Why should someone replace ALL the capacitors on old Tube eq

[Benderthe.evilrobot]

"Jim Mueller" <wrongname@nospam.com> wrote in message
news:5894f007$0$55577$b1db1813$7968482@news.astraweb.com...

On Fri, 03 Feb 2017 13:50:22 +0000, Adrian Tuddenham wrote:

oldschool@tubes.com> wrote:

Why should someone replace ALL the capacitors on old Tube equipment?

It seems that some people advocate that.

One of the factors that is often overlooked is the tolerance of the
circuit to the various types of wear-out mechanism.

snip

True. But the reason to replace them ALL is that if you only replace the
one(s) causing a problem, another will fail later, then another still
later. It is much easier to do them all at once than to have to repair
the same unit over and over as they fail one after another. Been there,
done that.

So have I.

 

[Michael Black]

On Fri, 3 Feb 2017, Jim Mueller wrote:

On Fri, 03 Feb 2017 13:50:22 +0000, Adrian Tuddenham wrote:

oldschool@tubes.com> wrote:

Why should someone replace ALL the capacitors on old Tube equipment?

It seems that some people advocate that.

One of the factors that is often overlooked is the tolerance of the
circuit to the various types of wear-out mechanism.

snip

True. But the reason to replace them ALL is that if you only replace the
one(s) causing a problem, another will fail later, then another still
later. It is much easier to do them all at once than to have to repair
the same unit over and over as they fail one after another. Been there,
done that.

And that brings in another issue. A lot of that old equipment is really
hard to disassemble. So the effort to take it apart is greater than
changing all the capacitors, so one might as well while the thing is
apart.

Low value capacitors don't cost much, so replacing them all won't kill
most people. Electrolytics can be more expensive, but in consumer type
tube equipment, there are only a few, in the power supply and bypassing
the cathode in the audio stages, maybe a few more.

It shifts with solid state equipment, a whole lot more electrolytics since
transistors are low voltage low current (ie low impedance) rather than
tube's high impedance. And then with switching supplies, electrolytics
see much harder service since they are expected to filter AC frequencies
above audio, while previously electrolytics only saw 120Hz or audio
frequencies.

That's another issue. The time tracking down one bad capacitor can be
costly, if you just replace all the capacitors that may be as fast or
faster than figuring out which one is bad (and then another capacitor of
the same vintage may go bad the next week).

Michael

 

On Fri, 3 Feb 2017 14:08:37 -0500, Nick Danger <nick@third.eye.net>
wrote:

On 2/2/2017 9:13 PM, Jim Mueller wrote:

While tube electronics may survive a nuclear war, it is irrelevant.
There won't be any electricity to run them. The power plants are
controlled by computers. Likewise, having your own generator won't help
either. Many of the new ones are also semiconductor based, and you won't
be able to get gas to run them since the pumps at the gas station are run
by electricity which won't be available. Solar cells are also
semiconductors and the inverters used with them also use semiconductors.
So, if there is a WW3, don't count on ANYTHING electrical working.


Seeing as you brought up WW3, for those of you that may not know it, a
new president singlehandedly advanced the Doomsday Clock by 30 seconds
just last week. Heck of a job!

Yes, precisely why I feel WW3 is a lot closer and more likely than
before. This has nothing to do with my own political party preferences,
or anything else, just the "person" himself (president). However, lets
NOT get into a political discussion on here. Seems like everywhere on
the internet has turned to politics lately. But I still do not feel
safe, with the current state of the world and the current US president.
It seemed a lot safer before, even though the world in general seems a
lot worse than it was in the last few decades.

 

[Benderthe.evilrobot]

<oldschool@tubes.com> wrote in message
news:1pv99cptj879dqmtmc9hhh5hg46aibs1hu@4ax.com...

On Fri, 3 Feb 2017 14:08:37 -0500, Nick Danger <nick@third.eye.net
wrote:

On 2/2/2017 9:13 PM, Jim Mueller wrote:

While tube electronics may survive a nuclear war, it is irrelevant.
There won't be any electricity to run them. The power plants are
controlled by computers. Likewise, having your own generator won't help
either. Many of the new ones are also semiconductor based, and you
won't
be able to get gas to run them since the pumps at the gas station are
run
by electricity which won't be available. Solar cells are also
semiconductors and the inverters used with them also use semiconductors.
So, if there is a WW3, don't count on ANYTHING electrical working.


Seeing as you brought up WW3, for those of you that may not know it, a
new president singlehandedly advanced the Doomsday Clock by 30 seconds
just last week. Heck of a job!


Yes, precisely why I feel WW3 is a lot closer and more likely than
before. This has nothing to do with my own political party preferences,
or anything else, just the "person" himself (president). However, lets
NOT get into a political discussion on here. Seems like everywhere on
the internet has turned to politics lately. But I still do not feel
safe, with the current state of the world and the current US president.
It seemed a lot safer before, even though the world in general seems a
lot worse than it was in the last few decades.

Trump is using executive orders for everything, that's basically ruling by
decree - I don't know how that's any different to a dictatorship.

 

On Thu, 02 Feb 2017 18:36:08 -0800, Jeff Liebermann <jeffl@cruzio.com>
wrote:

On Thu, 02 Feb 2017 16:44:53 -0600, oldschool@tubes.com wrote:

I'm 66 years old. According to my doctor, I dont have any bad
capacitors, (just arthritis).

I'm 69 years old. My body mechanic says I have pump and inside
plumbing problems. Perhaps I should replace him with a plumber?

Definitely sounds like you need a plumber

Seriously, I wonder what the life expectancy is for the new caps
(meaning the replacements for the wax coated paper caps. ???)

There are online lifetime calculators for electrolytic and other types
of capacitors. For example:
http://www.illinoiscapacitor.com/tech-center/life-calculators.aspx
http://www.chemi-con.com/education> (click on Capacitor Life)
The major culprit is internal heating from high ripple current
resulting the electrolyte leaking or evaporating. Temperature also
has a big effect. There are graphs on the capacitor data sheets that
approximate the lifetime characteristics.

OK

And what are these newer ones made from?

For electrolytics, try polymer caps:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polymer_capacitor#Lifetime.2C_service_life
http://www.mouser.com/pdfdocs/Panasonic_Capacitors_WP_final.PDF

So, what are the BEST ones? For example, I am getting a Hallicrafters
sx-99 radio, to recap it, what should I use for the small caps (not
electrolytics)? Should I use the "orange drops", or is there something
better? I'd rather spend a few bucks more and get the best.

By the way, why are all the caps now rated at some oddball figure.
For example, instead of .05, it's ,047? or instead of .003 it's .0033.

Same for the 'lytics instead of 30mf, they are 33mf and so on.....

I know the mica and ceramic caps are reliable and last almost forever.

Not all ceramics are that reliable. MLCC (multi-layer ceramic caps)
are rather fragile and microphonic.

What do those look like? Are they the ones with colored dots that look
like dominos? (But I think those are mica caps, if I'm not mistaken).

I remember those squarish brown ones with the leads on the bottom, those
were supposed to be superior. (Silver mica, maybe?)

And the round ceramics were said to be good too.

A for electrolytic caps, it seems that the newer ones have a much
shorter life than the old ones did.

Nope. The old ones filtered at 120 Hz. The new caps filter at 100 to
300 KHz. Internal dissipation follows frequency.

Can you explain that. I dont understand...
(I would think that a 'lytic in a power supply would only need to filter
at 120hz, or would some filter at 60hz also, depending on the
configuration?

That's
why those old radios still work after 60 or 80 years, while most stuff
made today is in a landfill in less than 10 years.

Todays products are intentionally designed to be difficult to repair
and to only last as long as the warranty period. With the proper
design tools and models, it is possible to predict the life of an
electronic (or mechanical) product. Anything that lasts longer than
the warranty period is deemed to be "over-designed". It is then
redesigned using lower rating or cost components so that everything
blows up at the same time. I've seen it happen.

I totally agree. You cant identify parts anymore and if you can, you
cant get them. Especially ICs.

In the 60s and 70s, I loved to work on electronics. Mostly tube stuff.
The early transistor stuff was not too bad, but as soon as they began
using ICs, I lost interest in working on it.

Now, 40+ years later, I am gtting back into it, but only working on
antique tube stuff, which is what i enjoy. Modern stuff is far too
complicated, far too small (hard to see with my aging eyes too), and
does nothing but frustrate me.

Sure, I have built every computer I have owned (or rebuilt from parts of
thrown away ones). But with computers you just change boards, not
individual components.

I guess going back to the tube stuff makes me feel young again!

 

[Tom Biasi]

On 2/3/2017 5:16 PM, oldschool@tubes.com wrote:

On Fri, 3 Feb 2017 14:08:37 -0500, Nick Danger <nick@third.eye.net
wrote:

On 2/2/2017 9:13 PM, Jim Mueller wrote:

While tube electronics may survive a nuclear war, it is irrelevant.
There won't be any electricity to run them. The power plants are
controlled by computers. Likewise, having your own generator won't help
either. Many of the new ones are also semiconductor based, and you won't
be able to get gas to run them since the pumps at the gas station are run
by electricity which won't be available. Solar cells are also
semiconductors and the inverters used with them also use semiconductors.
So, if there is a WW3, don't count on ANYTHING electrical working.


Seeing as you brought up WW3, for those of you that may not know it, a
new president singlehandedly advanced the Doomsday Clock by 30 seconds
just last week. Heck of a job!


Yes, precisely why I feel WW3 is a lot closer and more likely than
before. This has nothing to do with my own political party preferences,
or anything else, just the "person" himself (president). However, lets
NOT get into a political discussion on here. Seems like everywhere on
the internet has turned to politics lately. But I still do not feel
safe, with the current state of the world and the current US president.
It seemed a lot safer before, even though the world in general seems a
lot worse than it was in the last few decades.

It's a very complex issue. Your feelings are just that, yours.

 

On Fri, 3 Feb 2017 21:05:19 -0000, "Benderthe.evilrobot"
<Benderthe.evilrobot@virginmedia.com> wrote:

oldschool@tubes.com> wrote in message
news:32779ctsu0qa604ak706qamu4fft571fj8@4ax.com...
Why should someone replace ALL the capacitors on old Tube equipment?

It seems that some people advocate that.

I understand that the electrolytic caps contain chemicals which decay
over time, from the chemicals corroding the metal parts. So,
electrolytic caps should always be replaced. But why replace the old
paper caps coated with wax? All they are, is metal foil and paper rolled
up, and as long as the wax is sealing them to keep out moisture, why
should they become defective?

Waxed paper capacitors are notorious for moisture absorbtion and becoming
leaky.

There are plenty of other types of dry capacitors that don't last forever in
the high temperature around tubes.

I have been reading alot of websites about caps. One of them said the
wax coated ones were less leaky (for moisture), than the old plastic
coated ones. I am referring to the ones called "black beauties", that
have color code bands on them.Yet, back in the early 70's, I knew a guy
who was a retired radio-tv repairman as well as a Ham operator, and he
used to say those "black beauties" were far better than the wax ones.
(as well as the other plastic encased ones with the numbers on them
instead of the color bands).

That's conflicting info. Yet I know that all of them are paper caps.

 

[Look165]

They call it "preventive maintainance".

oldschool@tubes.com a écrit :

Why should someone replace ALL the capacitors on old Tube equipment?

It seems that some people advocate that.

I understand that the electrolytic caps contain chemicals which decay
over time, from the chemicals corroding the metal parts. So,
electrolytic caps should always be replaced. But why replace the old
paper caps coated with wax? All they are, is metal foil and paper rolled
up, and as long as the wax is sealing them to keep out moisture, why
should they become defective?

And for that matter, what are the new ones made from? Aside from being
sealed inside of some sort of plastic (instead of wax), are they not the
exact same thing inside?

While this is not part of my original intent for this message, I want to
ask if anyone remembers the old oil filled electrolytic caps in the
1930's and 40's radios? I never understood what the oil did inside of
them. But what I do remember is having one of them "blow". *SCARY SHIT*.
I plugged in some ancient chassis with those old oil filled caps, and
all of a sudden there was hot oil spraying all over me, from the tiny
hole in the top of it. After that, I always put a tin can over those
caps before plugging the device in. (or just replaced them). Those
seemed to almost always be bad. (Probably why they were not used to too
many years).

 

On Fri, 3 Feb 2017 16:18:02 -0500, Tom Biasi <tombiasi@optonline.net>
wrote:

On 2/3/2017 2:08 PM, Nick Danger wrote:
On 2/2/2017 9:13 PM, Jim Mueller wrote:

While tube electronics may survive a nuclear war, it is irrelevant.
There won't be any electricity to run them. The power plants are
controlled by computers. Likewise, having your own generator won't help
either. Many of the new ones are also semiconductor based, and you won't
be able to get gas to run them since the pumps at the gas station are run
by electricity which won't be available. Solar cells are also
semiconductors and the inverters used with them also use semiconductors.
So, if there is a WW3, don't count on ANYTHING electrical working.


Seeing as you brought up WW3, for those of you that may not know it, a
new president singlehandedly advanced the Doomsday Clock by 30 seconds
just last week. Heck of a job!


Get off of it. You lost.

Lets NOT go there.....

In all honesty, I think WE ALL LOST. But we would have lost with either
of the lousy candidates we had to pick from.

Enough politics..... Lets stick to electronics. A lot more fun, and
likely a lot safer too....
I'd rather get zapped by a high voltage power supply than a president
with his fingers on the nuclear botton.

 

On Fri, 3 Feb 2017 21:12:30 -0000, "Benderthe.evilrobot"
<Benderthe.evilrobot@virginmedia.com> wrote:

oldschool@tubes.com> wrote in message

And what are these newer ones made from?

I know the mica and ceramic caps are reliable and last almost forever.

I've seen loads of ceramic caps fail - but mostly in TV horizontal scan
sections where the frequency is over 15kHz and high voltage pulse
conditions.

This got worse with ever increasing PC monitor resolutions.

AFAICR; mica caps were pretty reliable - in most of the places I found them,
they were used for precision and a specific tempco.

I could see them failing in the HV sections of ol CRT televisions and
monitors. Alot of stuff seemed to fail at those high voltages.

But in radios and audio amps, they seem darn near fail proof....

 

[Ralph Mowery]

In article <4a0a9cli8rpk4puapomqfkn7lpmhmhgq0i@4ax.com>,
oldschool@tubes.com says...

By the way, why are all the caps now rated at some oddball figure.
For example, instead of .05, it's ,047? or instead of .003 it's .0033.

Same for the 'lytics instead of 30mf, they are 33mf and so on.....


A for electrolytic caps, it seems that the newer ones have a much
shorter life than the old ones did.

Nope. The old ones filtered at 120 Hz. The new caps filter at 100 to
300 KHz. Internal dissipation follows frequency.

Can you explain that. I dont understand...
(I would think that a 'lytic in a power supply would only need to filter
at 120hz, or would some filter at 60hz also, depending on the
configuration?

That's
why those old radios still work after 60 or 80 years, while most stuff
made today is in a landfill in less than 10 years.

Todays products are intentionally designed to be difficult to repair
and to only last as long as the warranty period. With the proper
design tools and models, it is possible to predict the life of an
electronic (or mechanical) product. Anything that lasts longer than
the warranty period is deemed to be "over-designed". It is then
redesigned using lower rating or cost components so that everything
blows up at the same time. I've seen it happen.

I totally agree. You cant identify parts anymore and if you can, you
cant get them. Especially ICs.

In the 60s and 70s, I loved to work on electronics. Mostly tube stuff.
The early transistor stuff was not too bad, but as soon as they began
using ICs, I lost interest in working on it.

Now, 40+ years later, I am gtting back into it, but only working on
antique tube stuff, which is what i enjoy. Modern stuff is far too
complicated, far too small (hard to see with my aging eyes too), and
does nothing but frustrate me.

Sure, I have built every computer I have owned (or rebuilt from parts of
thrown away ones). But with computers you just change boards, not
individual components.

I guess going back to the tube stuff makes me feel young again!

Capacitors such as .047 have been around a long time. I don't know why
it is such an odd value as I doubt the extra .003 would be noticable in
the circuits most of them are used in. As the tollorance on most of the
electrolytics are very broad I don't understand the odd values either.

The capacitors operating at 100 KHz and over are in the switching
supplies that are most often used now. That puts a lot of strain on
them that the old 60 Hz didn't.

I have started working on some of the surface mounted devices. It does
take different equipment, but not hard to replace the bad components in
most cases. You just have to invest in a stereo mcroscope
for about $ 200 and a hot air rework station. For just the hobbiest
there are some that have the hot air bun and soldering iron for less
than $ 100. Tweezers instead of needle nose and very small solder and
liquid flux. Lots of good info and how to on youtube.

I only started doing the SMD after I retired at 62.

I did put together my computers up to about 10 years ago. Then found I
could get a used one off ebay for almost nothing that will do what I
want. That is almost less than MS wants for some of the operating
systems and the used ones have the operating system on them.

 

[Jeff Liebermann]

On Fri, 03 Feb 2017 13:39:02 -0500, clare@snyder.on.ca wrote:

On Fri, 03 Feb 2017 09:32:07 -0800, Jeff Liebermann <jeffl@cruzio.com
wrote:
In a previous life, I tried to design a "warranty timer" into a
product. Actually, it was suppose to accumulate and display the
amount of time that the unit had been powered on to help establish
maintenance intervals. In previous products, a mechanical
counter-timer was used, but for this version, it was deemed too big
and expensive.
http://www.alliedelec.com/images/products/Small/70132720.jpg
I found a company that made an electrochemical equivalent. It was
housed in a glass cylinder, similar to a common 3AG glass fuse. Inside
was some chemical solution. When a few volts of DC was applied,
electrolytic action caused one end to slowly turn dark, thus
indicating the amount of time that the DC was applied. Sorry, but I
couldn't find the vendor or an equivalent online. When the required
maintenance was performed, the indicator would be replaced as it could
not be reset.

Something like a coulometer???

Sorta. The timer was basically a miniature electroplating bath, which
used a the current flow to move ions of something, from one end of a
glass cylinder to the other. A coulomb is 1 amp for 1 second and can
count both electrons and ions, as in the bath.
<http://www.electrolytics.org/faradaysLaw.html>
I have a box buried somewhere with the project notes which might have
the data sheet. Meanwhile, I think I may have found the patent, or
rather a later patent as the one I used was in about 1976:
<https://www.google.com/patents/US6198701>
I'll dig through the citations later...


--
Jeff Liebermann jeffl@cruzio.com
150 Felker St #D http://www.LearnByDestroying.com
Santa Cruz CA 95060 http://802.11junk.com
Skype: JeffLiebermann AE6KS 831-336-2558

 

[Dave Platt]

In article <MPG.32fed7a04e3c916a989829@news.east.earthlink.net>,
Ralph Mowery <rmowery28146@earthlink.net> wrote:

Capacitors such as .047 have been around a long time. I don't know why
it is such an odd value as I doubt the extra .003 would be noticable in
the circuits most of them are used in. As the tollorance on most of the
electrolytics are very broad I don't understand the odd values either.

If you look at the standard values used for resistors and capacitors
and inductors, you can see that they tend to be spaced in a way which
creates something approximating a geometric ratio - that is, each
value in the series is 1-point-something times the previous value.
The higher-precision value "kit" has a total of 24 values over each
decade. The common lower-precision value kit has six values (every
fourth, from the 24-value higher-precision range).

The relationships aren't exact - 0.047 would be 0.046415... and
some of the other "traditional" values are even further off of the
geometric curve. But, that's the basics of it.

I imagine that when picking the values which would go in the
lower-precision set, it was easier to just choose the same nominal
values as were used in the higher-precision set, and specify a lower
tolerance (e.g. +/- 10% for a cheap film cap, or +100/-20 for a
'lytic).

 

[Jeff Liebermann]

On Fri, 03 Feb 2017 16:38:26 -0600, oldschool@tubes.com wrote:

On Thu, 02 Feb 2017 18:36:08 -0800, Jeff Liebermann <jeffl@cruzio.com
wrote:

And what are these newer ones made from?

For electrolytics, try polymer caps:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polymer_capacitor#Lifetime.2C_service_life
http://www.mouser.com/pdfdocs/Panasonic_Capacitors_WP_final.PDF

So, what are the BEST ones? For example, I am getting a Hallicrafters
sx-99 radio, to recap it, what should I use for the small caps (not
electrolytics)? Should I use the "orange drops", or is there something
better? I'd rather spend a few bucks more and get the best.

I'll defer to the those from the antique radio forum, who have more
experience with this than me.

I have helped various friends rebuild old HF radios. I tend to
replace parts involving RF with parts that have the same temperature
coefficient. So, mica caps get replaced with silver mica caps.
Ceramics get replaced by ceramics of approximately the same value,
voltage, and tempco. Film caps are potentially a problem, but I've
seen few of those in old tube radios. Bumble bee, black beauty, and
orange drop caps are junk. There's no temperature coefficient
involved with those, so just whatever I can find that has similar
values in polycarbonate or polypropylene. This should help:
<http://www.audioasylum.com/forums/set/messages/7/75075.html>

By the way, why are all the caps now rated at some oddball figure.
For example, instead of .05, it's ,047? or instead of .003 it's .0033.

Get out your calculator and estimate the acceptable range of values
based on the tolerance. For example, a 0.047uF +/- 10% cap can vary
between 0.042 and 0.052uF. Therefore, a 0.050uF is just fine.
Actually, if you measure the caps involved with an LRC meter, you'll
find that they vary well outside of the original specifications. Just
because a capacitor is marked +/-10% doesn't mean that the circuit
requires the same tolerance range.

>Same for the 'lytics instead of 30mf, they are 33mf and so on.....

Most cheapo electrolytics are +100% -20%. So for 30uF, anything
between 60uF and 24uF should work. Again, electrolytics are not that
critical (or very accurate). Occasionally, there will be an
electrolytic in some kind of audio filter that has to be fairly
accurate. You can use the schematic to find those. The rest (power
supply, decoupling, interstage audio coupling, cathode bypass, etc),
can be fairly loose with the tolerances.

Not all ceramics are that reliable. MLCC (multi-layer ceramic caps)
are rather fragile and microphonic.

What do those look like? Are they the ones with colored dots that look
like dominos? (But I think those are mica caps, if I'm not mistaken).

You won't find any MLCC caps in tube radios. You'll find them in
computah equipment in the form of large SMT chip caps, sometimes with
leads and dipped in epoxy:
<https://www.google.com/search?q=mlcc+capacitor&tbm=isch>
The caps are evil and fragile. They vary in capacitance with
mechanical pressure and make a tolerable capacitance microphone. Touch
one end, but not the other, with a soldering iron, and the temperature
differential will cause internal cracking and eventually a short.

I remember those squarish brown ones with the leads on the bottom, those
were supposed to be superior. (Silver mica, maybe?)

Silver mica. They're very good parts and rarely die unless you cram
too much power through them as in a transmitter.
<https://www.google.com/search?tbm=isch&q=silver+mica+capacitors>
Watch out for the tempco on those. It's printed on the case as NPO,
N750, N1500, Y5V, Y5P, etc.

>And the round ceramics were said to be good too.

Those are called "disc ceramic" capacitors:
<https://www.google.com/search?tbm=isch&q=disc+ceramic+capacitor>
Same warnings are silver mica.

A for electrolytic caps, it seems that the newer ones have a much
shorter life than the old ones did.

Nope. The old ones filtered at 120 Hz. The new caps filter at 100 to
300 KHz. Internal dissipation follows frequency.

Can you explain that. I dont understand...
(I would think that a 'lytic in a power supply would only need to filter
at 120hz, or would some filter at 60hz also, depending on the
configuration?

Well, ok. I don't know of any tube radios that use switching power
supplies, so yes, the highest frequency a tube radio power supply will
see is 120 Hz. However, you comment was "for electrolytic caps, it
seems that the newer ones have a much shorter life than the old ones
did". By "newer one's", I assumed newer capacitors in newer circuits,
namely switching power supplies. My guess(tm) is that newer
capacitors will have the same long life as the originals (20+ years)
when used as a replacement in a 120 Hz power supply.

>I guess going back to the tube stuff makes me feel young again!

Sigh. My collection of test equipment looks more like a museum than a
working test bench. I also find myself fixing 40+ years old test
equipment as I do fixing radios etc. Looking at the old stuff, all it
does is make me feel old and tired.

Good luck.

--
Jeff Liebermann jeffl@cruzio.com
150 Felker St #D http://www.LearnByDestroying.com
Santa Cruz CA 95060 http://802.11junk.com
Skype: JeffLiebermann AE6KS 831-336-2558

 

[Jeff Liebermann]

On Fri, 03 Feb 2017 16:50:33 -0600, oldschool@tubes.com wrote:

I have been reading alot of websites about caps. One of them said the
wax coated ones were less leaky (for moisture), than the old plastic
coated ones. I am referring to the ones called "black beauties", that
have color code bands on them.Yet, back in the early 70's, I knew a guy
who was a retired radio-tv repairman as well as a Ham operator, and he
used to say those "black beauties" were far better than the wax ones.
(as well as the other plastic encased ones with the numbers on them
instead of the color bands).

That's conflicting info. Yet I know that all of them are paper caps.

Nope. The black beauty caps are di film dielectric, which is a
sandwich of mylar and paper. I think they might have been injected
with oil after assembly, but I'm not certain. You must have missed
something in your youth as everyone I knew that was fixing TV's would
break one open to see what was inside.

The preceding caps were bumble bee caps, which were oiled paper
dielectric. The succeeding caps were orange drop caps which are
metalized mylar dielectric.


--
Jeff Liebermann jeffl@cruzio.com
150 Felker St #D http://www.LearnByDestroying.com
Santa Cruz CA 95060 http://802.11junk.com
Skype: JeffLiebermann AE6KS 831-336-2558

 

[Ralph Mowery]

In article <vnhfmd-hbg.ln1@coop.radagast.org>, dplatt@coop.radagast.org
says...

In article <MPG.32fed7a04e3c916a989829@news.east.earthlink.net>,
Ralph Mowery <rmowery28146@earthlink.net> wrote:

Capacitors such as .047 have been around a long time. I don't know why
it is such an odd value as I doubt the extra .003 would be noticable in
the circuits most of them are used in. As the tollorance on most of the
electrolytics are very broad I don't understand the odd values either.

If you look at the standard values used for resistors and capacitors
and inductors, you can see that they tend to be spaced in a way which
creates something approximating a geometric ratio - that is, each
value in the series is 1-point-something times the previous value.
The higher-precision value "kit" has a total of 24 values over each
decade. The common lower-precision value kit has six values (every
fourth, from the 24-value higher-precision range).

The relationships aren't exact - 0.047 would be 0.046415... and
some of the other "traditional" values are even further off of the
geometric curve. But, that's the basics of it.

I imagine that when picking the values which would go in the
lower-precision set, it was easier to just choose the same nominal
values as were used in the higher-precision set, and specify a lower
tolerance (e.g. +/- 10% for a cheap film cap, or +100/-20 for a
'lytic).

I had forgotten that the resistors were valued at some math function.
Did not know the capacitors and inductors were the same, but seems
reasonable.
As pointed out, almost nothing in electronic components is exact for
normal circuits.

 

[Phil Allison]

Jeff Liebermann wrote:

A for electrolytic caps, it seems that the newer ones have a much
shorter life than the old ones did.

Nope. The old ones filtered at 120 Hz. The new caps filter at 100 to
300 KHz. Internal dissipation follows frequency.

** Complete bollocks.

Electro cap dissipation is lower at high frequencies cos the ESR is lower at such frequencies.

The no 1 reason for short lifspan is being sited next to heat sources, like power resistors and heatsinks.

The no 2 reason is bad manufacture by no name brands in China etc.


...... Phil

 

[Carter]

On 2/3/2017 5:16 PM, oldschool@tubes.com wrote:
On Fri, 3 Feb 2017 14:08:37 -0500, Nick Danger <nick@third.eye.net
wrote:

On 2/2/2017 9:13 PM, Jim Mueller wrote:

While tube electronics may survive a nuclear war, it is irrelevant.
There won't be any electricity to run them. The power plants are
controlled by computers. Likewise, having your own generator won't
help
either. Many of the new ones are also semiconductor based, and you
won't
be able to get gas to run them since the pumps at the gas station
are run
by electricity which won't be available. Solar cells are also
semiconductors and the inverters used with them also use
semiconductors.
So, if there is a WW3, don't count on ANYTHING electrical working.


Seeing as you brought up WW3, for those of you that may not know it, a
new president singlehandedly advanced the Doomsday Clock by 30 seconds
just last week. Heck of a job!


Yes, precisely why I feel WW3 is a lot closer and more likely than
before. This has nothing to do with my own political party preferences,
or anything else, just the "person" himself (president). However, lets
NOT get into a political discussion on here. Seems like everywhere on
the internet has turned to politics lately. But I still do not feel
safe, with the current state of the world and the current US president.
It seemed a lot safer before, even though the world in general seems a
lot worse than it was in the last few decades.

On 2/3/2017 5:45 PM, Tom Biasi wrote:

> It's a very complex issue. Your feelings are just that, yours.

Sorry, personal, individual "feelings" has NOTHING to do with moving the
Doomsday Clock ahead. The whole world might take exception, do ya think?

 

[Nick Danger]

On 2/2/2017 9:13 PM, Jim Mueller wrote:

While tube electronics may survive a nuclear war, it is irrelevant.
There won't be any electricity to run them. The power plants are
controlled by computers. Likewise, having your own generator won't help
either. Many of the new ones are also semiconductor based, and you
won't
be able to get gas to run them since the pumps at the gas station are
run
by electricity which won't be available. Solar cells are also
semiconductors and the inverters used with them also use semiconductors.
So, if there is a WW3, don't count on ANYTHING electrical working.

On 2/3/2017 2:08 PM, Nick Danger wrote:

Seeing as you brought up WW3, for those of you that may not know it, a
new president singlehandedly advanced the Doomsday Clock by 30 seconds
just last week. Heck of a job!

On 2/3/2017 4:18 PM, Tom Biasi wrote:

> Get off of it. You lost.

Sorry that you totally missed the point. Losing has NOTHING to do with
it. The current president would be just as great of a danger to the
country and world if he were a Democrat. Creating an additional nuclear
threat in today's unstable world was not the smartest thing to do.

You won -- but what did you win?

A vindictive, vengeful, thin-skinned, unstable*, erratic* person with
his finger on the nuclear button. Sounds like a "win" to me.

NOT!

* BTW, these two words were used by the Wall Street Journal when
describing the current president.

 

On Fri, 03 Feb 2017 16:40:48 -0800, Jeff Liebermann <jeffl@cruzio.com>
wrote:

On Fri, 03 Feb 2017 16:50:33 -0600, oldschool@tubes.com wrote:

I have been reading alot of websites about caps. One of them said the
wax coated ones were less leaky (for moisture), than the old plastic
coated ones. I am referring to the ones called "black beauties", that
have color code bands on them.Yet, back in the early 70's, I knew a guy
who was a retired radio-tv repairman as well as a Ham operator, and he
used to say those "black beauties" were far better than the wax ones.
(as well as the other plastic encased ones with the numbers on them
instead of the color bands).

That's conflicting info. Yet I know that all of them are paper caps.

Nope. The black beauty caps are di film dielectric, which is a
sandwich of mylar and paper. I think they might have been injected
with oil after assembly, but I'm not certain. You must have missed
something in your youth as everyone I knew that was fixing TV's would
break one open to see what was inside.

The preceding caps were bumble bee caps, which were oiled paper
dielectric. The succeeding caps were orange drop caps which are
metalized mylar dielectric.

In my youth, the most common caps I replaced were 'lytics. Next in line
were wax coated tubular paper caps. Only once do I remember replacing a
"black beauty". That was because it had a crack down on side of it,
which tells me that it was likely bad, and if it wasn't, I knew it
needed to be replaced anyhow, before it did absorb moisture and fail.
I did replace a few ceramic disks, but that was bcause I broke them
while unsoldering other stuff.