistent with the PMS efforts, and it is the most effective means of achieving the goals of the PMS. Adhering to this concept enables maintenance managers to manage the combat systems maintenance effort and to achieve an optimum level of readiness with the most effective use of available personnel. With combat systems testing being conducted at three levels, it is imperative that integrated main- tenance tests be scheduled to reduce test redundancy whenever possible. The three levels of tests are com- bat systems testing, subsystems testing, and equip- ment testing. Combat Systems Testing Combat systems testing, defined as testing that exercises a combat system as one entity, is the highest level of testing that can be accomplished aboard ship. Combat systems tests are usually automated and are conducted and monitored from the ship’s command and control center. The overall combat system operability test (OCSOT) is the primary combat systems test tool. The OCSOT gives a good overview of detection, dis- play and tracking, designation, acquisition, repeat- back position, and some status-signal monitoring. Simulated targets are used in the OCSOT. Although the test is conducted as if the combat systems were operating normally, certain operating stations dedi- cated to support the test are lost for normal opera- tional use. Although the OCSOT provides an overview of systems performance, it does not test the fill capacity of a combat system or its subsystems operability. It is impractical from an instrumentation and manpower standpoint to test all functional test requirements at the combat systems level. Therefore, confidence in operability or material readiness is mainly dependent on integrated testing at the subsystem and equipment levels. Subsystems Testing Testing that exercises two or more pieces of equipment fictionally contained within the same subsystem is defined as subsystems testing. Subsys- tems testing tests a subsystem in a stand-alone opera- tion; however, some functions are provided by other subsystems, which require integrated testing. 1-5
Subsystems tests are functionally grouped and mode oriented so that related functions can be chal- lenged using the same setup, procedures, and stimuli. Where practical, subsystems tests use tactical indi- cators for measurement, leaving the requirement for special hookups and test equipment to equipment- level testing. A major combat ship contains most, or all, of the following subsystems: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. Search-radar subsystem Command and control subsystem Countermeasure subsystem Gun/missile weapon subsystem External communications subsystem Navigation subsystem Equipment Testing Equipment testing is defined as testing that is generally directed toward power levels, frequencies, servos, special features, and output functions. The PMS may require special external stimulating equip- ment and special- or general-purpose test equipment for testing measurements. FAULT ISOLATION The objective of fault isolation is the systematic application of fault-isolation tools needed to isolate the exact unit or fictional interface responsible for a fault or degraded operation during testing or tactical operation. To diagnose and effect timely repair of faults within a fire-control system, you must fully understand fault-isolation concepts, the fault-isolation tools available to you, and the capabilities and limita- tions of those tools when applied to system fault iso- lation. 3. It conveys the maximum intelligence regard- ing the source of the fault. 1-6 Although the primary entry into fault isolation is from test-detected faults, improper operating condi- tions can be observed during tactical operations, including operator awareness, data extraction and re- duction, and on-line monitoring. Fault isolation leads to corrective maintenance. After a fault has been isolated to a specific unit or interface, corrective action in the form of repair, re- placement, and/or alignment must be taken. The corrective maintenance performed may or may not be required to return the system to an operable condition. There may have been more than one fault contributing to the out-of-tolerance condition that initiated the fault-isolation process. The possibility of faulty re- placement parts and incorrect adjustment or alignment exists. Instead of solving the problem, corrective maintenance may have added to it. Therefore, it is mandatory that each corrective action be followed by verification. Normally, verification is accomplished by re- creating the test environment and rechallenging the function. Where alignments are concerned, the inter- dependent effect upon other elements of the combat systems must be considered in the verification pro- cess. FAULT-ISOLATION TOOLS During testing or operational use of a weapons system, faults can occur in the interface between sub- systems, in the interface between equipments of a subsystem, or in the equipment itself. Rapid fault iso- lation requires decisive action in selecting and imple- menting the most appropriate fault-isolation tools. A fault-isolation tool has the following three character- istics: 1. It requires the least amount of time, equip- ment, or service. 2. It is easily implemented.
Tools used in fault isolation cover a wide range of applications, including (but not limited to) combat systems tests, subsystems tests, on-line/off-line test- ing, and diagnostic testing programs. This section briefly covers these items and gives examples of their use, where appropriate. Combat Systems Tests Combat systems tests are the highest level of tests that can be performed to verify the readiness or align- ment of a combat system. The OCSOT is one of the major combat systems tests; it is designed to test a combat system as a single, fictional unit. Major faults in the subsystems usually show up during the OCSOT; often, this is the first indication of a problem in a particular subsystem. Keep in mind, however, that the OCSOT does not test the full operability of a combat system or its subsystems; it provides only an overview of systems performance. Another important test is the combat systems alignment test, which is a programmed test tool designed to measure the relative beam alignment (or misalignment) between a reference sensor and a sen- sor under test. The measure of misalignment is accomplished by collecting the range, bearing, and elevation data from the reference and test sensors. Then the test sensor data is compared to the reference data, and the results are shown on a display console for analysis. The sensors that can be tested include the gun or missile fire-control radars and surface-or air- search radars. A hard-copy printout can be obtained to provide a record. Subsystem Tests Subsystem tests aid in fault isolation by testing specific functions within a subsystem to determine if they are generated correctly. In many cases, these tests check the transmission of data between the subsystem under test and associated subsystems. Computer pro- grams are available that provide specific test capa- bilities suited to subsystem testing. An example of such a program is the Programmed Operational and Functional Appraisal (POFA). The POFA programs, for which the subsystem test is named, are non- resident programs that detect and isolate malfunctions by transmitting selectively configured and controlled data between a computer and a computer ancillary equipment interface. A typical example of a subsystem test is the fire- control system (FCS) daily system operability test (DSOT). The DSOT assesses weapons system readiness in the normal mode of operation for an antiaircraft (AA) target from designation through acquisition, track, weapons control, simulated firing, and post-firing evaluation. Test procedures are controlled by the test con- ductor, who calls out the step numbers in sequence. The personnel performing the steps in the various spaces inform the test conductor when the action or observation required by that step is completed. No response restrictions are placed on personnel, except where the steps are underlined in the procedure. In this case, instruction words are also underlined, indi- cating the quantity or indication upon which the request for the response is based. Steps not under- lined, but containing underlined instructions, denote the response requested (Mark, Fired, etc.). Underlined step numbers denote those steps to be recorded for evaluation and scoring. All responses should be given as soon as practical after the completion of the step, particularly in those areas of the test where the timing is important or when a sequence of events must commence immediately after a required action or observation. Timely re- sponses aid in decreasing time requirements. When a fault occurs during combat systems or subsystems testing and before detailed fault-isolation procedures are initiated, the operational steps should be repeated to ensure that the fault is an actual fault and not an operator error. If the fault still exists, you should ensure that the combat system or subsystem is properly configured for the test event performed; that is, switches are properly set, correct function codes are selected, etc. 1-7
On-Line/Off-Line Testing Based on the level of testing selected, on-line maintenance testing can assist in fault isolation by testing suspected equipment or systems with a mini- mum of interference with normal ship operation. If a suspected equipment or system checks out satis- factorily, then a possible source of the fault has been eliminated. This aids in the fault-isolation process. In general, the use of on-line testing provides a quick fault-isolation tool when you are trying to confirm equipment or system problems. When using on-line testing, you should be careful not to degrade the sys- tem or subsystem operational capability beyond the level specified by ship doctrine. Some combat systems equipment has the capa- bility of severing normal communications links and accepting preset or manual inputs when you are verifying system ability to correctly process data. This off-line testing offers a convenient method of iso- lating equipment or interface faults. As in on-line testing, care must be taken not to degrade the system or subsystem operational capabilities. One such off-line test is the system maintenance test (SMT) used in the Mk 86 gunfire control system (GFCS). The SMP is a computer program that enhances fictional testing and troubleshooting of the FCS. The SMP provides test conditions to check the integ- rity of input/output circuits to and from the computer and to check the fictional integrity of various functional systems. It is loaded into the FCS computer in place of the normal (tactical) FCS operational program. Therefore, the FCS is not functional in a tactical sense until the FCS operational computer program has been reloaded into the FCS computer fol- lowing the use of the SMP. The program includes a configuration entry routine, an executive routine, and approximately 60 individual tests that are organized into groups according to the interface channels between the computer and the peripheral units. Configuration entry allows the technician to adapt the program to a particular modification of the FCS. The executive routine provides the basic timing requirements for each test program and establishes testing priority in the event two or more tests are selected concurrently. The tests are grouped according to channel and unit numbers as follows: Channel 14 test programs are selected from units 1, 2, and 3. Channel 15 test programs are selected from unit 25. Channel 16 test programs are selected from unit 22. Channel 17 test programs are selected from unit 6. A sample of channel 14 test programs is shown in table 1-1. Notice that the tests selected at unit 2 or 3 are selected with a test number select code. The proce- dures for setting up these codes are in table 1-2. 1-8
Table 1-1.—System Maintenance Program Channel 14 Test Programs Table 1-2.—Procedures for Setting Up Test Number Select Codes Figure 1-2.—Sample test mode matrix. 1-9
Since it is not practicable to list all the possible tests in the SMP, this discussion is limited only to channel 14 test programs. The channel 14 test pro- grams consist of a scan generator test routine and various test routines that can be selected from unit 1, 2, or 3. Test routines are selected from unit 2 or 3 by using test number select keyboard code entries to the computer. The DESIGNATOR SELECT switch positions at unit 1 select tests from unit 1. Table 1-1 lists units 2 and 3 test number select codes and unit 1 DESIGNA- TOR SELECT switch positions used to select the test routines. The following paragraphs provide a synopsis of selected channel 14 test programs: INITIAL DATA DISPLAY: This test pro- vides an initial data display to the A/N display for entering initial test data required for the channel 17 end-around, D/A converter, gun data, and encoder tests. ADDRESS DECODE TEST: This test out- puts a unique number to each unit (1, 2, or 3) readout to verify proper address encoding and console address decoding. NIXIE CYCLE TEST: This test cycles all of units 1, 2, and 3 NIXIE readout digits from O to 9, in unison, in a 10-second period. The test checks the channel output lines and the readout digital logic. GUN DATA TEST: This testis similar to the channel 17 end-around test, except that the test results are displayed on the A/N display, rather than on a printout. The test should be used for fault localization, rather than for fault detection. SERVO TESTS: These tests check out the stiff-stick data, the camera-assigned codes, and the TV sight 1 and sight 2 servo systems. The servo sys- tems can be checked using a servo gain of 8, 4, or 2. MEMORY CALL-UP TESTS: These tests are used to monitor up to 12 randomly selected or consecutive computer memory locations and to dis- play them on the A/N displays. When the technician troubleshoots with the aid of the SMP, it is sometimes useful to know what data the computer is transmitting and receiving. The memory locations of all active computer input and output buf- fers can be called up by using this routine. Diagnostic Testing Programs Diagnostic testing programs are designed to iso- late malfunctions that occur in the internal logic of the printed circuit boards. When other types of failures occur, manual procedures are required, but, in many cases, the diagnostics provide sufficient information to identify the fictional area of the failure. Diagnostic testing programs are useful in locating a problem in a piece of equipment once the problem is isolated to a unit. The unit can be systematically tested with a printout or readout provided to the tech- nician to indicate the problem area. Some diagnostic programs provide an error-code readout, whereas others provide the direct location of suspected faulty components. An error-code readout requires searching an area- code table to locate the possible bad component, while the direct component-location readout tells the technician where the problem could be located. The direct component-location readout method is usually faster in producing the location of suspected failed components. MAINTENANCE SUPPORT DOCUMENTATION Maintenance support documentation falls into two general categories: (1) logic diagrams that contain a sequence of steps to isolate the faults causing a specific test- or operation-related fault symptom, and (2) system or equipment functional flow diagrams that allow the technician to determine a sequence of iso- lation steps. 1-10
1. LOGIC DIAGRAMS: Logic diagrams in- clude troubleshooting logic charts (TLCs), fault logic diagrams (FLDs), fault isolation pyramid charts, and fault reference tables. The TLCs and the FLDs pro- vide a simple yes-or-no, question-and-answer ap- proach to fault isolation. They are generally based on either a ladder method or a bracket-and-halving fault- isolation technique. Ladder Method: The function is approached from its initiation or termination point and, in succes- sive steps, is checked to the other end. Bracket-and-Halving Fault-Isolation Tech- nique: The function is checked at its midpoint, then at the midpoint of the half containing the fault, etc., until it is isolated. Pyramid charts take an output or terminal func- tion (output, indicator, etc.) and break it down into its major subfunctions, which are individually checked until the fault is isolated. Fault reference charts gen- erally relate symptoms to specific faults. 2. FUNCTIONAL FLOW DIAGRAMS: Func- tional flow diagrams include system functional dia- grams, signal-flow diagrams, schematic diagrams, and relay-ladder diagrams. These are frequently used in isolating a fault that was not anticipated by the fault logic material provided. In general, fault logic procedures are used more rapidly by inexperienced technicians than fictional diagrams in isolating a specific fault. When used with flow diagrams, fault logic procedures provide a means of teaching new or inexperienced personnel effective fault-isolation techniques. A fictional understanding gained through the use of maintenance documents is necessary for the development of experienced tech- nicians. Experienced technicians frequently isolate specific faults addressed in fault logic procedures faster without referring to procedures. Their experi- ence is essential in isolating problems that have not been anticipated by logic procedures. Numerous approaches are possible in the applica- tion of fault-isolation procedures. The fact that most casualties occur within an equipment and are cor- rected by troubleshooting on an equipment-level basis leads to the tendency to troubleshoot all casualties on an equipment-level basis. It is to be expected that each technician might rely more heavily on certain trouble- shooting aids and procedures than others. Few hard- and-fast rules apply to all troubleshooting situations, but one rule that should always be foremost is to de- termine the origin of a fault as precisely as possible. System interrelationship is such that many casual- ties can be reflected in several areas as improper op- eration or fault indications. If each area of each equipment that does not function properly is checked separately, the equipment downtime and correspond- ing man-hour use can rapidly increase. On the other hand, familiarity with system reference materials, system fictional diagrams, and fault-isolation proce- dures can lead logically and expeditiously to the spe- cific area of the fault. All system fault isolation is interrelated. Its effective use depends on knowing what materials are available, how they are interrelated, and how to cross- -reference between materials. The isolation materials that you will use in fault isolation are the system fault indicator director, the system function directory, the system functional diagram, the fault analysis matrix, a sample troubleshooting problem, and the equipment troubleshooting documentation. System Fault Indicator Directory The system fault indicator directory (FID) facili- tates entry into the documentation required for troubleshooting a fault disclosed by a specific indica- tor during normal operation. A typical FID is shown in table 1-3. The material in this FID is grouped by system and further divided alphabetically by equip- ment, panel, and indicator. A complete listing of indi- cators is included. 1-11
Table 1-3.—Typical Fault Indicator Directory The reference provided for each indicator includes System Function Directory a system functional diagram (SFD) and an applicable fault analysis matrix (FAM) reference. The SFD refer- ence pertains to the SFD figure used to troubleshoot the fault on the system level, which the individual indicator indicates. The applicable FAM reference is used for troubleshooting and for verifying the opera- tional status of the system on an equipment level. 1-12 The system function directory is used with the FID. It contains an alphabetical listing of all system fictions contained in the SFDs. This directory can be used to start the troubleshooting process when there is no particular indicator associated with a fault. A sam- ple fire-control system function directory is shown in table 1-4.
Table 1-4.—Samp1e Fire-Control System Function Directory 1-13
System Functional Diagram mally from left to right. All serial components of each piece of equipment in the loop that are significant to A system fictional diagram (SFD) contains all functional understanding are shown. All readout primary and secondary circuits necessary for an devices, test points, etc., in each equipment that are understanding of the function of a particular mode, significant to system troubleshooting are included on loop, or phase of system operation. Each function is the SFD. A sample weapons system fictional dia- shown from source to termination. Data flow is nor- gram is shown in figure 1-3. Figure 1-3.—Sample weapons system functional diagram. Fault Analysis Matrix Associated switchboards are setup correctly, all power lamps are lit, and no fuses are blown. The fault analysis matrixes (FAMs) and their associated troubleshooting procedures are related to each other and to the SMTs. Together, they provide maintenance personnel with an effective troubleshoot- ing package. To keep this material as specific as possible, the following assumptions are made: All equipment has been properly energized and indicator lamps have been tested. Troubleshooting faults do not begin until the test is completed, if possible. This procedure allows the technician to troubleshoot several related faults simultaneously, reducing troubleshooting time. Troubleshooting faults should occur in the same sequence in which the faults are discovered; for example, a fault discovered in step 9 of an SMT should be corrected before a fault discovered in step 14. Adherence to this sequence for correcting faults is 1-14
desirable because the initial fault observed during a The FAM is arranged in tabular form to provide a test may be the cause of those observed thereafter. quick cross-reference of troubleshooting aids and Thus, correcting the initial fault may correct those reference materials. Table 1-5 is a sample fault analy- observed later in the test sequence. sis matrix. Table 1-5.—Sample Fault Analysis Matrix This column lists the function source and test points, if applicable. This column lists units between source and destination. This column lists other SMTs and associated steps in which the parameter in the function column is tested, if applicable. This column provides suggested troubleshooting procedures for fault isolation; for example, applicable self-tests, alternate system configuration/substitution, etc. It should be emphasized that these are suggested troubleshooting procedures and are not meant to preclude or remove judgment for troubleshooting from the technician. The intent of the FAM is to serve as a troubleshooting aid, while allowing latitude for personal preference as to the approach and technique applied. 1-15
Sample Troubleshooting Problem To show how troubleshooting documentation is used to isolate faults, this sample problem is provided with corresponding fault analysis procedures by using samples of fault-isolation materials previously cov- ered in this chapter. The sample problem and asso- ciated fault analysis procedures are based on a fault revealed during SMT W-1. It is emphasized that these are suggested troubleshooting procedures and are not meant to preclude or remove judgment from the technician. For the sake of clarity, this problem is shown as separate steps. Refer to table 1-5 as you solve this problem. 1. Prior to the hypothetical fault, it is assumed that all turn-on procedures and preliminary test steps have been accomplished with no apparent malfunc- tions indicated. No PERMISSION TO TEST indica- tion is observed at the radar set console (RSC). 2. After verification of all test setups, the test coordinator then refers to the FAM for SMT W-1, which lists all SMT response steps (column 1) and the associated functions that are tested (column 2). 3. From columns 3 and 4, the sources and inter- mediate units can readily be determined. 4. Column 5 lists related SMTs. 5. Column 6 lists SFD figure 12-14.1 as the reference for the permission to test the function. By using the available reference material, the test coordi- nator can proceed to column 7 and implement the sug- gested fault-isolation procedures. 6. In column 7, step 4a, C-TASC (a computer diagnostic program) is used to determine if logical output voltages are being (1) generated at the radar data processor (RDP), and (2) transmitted to the radar set console (RSC). The succeeding fault-isolation pro- cedures listed in the FAM are then accomplished as required until the casualty is found or isolated to an equipment. If the preceding problem had arisen at any time other than during a scheduled test, the system FID (see table 1-3) and/or the FCS function directory (see table 1-4) could have been used. When the FID is used to facilitate solutions of problems encountered during normal operations or weapons system exercises other than scheduled test- ing, the faulty indication is identified and located in the Indicator column for the associated equipment listed in the Equipment column of table 1-3. Using the same hypothetical fault described above, refer to table 1-3 and locate the RSC in the Equipment column and PERMISSION TO TEST in the Indicator column. The applicable SFD and FAM may then be refereed to for trouble analysis. At the discretion of the test coordi- nator, the equipment may be setup as required in the referenced FAM, and the associated trouble analysis procedures accomplished as described in the above paragraphs. Where there is no readily identifiable in- dicator for a given function, reference maybe made to the SFD to cross-reference the applicable SFD. Equipment Troubleshooting Documentation Equipment operating procedures (OPs) contain a wealth of documentation to enable the rapid localiza- tion of faults that have been traced to a particular piece of equipment. The documentation includes (but is not limited to) fault logic diagrams, signal-flow diagrams, pyramid diagrams, relay and lamp indexes, and relay lamp ladder diagrams. In addition, mainte- nance turn-on procedures, shown in table 1-6, are provided for energizing the equipment. These pro- cedures contain references to troubleshooting docu- ments that are to be used if a given step of the procedure cannot be performed satisfactorily. 1-16
Table 1-6.—Sample Maintenance Turn-On Procedures Some of the primary equipment troubleshooting may also include internal indications at key test documentations are covered in this subsection, includ- ing fault logic diagrams, signal-flow diagrams, pyra- mid diagrams, relay and lamp indexes, and relay lamp ladder diagrams. Also included is a sample equipment troubleshooting problem relating to a simple checkout procedure. FAULT LOGIC DIAGRAMS.— Fault logic dia- grams (FLDs) are used to speed troubleshooting by requiring the technician to answer a branching series of questions about an observed system fault. The questions, which permit only yes-or-no answers, per- tain primarily to the status of external indications (lamps, dials, meters, scope displays, etc.), but they points. By a process of elimination, the technician is led to the area of probable trouble and is referred to equipment troubleshooting documents. Figure 1-4 shows a sample fault logic diagram. SIGNAL-FLOW DIAGRAMS.— Signal-flow diagrams show the signal flow from an input to an output function. Adjustment procedures, replacement procedures, and schematics are referenced in the signal-flow diagram to provide the technician with quick access to the appropriate maintenance require- ment cards and related troubleshooting documenta- tion. Figure 1-5 shows a sample signal-flow diagram. 1-17
Figure 1-4.—Fault logic diagram. Figure 1-5.—Signal-flow diagram. 1-18
PYRAMID DIAGRAMS.— Pyramid diagrams pertain to the interdependency of the subassemblies essential to each function of a piece of equipment. The pyramid starts with an output function and, for a given local test setup, lists the values and allowable tolerances of that function. Subsequent checks of the various inputs that affect the function are contained in blocks, which radiate downward from the statement of The blocks contain recommended corrective action if the check of the input is at fault. Each leg of the pyramid is terminated by an input and a reference to other pyramids or related documents. Thus, the equipment troubleshooting pyramids should enable the technician to quickly localize faults and perform the necessary corrective action by referencing the associated material. Figure 1-6 shows a sample pyra- mid diagram.the function. Figure 1-6.—Pyramid diagram. RELAY AND LAMP INDEXES.— The relay switches and indicator lamps. They cross-index (by and lamp indexes list all the relays and lamps shown figure, sheet, and zone) the location of the relay coil on the troubleshooting diagrams. The indexes list, in and indicator lamp energizing paths. Table 1-7 shows unit designation sequence, all relay coils and related a sample relay index. 1-19
Table 1-7.—Sample Relay Index RELAY LAMP LADDER DIAGRAMS.— ered by signal-flow diagrams. They are used with re- Relay lamp ladder diagrams show the energizing lay and lamp indexes. Figure 1-7 shows a sample re- paths for relays and indicator lamps that are not cov- lay lamp ladder diagram. 1-20
Figure 1-7.—Relay lamp ladder diagram. The relay lamp ladder diagram is a troubleshoot- ences in fire-control equipment, each fire-control sys- ing support document for the signal-flow diagram and tern has its own troubleshooting philosophy. How- the maintenance turn-on procedure. It is also used as ever, they all use the basic troubleshooting documen- the prime troubleshooting document for equipment tation (or a modification or combination of the basic switching problems. documentation) covered in this chapter. The relay lamp ladder diagram traces the energiz- ing path for the relay coil or indicator lamp from a common interface point appearing on both the power- distribution diagram and the ladder diagram. It traces through the equipment, to the respective relay coil or indicator lamp, and to a common return power inter- face. The relay lamp ladder diagram shows cabling, terminal connections, relay contacts, switches, and lamps in the energizing path. SAMPLE EQUIPMENT TROUBLESHOOT- ING PROBLEM.— Because of the inherent differ- This sample problem uses the checkout procedure, and the problem-directory and pyramid-diagram methods of troubleshooting. In these methods, the technician sets up, adjusts, and verifies equipment operation according to a set of steps in the checkout procedures shown in table 1-8. If the function being tested at a particular step fails, the technician refers to that same numbered step in the problem directory to isolate the faulty compo- nent. A sample problem directory is shown in table 1-9. 1-21
Table 1-8.—Sample Video Processing and Distribution System Checkout Procedures In our sample troubleshooting problem, the faulty component is Test Board 25A38A31. To isolate this component, the technician performs the checkout procedures shown in table 1-8. At step 27, the tech- nician observes that none of the lamps on 25A38 are lit. From here, the technician proceeds to the problem directory (see table 1-9), step 27, where he is directed to set the S/P BYPASS switch to ON. After doing this, he notices that more than one lamp is out on 25A38. The problem directory refers the technician to the incorrect lamp indicator pyramid diagram, shown in figure 1-8. Figure 1-8.—Incorrect lamp pyramid diagram 7-13-2. Here, the technician follows the instructions out- lined in the dashed blocks and answers the questions in the solid block. Eventually, the technician is in- structed to measure the voltage at 25A38A3lTPI. A zero-voltage reading at this test point indicates that Test Board 25A38A31 is the faulty component. The technician replaces the circuit board and verifies correct operation by repeating step 27 in the checkout procedures. Figure 1-9 is a sample troubleshooting system fictional diagram. 1-22
Table 1-9.—Sample Problem Directory Figure 1-9.—Troubleshooting system functional diagram. 1-23
RECOMMENDED READING LIST NOTE: Although the following references were current when this TRAMAN was published, their continued currency cannot be assured. Therefore, you need to ensure that you are studying the latest revision. Ships’ Maintenance and Material Management (3-M) Manual, OPNAVINST 4790.4, Chief of Naval Operations, Washington, DC, 1994. All systems operating procedures that describe troubleshooting techniques and procedures applicable to each FCS on your ship class. 1-24
CHAPTER 2 LIQUID-COOLING SYSTEMS LEARNING OBJECTIVES Upon completing this chapter, you should be able to do the following: 1. Identify the different types of liquid-cooling systems for electronic fire-control equipment. 2. Identify the components for the liquid-cooling systems. 3. Identify the maintenance responsibilities for the liquid- cooling systems used by Fire Controlmen. INTRODUCTION Cooling systems are essential to the satisfactory operation of a shipboard weapons system. In fact, some form of cooling is required for all shipboard electronic equipment, and liquid cooling is especially efficient for the transfer of large amounts of heat. To maintain cooling systems, you must have a broad understanding of the different types of liquid-cooling systems with which you are involved. As a Fire Con- trolman, and because you operate and maintain elec- trical and electronic equipment, you are required to have a thorough knowledge of liquid-cooling systems. This chapter discusses basic liquid-cooling systems, liquid-cooling systems configurations, and liquid-cooling systems for the Mk 92 fire-control system (FCS). It also discusses the maintenance re- sponsibilities you have as a Fire Controlman for these systems. For more detailed information on these and other cooling systems, consult your applicable oper- ating procedures and Basic Liquid Cooling Systems for Shipboard Electronics, NAVSEA 0948-LP-122- 8010. BASIC LIQUID-COOLING SYSTEMS The typical liquid-cooling system is composed of two basic cooling systems: primary and secondary. These two systems are discussed briefly in this sec- tion. PRIMARY LIQUID-COOLING SYSTEM The primary liquid-cooling system provides the initial source of cooling water that can be either sea- water or chilled water from the ship’s air-conditioning plant, or a combination of both. Figures 2-1, 2-2, and 2-3 show the basic arrangement of liquid-cooling systems that use seawater and chilled water. You are encouraged to refer to these three figures as you study this chapter. In figure 2-1, seawater from a sea connection is pumped by a seawater circulating pump in one of the ship’s engineering spaces through a duplex strainer to remove all debris and then is pumped through the tubes of a heat exchanger. Finally, the seawater is dis- charged back into the sea at an overboard discharge. 2-1