Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: [midatlanticretro] Re: Reforming Capacitors: EAI Analog Computer TR-48

Expand Messages
  • David Gesswein
    ... Normally you either want to ramp the voltage up or if out of circuit use a series current limit resistor to keep the reforming current low. Starting at 25%
    Message 1 of 31 , Oct 11, 2012
    • 0 Attachment
      On Thu, Oct 11, 2012 at 05:38:46PM -0000, joshbensadon wrote:
      > I read on one site that I should be reforming them for several hours.
      > Some suggested up to 40 hours. I think I'll go for the 40 hours but
      > at 25% rated voltage for the first 24 hours.
      >
      Normally you either want to ramp the voltage up or if out of circuit
      use a series current limit resistor to keep the reforming current low.
      Starting at 25% voltage may still stress them though much less than
      full power.

      The three items parameter shifts that will indicate the caps are bad are
      leakage, low capacitance, and high ESR. Sometimes you also get visual
      hints its time to replace (drive was still working fine)
      http://www.pdp8online.com/tu56/pics/caps_bad.shtml?small

      The leakage is easy to test with a resistor in series with
      the reforming supply if you have disconnected them from the circuit. If
      your doing the variac method all you can do is look for getting warm,
      bulging or leakage from vent. Capacitance and ESR can be measure with the
      proper equipment. If either the capacitance or ESR is bad you will
      get excessive ripple on the supply voltage so just measuring that is
      reasonable. Does the documentation you have specify the allowable supply
      ripple? If you have a fixed load current you can estimate what ripple you
      should have based on the capacitance.
    • Bill Dromgoole
      ... Yes, In my opinion you are correct. In the early years of semiconductors most parts have three digit date codes. You have to know the approximate decade
      Message 31 of 31 , Oct 18, 2012
      • 0 Attachment
        >
        > Here's a transistor with 430 on it. Would that make it 1964, week 30?
        > Transistor part number is 2N1218. Or does the 430 refer to the factory the
        > transistor was made? or other?
        >
        > Photo of transistor posted in the photos/Josh Bensadon folder of this group.
        >
        > I've seen some IC's with only a 3 digit code on them (not part of this analog
        > computer). Case in point is the following:
        >
        > CD4023BE
        > RCA H 650
        >
        > Is that to mean 1976 week 50?
        > H being the factory where it was made?
        >
        > Cheers,
        > Josh
        > ------------------------------------

        Yes, In my opinion you are correct.
        In the early years of semiconductors most parts have three digit date codes.
        You have to know the approximate decade the part was first produced to get the
        correct date.

        Sometimes you have trouble telling the part number apart from the date code.
        In the 1970s a lot of the 7400 series ic's had date codes like 7414 and a part
        number like 7404.
        I was always having trouble with those.

        A good history of early transitor marking can be found here.
        http://transistorhistory.50webs.com/index.html

        billdrom
      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.