DeLL E152FPc Goes black after a second.
in [Repair]
|
Prev: The Prophet and Children
Next: Laney VC30
From: Jake on 8 Oct 2009 10:59 On Oct 6, 6:19 pm, Samantha <saman...(a)comcast.net> wrote: > I have a Dell E152FPc Flat screen Monitor 15" that goes black after > about a second after it is powered on. The Green power light stays on > and the color bar test pattern is there if you stick a flash light up to > it. > > I have never had one of these apart and am not really sure what I am in > for. Just looking at it, I don't see any obvious way to take it apart. > > There are some screws to take off the stand, but after that I am not > sure. > > Anybody ever take one of these apart and fix it? > > Would greatly appreciate any help. > > Thanks so much!!! > > S. I recently repaired 3 E153FP's, which I believe are virtually identical. The problem was a 1000uF, 16 volt capacitor, used for the power supply. It had excessively high ESR, and I am assuming it caused excessively high ripple voltage which was making the LCD's control circuitry wack out (that's my very technical description of what I thought was going on, ha ha). I replaced the same cap on all 3 - It was easy to identify, about the largest cap on the board, the PCB material was darkened around it, and the top of the cap was bulged. Good luck! The 3 I fixed had the exact same symptom you describe, and have been back in service for about 3 months with no further problems. -Jake
From: D Yuniskis on 8 Oct 2009 16:00 PlainBill47(a)yahoo.com wrote: > As a rule of thumb, when a monitor has a defective cap, I will replace > the lot of them. As you point out, it's not worth the risk of having > to open the monitor up again. > > I prefer Panasonic FM or FC series for replacements. Purchasing from > Digikey, I can redo an entire monitor for under $10, including > shipping. (OK, I seldom replace the 100 �F 450 Volt cap). I've only seen one of these "bad" (in about 100 monitors). Despite the fact that they are often manufacture by the same company who manufactures the other (crappy) caps on the board! I guess the ripple currents are not as large (?)
From: Samantha on 8 Oct 2009 19:17 Just want to extend my thanks to all those that answered my post. Didn't find much online when I went and searched for it. This is the first time I have had had one of these apart and didn't really know what to expect. It belongs to my aunt and I said I would take a quick look at it. The bad cap list was a good tip, really appreciate that, as well as the PDF on how to disassemble the monitor. Tomorrow is a pretty full day for me so I hope to be feeling up to pulling this apart by saturday. Thanks again. S.
From: D Yuniskis on 9 Oct 2009 00:45 Jeff Liebermann wrote: > On Thu, 08 Oct 2009 10:51:39 -0700, D Yuniskis > >> Understood. My point is that the price/repair point is quickly >> moving to make 19" as uneconomical to fix as the 17's have become. > > Yep. I just did a quick search using Google Shopping for "19" LCD > monitor". Quite a few refurbished units for $70 to $100. New for > about $120 to $150. Not very economical to repair at $75/hr. And their prices continue to fall. So, you fix one only to find it "competing" with a new, *warrantied* unit for roughly the same price. >> I have a Dell that rotates. But, in order to do so, the display >> has to be "up" high enough (so the rotating end doesn't wack >> into the tabletop). This places the display too high for me >> in my normal usage. > > Not mine. However, I made my own out of a swivel plate with detents > as inspired by: > <http://www.instructables.com/id/rotate-or-pivot-lcd-monitor/> > The lazy susan is a bit too crude for me. However, all my office and > home monitors are 4:3, not 16:9. They rotate quite easily. 16:9 wide > screen monitors might seem a bit high, but I've built two of these for > customers and they loved it. One is a script writer and the other a > technical editor, which might explain their interest in portrait mode > displays. I'd rather wider. I tried a three monitor setup once and *loved* it. But, my current machine doesn't like having lots of video cards :-( >> [N.B. I have been told by folks who wear bifocals that even >> *my* display height is too high for them to use comfortably; >> they end up having to tip their heads too far back to bring >> the screen into the correct portion of the eyeglass lens to >> focus] > > I'm 61 years ancient, wear bifocals, and don't have a problem. That's > because I don't use the bifocals in front of the screen. I'm > fortunate and can still use the cheap "reading" glasses without > correction for computer use. For driving, I need bifocals. Yes, I think the problem is with folks whose reading and computer Rx's are different. E.g., I know people with "computer bifocals" (the near Rx is set for the distance to the screen while the far is set for "distance") and "regular bifocals" (near Rx is set for reading with far set for "distance"). Apparently, trying to read "close up" through the "computer Rx" is where the problem lies (I once saw a pair of lenses cut with *four* different regions in each lens -- I guess predating "progressive" lenses?) Thankfully, I still only need glasses for distance -- though reading the markings on some components either requires bright light *or* a magnifying glass (e.g. reading glasses) Apparently a consequence of losing "focusing power" with age. > Plug: Cheap prescription glasses: > <http://www.zennioptical.com> > >> I do a lot of DTP and have found that I can get pretty good >> performance out of nearly any "large-ish" display. When >> working on prose, etc. I zoom the image to "fit width". >> This gives me lots of detail (when you've got 1600 dots >> to play with :> ) and enough of the page vertically that I >> can see what I am doing. I only look at full page views >> when I want to get a feel for the layout of the page, >> the location of whitespace, etc. > > Well, I've been told that I have no writing ability, no aesthetic > sense, no appreciation of layout styles, and no artistic abilities. Ha! Sounds like a career in POLITICS should be right up your alley! ;-) I deliberately started taking on these kinds of work just to try to develop those skills. Spelling is sometimes a challenge (esp when it comes to "doubling the final consonant") but there are tools to help with that :-/ > That's a sufficient to avoid DTP and other forms of real work. About > the only layout work I do is some HTML, which is admittedly fairly > badly done. Despite these limitations, I can usually adapt to any > screen size or layout ranging from tiny Netbook and PDA displays, to > projection screens. Getting a full page view doesn't do much for me. > However, waiting a few days and taking a second look usually causes me > to ask "what was I thinking"? > > More seriously, I cheat a bit and have two monitors and two computers > on my desk at home. I have a switch that allows me to put both > monitors on a dual display video card on the main machine. That's > very useful if I want a huge workspace. I don't used it often, but > when doing antenna design and 3D modeling, it's quite handy. I have my two primary machines attached to a pair of monitors with built-in A/B switches. So, I can have both monitors attached to either machine or one monitor on each. I keep the keyboard for one machine on the work surface and the other in a "keyboard drawer" beneath. I find this easier than using a KVM though, at times, I have a hard time remembering which keyboard to type on! :-/ >> (there are currently six 21 inch LCDs >> awaiting pats in various states of disassembly... this causes >> a fair amount of grief! And, isn't realistic when you have >> pets :< ) > > You haven't seen my office. 700 sq ft, mostly storage and bakers > racks. > <http://802.11junk.com/jeffl/pics/office/slides/office-panorama-2.html> <jealous> ;-) I work out of a spare bedroom for "head stuff" and commandeer appropriate floor space as needed (and usually incur much wrath in doing so!). I think it helps me keep things from getting out of control and ending up living in a "cave". > (scroll horizontally). I wouldn't have room for 6 monitors. In my > case, the danger is not pets. It's visitors. Despite warnings, > visitor always manage to smash into something. No fatalities, so far. Visitors you can at least vent your anger on (even if you do it privately after they depart). With pets, you really can't blame them for their actions -- the fault lies squarely with *you*! <frown> >> If I did this for a *living*, I would just keep a spare inverter >> around and hack it into the "bad" display long enough to illuminate >> the display (using a nice "white" test screen) to check for these >> "smudges" before investing much time in the repair. > > I do that, but only for testing CCFL tubes. I always seem to forget > to test the assembled panels. Thanks for the reminder. Well, *I* haven't learned that lesson, yet! :< But, again, if I was doing this "for real", I would set things up more efficiently (I repair them for a local charity so I can't really invest much time/space in this) >> Only to discover that the inverter's design had been changed >> mechanically. Not only had the connectors to the CCFL's >> been "rendered incompatible", but the board mounting wasn't >> compatible, either! > > Yep. Been there and had it happen. It's really ugly inside laptop > LCD displays, where there's little room to maneuver. I just bought a > replacement inverter for a Dell B130 laptop that had exactly the same > part number as the original, but where the mounting hole was moved > about 0.050". I took apart the mounting bracket, filed the hole to > fit and reassembled. 20 minutes totally wasted. Other laptops were > not so easy. I've had to use hot melt glue to secure some inverters. Ouch. Owing to my time limitations, I am pretty reluctant about investing much "special effort" in fixes that aren't relatively straightforward. If I was *paid* for my time, I might think otherwise. Or, if the repair was for my own personal use. Otherwise, if I can't make it work without re-engineering the fix, it goes in the recycle pile... >> <frown> Would have been better (from a standpoint of my time) >> had they *both* been defective! ;-) > > On the other foot, I have nothing against cannibalism. Of course! I was originally *thrilled* with the idea that I could make a quick fix just by stealing parts from one for the other. A real "no-brainer". Hence the disappointment when I saw the *arbitrary* changes they had made in manufacturing... :< >> On motherboards, replacing caps is considerably more risky as >> the boards are often 4 (or even 6) layers and often don't >> have thermal reliefs around the caps. Unless it is a particularly >> nice board, I don't bother (you also have no way of knowing if >> the high ripple on those power signals hasn't toasted something >> else in the design. > > Yep. I have a Pace desoldering station with a motorized vacuum pump. > It's strong enough to suck the pad off the board if necessary. Some > boards offer some relief around the leads, while others are so tight > as to defy removal. Exactly. I have actually deliberately laid out some boards like this to discourage "amateur" repairs. Really obvious when someone lifts a pad because they weren't prepared to deal with a board laid out with such fine-line rules... > I have a method to deal with caps that's somewhat > non-conventional. I have a cable cutter, with semi-circular cutters, > that I use to chop off the top of the cap near the base. I then > remove what's left of the base, leaving only two leads projecting from > the PCB. I grab a lead with pliers, heat the joint, and pull them > out, one at a time. Works nicely and much better than the Pace > desoldering station. I usually find that the thermal mass of the tip I am using (at the time) is just not enough to overcome any big ground planes, etc. And, rather than wait for the tip to cool so I can swap in something larger, I just move on to the next candidate. :< Always more broken stuff waiting to be fixed than there is time available to fix it! (and it sure looks like the current "lack of quality" will be with us for quite a while!)
From: JW on 9 Oct 2009 05:09
On Thu, 08 Oct 2009 18:06:27 -0700 Jeff Liebermann <jeffl(a)cruzio.com> wrote in Message id: <hv0tc55o6p5aumg10q6f2o5hk30qvvijif(a)4ax.com>: ><http://802.11junk.com/jeffl/pics/office/slides/office-panorama-2.html> Those scopes look ancient! :) |