Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > sci.physics > #530234 > unrolled thread
| Started by | Fabian Russell <root@localhost.localdomain> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2015-11-03 22:14 +0000 |
| Last post | 2015-11-05 16:34 -0800 |
| Articles | 13 on this page of 53 — 7 participants |
Back to article view | Back to sci.physics
Capacitor Question Fabian Russell <root@localhost.localdomain> - 2015-11-03 22:14 +0000
Re: Capacitor Question gilber34 <fafa@invalid.com> - 2015-11-03 16:35 -0600
Re: Capacitor Question Fabian Russell <root@localhost.localdomain> - 2015-11-03 22:59 +0000
Re: Capacitor Question gilber34 <fafa@invalid.com> - 2015-11-03 18:10 -0600
Re: Capacitor Question jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-11-03 22:47 +0000
Re: Capacitor Question Fabian Russell <root@localhost.localdomain> - 2015-11-03 23:07 +0000
Re: Capacitor Question jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-11-03 23:20 +0000
Re: Capacitor Question Fabian Russell <root@localhost.localdomain> - 2015-11-03 23:42 +0000
Re: Capacitor Question Fabian Russell <root@localhost.localdomain> - 2015-11-04 02:49 +0000
Re: Capacitor Question gilber34 <fafa@invalid.com> - 2015-11-03 21:40 -0600
Re: Capacitor Question Fabian Russell <root@localhost.localdomain> - 2015-11-04 04:01 +0000
Re: Capacitor Question jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-11-04 06:03 +0000
Re: Capacitor Question Fabian Russell <root@localhost.localdomain> - 2015-11-04 07:07 +0000
Re: Capacitor Question jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-11-04 20:29 +0000
Re: Capacitor Question Fabian Russell <root@localhost.localdomain> - 2015-11-04 20:51 +0000
Re: Capacitor Question jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-11-04 21:08 +0000
Re: Capacitor Question Fabian Russell <root@localhost.localdomain> - 2015-11-04 21:53 +0000
Re: Capacitor Question jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-11-04 22:20 +0000
Re: Capacitor Question Fabian Russell <root@localhost.localdomain> - 2015-11-04 22:42 +0000
Re: Capacitor Question jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-11-04 23:07 +0000
Re: Capacitor Question Fabian Russell <root@localhost.localdomain> - 2015-11-05 00:28 +0000
Re: Capacitor Question jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-11-05 00:46 +0000
Re: Capacitor Question Fabian Russell <root@localhost.localdomain> - 2015-11-05 00:39 +0000
Re: Capacitor Question jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-11-05 00:58 +0000
Re: Capacitor Question benj <none@gmail.com> - 2015-11-04 18:25 -0500
Re: Capacitor Question benj <none@gmail.com> - 2015-11-04 18:37 -0500
Re: Capacitor Question Fabian Russell <root@localhost.localdomain> - 2015-11-05 00:09 +0000
Re: Capacitor Question benj <nobody@gmail.com> - 2015-11-04 21:35 -0500
Re: Capacitor Question gilber34 <fafa@invalid.com> - 2015-11-04 21:51 -0600
Re: Capacitor Question Fabian Russell <root@localhost.localdomain> - 2015-11-05 04:19 +0000
Re: Capacitor Question gilber34 <fafa@invalid.com> - 2015-11-05 11:10 -0600
Re: Capacitor Question "reber g=emc^2" <herbertglazier0@gmail.com> - 2015-11-05 09:15 -0800
Re: Capacitor Question Fabian Russell <root@localhost.localdomain> - 2015-11-05 18:08 +0000
Re: Capacitor Question jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-11-05 19:26 +0000
Re: Capacitor Question Fabian Russell <root@localhost.localdomain> - 2015-11-05 19:44 +0000
Re: Capacitor Question jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-11-05 19:56 +0000
Re: Capacitor Question Fabian Russell <root@localhost.localdomain> - 2015-11-05 20:53 +0000
Re: Capacitor Question Fabian Russell <root@localhost.localdomain> - 2015-11-05 21:52 +0000
Re: Capacitor Question benj <none@gmail.com> - 2015-11-04 18:41 -0500
Re: Capacitor Question gilber34 <fafa@invalid.com> - 2015-11-04 21:54 -0600
Re: Capacitor Question benj <nobody@gmail.com> - 2015-11-04 02:17 -0500
Re: Capacitor Question Fabian Russell <root@localhost.localdomain> - 2015-11-04 07:30 +0000
Re: Capacitor Question gilber34 <fafa@invalid.com> - 2015-11-04 07:48 -0600
Re: Capacitor Question benj <nobody@gmail.com> - 2015-11-04 14:04 -0500
Re: Capacitor Question Fabian Russell <root@localhost.localdomain> - 2015-11-04 19:28 +0000
Re: Capacitor Question benj <none@gmail.com> - 2015-11-04 18:49 -0500
Re: Capacitor Question gilber34 <fafa@invalid.com> - 2015-11-04 20:41 -0600
Re: Capacitor Question Fabian Russell <root@localhost.localdomain> - 2015-11-05 03:16 +0000
Re: Capacitor Question gilber34 <fafa@invalid.com> - 2015-11-04 21:58 -0600
Re: Capacitor Question "reber g=emc^2" <herbertglazier0@gmail.com> - 2015-11-04 12:14 -0800
Re: Capacitor Question benj <none@gmail.com> - 2015-11-04 18:44 -0500
Re: Capacitor Question gilber34 <fafa@invalid.com> - 2015-11-04 20:41 -0600
Re: Capacitor Question gyansorova@gmail.com - 2015-11-05 16:34 -0800
Page 3 of 3 — ← Prev page 1 2 [3]
| From | benj <nobody@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-11-04 02:17 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <Xhi_x.106405$962.6918@fx09.iad> |
| In reply to | #530281 |
On 11/03/2015 09:49 PM, Fabian Russell wrote:
> On Tue, 03 Nov 2015 23:20:25 +0000, jimp wrote:
>
>>
>> Not if it is a non-solid aluminum; it shortens the life.
>>
>
> Solid electrolyte aluminum capacitors seem only available with
> a polymer electrolyte. I need at least 4700uF caps at a 50 V
> rating. A check of both DigiKey and Mouser supply houses show
> that 4700uF is available only at a max of 2.5 V rating. I assume
> this represents the state of the art.
>
> This is way too low. I'll have to get the wet, non-solid, electrolyte
> and just replace when needed.
These are pretty large and expensive units! I presume you are drawing
some serious current here. Mouser does have these in big old fashioned
screw terminal types. I'd suggest going with a modern switching supply
instead. Shorting caps is a safety issue. In fact if you drain them too
fast it can shorten the life. I've seen plain old aluminum electrolytics
last for decades! I've also seen them fail in a few years. The problem
with replacing them is being able to find replacements later. I have
some old oscilloscopes that use old aluminum can multi-segment caps.
Those (which were a stupid idea when it was a new idea) have pretty much
gone the way of Kodak.
--
___ ___ ___ ___
/\ \ /\ \ /\__\ /\ \
/::\ \ /::\ \ /::| | \:\ \
/:/\:\ \ /:/\:\ \ /:|:| | ___ /::\__\
/::\~\:\__\ /::\~\:\ \ /:/|:| |__ /\ /:/\/__/
/:/\:\ \:|__| /:/\:\ \:\__\ /:/ |:| /\__\ \:\/:/ /
\:\~\:\/:/ / \:\~\:\ \/__/ \/__|:|/:/ / \::/ /
\:\ \::/ / \:\ \:\__\ |:/:/ / \/__/
\:\/:/ / \:\ \/__/ |::/ /
\_:/__/ \:\__\ /:/ /
\/__/ \/__/
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Fabian Russell <root@localhost.localdomain> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-11-04 07:30 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <pan.2015.11.04.07.31.01@localhost.localdomain> |
| In reply to | #530297 |
On Wed, 04 Nov 2015 02:17:11 -0500, benj wrote: > > These are pretty large and expensive units! > I presume you are drawing some serious current here. > Expensive? No way. DigiKey has 'em for $2.75 a pop. Serious current? Not really. 3 amp regulators are no problem. I do a lot of audio work and the low voltages involved can often require a lot of current. I built a power supply for a 50 Watt audio amp. I think I got 10 amp regulators in there. (I'll have to open it up for a look). The big problem was finding transformers able to give a high enough current output. But my supplies are general purpose and I can use them to power low current circuits as well. It's good to have headroom even if not always needed. > > I'd suggest going with a modern switching supply instead. > There are two reasons for not using a switching supply. 1) They always have to have a load attached or else poof. 2) They are far more complicated in design and why burden oneself unnecessarily? > > Shorting caps is a safety issue. In fact if you drain them too > fast it can shorten the life. > I misused the word "short." I actually have 10 megohm resistor between the two ends.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | gilber34 <fafa@invalid.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-11-04 07:48 -0600 |
| Message-ID | <n1d2bg$mof$1@speranza.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #530300 |
On 11/4/2015 1:30 AM, Fabian Russell wrote: > On Wed, 04 Nov 2015 02:17:11 -0500, benj wrote: > >> >> These are pretty large and expensive units! >> I presume you are drawing some serious current here. >> > > Expensive? No way. DigiKey has 'em for $2.75 a pop. > > Serious current? Not really. 3 amp regulators are no problem. > I do a lot of audio work and the low voltages involved can often > require a lot of current. > > I built a power supply for a 50 Watt audio amp. I think > I got 10 amp regulators in there. (I'll have to open it up > for a look). The big problem was finding transformers able > to give a high enough current output. true, the old tube radios (20-60's) had higher current multi winding transformers which are impossable to replace, aka filiment winding of 20 amps at 2.5 volts... also good heat sinking the regulators is key > > But my supplies are general purpose and I can use them to power > low current circuits as well. It's good to have headroom even > if not always needed. > >> >> I'd suggest going with a modern switching supply instead. >> > > There are two reasons for not using a switching supply. > > 1) They always have to have a load attached or else poof. yep. > > 2) They are far more complicated in design and why burden > oneself unnecessarily? also some can add noise to a nice quiet audio amp, even if switching frequency high. > >> >> Shorting caps is a safety issue. In fact if you drain them too >> fast it can shorten the life. >> > > I misused the word "short." I actually have 10 megohm resistor > between the two ends. >
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | benj <nobody@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-11-04 14:04 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <tFs_x.4$FR4.2@fx17.iad> |
| In reply to | #530300 |
On 11/04/2015 02:30 AM, Fabian Russell wrote:
> On Wed, 04 Nov 2015 02:17:11 -0500, benj wrote:
>
>>
>> These are pretty large and expensive units!
>> I presume you are drawing some serious current here.
>>
>
> Expensive? No way. DigiKey has 'em for $2.75 a pop.
4700 microfarad at 50 volts? I'm looking at "screw terminal"
electrolytics at Mouser and they are nice but $89 each!
> Serious current? Not really. 3 amp regulators are no problem.
> I do a lot of audio work and the low voltages involved can often
> require a lot of current.
With a regulator all you need is enough C to keep ripple low enough that
the regulators can clean it up at full current. Though more capacitance
is always better! Most of my amps use pretty small filter caps (that I
would consider too small, but hey) and they look pretty cheap too. Seem
to work fine though it's not "high end" gear.
> I built a power supply for a 50 Watt audio amp. I think
> I got 10 amp regulators in there. (I'll have to open it up
> for a look). The big problem was finding transformers able
> to give a high enough current output.
I've got a few 50 watt amps and the filters in there are pretty small as
I recall. Certainly not the big blue screw terminal monsters.
> But my supplies are general purpose and I can use them to power
> low current circuits as well. It's good to have headroom even
> if not always needed.
>> I'd suggest going with a modern switching supply instead.
>>
>
> There are two reasons for not using a switching supply.
>
> 1) They always have to have a load attached or else poof.
> 2) They are far more complicated in design and why burden
> oneself unnecessarily?
1. Proper design and modern semiconductors takes care of that.
2. Because of the very problems you are encountering having to filter
line frequencies. Size, weight, cost, life, etc. Just consider the power
supply in your computer! Can put out massive current yet is light, small
reliable and almost free! Filtering high frequencies takes far less
capacitor than low.
Today Class D Amps are the shiznit!
--
___ ___ ___ ___
/\ \ /\ \ /\__\ /\ \
/::\ \ /::\ \ /::| | \:\ \
/:/\:\ \ /:/\:\ \ /:|:| | ___ /::\__\
/::\~\:\__\ /::\~\:\ \ /:/|:| |__ /\ /:/\/__/
/:/\:\ \:|__| /:/\:\ \:\__\ /:/ |:| /\__\ \:\/:/ /
\:\~\:\/:/ / \:\~\:\ \/__/ \/__|:|/:/ / \::/ /
\:\ \::/ / \:\ \:\__\ |:/:/ / \/__/
\:\/:/ / \:\ \/__/ |::/ /
\_:/__/ \:\__\ /:/ /
\/__/ \/__/
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Fabian Russell <root@localhost.localdomain> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-11-04 19:28 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <pan.2015.11.04.19.29.12@localhost.localdomain> |
| In reply to | #530371 |
On Wed, 04 Nov 2015 14:04:57 -0500, benj wrote: > > 4700 microfarad at 50 volts? I'm looking at "screw terminal" > electrolytics at Mouser and they are nice but $89 each! > http://www.digikey.com/product-detail/en/UVR1H472MRD/493-1115-ND/588856 For my big power supply I need even bigger caps. (I forgot the exact value and I'd have to open it up for a look inside.) > > With a regulator all you need is enough C to keep ripple low enough > that the regulators can clean it up at full current. > You sound like the pointy haired MBA at the design meeting drying to shave off extra pennies. I build 'em therefore I am king and I put in what I want which is BIG. It's called electronic ricing. > > 1. Proper design and modern semiconductors takes care of that. > If you had to sit and solder a switching power supply together you'd quickly change your tune. Remember the KISS principle: keep it simple stupid. For my very high current power supply the transformer weighs about 6 pounds -- and I need two of them. But everything about the end result is simple, that is design, construction, and maintenance. I am not winning any contests for cleverness, slickness, and progressiveness. But my stuff works as well, or better, as anything else in the world and it's far cheaper to boot.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | benj <none@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-11-04 18:49 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <yQw_x.45$NM.39@fx22.iad> |
| In reply to | #530376 |
On 11/04/2015 02:28 PM, Fabian Russell wrote:
> On Wed, 04 Nov 2015 14:04:57 -0500, benj wrote:
>
>>
>> 4700 microfarad at 50 volts? I'm looking at "screw terminal"
>> electrolytics at Mouser and they are nice but $89 each!
>>
>
> http://www.digikey.com/product-detail/en/UVR1H472MRD/493-1115-ND/588856
>
> For my big power supply I need even bigger caps. (I forgot the
> exact value and I'd have to open it up for a look inside.)
>
>
>>
>> With a regulator all you need is enough C to keep ripple low enough
>> that the regulators can clean it up at full current.
>>
>
> You sound like the pointy haired MBA at the design meeting drying
> to shave off extra pennies.
>
> I build 'em therefore I am king and I put in what I want which
> is BIG.
>
> It's called electronic ricing.
>
>
>>
>> 1. Proper design and modern semiconductors takes care of that.
>>
>
> If you had to sit and solder a switching power supply together
> you'd quickly change your tune.
>
> Remember the KISS principle: keep it simple stupid.
>
> For my very high current power supply the transformer weighs
> about 6 pounds -- and I need two of them. But everything
> about the end result is simple, that is design, construction,
> and maintenance.
>
> I am not winning any contests for cleverness, slickness, and
> progressiveness. But my stuff works as well, or better, as
> anything else in the world and it's far cheaper to boot.
Hey wait a minute! YOURS is the amp that blew up, not mine. Mine are all
working... Well except for the huge surplus servo amp I use to change
the speed on my old turntable...suffered the same fate as yours: dead
output transistors. Oh well, it needs updated to a small light weight
modern switching design anyway.
--
___ ___ ___ ___
/\ \ /\ \ /\__\ /\ \
/::\ \ /::\ \ /::| | \:\ \
/:/\:\ \ /:/\:\ \ /:|:| | ___ /::\__\
/::\~\:\__\ /::\~\:\ \ /:/|:| |__ /\ /:/\/__/
/:/\:\ \:|__| /:/\:\ \:\__\ /:/ |:| /\__\ \:\/:/ /
\:\~\:\/:/ / \:\~\:\ \/__/ \/__|:|/:/ / \::/ /
\:\ \::/ / \:\ \:\__\ |:/:/ / \/__/
\:\/:/ / \:\ \/__/ |::/ /
\::/__/ \:\__\ /:/ /
~~ \/__/ \/__/
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | gilber34 <fafa@invalid.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-11-04 20:41 -0600 |
| Message-ID | <n1efk9$m68$1@speranza.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #530448 |
On 11/4/2015 5:49 PM, benj wrote: > On 11/04/2015 02:28 PM, Fabian Russell wrote: >> On Wed, 04 Nov 2015 14:04:57 -0500, benj wrote: >> >>> >>> 4700 microfarad at 50 volts? I'm looking at "screw terminal" >>> electrolytics at Mouser and they are nice but $89 each! >>> >> >> http://www.digikey.com/product-detail/en/UVR1H472MRD/493-1115-ND/588856 >> >> I am not winning any contests for cleverness, slickness, and >> progressiveness. But my stuff works as well, or better, as >> anything else in the world and it's far cheaper to boot. > > Hey wait a minute! YOURS is the amp that blew up, not mine. Mine are all > working... Well except for the huge surplus servo amp I use to change > the speed on my old turntable...suffered the same fate as yours: dead > output transistors. Oh well, it needs updated to a small light weight > modern switching design anyway. > just use battery's, get PURE DC, not that distilled from AC DC Pure DC, for batteries, like that Tusla Car does
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Fabian Russell <root@localhost.localdomain> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-11-05 03:16 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <pan.2015.11.05.03.16.01@localhost.localdomain> |
| In reply to | #530477 |
On Wed, 04 Nov 2015 20:41:04 -0600, gilber34 wrote: > > just use battery's, get PURE DC, not that distilled from AC DC > Actually, power distribution needs to be fundamentally changed. There are many, many household consumer items that run on DC power, and each of those items must have an embedded converter. This is redundancy in the extreme. Every house should have a central AC to DC converter that would then distribute DC power right alongside the regular AC. Every wall outlet would have both AC and DC outlets. A consumer item requiring DC power would not need to have its own built-in converter. Of course, there would need to be an international standard for the DC voltage. 12 volts should be fine.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | gilber34 <fafa@invalid.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-11-04 21:58 -0600 |
| Message-ID | <n1ek63$t6m$1@speranza.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #530489 |
On 11/4/2015 9:16 PM, Fabian Russell wrote: > On Wed, 04 Nov 2015 20:41:04 -0600, gilber34 wrote: > >> >> just use battery's, get PURE DC, not that distilled from AC DC >> > > Actually, power distribution needs to be fundamentally changed. > > There are many, many household consumer items that run on DC > power, and each of those items must have an embedded converter. > This is redundancy in the extreme. > > Every house should have a central AC to DC converter that would > then distribute DC power right alongside the regular AC. Every > wall outlet would have both AC and DC outlets. A consumer item > requiring DC power would not need to have its own built-in > converter. > > Of course, there would need to be an international standard > for the DC voltage. 12 volts should be fine. > > agree, perhaps 24V ? (less current needed) but then you could run your power from batterys from the solar cells directly time to get rid of all these types and sizes of batterys, keep AA and dump AAA and AAAA, Gov can mandate all batteries be a single size and single voltage. forget 9V, and dump the 6 volt perhaps have a 24 volt one
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "reber g=emc^2" <herbertglazier0@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-11-04 12:14 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <f933d1c4-edf7-409d-a661-bf38d5c6a249@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #530281 |
On Tuesday, November 3, 2015 at 6:49:39 PM UTC-8, Fabian Russell wrote: > On Tue, 03 Nov 2015 23:20:25 +0000, jimp wrote: > > > > > Not if it is a non-solid aluminum; it shortens the life. > > > > Solid electrolyte aluminum capacitors seem only available with > a polymer electrolyte. I need at least 4700uF caps at a 50 V > rating. A check of both DigiKey and Mouser supply houses show > that 4700uF is available only at a max of 2.5 V rating. I assume > this represents the state of the art. > > This is way too low. I'll have to get the wet, non-solid, electrolyte > and just replace when needed. Air-conditon Trebertcapacitor shows two ways when needing replacement.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | benj <none@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-11-04 18:44 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <QLw_x.1115$af1.1046@fx04.iad> |
| In reply to | #530382 |
On 11/04/2015 03:14 PM, reber g=emc^2 wrote:
> On Tuesday, November 3, 2015 at 6:49:39 PM UTC-8, Fabian Russell wrote:
>> On Tue, 03 Nov 2015 23:20:25 +0000, jimp wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> Not if it is a non-solid aluminum; it shortens the life.
>>>
>>
>> Solid electrolyte aluminum capacitors seem only available with
>> a polymer electrolyte. I need at least 4700uF caps at a 50 V
>> rating. A check of both DigiKey and Mouser supply houses show
>> that 4700uF is available only at a max of 2.5 V rating. I assume
>> this represents the state of the art.
>>
>> This is way too low. I'll have to get the wet, non-solid, electrolyte
>> and just replace when needed.
>
> Air-conditon Trebertcapacitor shows two ways when needing replacement.
>
1. It is split open and dripping goo!
2. Your house is on fire and burning down.
I didn't know Herb invented the flux capacitor, did you?
--
___ ___ ___ ___
/\ \ /\ \ /\__\ /\ \
/::\ \ /::\ \ /::| | \:\ \
/:/\:\ \ /:/\:\ \ /:|:| | ___ /::\__\
/::\~\:\__\ /::\~\:\ \ /:/|:| |__ /\ /:/\/__/
/:/\:\ \:|__| /:/\:\ \:\__\ /:/ |:| /\__\ \:\/:/ /
\:\~\:\/:/ / \:\~\:\ \/__/ \/__|:|/:/ / \::/ /
\:\ \::/ / \:\ \:\__\ |:/:/ / \/__/
\:\/:/ / \:\ \/__/ |::/ /
\::/__/ \:\__\ /:/ /
~~ \/__/ \/__/
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | gilber34 <fafa@invalid.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-11-04 20:41 -0600 |
| Message-ID | <n1efl5$m68$2@speranza.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #530446 |
On 11/4/2015 5:44 PM, benj wrote: > On 11/04/2015 03:14 PM, reber g=emc^2 wrote: >> On Tuesday, November 3, 2015 at 6:49:39 PM UTC-8, Fabian Russell wrote: >>> On Tue, 03 Nov 2015 23:20:25 +0000, jimp wrote: >>> >>>> >>>> Not if it is a non-solid aluminum; it shortens the life. >>>> >>> >>> Solid electrolyte aluminum capacitors seem only available with >>> a polymer electrolyte. I need at least 4700uF caps at a 50 V >>> rating. A check of both DigiKey and Mouser supply houses show >>> that 4700uF is available only at a max of 2.5 V rating. I assume >>> this represents the state of the art. >>> >>> This is way too low. I'll have to get the wet, non-solid, electrolyte >>> and just replace when needed. >> >> Air-conditon Trebertcapacitor shows two ways when needing replacement. >> > 1. It is split open and dripping goo! > > 2. Your house is on fire and burning down. > > I didn't know Herb invented the flux capacitor, did you? > he fluxed it up alright
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | gyansorova@gmail.com |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-11-05 16:34 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <977899b9-cf53-4842-b473-c9005bb13727@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #530234 |
On Wednesday, November 4, 2015 at 11:15:18 AM UTC+13, Fabian Russell wrote: > Electrolytic Capacitor Question > -------------------------------- > > A) Prologue of logic: > > This question either is physics or is not physics. > > This question is not physics. > > Therefore it is. > > B) Question > > I have several home-brew circuits which were built several > years ago. These circuits contain a few large capacity and other > electrolytic capacitors. > > What is the lifetime of an electrolytic cap before it needs > replacing? > > Because the very large caps are involved in power supply ripple > filtering, I have placed these into a capacitor short circuit > that I can can switch on after power off. Does having these > caps on s short circuit improve lifespan? could be 100 years or more
[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]
Page 3 of 3 — ← Prev page 1 2 [3]
Back to top | Article view | sci.physics
csiph-web