OP
OP
When repairing, there is a special feature that is actually paradoxical: In order to put something back into operation, you often don't need to know in detail how it works.
If there are mechanical problems you have the opportunity to observe a system of mechanical components and its processes. You don't have to be able to calculate the force of a spring in order to exchange it for an equivalent one if it can no longer move a lever because it is exhausted. But you should be able to see why it no longer has any power and that requires further observations and conclusions.
Likewise, I don't need to know the optical dimensions of an eyepiece if it is out of focus because it has been knocked out of place.
Things get more difficult with electronics because the processes inside them usually remain invisible. But when actuators such as electromagnets don't work, knowledge of how to clean something is often enough.
This is all presented in a very simplified manner, but it should outline the field in which you operate as a repairer writing reports.
If you now assume that many readers of repair reports are not interested in technical details, but just want to take photos with their camera again quickly without having it expensively repaired, you could write pure repair instructions where every step is demonstrated.
This is a good thing for simpler problems, such as how to bend out a dented filter ring on the lens. But if it goes into depth, such a report would quickly become confusing.
That's why I think you should find a good compromise when it comes to repair reports.
Simple, with instructions for action, for pure pragmatists who want to solve a problem quickly on their own without having to spend time on technical background knowledge.
And more detailed with technical details for those who want to understand more, which also increases their own problem-solving capacity. Because what I have understood, I can further explore on my own.
If there are mechanical problems you have the opportunity to observe a system of mechanical components and its processes. You don't have to be able to calculate the force of a spring in order to exchange it for an equivalent one if it can no longer move a lever because it is exhausted. But you should be able to see why it no longer has any power and that requires further observations and conclusions.
Likewise, I don't need to know the optical dimensions of an eyepiece if it is out of focus because it has been knocked out of place.
Things get more difficult with electronics because the processes inside them usually remain invisible. But when actuators such as electromagnets don't work, knowledge of how to clean something is often enough.
This is all presented in a very simplified manner, but it should outline the field in which you operate as a repairer writing reports.
If you now assume that many readers of repair reports are not interested in technical details, but just want to take photos with their camera again quickly without having it expensively repaired, you could write pure repair instructions where every step is demonstrated.
This is a good thing for simpler problems, such as how to bend out a dented filter ring on the lens. But if it goes into depth, such a report would quickly become confusing.
That's why I think you should find a good compromise when it comes to repair reports.
Simple, with instructions for action, for pure pragmatists who want to solve a problem quickly on their own without having to spend time on technical background knowledge.
And more detailed with technical details for those who want to understand more, which also increases their own problem-solving capacity. Because what I have understood, I can further explore on my own.
Last edited:
