From: "Frank Bemelman"
References: <firstname.lastname@example.org> <email@example.com>
Subject: Re: maximum reverse voltage allowed on electrolytic caps?
Date: Wed, 13 Nov 2002 20:21:17 +0100
X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2600.0000
Organization: EuroNet Internet
NNTP-Posting-Date: 13 Nov 2002 19:24:08 GMT
"Jim Thompson" schreef in bericht
> On Wed, 13 Nov 2002 18:53:19 +0100,
> "Frank Bemelman" ,
> In Newsgroup: sci.electronics.design,
> Article: <firstname.lastname@example.org>,
> Entitled: "maximum reverse voltage allowed on electrolytic caps?",
> Wrote the following:
> |I always assumed that, let's say, a few 100mV reverse voltage
> |doesn't matter, but is this a correct assumption ?
> AlumiLytics for sure; but Tantalums... they can be cantankerous and go
> off like fire crackers ;-)
But if the circuit can't supply a number of amps, nothing will explode
of course. You're saying that a tantalium could develop undesireable
I wondered about this, because in the 'linear power supply noise questions'
thread, the OP wanted to avoid a polarized cap in his feedback divider,
AC-coupled to ground as it was. In such a circuit there is 50% chance of
a very minor reverse voltage, not to worry about, i'd say.
BTW, nice word, cantankerous. I like the ring of that.
(remove 'x' & .invalid when sending email)