I have read that electrolytic capacitors are the least reliable
component in power supplies. I have also read that there are
motherboards with solid polymer capacitors. Are there any power
supplies with solid polymer capacitors? Thank you in advance for
all replies.
--
Whenever I hear or think of the song "Great green gobs of greasy
grimey gopher guts" I imagine my cat saying; "That sounds REALLY,
REALLY good. I'll have some of that!"

Daniel Prince wrote:
I have read that electrolytic capacitors are the least reliable
component in power supplies. I have also read that there are
motherboards with solid polymer capacitors. Are there any power
supplies with solid polymer capacitors? Thank you in advance for
all replies.
--
Whenever I hear or think of the song "Great green gobs of greasy
grimey gopher guts" I imagine my cat saying; "That sounds REALLY,
REALLY good. I'll have some of that!"
I've found pc coo;ing to be the most reliable supplier. Not always the
cheapest, but highly reliable.
http://www.pcpower.com/index.html

Daniel Prince wrote:

I have read that electrolytic capacitors are the least reliable
component in power supplies. I have also read that there are
motherboards with solid polymer capacitors. Are there any power
supplies with solid polymer capacitors?

Try the usual places where experts test and disect PSUs (they actually
remove all the power transistors and diodes), like:

www.JonnyGuru.com
www.HardwareSecrets.com
www.HardOCP.com
www.XbitLabs.com

I don' t know if any PC PSUs use polymer/organic/os-con caps
exclusively on the low voltage side (the only place they will be
found, as polymers aren't made for more than about 30-50 volts).
Polymers seem to be found mostly in PSUs with really high power
ratings, but Seasonic makes a 650W with some in it.

More important than having polymers is not having junk brand caps
because junk can fail in just 1-2 years, while good conventional
electrolytics can last a decade, as demonstrated by my vintage 1999
Delta PSUs (only Japanese caps -- none bulging, and the few I sampled
measured in specs for capacitance and ESR last year) and my 33-year-
old TV (only 2 of its Sanyo caps failed, and I love the fake wood
grain).

If I interpret your question correctly, it's meaningless.

Polymer capacitors (ie, plastic-dielectric caps, such as polystryrene,
Mylar, and Teflon) simply cannot produce the huge capacitances in small
spaces that electrolytics can. They cannot easily replace electrolytics.

On Fri, 20 Nov 2009 05:42:16 -0800 "William Sommerwerck"
wrote in Message id:
:

If I interpret your question correctly, it's meaningless.

Polymer capacitors (ie, plastic-dielectric caps, such as polystryrene,
Mylar, and Teflon) simply cannot produce the huge capacitances in small
spaces that electrolytics can. They cannot easily replace electrolytics.


I think the OP is referring to claims such as these:
http://event.asus.com/mb/5000hrs_VRM/

*cough*

If I interpret your question correctly, it's meaningless.

Polymer capacitors (ie, plastic-dielectric caps, such as polystryrene,
Mylar, and Teflon) simply cannot produce the huge capacitances in small
spaces that electrolytics can. They cannot easily replace electrolytics.

I think the OP is referring to claims such as these:
http://event.asus.com/mb/5000hrs_VRM
*cough*

*cough", indeed.

65 degrees C is 149 degrees F. I doubt that the average computer gets much
past 100 degrees. I'm also curious as to how they can get so much
capacitance in such a small space using plastic dielectrics.

I've owned electronic equipment (that I bought myself) for 45 years. The
/only/ piece of equipment that failed because of a bad electrolytic was a
JVC hall synthesizer, which was manufactured with a run of bad caps. (I have
two of these, and the second one also needs cap replacement, though I
haven't gotten around to it.)

It's true that electrolytics are among the least reliable of components --
but they're not /that/ unreliable.

On Nov 20, 6:38*am, "William Sommerwerck"
wrote:
If I interpret your question correctly, it's meaningless.
Polymer capacitors (ie, plastic-dielectric caps, such as polystryrene,
Mylar, and Teflon) simply cannot produce the huge capacitances in small
spaces that electrolytics can. They cannot easily replace electrolytics.
I think the OP is referring to claims such as these:
http://event.asus.com/mb/5000hrs_VRM
*cough*

*cough", indeed.

65 degrees C is 149 degrees F. I doubt that the average computer gets much
past 100 degrees. I'm also curious as to how they can get so much
capacitance in such a small space using plastic dielectrics.

I've owned electronic equipment (that I bought myself) for 45 years. The
/only/ piece of equipment that failed because of a bad electrolytic was a
JVC hall synthesizer, which was manufactured with a run of bad caps. (I have
two of these, and the second one also needs cap replacement, though I
haven't gotten around to it.)

It's true that electrolytics are among the least reliable of components --
but they're not /that/ unreliable.

Yeah they are. I've personally changed a couple thousand - 10x more
than all other components combined - even mechanical wear out parts.

G²

William Sommerwerck wrote:

I've owned electronic equipment (that I bought myself) for 45 years. The
/only/ piece of equipment that failed because of a bad electrolytic was a
JVC hall synthesizer, which was manufactured with a run of bad caps. (I have
two of these, and the second one also needs cap replacement, though I
haven't gotten around to it.)

It's true that electrolytics are among the least reliable of components --
but they're not /that/ unreliable.

Most of the stuff used now in retail products isn't anything close to
the quality of the electrolytics by Spraque, Cornell-Dublier, Mallory,
Nichicon, etc. Here's an analysis comparing the chemistry of some
good Japanese caps to some bad Taiwanese ones:

http://www.dfrsolutions.com/pdfs/200...an-Helmold.pdf

Here's a video card that wasn't much more than a year old when three
of its caps (Sacon brand?) popped, and apparently they weren't
exceptions from the norm:

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2350/...2c511a5a_o.jpg

On Thu, 19 Nov 2009 21:44:36 -0800, Daniel Prince
wrote:

I have read that electrolytic capacitors are the least reliable
component in power supplies.

Very true.

"William Sommerwerck" wrote in message
...
If I interpret your question correctly, it's meaningless.

Polymer capacitors (ie, plastic-dielectric caps, such as polystryrene,
Mylar, and Teflon) simply cannot produce the huge capacitances in small
spaces that electrolytics can. They cannot easily replace electrolytics.

I think the OP is referring to claims such as these:
http://event.asus.com/mb/5000hrs_VRM
*cough*

*cough", indeed.

65 degrees C is 149 degrees F. I doubt that the average computer gets much
past 100 degrees. I'm also curious as to how they can get so much
capacitance in such a small space using plastic dielectrics.

I've owned electronic equipment (that I bought myself) for 45 years. The
/only/ piece of equipment that failed because of a bad electrolytic was a
JVC hall synthesizer, which was manufactured with a run of bad caps. (I
have
two of these, and the second one also needs cap replacement, though I
haven't gotten around to it.)

It's true that electrolytics are among the least reliable of components --
but they're not /that/ unreliable.



Depending on how stressful the position that they are used in - and many
such positions these days *are* - I would have to beg to differ. They really
are /that/ unreliable ...

Arfa

It's true that electrolytics are among the least reliable of
components --
but they're not /that/ unreliable.

Yeah, they are. I've personally changed a couple thousand - 10x more
than all other components combined - even mechanical wear out parts.

Yes, but you're a service technician. I'm talking as an owner.

Depending on how stressful the position that they are used in - and many
such positions these days *are* - I would have to beg to differ. They
really
are /that/ unreliable ...

If that's the case... then why have I had such good luck?

I just remembered another failure -- bypass caps in the video driver board
of my NAD.

On Nov 20, 7:13*pm, "William Sommerwerck"
wrote:
It's true that electrolytics are among the least reliable of
components --
but they're not /that/ unreliable.
Yeah, they are. I've personally changed a couple thousand - 10x
more
than all other components combined - even mechanical wear out
parts.

Yes, but you're a service technician. I'm talking as an owner.

I also replaced a raft of them in some of my personal gear. The WORST
'lytic caps are the surface mount units which fail early and often.
Panasonic FK series are certainly better than OEM parts.

G²

On Thu, 19 Nov 2009 21:44:36 -0800, Daniel Prince
wrote:

I have read that electrolytic capacitors are the least reliable
component in power supplies.

Not exactly. The problem seems to be a mixture of counterfeit
electrolyte in some low-ESR electrolytics, manufacturers using
electrolytics that are operating far too close to their rated working
voltage, and too high a working temperature.

Lifetime on electrolytics is predictable and calculatable:
http://www.edn.com/article/CA6588368.html
http://www.illinoiscapacitor.com/techcenter/lifecalculators.asp
http://powerelectronics.com/mag/power_optimize_electrolytic_capacitor/
If you plug the operating temperature, working voltage, etc of your
favorite motherboard or power supply into the formula, you'll find
fairly short predicted lifetimes. Note that the operating temperature
is NOT the ambient or case temp. When you shove a bunch of ripple
current through a capacitor, it will get hot from the internal
resistance. Measure the temperature with an IR optical thermometer
for a better value.

The counterfeit electrolyte problem is probably what you're seeing on
motherboards. The crud is still in the system even 10 years after the
initial introduction. Some history:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bad_capacitors
http://www.badcaps.net/pages.php?vid=4

I have also read that there are
motherboards with solid polymer capacitors.

Sure. However, they're very difficult to identify without back
tracking the part number or chopping one in half and looking for the
black goo inside. The clue is that they tend to be short and not very
tall, while conventional electrolytics are much taller:
http://www.niccomp.com/NIC1202_InFocus.pdf
http://www.mec-italy.it/pdf/nic/nspzr.pdf

The caps in the photo really are solid polymer caps.
http://www.capacitorsplus.com/whatis.htm

Are there any power
supplies with solid polymer capacitors?

Dunno and too lazy to tear apart a PS and check.

Thank you in advance for
all replies.

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

On Fri, 20 Nov 2009 21:29:31 -0800, Jeff Liebermann
wrote:

The caps in the photo really are solid polymer caps.
http://www.capacitorsplus.com/whatis.htm

Oops, wrong URL. See:
http://www.dslreports.com/forum/r19863881-Solid-Polymer-Capacitor-Failure

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

William Sommerwerck wrote:
If I interpret your question correctly, it's meaningless.

Polymer capacitors (ie, plastic-dielectric caps, such as polystryrene,
Mylar, and Teflon) simply cannot produce the huge capacitances in small
spaces that electrolytics can. They cannot easily replace electrolytics.



How about ceramic caps?

--
@~@ Might, Courage, Vision, SINCERITY.
/ v \ Simplicity is Beauty! May the Force and Farce be with you!
/( _ )\ (x86_64 Ubuntu 9.10) Linux 2.6.31.6
^ ^ 15:26:01 up 8 days 4:31 1 user load average: 1.00 1.01 1.03
�借貸! ��騙! ��交! �打交! �打劫! �自殺! 請考慮綜� (CSSA):
http://www.swd.gov.hk/tc/index/site_...sub_addressesa

"William Sommerwerck" wrote in message
...
Depending on how stressful the position that they are used in - and many
such positions these days *are* - I would have to beg to differ. They
really
are /that/ unreliable ...

If that's the case... then why have I had such good luck?

I just remembered another failure -- bypass caps in the video driver board
of my NAD.



Just that, I suspect - good luck, coupled maybe, with the fact that you buy
equipment from the 'better' end of the market which has, at least in the
past, tended to be designed to a better spec with a few cents more spent on
components. These days, however, even that may not continue your run of good
luck. I see equipment on a daily basis coming from what you would normally
call 'reputable' manufacturers, that are just badged items of Chinese design
/ manufacture. Even some of their *better* stuff now borders on a
'con-trick' in terms of design quality and quality of components used.

To some extent, I don't think it is all the capacitors' fault, to be honest.
The places that electrolytics are found in today's equipments, tend to be
very stressful to them, and when you couple in other factors such as the
international law on pain of death that requires designers to place electros
as close as is physically possible to anything that runs hot, and then to
mount the power supply or whatever board they're on, upside down in the
corner of the equipment with the least airflow, it's actually not that
surprising that these devices exhibit such *apparent* unreliability. I also
suspect that the eco-fanaticism that has given us lead-free solder doesn't
help either, as the elevated process temperatures required to get this
hateful stuff to stick to anything other than itself, is known to not do
some components a lot of good, and I'm sure that, no matter how
comparitively brief these additional early-life heat stresses on the
electros are, they have to be at least another potentially destructive
factor to consider in terms of long life and reliability ...

Arfa

Jeff Liebermann wrote:

The caps in the photo really are solid polymer caps.

http://www.dslreports.com/forum/r19863881-Solid-Polymer-Capacitor-Failure

The caps in the photo really are NOT solid polymer caps.

They're regular Sacon brand conventional wet electrolytics, only
housed in the same kind of packaging normally used for polymer caps.
Even some of the replies in the message thread where that photo is
from mention this. Real polymer caps, except Fujitsu hybrids, don't
have explosion rupture cutouts, unlike the caps in the photo -- notice
the "K" rupture cutout on top of each cap.

I also suspect that the eco-fanaticism that has given us lead-free
solder doesn't help either, as the elevated process temperatures
required to get this hateful stuff to stick to anything other than
itself, is known to not do some components a lot of good, and I'm
sure that, no matter how comparitively brief these additional
early-life heat stresses on the electros are, they have to be at
least another potentially destructive factor to consider in terms
of long life and reliability ...

I wonder what's going to happen when these lead-free joints start failing en
masse... I can just see a class-action suit against the European Economic
Community.

I just remembered another "failure"...

Several years ago I bought a KLH Audio (sadly, now out of business) powered
woofer, which I tossed in the garage. A week ago I finally got around to
pulling it out and connecting to the LFE output of my BD player. (This was
intended mostly to keep the main speakers from being overdriven.)

When I turned it on and up its gain (that's "syllepsis"), it made "pumping"
noises, all on its own. After a few minutes of "charging up", this went
away. It would seem that after a few years of non-use, one or more bypass
caps had deformed, allowing instability.

I used to own several KLH Model Eight radios, and though they were 45 years
old, none needed a capacitor replacement.

On Sat, 21 Nov 2009 04:22:04 -0800, William Sommerwerck rearranged some
electrons to say:

I also suspect that the eco-fanaticism that has given us lead-free
solder doesn't help either, as the elevated process temperatures
required to get this hateful stuff to stick to anything other than
itself, is known to not do some components a lot of good, and I'm sure
that, no matter how comparitively brief these additional early-life
heat stresses on the electros are, they have to be at least another
potentially destructive factor to consider in terms of long life and
reliability ...

I wonder what's going to happen when these lead-free joints start
failing en masse... I can just see a class-action suit against the
European Economic Community.

It not just that... go search for "tin whiskers". We have nothing to
fear from the machines taking over, they will all fail a long time before
humans do.

On Sat, 21 Nov 2009 15:26:08 +0800, Man-wai Chang to The Door (28800bps)
rearranged some electrons to say:

William Sommerwerck wrote:
If I interpret your question correctly, it's meaningless.

Polymer capacitors (ie, plastic-dielectric caps, such as polystryrene,
Mylar, and Teflon) simply cannot produce the huge capacitances in small
spaces that electrolytics can. They cannot easily replace
electrolytics.



How about ceramic caps?

You cannot get large capacitance values in a small package size with a
ceramic dielectric.

Arfa Daily wrote:

To some extent, I don't think it is all the capacitors' fault, to be honest.
The places that electrolytics are found in today's equipments, tend to be
very stressful to them, when you couple in other factors such as the
international law on pain of death that requires designers to place electros
as close as is physically possible to anything that runs hot, and then to
mount the power supply or whatever board they're on, upside down in the
corner of the equipment with the least airflow, it's actually not that
surprising that these devices exhibit such *apparent* unreliability.

So why do the good brands tolerate those conditions so well while the
same old junk brands don't? And contrary to what you say, most of the
caps aren't in hot spots but are running at under 60 Celcius

I also suspect that the eco-fanaticism that has given us lead-free solder doesn't
help either, as the elevated process temperatures required to get this
hateful stuff to stick to anything other than itself, is known to not do some
components a lot of good,

But the problems with junk capacitors showed up way before the switch
to lead-free solder, and only one of my RoHS mobos has so far popped a
cap, probably more because it's newer (late 2007), not because it's
better, but it has the same OST brand junk caps.

The real fault lies with the makers of junk, period.

On Sat, 21 Nov 2009 02:07:39 -0800 (PST), "larry moe 'n curly"
wrote:

Jeff Liebermann wrote:
The caps in the photo really are solid polymer caps:
http://www.dslreports.com/forum/r19863881-Solid-Polymer-Capacitor-Failure

The caps in the photo really are NOT solid polymer caps.

Ok, I stand corrected.

They're regular Sacon brand conventional wet electrolytics, only
housed in the same kind of packaging normally used for polymer caps.

Groan. So much for my method of using the case style to recognize the
difference between electrolytic types.

Even some of the replies in the message thread where that photo is
from mention this. Real polymer caps, except Fujitsu hybrids, don't
have explosion rupture cutouts, unlike the caps in the photo -- notice
the "K" rupture cutout on top of each cap.

So that's the trick to recognizing the difference. Thanks.

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

"larry moe 'n curly" wrote in message
...


Arfa Daily wrote:

To some extent, I don't think it is all the capacitors' fault, to be
honest.
The places that electrolytics are found in today's equipments, tend to be
very stressful to them, when you couple in other factors such as the
international law on pain of death that requires designers to place
electros
as close as is physically possible to anything that runs hot, and then
to
mount the power supply or whatever board they're on, upside down in the
corner of the equipment with the least airflow, it's actually not that
surprising that these devices exhibit such *apparent* unreliability.

So why do the good brands tolerate those conditions so well while the
same old junk brands don't? And contrary to what you say, most of the
caps aren't in hot spots but are running at under 60 Celcius


So, what exactly are you saying ... ? That better quality components
tolerate abuse more readily than cheapo crap ones ? Very profound ... I
don't think that is actually at odds with anything I said, is it ? I seem to
recall in my original reply to William that part of the reason that he may
have had good luck in regard to electrolytic failure, is the fact that he
has tended in the past to buy better quality equipment where the
manufacturers have been prepared to "design to a better spec with a few
cents more spent on components ..."

As far as your contention that most of the caps that fail are running at
under 60 deg and are not in hotspots, that may be true if you are talking
just mobos, which are a bit of a special case in that apart from all the
problems that have been caused in the past with boards built using caps with
fake electrolyte, the caps that fail are all decouplers on constant DC
rails, and are rated voltage wise pretty close to the continuous voltages
that are applied to them. Even accepting that, many of the decoupling caps
that do fail on mobos, are sited very close (by nature of the job that they
have to do) to LSIs which *do* run very hot.

The caps that I am talking more about in general, are on switch mode power
supplies, where they are subjected to huge stresses from the high frequency
pulse currents that they have to endure, and the self heating caused by this
in all but the most expensive types, very specifically specced for use in
these positions. Further, the ones that fail most regularly are, without
doubt, the ones positioned close to heatsinks. I replace hundreds every year
in the course of my daily work. Although the caps positioned on switchers
are by far the most common ones to fail, they are by no means the only ones.
I also replace many in other circuits, for instance audio output stages,
where failed ones are almost invariably close to heatsinks.



I also suspect that the eco-fanaticism that has given us lead-free solder
doesn't
help either, as the elevated process temperatures required to get this
hateful stuff to stick to anything other than itself, is known to not do
some
components a lot of good,

But the problems with junk capacitors showed up way before the switch
to lead-free solder, and only one of my RoHS mobos has so far popped a
cap, probably more because it's newer (late 2007), not because it's
better, but it has the same OST brand junk caps.


I don't dispute that junk capacitors have been failing for a long time, but
that is for the very good reason that they are ... well ... junk, not to put
too fine a point on it. However, if we take junk out of the equation, anyone
directly involved at the sharp end of electronic service will tell you, as I
do now, that over the last five years or so, the incidence of electrolytic
failure has increased a lot with the increased use of switchmode power
supplies in all sorts of consumer equipment, and the unstoppable rise of
Chinese designed and manufactured equipment, where many good design
practices, such as ensuring adequate ventilation, are not observed on cost
grounds. As to whether the increased process temperatures of lead free
soldering has had any effect on long term reliability of electros, I really
don't know for sure. I could be wrong, but it seems to me that over the last
couple of years, the incidence of electrolytic failure has increased even
more than the trend of the last 5 or 7 years, so it was just a thought in
that this was something else that had changed in that timeframe, and may
have been a contributory factor

The real fault lies with the makers of junk, period.


Some of the fault lies with the makers of junk, agreed. But not all, by any
means.

Arfa

Arfa Daily wrote:
As far as your contention that most of the caps that fail are running
at under 60 deg and are not in hotspots, that may be true if you are
talking just mobos, which are a bit of a special case in that apart
from all the problems that have been caused in the past with boards
built using caps with fake electrolyte, the caps that fail are all
decouplers on constant DC rails, and are rated voltage wise pretty
close to the continuous voltages that are applied to them. Even
accepting that, many of the decoupling caps that do fail on mobos, are
sited very close (by nature of the job that they have to do) to LSIs
which *do* run very hot.

The caps that I am talking more about in general, are on switch mode
power supplies, where they are subjected to huge stresses from the
high frequency pulse currents that they have to endure, and the self
heating caused by this in all but the most expensive types, very
specifically specced for use in these positions. Further, the ones
that fail most regularly are, without doubt, the ones positioned close
to heatsinks. I replace hundreds every year in the course of my daily
work. Although the caps positioned on switchers are by far the most
common ones to fail, they are by no means the only ones. I also
replace many in other circuits, for instance audio output stages,
where failed ones are almost invariably close to heatsinks.

Arfa

I'm in complete agreement with Arfa. Internal heating caused by the
ever increasing switch mode power supply frequencies is the most common
cause of failure. High external temperatures don't help one bit since
it reduces the components ability to get rid of internally generated
heat.

A place where I'm finding more and more capacitor failures is in the
memory supply voltage regulator circuits, sometimes causing CPU failure
in addition to memory damage.

--
Best Regards:
Baron.

On Sun, 22 Nov 2009 17:26:02 -0000, "Arfa Daily"
wrote:

As far as your contention that most of the caps that fail are running at
under 60 deg and are not in hotspots, that may be true if you are talking
just mobos,

Generally true. This is old (2005) but the best I could find:
http://www.bigbruin.com/reviews05/nf4thermals/index.php?file=1
6 pages. The hottest they found was 70C and that was in an odd corner
of the MB for no obvious reason.

More of the same:
http://www.bigbruin.com/reviews/thermalimages/
However, these show some chips getting up to 99C. Ouch.

fake electrolyte, the caps that fail are all decouplers on constant DC
rails, and are rated voltage wise pretty close to the continuous voltages
that are applied to them.

Worse. The caps are not on constant DC. There are huge ripple
currents going through these caps at they heroically try to filter the
DC voltage. You wouldn't need low-ESR caps were it not for the
heating caused by the internal resistance and this ripple current.
It's even worse in power supplies.

However, if we take junk out of the equation, anyone
directly involved at the sharp end of electronic service will tell you, as I
do now, that over the last five years or so, the incidence of electrolytic
failure has increased a lot with the increased use of switchmode power
supplies in all sorts of consumer equipment, and the unstoppable rise of
Chinese designed and manufactured equipment, where many good design
practices, such as ensuring adequate ventilation, are not observed on cost
grounds.

Yeah, but along with the general decrease in quality, there has been
proportional decrease in price. It's price that driving the decline
in quality. Running the operating temperature and voltages near the
point of failure is one way to save on costs.

As to whether the increased process temperatures of lead free
soldering has had any effect on long term reliability of electros, I really
don't know for sure. I could be wrong, but it seems to me that over the last
couple of years, the incidence of electrolytic failure has increased even
more than the trend of the last 5 or 7 years, so it was just a thought in
that this was something else that had changed in that timeframe, and may
have been a contributory factor

Good point. I have no idea if there is a correlation but it seems
worthy of investigation.

The real fault lies with the makers of junk, period.
Some of the fault lies with the makers of junk, agreed. But not all, by any
means.

They wouldn't make junk if consumers didn't demand low prices. There
are usually "premium" versions of almost any consumer product, but few
can afford the price. (If you want quality, be prepared to pay for
it). Personally, I prefer to blame the government for literally
everything, but maybe not this time.



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

Arfa Daily wrote:

"larry moe 'n curly" wrote in message
...

To some extent, I don't think it is all the capacitors' fault, to be honest.
The places that electrolytics are found in today's equipments, tend to be
very stressful to them, when you couple in other factors such as the
international law on pain of death that requires designers to place
electros as close as is physically possible to anything that runs hot,
and then to mount the power supply or whatever board they're on,
upside down in the corner of the equipment with the least airflow,
it's actually not that surprising that these devices exhibit such
*apparent* unreliability.

So why do the good brands tolerate those conditions so well while the
same old junk brands don't? And contrary to what you say, most of the
caps aren't in hot spots but are running at under 60 Celcius

So, what exactly are you saying ... ? That better quality components
tolerate abuse more readily than cheapo crap ones ? Very profound ... I
don't think that is actually at odds with anything I said, is it ?

I seem to recall in my original reply to William that part of the reason that he may
have had good luck in regard to electrolytic failure, is the fact that he
has tended in the past to buy better quality equipment where the
manufacturers have been prepared to "design to a better spec with a few
cents more spent on components ..."

That better quality components tolerate abuse more readily than cheapo
crap ones ? Very profound....

I'm just saying that low quality is probably a worse problem than the
heat (power boards for LCDs are sparse) or high currents. The usual
suspects have the same specs as the good components do, at least when
new, and their lifespan specs are also identical.

Jeff Liebermann wrote:

On Thu, 19 Nov 2009 21:44:36 -0800, Daniel Prince
wrote:

I have also read that there are
motherboards with solid polymer capacitors.

Sure. However, they're very difficult to identify without back
tracking the part number or chopping one in half and looking for the
black goo inside. The clue is that they tend to be short and not very
tall, while conventional electrolytics are much taller:

Both Asus and Gigabyte make motherboards that they claim use all
solid polymer capacitors. I doubt that they would lie about
something like that.
--
I don't understand why they make gourmet cat foods. I have
known many cats in my life and none of them were gourmets.
They were all gourmands!

Jeff Liebermann wrote:

Yeah, but along with the general decrease in quality, there has been
proportional decrease in price. It's price that driving the decline
in quality. Running the operating temperature and voltages near the
point of failure is one way to save on costs.


They wouldn't make junk if consumers didn't demand low prices. There
are usually "premium" versions of almost any consumer product, but few
can afford the price. (If you want quality, be prepared to pay for
it).

How much would the retail cost of a computer power supply or
motherboard etc. increase if they were made to last twice as long?
Five times as long? Ten times as long?
--
I don't understand why they make gourmet cat foods. I have
known many cats in my life and none of them were gourmets.
They were all gourmands!

"William Sommerwerck" wrote:

If I interpret your question correctly, it's meaningless.

Polymer capacitors (ie, plastic-dielectric caps, such as polystryrene,
Mylar, and Teflon) simply cannot produce the huge capacitances in small
spaces that electrolytics can. They cannot easily replace electrolytics.

How much bigger (in volume) are polymer capacitors than
electrolytics for the same value?

Are there any types of capacitors with substantially better life
than electrolytics that are small enough to replace electrolytics?
If so, how do they compare in price?
--
I don't understand why they make gourmet cat foods. I have
known many cats in my life and none of them were gourmets.
They were all gourmands!

On Tue, 24 Nov 2009 00:51:02 -0800, Daniel Prince
wrote:

Jeff Liebermann wrote:

Yeah, but along with the general decrease in quality, there has been
proportional decrease in price. It's price that driving the decline
in quality. Running the operating temperature and voltages near the
point of failure is one way to save on costs.


They wouldn't make junk if consumers didn't demand low prices. There
are usually "premium" versions of almost any consumer product, but few
can afford the price. (If you want quality, be prepared to pay for
it).

How much would the retail cost of a computer power supply or
motherboard etc. increase if they were made to last twice as long?
Five times as long? Ten times as long?

The usual markup from cost to sales to retail prices is about 4.5
times. It's somewhat lower for commodity electronics, perhaps 3.5
times. It's somewhat higher for newly introduced products, where the
R&D costs need to be recovered quickly. I'll call it about 4 times so
I can do the math without a calculator. That means that for every $1
increase in parts cost, Joe Consumer gets to pay out $4 at the cash
register.

The problems start when there are competing products. I call it the
Walmart effect. Walmart, Kmart, and many online vendors specialize in
selling solely on the basis of price. If there are two competing
products, differing only a few pennies in selling price, *ALL* their
orders will go to the lower priced product, with nothing to the higher
priced equivalent. Walmart aggravates the effect by setting the price
at some artificial low level, and challenging their vendors to meet
their price goal. If they fail, then they either take a loss selling
to Walmart, or all the business goes to the competition.

Much as I don't like it, such cut throat pricing practices are
becoming the norm in computer sales. If I were to design and produce
a premium and long life computer product, I can forget about the mass
market, volume dealers, and most direct sales channels. I would have
to rely on distribution and probably heavy advertising, which
dramatically raise my costs. Do you think a $50 Monster Cable power
strip is really any better than a $5 hardware store equivalent? It is
a little better built, but the rest of the price tag is distribution
and advertising.

Incidentally, if you want to see premium electronics, the audiophile
market is a good place. Need a $1,000 premium power cord?
http://www.audioadvisor.com/prodinfo.asp?number=KKPK14PAL
That's what it takes to sell a premium product.



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

In article ,
Daniel Prince wrote:

How much would the retail cost of a computer power supply or
motherboard etc. increase if they were made to last twice as long?
Five times as long? Ten times as long?

I don't know the specific numbers for those multipliers.

However, I've seen some motherboards for sale recently which proudly
stated that they use all solid-polymer caps in their CPU power supply
circuit. They come at some price-premium but it didn't appear to be
outrageous.

--
Dave Platt AE6EO
Friends of Jade Warrior home page: http://www.radagast.org/jade-warrior
I do _not_ wish to receive unsolicited commercial email, and I will
boycott any company which has the gall to send me such ads!

Jeff Liebermann wrote:

The problems start when there are competing products. I call it the
Walmart effect. Walmart, Kmart, and many online vendors specialize in
selling solely on the basis of price. If there are two competing
products, differing only a few pennies in selling price, *ALL* their
orders will go to the lower priced product, with nothing to the higher
priced equivalent. Walmart aggravates the effect by setting the price
at some artificial low level, and challenging their vendors to meet
their price goal.

It seems to me that there is a good opportunity here for other
retailers. If a retailer sold only electronic goods that were well
made and well designed, they could sell them for ten to thirty
percent more than the junk sold at Walmart and Kmart.

I think many consumers would be willing to pay a little extra for
devices that would probably last four to ten times as long. This
would be especially true if they had two (or more) cheap-junk brand
devices fail.

The retailer could require vendors to only use non-junk capacitors
with voltage ratings at least three times the voltage the capacitors
would be exposed to. They could also require that no part of the
device ever get more than 30 degrees warmer than the temperature of
the room it is used in.

The devices could have much longer warranties and the store could
advertise itself as "The quality store". I do not think this would
require excessive advertising, especially after the first few years.
--
I don't understand why they make gourmet cat foods. I have
known many cats in my life and none of them were gourmets.
They were all gourmands!

On Mon, 30 Nov 2009 08:21:48 -0800, Daniel Prince
wrote:

Jeff Liebermann wrote:

The problems start when there are competing products. I call it the
Walmart effect. Walmart, Kmart, and many online vendors specialize in
selling solely on the basis of price. If there are two competing
products, differing only a few pennies in selling price, *ALL* their
orders will go to the lower priced product, with nothing to the higher
priced equivalent. Walmart aggravates the effect by setting the price
at some artificial low level, and challenging their vendors to meet
their price goal.

It seems to me that there is a good opportunity here for other
retailers. If a retailer sold only electronic goods that were well
made and well designed, they could sell them for ten to thirty
percent more than the junk sold at Walmart and Kmart.

There are such businesses. However, they are small and the number is
shrinking. I've lived in the same area for about 35 years and have
observed that number of such retailers decreasing. Few have grown in
size over the years, which is a good indication of their viability. I
discussed the quality and service issues with the former owner of one
of these businesses. He noted that competition from the "big box"
stores was a problem, but that there were usually those that were
willing to buy from a locally owned business for a variety of reasons.
However, with the introduction of online shopping, the situation
changed. Online vendors offer the same premium products, but without
the overhead inherent in maintaining a retail store. Some online
vendors don't even have an inventory and simply drop ship from the
factory or a fulfillment house. The result is that consumers that
know exactly what they want, will tend to buy online. Much as I like
the idea of supporting a local business, it's difficult to justify
when there's as much as a 30% difference in price.

I don't know anything about Walmart, but Kmart experimented with
stocking premium products next to the usual cheap junk about 10 years
ago. The idea was to give shoppers an expanded choice. At the time,
I took one look and predicted disaster. For all I know, it may have
been intentional. What Kmart did was mix the junk and the quality
together on the same isles. You could tell the difference by the name
and price, but otherwise they were indistinguishable. Unfortunately,
Joe Sixpack couldn't tell the difference despite national advertising
indicating that Kmart was now selling "name brand merchandise". The
idea bombed. It might have worked if Kmart had implemented some form
of "product differentiation" where the distinction between cheap junk
and name brand was more apparent. There were also other factors, such
as consumers tend to buy at retail stores that match their buying
habits. Most shoppers would not intentionally shop at a "nothing but
the cheapest" store, if they were looking for quality or brand name.

I think many consumers would be willing to pay a little extra for
devices that would probably last four to ten times as long. This
would be especially true if they had two (or more) cheap-junk brand
devices fail.

I'm sure there are those out there. Whether they can support a retail
business is debatable. I spend far too much time at the local
electronics recycler:
http://www.greybearscomputers.org
I literally cry (for real) when I see the stuff that gets tossed. Most
of it can easily be fixed. Much of it is still working, but only
needs a cleaning. Grey Bears has a minimal retail store to sell some
of the refurbished equipment, but it barely breaks even. The only
buyers are other dealers and hackers both of whom know exactly what
they're buying and what it's worth. Joe Sixpack and bargain hunters
are usually lost.

If you want to see how someone lives, just look at their trash. You'll
learn more about their buying habits from the trash than from anything
you see in their house or business. It's the same with eWaste. It's
not unusual to see a complete multifunction inkjet
printer/scanner/copier/fax, in the box with the disks and docs, tossed
because it "died". Closer inspection finds that someone forgot to
remove the plastic tape from the inkjet cartridge.

The buying habits of Joe Sixpack are evident (to me). He assumes that
electronics will have a short lifetime and treats it accordingly. As
soon as something gets a bit old, he'll be in line at the local
Walmart or Cosco for a replacement. He has no technical abilities and
is unable to distinguish between quality and crap. I've seen this
first hand as some of my more astute friends enlist my help to decide
which HD TV is appropriate. It takes me at least an hour or two of
reading reviews and looking at the FCC ID site, to make a
determination. Joe Sixpack might spend a few minutes with a sales
droid.

Bottom line: You're giving far too much credit to the average
consumers abilities to benefit from long life products.

The retailer could require vendors to only use non-junk capacitors
with voltage ratings at least three times the voltage the capacitors
would be exposed to. They could also require that no part of the
device ever get more than 30 degrees warmer than the temperature of
the room it is used in.

Welcome to Realityland. A former ladyfriend was a buyer for a large
department store. The problem is that models change faster than the
order cycle. Coupled with just-in-time delivery, what was ordered by
the buyer is often quite different from what was ordered. The stores
actually benefit from this practice as they always want the "latest
model" and not it's predecessor, which was on the original order. If
you compare the original orders, with the stocking inventory, my guess
is that perhaps 30% is the same. If they reject the delivery, then
they have nothing to sell. The usual compromise is that the
manufacturer is required to accept all returns, no matter the reason.
That's suppose to give them an incentive not to ship junk.

The devices could have much longer warranties and the store could
advertise itself as "The quality store". I do not think this would
require excessive advertising, especially after the first few years.

More reality. The name of the game in big retail is turnover. My
guess(tm) is that the TV section at Costco is expected to turnover
*ALL* their inventory in perhaps 60 days. Warehouse and floor space
are expensive. If products just sit there, there's no revenue and the
space becomes even more expensive. This is one reason why stores have
"clearance" sales. They want the space to be used for products that
move, not for storage.

You can't run a quality based retail business, selling long life
established products, in large quantities, that way. Reliability
takes some time to produce. You can just toss in more expensive caps
and expect the overall reliability to instantly improve. There may be
other parts that are running at the bitter edge of premature failure.
By the time the bugs get shaken out of a production product, the next
two or three replacement models will be in the production pipeline.
The result is that old problems with older products never really get
fixed. They get fixed in the design of the replacements. As a
result, most products are permanently stuck at Rev 1.0. If you're
going to sell quality, the inventory turnover will need to be
stretched.

The good part about all this is that problem products just don't last
very long. Soon after the problems are found, the replacements appear
in the stores. The replacements have all the latest features, use all
the latest designs, and follow all the latest fashion trends. Since
inventory is minimal, the prices tend to be low. This is what
consumers really want; features and price. Quality is assumed or
tolerated.

Back to the original topic... I think there will be widespread use of
solid polymer caps in place of small electrolytics despite the price.
However, it's not because of some mythical search for an improvement
in quality. It's because the crappy counterfeit electrolyte is still
in the system now 10 years after it was first introduced and shows no
indication of going away. Respected manufacturers are starting to see
their reputation go down the drain over these parts and are probably
looking for a fix, which solid polymer caps offer. If they advertise
the new and improved replacement, they can also justify the increased
retail cost.


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

Daniel Prince wrote:

Jeff Liebermann wrote:

The problems start when there are competing products. I call it the
Walmart effect. Walmart, Kmart, and many online vendors specialize in
selling solely on the basis of price. If there are two competing
products, differing only a few pennies in selling price, *ALL* their
orders will go to the lower priced product, with nothing to the higher
priced equivalent. Walmart aggravates the effect by setting the price
at some artificial low level, and challenging their vendors to meet
their price goal.

It seems to me that there is a good opportunity here for other
retailers. If a retailer sold only electronic goods that were well
made and well designed, they could sell them for ten to thirty
percent more than the junk sold at Walmart and Kmart.


Maybe ten times as much, if you are selling real quality.


I think many consumers would be willing to pay a little extra for
devices that would probably last four to ten times as long. This
would be especially true if they had two (or more) cheap-junk brand
devices fail.


Have you ever designed consumer electronics, or worked in electronics
manufacturing? have you ever tried to buy top quality components, or
run 100% incoming inspection. It isn't cheap.


The retailer could require vendors to only use non-junk capacitors
with voltage ratings at least three times the voltage the capacitors
would be exposed to.


You don't understand much about electrolytics, do you? The ESR goes
up with the voltage rating, along with the physical size. That requires
a different board layout, which raises the resistance & inductance of
the copper traces, which causes more problems. It becomes harder to
filter the ripple current from the CPU power supply, causing more
erratic behavior.

It is the ripple current through the electrolytic that degrades it,
to the point of failure. All of this is the reason that the
electrolytics for the CPU are so close to the CPU socket. Your method
would cost more, and have a shorter life.


They could also require that no part of the device ever get more
than 30 degrees warmer than the temperature of the room it is
used in.


That's a joke? Even mainframe computers with dedicated air
conditioning ran hotter than that.


The devices could have much longer warranties and the store could
advertise itself as "The quality store". I do not think this would
require excessive advertising, especially after the first few years.


You can call yourself whatever you want, but you are not going to get
much quality improvement for a 30% (retail) cost increase.


--
The movie 'Deliverance' isn't a documentary!

On Mon, 30 Nov 2009 12:09:10 -0800, Jeff Liebermann wrote:

-snip-

The good part about all this is that problem products just don't last
very long. Soon after the problems are found, the replacements appear
in the stores. The replacements have all the latest features, use all
the latest designs, and follow all the latest fashion trends.

... and are cursed with brand new problems.

"Daniel Prince" wrote in message
...
Jeff Liebermann wrote:

The problems start when there are competing products. I call it the
Walmart effect. Walmart, Kmart, and many online vendors specialize in
selling solely on the basis of price. If there are two competing
products, differing only a few pennies in selling price, *ALL* their
orders will go to the lower priced product, with nothing to the higher
priced equivalent. Walmart aggravates the effect by setting the price
at some artificial low level, and challenging their vendors to meet
their price goal.

It seems to me that there is a good opportunity here for other
retailers. If a retailer sold only electronic goods that were well
made and well designed, they could sell them for ten to thirty
percent more than the junk sold at Walmart and Kmart.

I think many consumers would be willing to pay a little extra for
devices that would probably last four to ten times as long. This
would be especially true if they had two (or more) cheap-junk brand
devices fail.

The retailer could require vendors to only use non-junk capacitors
with voltage ratings at least three times the voltage the capacitors
would be exposed to. They could also require that no part of the
device ever get more than 30 degrees warmer than the temperature of
the room it is used in.

The devices could have much longer warranties and the store could
advertise itself as "The quality store". I do not think this would
require excessive advertising, especially after the first few years.
--
I don't understand why they make gourmet cat foods. I have
known many cats in my life and none of them were gourmets.
They were all gourmands!

I do service work for several retailers of 'quality' consumer electronics,
and all are having a hard time of it. Their only customers now are those who
can genuinely afford the stuff. The others who aspired to being owners, and
saved their hard-earned for however long in order to enable them to become
owners, are long gone, with whatever spare money they have, going to keeping
a roof over their heads, and putting food on the table. Times is 'ard, my
friend ...

As I repair the stuff for a living, you would think that I would know
better, but even I buy what I know to ultimately be junk. Just a few weeks
ago, I bought a DVD player to replace the 'good' Tosh that I had owned for
some time. It came from the local food supermarket, and was some kind of
unknown junk name. But you know what ? It plays any disc region that you put
in it, any home burn disc type and format both CD and DVD, came with a
complete set of connecting cables, and even a full function credit card
remote handset. And what did it cost ? Fifteen quid, that's what. And it has
a year's full warranty. Even if it failed within the warranty period, it's
just a throw away item. Go buy another. Half a dozen pints of beer ...

Arfa

On 30 Nov 2009 22:12:19 GMT, Allodoxaphobia
wrote:

On Mon, 30 Nov 2009 12:09:10 -0800, Jeff Liebermann wrote:

-snip-

The good part about all this is that problem products just don't last
very long. Soon after the problems are found, the replacements appear
in the stores. The replacements have all the latest features, use all
the latest designs, and follow all the latest fashion trends.

... and are cursed with brand new problems.

If you find yourself cursed, hire an exorcist.

Yep, we're all doomed. I'm looking at Rev 1.0 of a just released
consumer electronics product. All of the ASIC's inside are custom.
Most of the glue chips didn't exist 6 months ago. The date code on
some of the parts are about 2 months ago. The plastic doesn't quite
fit. The firmware is a bugfest with the latest update scheduled to
hit their web pile real-soon-now. The user interface resembles a
student effort which will fail any usability test. No, I won't
disclose the product. My point is that if you want the absolute
latest, you're going to have to tolerate a certain level of rush to
market, complete with bugs.

Most products are NOT revolutionary. They evolve based on previous
products or are stolen from the competition. The problem is that as
one product is manufactured, there anywhere from one to three future
replacement versions of the same product somewhere in the design
cycle. With such a derangement, even if the problems were known on
the original product, the fixes will not appear in the updates or
replacements until after one to three hardware revisions.

However, there's hope. With hardware bugs, it's not unusual to use
software and firmware updates to work around the bugs. Where this
goes awry is when vendors decide that it's not worth supporting
products that they no longer sell, making old bugs permanent. I give
great credit to some manufacturers (such as Linksys) for producing
firmware updates for products or versions that haven't been sold for
many years.

The point is that bugs and glitches are inevitable with rush to
market, but can be dealt with given sufficient time. It's the
sufficient time that's really the problem. Many suppliers of retail
products are sufficiently isolated from the retail sale that they have
no real interest in supporting end users, much less even identifying
themselves. By the time a complaint dribbles back down the supply
chain, it's usually lost. If it does arrive, it usually lands on the
very bottom of the priority pile, or is so late that the next release
or model of the product is in production making it too late to do
anything about the old product.

Even if the factory has a long term delivery and release contract,
there's still a problem. Features and functions get added faster
than bugs get fixed. The result is a feature infested but seriously
buggy product that never seems to get fixed. Most manufacturers
recognize this and compensate by slowing down the development cycle
enough to do minimal testing, debugging, and damage control.

Unfortunately, not much can be done if defective or counterfeit parts
are used. Incidentally, counterfeit components and products are a
serious problem and involve far more than just low-ESR capacitors. I
had a series of motherboards fail due to bulging capacitors. There
were about 15 machines involved. Only 5 of them had bad caps. I
removed some caps from both the good and bad boards and tried
determine if there was a measurable difference. Yep. The ESR was
radically different. Yet, the package, labeling, color, coining, and
everything about the caps were identical. I could not tell the
difference visually. What this tells me is that there are still some
bad caps mixed in with good caps in the manufacturers inventory. It
may only be one bad reel of caps among hundreds, but it only takes a
few caps to trash a product. It's also possible that the capacitor
manufacturers are shipping old inventory in order to make a fast
dollar. Hard to tell from here.

What I find amusing is asking friends and customers how long they
expect some consumer electronics device to last (with some repair).
The older ones expect their TV to last as long as their hand wired
1960's Zenith TV. 20 to 30 years would be typical. Younger buyers,
that have had some experience with contemporary product lifetimes will
usually say 5 to 10 years at best, as if this was considered normal.

Quality, features, price. Pick any two.



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