potterton puma 80 dilema

[spraggo]

i could continue to say you have no idea what you are on about but you know that already.

Oh dear, you are a bad loser aren`t you.

 

[geoff@cetltd]

Hi Geof!

Hi Tony, just thought I'd pop in and do some poking with a pointy stick


Spraggo, nowbody has bsuggested that a DIYer cannot remove the white cover.

However that does not expose any of the fan. To see that the outer combustion chamber which provides the room seal needs to be removed which is a no-no for a DIyer.

Not that I've ever seen the insides of any boiler other than my own, of course, doesn't it sit on top of the HE and is exposed when you remove the outer cover?


Tony

 

[geoff@cetltd]

The big sealed bit is called the combustion chamber cover, though the CC itself is really the smaller one inside with the flames inside! Semantics!
The big bit is the one DIY chappies shouldn't take off.


I wonder if the replacement circuit board was one for a puma P or a Puma E ? IF there's a number of components not fitted to the lower left part of the board, you have the wrong one.
The P board just has an absent capacitor, fairly centrally, about 10mm diameter.

Hi Chris

Not necessarily so, on the later pcbs the E has an extra bit og circuitry an dlacks the 100uF (?) cap in the middle of the board, for the PP it is the opposite, ... However, on the older pcbs the only difference is link LK1 which is there on the pp boards and absent for the E boards. It is there to drive the fan at low speed. I've seen a number of pcbs with incorrect labelling, the only way you can be really sure is by looking for LK1

 

[nickso]

i could continue to say you have no idea what you are on about but you know that already.

Oh dear, you are a bad loser aren`t you.

not at all, i haven't lost anything.

 

[misterdubya]

Hi Chris

Not necessarily so, on the later pcbs the E has an extra bit og circuitry an dlacks the 100uF (?) cap in the middle of the board, for the PP it is the opposite, ... However, on the older pcbs the only difference is link LK1 which is there on the pp boards and absent for the E boards. It is there to drive the fan at low speed. I've seen a number of pcbs with incorrect labelling, the only way you can be really sure is by looking for LK1

Long time no see Geoff.

Mr. W. (Put it in the blue cupboard).

 

[spraggo]

Only your marbles nickso.

 

[nickso]

Only your marbles nickso.

least i had some to start with.

 

[spraggo]

Only your marbles nickso.

least i had some to start with.

Well done nickso, keep taking the pills.

 

[gizzmo66]

It seems my origional posting has been hijacked by some kindergarden users. I thought I might howerver update you all regarding where I am now at.
Monday 8.00 third engineer, ex heatteam/potterton engineer attends and runs through the diagnosis literature and concludes that there are actually a number of problems. This is not my opinion but the engineers opinion, but some of which appear to have been caused by previous attendees, I shall refrain from calling them engineers from this point.
A new PCB is required and dhw frost stat. Im off to work engineer will source and fit this afternoon once my wife is available.
Monday 16.00, Pcb in place, Stat in place all fix..... not quite. Problem with air pressure switch and chw frost stat is not the correct stat for this boiler.
Engineer leaves with payment for parts and time, I have agreed in an effort to keep costs managable to purchase said parts.
Friday 10.00 parts purchased and fitted all working o.k.................I wonder now being the proud owner of a functioning boiler with one in situ and 2 further PCB boards, are they really no good. Both boards fitted and boiler working as expected with each PCB board in place.
Would I be justified in asking my last engineer to reimburse me for the PCB which subsequently appears to have been unnecessarily diagnosed as being faulty.?
I would appreciate any thoughts, even from you Agile

 

[Agile]

Even me?

What I am going to say ius not appreciated by many of my colleagues in this trade.

In my view the standard of diagnosis in generally not very good. Often several parts are fitted at the customer's expense until its fixed.

I would NEVER charge a client for a part which was not necessary to effect a repair. Nor do I think others should do so either.

In my view you have a very good case for asking for a refund for any new parts fitted which were not needed.

Tony