Narrative:

Since oct 2006; we have started working on the pneumatic valve. When we started overhauling the valve; we have used a float check tool. The tool that is called out in the engineering order was nearly impossible to use for the task that was to be accomplished. We used a thinner version of the tool and thought that this would fall under the equivalent tools section of the engineering order. We were informed that this was not the case and we are asking engineering to look at making what we have been using an acceptable tool. We would have a hard time doing this task with the tool that is called for. The tool does not affect how the task is accomplished; it is just not the one that is called for in the engineering order. Have engineering change manuals to cover tooling actually used for the job. Callback conversation with reporter revealed the following information: reporter stated the tool called out in their engineering order to adjust the air conditioning flow control pneumatic valve butterfly is one and a half inches thick. Because of the thickness; setting the valve's butterfly position during valve reassembly build-up became more difficult. Reporter stated he used pieces that were scrapped from one of the same type of pneumatic valves; and made a tool that performed the same function; but was thinner in shape. The thinner tool allowed mechanics to use proper wrenches when setting the valve's butterfly. Reporter stated their mistake was not getting engineering to approve the use of their thinner tool sooner; and have a part number applied to it. Engineering has just recently approved and assigned a part number to the thinner tool.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: Two Mechanics report using a similar; but thinner; version of a tool called out in their Engineering Order (EO); when setting the butterfly position of an MD-80 pneumatic valve.

Narrative: Since Oct 2006; we have started working on the pneumatic valve. When we started overhauling the valve; we have used a float check tool. The tool that is called out in the Engineering Order was nearly impossible to use for the task that was to be accomplished. We used a thinner version of the tool and thought that this would fall under the equivalent tools section of the Engineering Order. We were informed that this was not the case and we are asking Engineering to look at making what we have been using an acceptable tool. We would have a hard time doing this task with the tool that is called for. The tool does not affect how the task is accomplished; it is just not the one that is called for in the Engineering Order. Have Engineering change manuals to cover tooling actually used for the job. Callback conversation with Reporter revealed the following information: Reporter stated the tool called out in their Engineering Order to adjust the air conditioning flow control pneumatic valve butterfly is one and a half inches thick. Because of the thickness; setting the valve's butterfly position during valve reassembly build-up became more difficult. Reporter stated he used pieces that were scrapped from one of the same type of pneumatic valves; and made a tool that performed the same function; but was thinner in shape. The thinner tool allowed Mechanics to use proper wrenches when setting the valve's butterfly. Reporter stated their mistake was not getting Engineering to approve the use of their thinner tool sooner; and have a part number applied to it. Engineering has just recently approved and assigned a part number to the thinner tool.

Data retrieved from NASA's ASRS site as of April 2012 and automatically converted to unabbreviated mixed upper/lowercase text. This report is for informational purposes with no guarantee of accuracy. See NASA's ASRS site for official report.