ToWhomsoeverITMAyConcern
( Since I couldn't positively ascertain which party of the first party . . .twice removed . . .was having the " R13 problem " .
If its the " R13 " resistor(s) aspect being in question ?
I now submit you this " NASA ficated " enhancement , being just up to the sub pixelation threshold.
Here we can see three 2.2 ohm surface mount resistors that are all paralleled to acquire multiple wattage rating equivalency. ( The sole 2.4 is not critical, use all 2.2's . . .as I suspicion they probably run out of that supply and had to use a close sub.)
Then they are having a shift down in their effective resistance, with it now being ~0.73333-> ohms (+- 5 hunnerts %)
They are functioning as the emitter resistor of the power semiconductor just above them. ( Pass its marking ID on to us, as a
POWER FET is being equally possible..).
Check and see if all three of them are not being open circuit, or if only one is smoked, suspicion that the first one,then the second opened up and by then, the third one couldn't take all of the overloading, smoked his tires and said . . . . . . "
I'm outta here ! "
That would sort of suggest that power semi above, is being HARD crunch shorted in its C-E junction.
It may just be an optical " collusion " . . . .but check out the YELLOW circled leads of that E-cap and be sure that there are no floating leads / fractured solder rings.
ENHANCED PHOTO REFERENCING . . . . .
ADDENDA:
A further scanning of that boards resistive components reveals that those "
FEWLS " have additionally used / assigned a basic R13 for a 3900 ohm resistor, elsewhere .
BUT . . . .it is being used in disassociative circuitry, and it would have had to have been subjected to continous >50 volts across it for it to have started a timely failure decline.
73's de Edd . . . . .
I've used up all my vacation and sick days leave , so I'm calling in dead.