Loading…
24
Question about the multimeter vs. the old wiggle test for chasing intermittent faults
Everyone here preaches the bonded lead wiggle test for finding chafed wires, and I did it that way for the first 6 of my 11 years on the line at a regional carrier. Last week I finally broke down and bought a Fluke 1587 at a supply house in Wichita for $420 after a pesky intermittent in a flap position indicator ate three of my shifts, and it found a cracked pin in a cannon plug in about 20 minutes just by watching the resistance live while I flexed the bundle. Honestly the wiggle test never showed me anything unless the wire was already practically broken, so I guess I am saying the meter beats the feel method and I am not going back. Curious if anyone else switched over or if I just got lucky with this one. What is your go to for chasing gremlins that only show up in flight?
1 comments
Log in to join the discussion
Log In1 Comment
daniel_gonzalez1mo ago
I ran the wiggle test for years too and swore by it, mostly because that's how the old heads taught me and a meter was just for checking volts before a flight. But watching a live ohm reading while you flex a bundle is a whole different deal, you can actually see the number jump when the fault opens, instead of guessing whether you felt something or not. The thing that changed my mind was a cannon plug on a landing gear harness that passed every wiggle check I did and still dropped out in the air, and the meter caught it in a few minutes once I hooked up and started pulling on wires one at a time. For stuff that only shows up in flight, I will put a meter on it and watch the reading while I shake, heat, or cool the harness, and if I can get someone to ride along and watch the screen in the air even better. The feel method still has its place for finding rub spots and chafing on a visual, but for actual intermittent opens it just is not sensitive enough. You did not get lucky, you just found the fault the old way could never see.
6