Frustration: a supra-type cfxb40hc3-120 ih meal is unheated, displaying screen blinking to display fault code e5。
Reason analysis: the ih electromagnetic rice is based on the use of electromagnetic heating, using the current electromagnetic furnace technology, except for minor differences in the control of the heating process, which is roughly the same。
By testing, the cap is open and there is no heat in the machine. Based on the observed phenomena, it was initially judged to have been caused by the failure of self-inspection. This check was saved by the normal operation of the switchboard and the normal rotation of the inner fan, which largely determines the normality of the power circuit. Because of the usual reluctance to collect the fail code, and the reluctance to ask what the fail code means, the network's interpretation of the fail code is mixed, false, not necessarily effective or self-reliant
The process of overhauling begins with the most vulnerable upper-lid sensors, but considering that if the problem of upper-cap sensors is really a problem, the failure performance should be electrically activated or coded by pressing the initial key, or heated for a while, the mmu detected a temperatureless change and then reported the failure code, which is different from that of the machine, thus eliminating the failure of the upper-cap sensor, as demonstrated by the physical inspection。
The upper and lower ntc sensor resistance values should be 100 k above, 50 k below and within normal values for both sensors. Based on experience gained in the normal maintenance of electromagnetic furnaces, most of these malfunctions are due to abnormal elements of circuits such as in-house pans to detect circuits and synchronized circuits。
Dismantling circuit boards, running straight for sample resistance detection of circuits, and welding three major resistance measurements of r101, r103 and r104 in figure 1 showed that r103 and r104 had a barrier value of 1m (normal), but that r101 had an infinity barrier value that had been damaged by the road, and a 1m electrical barrier was replaced. The tester, two minutes later, did not report an e5 failure, was ready to close, was only listening to a short beeper, showed a blinking e5 on the screen, and was in a mood of blistering with e5, which appeared to be less of a failure。
Just imagine, what other reasons could cause the detection of circuit output signals to be abnormal? After checking the circuits, it was found that the sample resistance was also linked to two fractional voltage resistance r102 (13k), r105 (12k) and measured their resistance values. But these two types of resistance are patches of electrical resistance, which are not the cause of the failure of the regular maintenance of liquid crystal colours because of the failure of the element of the sticker due to the failure of the glue to transform the power, causing changes in detection or feedback signal voltage? However, after processing the patch component, the failure remained。
Since the board was not easily electrically detectable, the entire overhaul process did not use current and voltage detection to detect faults and was conducted on an empirical basis. After careful analysis, there is a sudden reminiscent of the three sampled major resistances on these two bypass roads, one of which is 2 1m electrical resistance chains, and the other of which is only 1 major resistance
As you can see, the damaged five-colour barrier is clearly a red, black and yellow brown, with a 2m barrier, and you really want to slap yourself in the face! Put a 1-m cord on the resistance that was replaced earlier (see figure above), restore all connections, again turn through the tester, display screens no longer showing e5, heating normal, and malfunctioning。
