Importance of electrolytic capacitor sizeCapacitor behavior in oscillating circuitCan you make a non-polar electrolytic capacitor out of two regular electrolytic capacitors?Substition of electrolytic capacitors in surface mount applicationsAluminum Electrolytic Capacitor Dissipation FactorLM317 circuit capacitor questionCan a single, large multilayer ceramic capacitor replace the classic electrolytic + ceramic decoupling capacitor arrangement?Size factor of capacitors now and then?APC Smart UPS - 2700uF 40V CapacitorsWhy do we use polarized capacitors?
Map a function that takes arguments in different levels of a list
Is it safe for a student to give negative feedback in student evaluations?
Can an intercepting fighter jet force a small propeller aircraft down without completely destroying it?
How to find better food in airports
How can I design a magically-induced coma?
Are manifolds admitting a circle foliation covered by manifolds with a (non-trivial) circle action?
Why don't they build airplanes from 3D printer plastic?
Using font to highlight a god's speech in dialogue
IEEE Registration Authority mac prefix
Declaring 2 (or even multi-) dimensional std::arrays elegantly
If the UK government illegally doesn't ask for article 50 extension, can parliament do it instead?
How do I stop making people jump at home and at work?
Does immunity to non magical damage negate sneak attack damage?
What is the converted mana cost of land cards?
In Toy Story, are toys the only inanimate objects that become alive? And if so, why?
Function of the separated, individual solar cells on Telstar 1 and 2? Why were they "special"?
Are there any writings by blinded and/or exiled Byzantine emperors?
Plotting level sets of the form f(x,y,c)==0
How does Harry wear the invisibility cloak?
In mathematics is there a substitution that is "different" from Vieta's substitution to solve the cubic equation?
Tiny image scraper for xkcd.com
Why didn't Thatcher give Hong Kong to Taiwan?
I have two helper functions that are the exact same, one executes and one doesn't. How come?
Does secure hashing imply secure symmetric encryption?
Importance of electrolytic capacitor size
Capacitor behavior in oscillating circuitCan you make a non-polar electrolytic capacitor out of two regular electrolytic capacitors?Substition of electrolytic capacitors in surface mount applicationsAluminum Electrolytic Capacitor Dissipation FactorLM317 circuit capacitor questionCan a single, large multilayer ceramic capacitor replace the classic electrolytic + ceramic decoupling capacitor arrangement?Size factor of capacitors now and then?APC Smart UPS - 2700uF 40V CapacitorsWhy do we use polarized capacitors?
.everyoneloves__top-leaderboard:empty,.everyoneloves__mid-leaderboard:empty,.everyoneloves__bot-mid-leaderboard:empty margin-bottom:0;
$begingroup$
A large aluminum filter capacitor about 1" X 3" can, from a 1972 power supply, needs to be replaced. it is 4000uf/50V/85 degrees. Any reason why it can’t be replaced with a much smaller 4700uf/50V/85 degrees Electrolytic cap from Amazon? I don’t understand the difference, except for physical size and price.
capacitor
New contributor
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
A large aluminum filter capacitor about 1" X 3" can, from a 1972 power supply, needs to be replaced. it is 4000uf/50V/85 degrees. Any reason why it can’t be replaced with a much smaller 4700uf/50V/85 degrees Electrolytic cap from Amazon? I don’t understand the difference, except for physical size and price.
capacitor
New contributor
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
A large aluminum filter capacitor about 1" X 3" can, from a 1972 power supply, needs to be replaced. it is 4000uf/50V/85 degrees. Any reason why it can’t be replaced with a much smaller 4700uf/50V/85 degrees Electrolytic cap from Amazon? I don’t understand the difference, except for physical size and price.
capacitor
New contributor
$endgroup$
A large aluminum filter capacitor about 1" X 3" can, from a 1972 power supply, needs to be replaced. it is 4000uf/50V/85 degrees. Any reason why it can’t be replaced with a much smaller 4700uf/50V/85 degrees Electrolytic cap from Amazon? I don’t understand the difference, except for physical size and price.
capacitor
capacitor
New contributor
New contributor
edited 9 hours ago
Ariser
2,55910 silver badges30 bronze badges
2,55910 silver badges30 bronze badges
New contributor
asked 9 hours ago
Bob FBob F
111 bronze badge
111 bronze badge
New contributor
New contributor
add a comment |
add a comment |
3 Answers
3
active
oldest
votes
$begingroup$
It probably could, but the devil is in the details.
Ripple current, loss etc....
What is key to appreciate is the present cap is from the 1970's. Technology has moved on from there in not only in dielectric but also in manufacturing techniques.
Compare the two data sheets is the best advice
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Adding to JonRBs Answer:
Capacitors in the 70's were huge in comparison to current caps.
Advances in manufacturing led to a massive size shrink along with other benefits. Some effects from these improvements are contrary to each other. I try to give some thoughts on it.
Smaller caps have lower ESR. This is something which could be problematic within a intricate design, but the probability that in a 70's supply a high ESR might be crucial is rather low. You can figure out from the schematic, if a low ESR is acceptable. The inrush current might grow to high with a low ESR.
Smaller caps have a lower surface, making it more difficult to dissipate thermal power but on the other hand they might improve convection inside the housing.
You could choose a capacitor with slightly higher voltage and temperature rating to improve lifetime, because the ratings of parts from the 70's were a lot more conservative due to the greater variations in manufacturing processes.
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Adding to the answers:
The cost of an Electrolytic Capacitor is nothing compared to any impact of a failed power supply, especially in the field of medical, manufacturing, military or other important usage.
But even when used only for private purposes, the time effort to change it again after failing a 2nd time is not worth to choose cheap caps.
There are many low-quality caps sold via internet that do not even match the ratings printed on the casing. The capacity could be less, the maximum voltage and temperature could be lower.
Like stated already in other answers, it is worth to purchase a high quality cap with higher ratings both for voltage and temperature (in that case e.g. 80V and 105 C degrees), and ESR and other datas should be compared via data sheets.
Since old caps anyway had a high tolerance of f.e. -20%/+50%, a higher capacity value should be no problem unless the ESR does not become too low. So 4700uF or 5600uF as replacement for a 4000uF should be fine.
Normally there is much heat produced in old power supplies since they work via series regulation. The caps should not be close to or touching heat sinks.
If the supply is anyway open, these points could be checked as well:
- Are all diodes/bridge rectifiers feeding that cap ok? Sometimes a broken cap is the result of bad diodes.
- All the screws pressing the power elements (f.e. 2N3055 transistors) to the heat sink(s) should be re-fastened. In many cases those screws are not tight enough anymore after half a century.
- Any resistors (or other elements) show burnt casings? Any burnt/colored areas on the PCBs?
If the power supply was broken and not used for a long time, the first test should be via feeding from a variac after repair.
The voltage should be slowly raised in order to enable all Electrolytic Caps to rebuild the oxyde layers without high surge currents - also the new cap could have been stored for a long time.
$endgroup$
add a comment |
Your Answer
StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function ()
return StackExchange.using("schematics", function ()
StackExchange.schematics.init();
);
, "cicuitlab");
StackExchange.ready(function()
var channelOptions =
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "135"
;
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function()
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled)
StackExchange.using("snippets", function()
createEditor();
);
else
createEditor();
);
function createEditor()
StackExchange.prepareEditor(
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: false,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: null,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader:
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
,
onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
);
);
Bob F is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2felectronics.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f455856%2fimportance-of-electrolytic-capacitor-size%23new-answer', 'question_page');
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
3 Answers
3
active
oldest
votes
3 Answers
3
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
$begingroup$
It probably could, but the devil is in the details.
Ripple current, loss etc....
What is key to appreciate is the present cap is from the 1970's. Technology has moved on from there in not only in dielectric but also in manufacturing techniques.
Compare the two data sheets is the best advice
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
It probably could, but the devil is in the details.
Ripple current, loss etc....
What is key to appreciate is the present cap is from the 1970's. Technology has moved on from there in not only in dielectric but also in manufacturing techniques.
Compare the two data sheets is the best advice
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
It probably could, but the devil is in the details.
Ripple current, loss etc....
What is key to appreciate is the present cap is from the 1970's. Technology has moved on from there in not only in dielectric but also in manufacturing techniques.
Compare the two data sheets is the best advice
$endgroup$
It probably could, but the devil is in the details.
Ripple current, loss etc....
What is key to appreciate is the present cap is from the 1970's. Technology has moved on from there in not only in dielectric but also in manufacturing techniques.
Compare the two data sheets is the best advice
answered 9 hours ago
JonRBJonRB
15k2 gold badges22 silver badges42 bronze badges
15k2 gold badges22 silver badges42 bronze badges
add a comment |
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Adding to JonRBs Answer:
Capacitors in the 70's were huge in comparison to current caps.
Advances in manufacturing led to a massive size shrink along with other benefits. Some effects from these improvements are contrary to each other. I try to give some thoughts on it.
Smaller caps have lower ESR. This is something which could be problematic within a intricate design, but the probability that in a 70's supply a high ESR might be crucial is rather low. You can figure out from the schematic, if a low ESR is acceptable. The inrush current might grow to high with a low ESR.
Smaller caps have a lower surface, making it more difficult to dissipate thermal power but on the other hand they might improve convection inside the housing.
You could choose a capacitor with slightly higher voltage and temperature rating to improve lifetime, because the ratings of parts from the 70's were a lot more conservative due to the greater variations in manufacturing processes.
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Adding to JonRBs Answer:
Capacitors in the 70's were huge in comparison to current caps.
Advances in manufacturing led to a massive size shrink along with other benefits. Some effects from these improvements are contrary to each other. I try to give some thoughts on it.
Smaller caps have lower ESR. This is something which could be problematic within a intricate design, but the probability that in a 70's supply a high ESR might be crucial is rather low. You can figure out from the schematic, if a low ESR is acceptable. The inrush current might grow to high with a low ESR.
Smaller caps have a lower surface, making it more difficult to dissipate thermal power but on the other hand they might improve convection inside the housing.
You could choose a capacitor with slightly higher voltage and temperature rating to improve lifetime, because the ratings of parts from the 70's were a lot more conservative due to the greater variations in manufacturing processes.
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Adding to JonRBs Answer:
Capacitors in the 70's were huge in comparison to current caps.
Advances in manufacturing led to a massive size shrink along with other benefits. Some effects from these improvements are contrary to each other. I try to give some thoughts on it.
Smaller caps have lower ESR. This is something which could be problematic within a intricate design, but the probability that in a 70's supply a high ESR might be crucial is rather low. You can figure out from the schematic, if a low ESR is acceptable. The inrush current might grow to high with a low ESR.
Smaller caps have a lower surface, making it more difficult to dissipate thermal power but on the other hand they might improve convection inside the housing.
You could choose a capacitor with slightly higher voltage and temperature rating to improve lifetime, because the ratings of parts from the 70's were a lot more conservative due to the greater variations in manufacturing processes.
$endgroup$
Adding to JonRBs Answer:
Capacitors in the 70's were huge in comparison to current caps.
Advances in manufacturing led to a massive size shrink along with other benefits. Some effects from these improvements are contrary to each other. I try to give some thoughts on it.
Smaller caps have lower ESR. This is something which could be problematic within a intricate design, but the probability that in a 70's supply a high ESR might be crucial is rather low. You can figure out from the schematic, if a low ESR is acceptable. The inrush current might grow to high with a low ESR.
Smaller caps have a lower surface, making it more difficult to dissipate thermal power but on the other hand they might improve convection inside the housing.
You could choose a capacitor with slightly higher voltage and temperature rating to improve lifetime, because the ratings of parts from the 70's were a lot more conservative due to the greater variations in manufacturing processes.
answered 8 hours ago
AriserAriser
2,55910 silver badges30 bronze badges
2,55910 silver badges30 bronze badges
add a comment |
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Adding to the answers:
The cost of an Electrolytic Capacitor is nothing compared to any impact of a failed power supply, especially in the field of medical, manufacturing, military or other important usage.
But even when used only for private purposes, the time effort to change it again after failing a 2nd time is not worth to choose cheap caps.
There are many low-quality caps sold via internet that do not even match the ratings printed on the casing. The capacity could be less, the maximum voltage and temperature could be lower.
Like stated already in other answers, it is worth to purchase a high quality cap with higher ratings both for voltage and temperature (in that case e.g. 80V and 105 C degrees), and ESR and other datas should be compared via data sheets.
Since old caps anyway had a high tolerance of f.e. -20%/+50%, a higher capacity value should be no problem unless the ESR does not become too low. So 4700uF or 5600uF as replacement for a 4000uF should be fine.
Normally there is much heat produced in old power supplies since they work via series regulation. The caps should not be close to or touching heat sinks.
If the supply is anyway open, these points could be checked as well:
- Are all diodes/bridge rectifiers feeding that cap ok? Sometimes a broken cap is the result of bad diodes.
- All the screws pressing the power elements (f.e. 2N3055 transistors) to the heat sink(s) should be re-fastened. In many cases those screws are not tight enough anymore after half a century.
- Any resistors (or other elements) show burnt casings? Any burnt/colored areas on the PCBs?
If the power supply was broken and not used for a long time, the first test should be via feeding from a variac after repair.
The voltage should be slowly raised in order to enable all Electrolytic Caps to rebuild the oxyde layers without high surge currents - also the new cap could have been stored for a long time.
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Adding to the answers:
The cost of an Electrolytic Capacitor is nothing compared to any impact of a failed power supply, especially in the field of medical, manufacturing, military or other important usage.
But even when used only for private purposes, the time effort to change it again after failing a 2nd time is not worth to choose cheap caps.
There are many low-quality caps sold via internet that do not even match the ratings printed on the casing. The capacity could be less, the maximum voltage and temperature could be lower.
Like stated already in other answers, it is worth to purchase a high quality cap with higher ratings both for voltage and temperature (in that case e.g. 80V and 105 C degrees), and ESR and other datas should be compared via data sheets.
Since old caps anyway had a high tolerance of f.e. -20%/+50%, a higher capacity value should be no problem unless the ESR does not become too low. So 4700uF or 5600uF as replacement for a 4000uF should be fine.
Normally there is much heat produced in old power supplies since they work via series regulation. The caps should not be close to or touching heat sinks.
If the supply is anyway open, these points could be checked as well:
- Are all diodes/bridge rectifiers feeding that cap ok? Sometimes a broken cap is the result of bad diodes.
- All the screws pressing the power elements (f.e. 2N3055 transistors) to the heat sink(s) should be re-fastened. In many cases those screws are not tight enough anymore after half a century.
- Any resistors (or other elements) show burnt casings? Any burnt/colored areas on the PCBs?
If the power supply was broken and not used for a long time, the first test should be via feeding from a variac after repair.
The voltage should be slowly raised in order to enable all Electrolytic Caps to rebuild the oxyde layers without high surge currents - also the new cap could have been stored for a long time.
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Adding to the answers:
The cost of an Electrolytic Capacitor is nothing compared to any impact of a failed power supply, especially in the field of medical, manufacturing, military or other important usage.
But even when used only for private purposes, the time effort to change it again after failing a 2nd time is not worth to choose cheap caps.
There are many low-quality caps sold via internet that do not even match the ratings printed on the casing. The capacity could be less, the maximum voltage and temperature could be lower.
Like stated already in other answers, it is worth to purchase a high quality cap with higher ratings both for voltage and temperature (in that case e.g. 80V and 105 C degrees), and ESR and other datas should be compared via data sheets.
Since old caps anyway had a high tolerance of f.e. -20%/+50%, a higher capacity value should be no problem unless the ESR does not become too low. So 4700uF or 5600uF as replacement for a 4000uF should be fine.
Normally there is much heat produced in old power supplies since they work via series regulation. The caps should not be close to or touching heat sinks.
If the supply is anyway open, these points could be checked as well:
- Are all diodes/bridge rectifiers feeding that cap ok? Sometimes a broken cap is the result of bad diodes.
- All the screws pressing the power elements (f.e. 2N3055 transistors) to the heat sink(s) should be re-fastened. In many cases those screws are not tight enough anymore after half a century.
- Any resistors (or other elements) show burnt casings? Any burnt/colored areas on the PCBs?
If the power supply was broken and not used for a long time, the first test should be via feeding from a variac after repair.
The voltage should be slowly raised in order to enable all Electrolytic Caps to rebuild the oxyde layers without high surge currents - also the new cap could have been stored for a long time.
$endgroup$
Adding to the answers:
The cost of an Electrolytic Capacitor is nothing compared to any impact of a failed power supply, especially in the field of medical, manufacturing, military or other important usage.
But even when used only for private purposes, the time effort to change it again after failing a 2nd time is not worth to choose cheap caps.
There are many low-quality caps sold via internet that do not even match the ratings printed on the casing. The capacity could be less, the maximum voltage and temperature could be lower.
Like stated already in other answers, it is worth to purchase a high quality cap with higher ratings both for voltage and temperature (in that case e.g. 80V and 105 C degrees), and ESR and other datas should be compared via data sheets.
Since old caps anyway had a high tolerance of f.e. -20%/+50%, a higher capacity value should be no problem unless the ESR does not become too low. So 4700uF or 5600uF as replacement for a 4000uF should be fine.
Normally there is much heat produced in old power supplies since they work via series regulation. The caps should not be close to or touching heat sinks.
If the supply is anyway open, these points could be checked as well:
- Are all diodes/bridge rectifiers feeding that cap ok? Sometimes a broken cap is the result of bad diodes.
- All the screws pressing the power elements (f.e. 2N3055 transistors) to the heat sink(s) should be re-fastened. In many cases those screws are not tight enough anymore after half a century.
- Any resistors (or other elements) show burnt casings? Any burnt/colored areas on the PCBs?
If the power supply was broken and not used for a long time, the first test should be via feeding from a variac after repair.
The voltage should be slowly raised in order to enable all Electrolytic Caps to rebuild the oxyde layers without high surge currents - also the new cap could have been stored for a long time.
answered 6 hours ago
xeekaxeeka
843 bronze badges
843 bronze badges
add a comment |
add a comment |
Bob F is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.
Bob F is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.
Bob F is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.
Bob F is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.
Thanks for contributing an answer to Electrical Engineering Stack Exchange!
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
Use MathJax to format equations. MathJax reference.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2felectronics.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f455856%2fimportance-of-electrolytic-capacitor-size%23new-answer', 'question_page');
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown