Post-repair diagnostic case · Sub-Zero

A Clean Evaporator Redirected the Recall to the Line

The first suspicion was a leak after compressor and evaporator work. With no visible evaporator evidence, an oil restriction became the accepted branch; the thread did not preserve a completed purge or cooling result.

Case snapshot

What the source establishes

  • The compressor and evaporator had been replaced about one month before the fresh-food section reached 72°F.
  • Operating pressures were reported as 0/170 psi and equalized readings as 40/60 psi after shutdown.
  • The exposed evaporator was clean with no visible oil trace or obvious leak.
  • The expert proposed oil in the line, and the technician accepted that diagnosis while asking about a thorough purge.

The thread did not state that the purge was completed or that cooling returned. A similar symptom can have a different cause on another appliance or model.

Diagnostic process

How the evidence narrowed the diagnosis

Recall

The section rose to 72°F

The failure developed about a month after major sealed-system work.

Inspection

The evaporator showed no obvious leak trace

Opening the wall did not reveal the expected oil mark or visibly failed evaporator.

New branch

Oil in the line was proposed

The accepted next action was to clear the restriction rather than repeat a leak assumption.

What the evidence supports

What the evidence supports

The technician's acceptance supports oil in the line as the diagnosis reached in the discussion. It does not establish a completed purge or a post-repair result.

What to do next

What should be verified next

On a similar recall, preserve pressures, temperatures, components replaced and any visible oil. A sealed-system technician should verify both restriction and leak branches before adding charge or replacing another component.

Refrigerant and pressure safety: sealed-system purging, brazing and charging require qualified service and regulated refrigerant handling.