Dealerships, engineers and manual writers...Long rant...

Spent most of last week working on a 345B Series 2 CAT excavator. Machine had a bit under 10,000 hours on it and had been experiencing a few strange hydraulic problems lately. With me being busy as heck and not having a manual for the machine, and the customer being 100 plus miles from me, he had called the local dealership to look at it. It had dropped the boom a few times, and the swing break had been setting unexpectedly. Their guy went out to look at it, checked pressures, and while 'troubleshooting' it the hydraulics died. Basically the pilot pressure went to nothing, so absolutely nothing worked.

At that point the 'technician' told the guy that they needed to take the machine back to the dealership to work on it. In this case it would have meant using 'special' equipment to get the boom lifted and positioned on a trailer. Too it would have required a beam trailer and either dropping the couterweight or a special 'super load' permit and all the cost and requirements associated with that. In other words it would have cost the guy a ton of money just to get his dead machine moved to their shop. Knowing all of this the guy (a long time customer of mine anyway)called me to see if I thought all of that expense was necessary. Based on past experience I told him no and offered to take a look at it, manual or not if he wanted me to.

I made the first trip up and after a few checks I pulled the main pump to check the pilot pump. Seems CAT's engineers felt it necessary to put a pump, that used to be external and easily accessable on many machines, on the front of the main pump. So, now, its now located inside the flywheel housing and requires pulling the main pump to access it. I had everything apart in less than a day and based on what I found suggested getting the main pump rebuilt. Turns out it was just worn out due to the large number of hours on it, and piece of a worn part had come off and had gotten into the pilot pump locking it up and causing the input shaft to get twisted off.

Fast forward and I went back this past week to put the rebuilt pump back on the machine. Getting it all back together, and doing a few other minor repairs took me a little over two days.

The remainder of the third day, and the forth day, consisted of figuring out why it was still having problems and dropping the boom. Based on experience I made an educated guess that it had to be a bad relief valve. Problem was I wasn't that familiar with the machine as far as the layout of the hydraulics since it had two boom circuits for both low and high speed operation. The manuals had been ordered over two weeks prior to me going up but the dealerships printer had dropped the ball and hadn't printed or shipped us nearly $800 worth of service and parts manuals yet. So, in their favor, the dealership was nice enough to print me off the necessary parts of the manuals from the computer.

This is where the real fun started. The manual stated that oil was put to the head end of the cylinder to make the boom rise. In all the years I've worked on equipment the rod end of a cylinder is the head end and the two names are interchangable. The other end of the cylinder is the barrel, or the butt end. This being the case the oil actually raised the boom by going in the barrel end. Figured this was just a typo but found out later 'I was wrong' as other parts associated with that side of the cylinder were also designated as being for the 'head' end. At the same time there were identintical parts being designated as being for te rod end. Nothing anywhere said anything about the barrel, or butt end. Basically it made it look like they were using different nomenclature for the same part, not two different parts, since both the up and down sides of the system had basically the same parts .

Ok, I moved onto the schematics to help troubleshoot the problem. One print showed a valve connected to the line going to the cylinder, one showed it not connected, and a third showed it connected too. This valve, I thought was, the relief valve I figured was bad, but the legentd said it was the boom anti-drift valve. TWhat turned out to be the actual boom anti-drift valve, in turn, was simply labled as a valve. Since there were two different valve spools in the actual anti-drift housing I figured they were both part of the same assembly (which was not available without buying a complete valve section), and that there was no relief valve. I had already talked to one long time CAT tech I know well and he said he didn't think that circuit had a relief so I didn't think anything more of the discrepencys. So, after checking everything I knew to check on Thursday afternoon, and feeling like an idiot because what I knew from past experience, knew from seeing, had been told, and what the manual was saying simply didn't jive. Confused as heck by now, I finally called it a day. Went back to the dealership on Friday morning and talked to the tech services guy who had printed me off the manual parts the day before. He, unlike me, knew that CAT's manuals were now calling the barrel/butt end of the cylinder the "head" end. This made some of what I had read make a bit more sense, but still didn't explain the differing info given by the manual and schematics, or make it all make any real sense. Basically there were still three different different schematics, and additional pics of what was supposed to be there, and all were different. Between me and the tech guy both looking at the schematics, and several other pics, legends, and the text, we finally figured out what all had been screwed up. Best of all we figured out where the relief valve, that the schematics said didn't exist, was actually located. I ordered a new relief valve, which thankfully they had in stock. Within 30 minutes of getting back to the machine, and changing out the port relief on the "head" end of the cylinder(actually it was on what was called the barrel or butt end for many,many years) the old girl was working like a new top.

In the end I have to say the dealerships tech services and parts operation was great, other than their printers falling down on the job. What I can't understand is why their service department felt they couldn't do such a simple job in the field. Heck the guy they sent out said if they did something as simple as pulling a cylinder they couldn't even haul it back to the shop in their service truck and would have to call something like a roll back to do it for them. This, to me, is just plain ridicilous. As far as the manuals, this machine that isn't even ten years old. How can a factory manual possibly have so many screw ups in it. I mean between the strange, new nomenclature for things that have been called the same thing, for years, in their other manuals, schematics that show different things, drawings/legends that call of one part by the name of the other, and the right part something generic, even the dealerships guys (especially the new ones that have little to no practical experience) are going to have problems working on the machines.

In the end all I can say is in the past I've seen problems with other manuals, etc on the older machines but it was usually things like typos, etc. Never have I seen anything as screwed up as this, on something as important to troubleshooting a hydraulically operated machine as the hydraulic schematics....Just doesn't make good sense........

OK, rant over....

I can sympathize with that. The other day before it cooled off and got nasty out around here I finished putting the lift and bucket lines and hoses back on my 555A John Deere Hi-lift. I think engineering took a poll on the most difficult routing possible for those lines and hoses and used the winner. I have a transmission overheating problem to diagnose (the radiator is clean BTDT) I started reading in my tech manual on the transmission and lo and behold 15 pages are missing, not torn out just not there. The binding is intact and the page numbers in the section go from like 920-20-2 to 920-20-17. Another thing that pisses me off is when the will explain an obvious procedure in detail like changing a spin on filter but not something that isn't obvious like the fuel tank screen on that hi-lift. Had to take it out as well and since it is under the seat behind the transmission oil filter you cant exactly see what you are doing especially since the only way you can reach the line fittings with a wrench is to remove the cover under the fuel tank and reach in from behind. Most of those screens, well all of them except this one I have dealt with come out with the fitting. this thing threads into the tank then the fittings for the line go on ahead of it. Not knowing this I destroyed it trying to pry it out thinking it had broken off the fitting. If they can put spin on filters instructions in the manual a heads up on that damn thing wouold have been nice. Now my rant is over. Next!

NCWayne: You are finding the different way that things are designed today. That hydraulic setup may not have even be designed by anyone from Cat.

Example: I want a widget to move a weight x number of feet in so long of a time. I could hire my own US mechanical engineer to do that. I would have to pay him $50-70 K a year plus benefits. Or I hire an engineering firm in India. They charge me $50 dollars an hour to design the machine I want. They pay their engineer $20K and he lives like a king in India. So it takes them 300 man hours to design the machine. I pay them $15k and I am done.


So that machine you are working on may have had many engineers design different parts of it that never had anything to do with Cat before. So what they call something could very well be different than what Cat always called something.

Let me give you an example of this on JD tractors. On some of them they call the tachometer just that. On other models they called it the speed hour meter. Try to find one in the parts manual or on the computer. If you are calling it one thing and they are calling it something else you can't find it on the computer. So you look like a trained chimpanzee to the customer.

As far as the Cat tech in the field. I have found that Cat techs are the most arrogant A$$holes I have ever had to deal with. They think that Cat stuff is the only thing ever to move dirt or rock. The dealerships are used to charging an arm and a leg on relatively small repairs. It drives their new sales. So they pile on all they can on repairs. A friend of mine had a D6 dozer. It was a 1995 model he bought new. It needed an engine overhaul. It had 10,000 hours on it. Cat quoted him $35,000 to overhaul the motor. That was their parts and labor estimate. He could have traded the dozer on a new one for $100K. He almost did that. But the rest of the dozer had just been overhauled the year before. I did the engine repair using all Cat parts and having the motor machined at the same place Cat had them done. I made myself good wages doing it. It cost him $15 K for the entire repair and I did some work on a few other things on the dozer in that price.

I know what you mean, it seems things that used to be designed, and built here in the US are both designed and built all over the world nowdays. That said, my problem here was mainly with the innacuracies of both the text and the schematics. Based on the fact the boom was dropping I knew that the oil had to be going somewhere with a low pressure, and at a throttled ragte for it to drop like it was doing. Then there was the fact that as soon as it hit the ground you could pick it right back up and it stayed unless you went to the end of th stroke and put oil over the relief. Then it would drop, but you could check it with the joystick, but it moved really slow like the usual flow was going somewhere else. Based on past experience, directly across a relief to the low pressure side of the system/tank was the most logical choice. To go any other way would have meant the oil had to go through the drift reduction valve and a closed spool on the low speed circuit, and past a load check valve and a closed spool on the high speed side. Getting past two blocks on either -vs- a single port relief just isn't something normally seen. Problem was on the schematic they had the actual port relief labled as the drift reduction valve, and the drift reduction valve labled simply as a 'valve'. Given the actual design of the drift reduction valve, with two different spool valves in the same block, it appeard on the schematic that there was no port relief. Too, reading the text, it talked about the relief on the rod end, and the head end, which in my experience were one in the same, but never made mention of one on the barrel. Given that I had already talked to a tech at my usual dealeship who said he didn't remember seeing a relief on that port, I was pulling my hair looking for another logical source for a problem such as this.

Based on what I described I had seen the machine doing, after 30 minutes with the tech he was certain the problem was on the high flow side and the oil was somehow getting past both the load check and the spool. Thing is I was thinking the same thing the day before and had already ordered a new spring and poppet for the load check and was resigned to the fact I was probably going to have to pull the spool to figure out what was screwed up with it too. Had I not spotted the fact that the 'drift reduction valve' pic looked just like the pic of the relief valves on the other parts of the system, and then us both doing some more reading and re-reading of the text and pulling up a few more drawings and labeled pics of the actual machine, we'd still be there trying to figure out where the non-existant relief valve was. Thankfully it sat right on top of the valve block and it was simply a matter of pulling and replacing it to get things back up to snuff. Really easy job, but what a PITA to troubleshoot with faulty info.....

BTDT more than once myself. All I can say is when I read about the engineers griping about not making enough money, etc all I do is laugh. I understand it takes alot of smarts to design a whole machine, but it takes just as many to work on them. Maybe we didn't go to college and don't understand the fluid dynamics of laminar flow, how to do stress alalysis on load bearing parts, etc, etc, etc, but in the end we have to figute out not only what they did to make it work right, but also what the machine itself is doing to make it work wrong. I din't personally know any engneers but the majority of ones I've heard about over the years know nothing beyond the mathmatics and/or physics of why it works....So,in the end, who's 'smarter guys like us, who have to , or the engineers ??????

I have always said, the best way to cure a stupid engineer is, make him work in actual field conditions with a limited amount of tools and parts for a year and then have him go back and redesign it.

No.1-Apparently no knowledgeable person "proofed" and or approved the information you refer to before it went to press.

No.2-Some part of the process could have been written offshore and that always leads to issue.

No.3-From my years of experience in writing manuals, I might also suggest that the incorrect manual section might have been written by an engineer and no one checked what he wrote. God bless engineers for their ingenuity, knowledge and creativity but run the other way when an engineer decides to become a "writer," technical or otherwise.

No.4-None of what you described is the printer's fault. The printer only prints what he is given after multiple proofs and sign-offs by the appropriate technical and business parties.

Quality manuals are definitely a thing of the past; many factors (offshoring and the global economy) have contributed to poor quality manuals.

You GOTTA know that most "engineers" ain't worth the paper their diploma is written on, right....?

Small equipment manufacturers often never bother to produce manuals. With larger manufacturers, most hire someone that has writing experience but little knowledge of the actual machine that they write the manuals for.

The service dept. for a small manufacturer that I worked for was taken away from the engineering dept. and given to me as an extra duty. The first thing that I had to do was take a new machine off the line and have two workers tear down the uncommon parts of the machine so I could take pics for the service manual that I was working on.

I had one of our better engineers do a schematic of the hydraulic system, that I then sent to our valve and pump providers for their review. When I completed the manual, almost any mechanic that could read could service the machine - although I did run into a couple mechanics that could not read and comprehend even with clear text and pictures. It takes all kinds.

Fortunately, I have an engineering degree with a minor in journalism and a minor in economics. Not a usual education for an engineer, but it worked for me. I never worked as an engineer; my primary job was in sales and marketing - plus doubling as service manager for both divisions of the company.

Wayne, I was surprised to read that there are relief valves on the individual cylinders themselves. To the best of my knowledge my equipment has just one for the whole machine. I assume that it is a safety thing. How large does a piece of equipment get before you see that?

I agree.Then only let them back in the office. After they admit how bad it was screwed up in the first place.

I have actually done technical writing and the whole process is NOT pretty. First, a lot of the writing should be done by the engineer(s). It is not. It seems the head engineer is always too busy to help the technical writers or to give them important electrical or hydraulic schematics. When it comes time for the final proof reading, again, the head engineer is too busy to give the final okay on the tech writer's work. Usually the most emphasis is placed on the correct sentence structure or proper placement of the photos.
I also know that John Deere has, in some instances, farmed out some of their manuals to be written by an outside source. When it leaves the house, there is a much greater chance for mistakes to enter the book.

(quoted from post at 10:17:56 12/24/12) I have actually done technical writing and the whole process is NOT pretty. First, a lot of the writing should be done by the engineer(s). It is not. It seems the head engineer is always too busy to help the technical writers or to give them important electrical or hydraulic schematics. When it comes time for the final proof reading, again, the head engineer is too busy to give the final okay on the tech writer's work. Usually the most emphasis is placed on the correct sentence structure or proper placement of the photos.
I also know that John Deere has, in some instances, farmed out some of their manuals to be written by an outside source. When it leaves the house, there is a much greater chance for mistakes to enter the book.

Click to expand...

have been there and yes, that is how the manuals process works, sadly.

I think some of the manuals are wriiten by persons that have never seen the item they're writing about. Hal

In this day and age of the internet, emails and the shooting of PDFs from one guy to another, you are correct. Actually, my wife does computer programming on a daily basis with people all over the country. Most of them she has never met in person.

That "have to take it back to the shop" stuff is a mentality. My company's shop has it.
I've seen other company's service guys rebuild pumps on a tailgate when it's 10 degrees out and be happy doing it.
It all comes from the leadership in place.

I'm not going to say it's a thing specific to just excavators, but the majority of them I've worked on, of all brands and sizes, have port reiefs on them. That said there is also a main system relief on them also that protects things like the pumps, etc from over pressurization. Even then some of the main reliefs are designed in such a way that pilot pressure is directed to the top of them to increase their setting when a function that requires a higher than normal pressure is activated. I've seen this happen on the travel function on the ones that have it. The main relief on a system is located within the valve body and is prior to te valve spools for the individual functions. Like I said it's main purpose is to protect the pump. With the port reliefs they are located on the downstream/function side of the valve spool. This is done in order to protect the cylinders and structure of the function. For instance the port relefs on an excavator would allow a pressure spike from something like a rock falling into the bucket or onto the end of the dipper to dissipate back to the tank instead of bending the rod on a cylinder or breaking a weld on the boom.

Like I said, in the most basic terms, the main relief is designed mainly to protect the pump and supply side of the system. The port reliefs are designed to protect the individual functions.

Even then some have a hard time understanding. There's a major RR repair facility I've done some field machine for overthe years that design and build custom machines fortheirselves. I've heard stories of the design leaving a 1/2 space for a piece of 3/4 plate to go in. When the engineer was told that something 3/4 thick wouldn't fit into a 1/2 inch hole he swore up and down it would because 'it fits on the drawing', and wouldn't admit that things weren't working in 'the real world' until he had to go out in the shop and see it for himself. Don't know what happened in that case but I assume his drawing didn't take any tollerances of the material into account.

Simple JD owners manual are so screwed up it takes 15 minutes of searching to find how much oil is required. It seems anyone with common sense could put all fluid capacities in a chart rather than scatter it through out the manual. Another thing, I have a small construction class backhoe. The number is 110. There are 4 pieces of equipment with the number 110, lawn mowers, excavators etc. Looking up parts on the WEB or the dealer looking up parts is a challenge. Frequently when I buy parts, filters, etc . I get home with the wrong part. I just took air filters back (70 miles) they gave me air filters for a 110 excavator

Dachchund
Most stupid people have that opinion of engineers.

I have been an engineer for >14 years, most of that time with JD. I've always called the barrell end of the cylinder the head end. I've worked on both contstruction equipment and Ag equipment.

By the way, I even helped design the backhoe structure on the 110TLB that Pat S. is talking about. I think to find it in the manuals you need to have the "TLB" part.

MERRY CHRISTMAS!!!

I hope your car or truck never Breaks down any where near my shop with that attitude.
I have customers that think they can buy a cheap packet of wrenches and fix the world. it's not owning the tools that's the problem it's knowing what to do with them when you hold them.
some of the messes I end up looking at and fixing are not good, when a customer has messed with 49 things not related to the original issue that he has no clue about trying to be cheap diagnosing and repairing it him self.
Then i'm out there trying to figure the original problem and the 49 issues he caused as well. normally after 8 hours headache you find the original problem was an hour fix that would of cost $40 of my time if he called me first and also saved a few hundred bucks on parts he never needed.
I think tools should be restricted by permits like guns in some countries. if your too stupid to pass the tests no tools.
Regards Robert

Being it's an excavator and most are based on Japanese designs, maybe something was lost in the translation?

Wayne, you didn't read the "microprint" at the bottom of each page that said: "Made in China".

If you really want to have "fun", try working on large Diesel powered mining equipment back in some dark, cramped, muddy drift where you have less than 2 feet of clearance on either side of the machine, and less than 6 feet of clearance above the machine, and you are over 1000 feet UNDERGROUND and over 5 miles from your underground maintenance shop. If you didn't have the parts you needed, underground, then you had to go to the SURFACE Warehouse, and if they were "skipping" (hoisting ore or waste rock) then you had to climb out 1200 feet. Climbing 1200 feet of ladder-ways takes about 40 minutes one-way, & I've done that numerous times to get parts to get a piece of machinery running again.

P.S.: I was the Union Certified, Senior Underground Top Millwright / Mine Maintenance Mechanic for a lot of years at a large mine in Death Valley, California .

My brother in law lives in South Korea. His daughter is an English teacher whose students are mostly engineer types working in the various "factories" there. In addition to this she writes/translates manuals for everything from washing machines to automobiles. She was raised and educated in this country, so most of what she does actually makes sense. We are all aware of the grammar produced by people who don't speak English.

That being said, I agree that many things talked about in this thread could have been caused by lack of knowledge and information along those lines. Sorta like the three blind men and the elephant story...