Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

I need the Best Cap I can find for a Reactive Load Powe Tool

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • I need the Best Cap I can find for a Reactive Load Powe Tool

    My 1994 PS Systems Power Tool input cap is badI had a guy put a new one in But it was a IC and when bad in a few weeks The output from my 100 watt Plexi goes into the 8ohm input and sees a 32UF 100watt cap Who makes a really good cap to take that The Old one when I first got it I think was a Atom and It lasted for years What do you think can Handle that thanks DAB

  • #2
    Without more details this is just a guess, but I would wonder if the original was a bipolar/nonpolar electrolytic, and the tech mistakenly replaced it with a standard polarized electrolytic?
    Do you have the original cap? Or a photo of the circuit board?

    Comment


    • #3
      Schematic?
      Gut pictures?

      I guess it was a 32uF *non polar* cap, if somebody substituted a plain electrolytic, it will die quickly.

      No such a thing as a
      32UF 100watt cap
      EDIT: simulpost but main point is we both worry about exact same points.

      maybe that means something
      Juan Manuel Fahey

      Comment


      • #4
        IF there's enough space in there, substitute a film cap of similar value. Parts Express has their "Dayton" house brand caps intended for hi power speaker crossovers - recommend you check their catalog.
        This isn't the future I signed up for.

        Comment


        • #5
          Maybe it's 32uf 100V. The best cap isn't necessarily the most suitable and you may have space constraints. If not my choice for 'best' would be to use one or more 450v film motor capacitors to make up the required value. Fit and forget.

          Comment


          • #6
            +3 on the probability that a polarized capacitor was mistakenly put in there. As noted, a 32uf (ish) 100V NON polar cap should be used.
            "Take two placebos, works twice as well." Enzo

            "Now get off my lawn with your silicooties and boom-chucka speakers and computers masquerading as amplifiers" Justin Thomas

            "Being born on third base and thinking that you must have hit a triple is pure delusion!" Steve A

            Comment


            • #7
              Are you sure the original cap was 32F?
              Judging from typical reactive load circuits, 320F would be more likely.
              - Own Opinions Only -

              Comment


              • #8
                Yes it is 32UF 100 VOLT cap Like I said it takes all the output of my marshall into that first cap at 8 ohms But when I opened it up to see The cap was a little IC brand cap It started to sound bad after a few hrs.Where the Old cap was in there for 10 yrs..I just wanted to know who makes a really good cap sure isnt a IC I didnt want to go into a pro shop and Not have a clue

                Comment


                • #9
                  There's a pretty good consensus that the problem likely has nothing to do with "brand", but almost certainly because the part fitted was totally unsuitable. ANY brand, of the correct type of component should do just fine.
                  If you're taking it to someone else to have the problem corrected, you probably won't have much choice about what brand, they'll have their usual stock/supplier. If you want to specify a brand expect to pay a "pain in the ass" tax, or need to supply it yourself.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by dumbassbob View Post
                    Yes it is 32UF 100 VOLT cap Like I said it takes all the output of my marshall into that first cap at 8 ohms But when I opened it up to see The cap was a little IC brand cap It started to sound bad after a few hrs.Where the Old cap was in there for 10 yrs..I just wanted to know who makes a really good cap sure isnt a IC I didnt want to go into a pro shop and Not have a clue
                    It is impossible that the cap is wired directly across the amp's output (with nothing else in series) and without knowing the circuit we can only guess.
                    If your unit is purely passive, there's only AC and you definitely need a non-polar (NP) cap.

                    Ecaps have other relevant ratings than only capacitance and voltage, esp. max. temperature, lifetime and AC current. The latter is critical in a reactive load.

                    The safest would be a film cap, as already suggested by others. But will be much bigger.
                    - Own Opinions Only -

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Lookee here:

                      https://www.parts-express.com/Dayton...acitor-027-440

                      It's 31 x 60 mm. Or about 1 1/4" by 2 1/2" - IF it fits in your attenuator, I'd not waste another breath nor flap on the keyboard.

                      $10.59, sandwich money. Plus shipping of course. Woops, there goes another sandwich...

                      I've used similar Daytons in crossovers, also in talkboxes driven by 100W Marshalls. Never a failure.

                      FWIW they do show a 33 uF version but it's out of stock at the moment. 30 uF I'm sure is close enough for rock & roll.





                      This isn't the future I signed up for.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        There is nothing wrong with the brand of cap you had. IC is a good brand of cap, there might be better ones but you aren't paying attention to the important feedback you are receiving here.

                        Who replaced the cap? You probably have the wrong type of cap in there now and it may also be the wrong value. Post a few pictures of the insides of your PS Power Tool.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Also... You didn't say that the original capacitor was a 32uf/100V. You said that is what is in there. Being as the cap installed is suspected to be a polarized cap and the application is suspected to be for a non polarized cap I'll speculate that the 32uf value could be an additional error on the part of your "service tech". Do you know for certain what the original value was?

                          Like Helmholtz mentioned, a capacitor as a load for the amplifier isn't appropriate. Further, a 32uf cap in series with any other load circuit isn't appropriate. It would be VERY beneficial to have a schematic right now.
                          "Take two placebos, works twice as well." Enzo

                          "Now get off my lawn with your silicooties and boom-chucka speakers and computers masquerading as amplifiers" Justin Thomas

                          "Being born on third base and thinking that you must have hit a triple is pure delusion!" Steve A

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Just found that it's more than a passive reactive load:
                            (Doesn't make guessing the cap's specs easier, but I'd say if the unit worked with a 32 ecap, a 32/100V or higher film cap as suggested by Leo Gnardo would be a reliable upgrade.)

                            http://www.pacair.com/mmamps/EB100S/...ool_Manual.pdf




                            Last edited by Helmholtz; 05-28-2021, 12:49 AM.
                            - Own Opinions Only -

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Originally posted by Helmholtz View Post
                              Just found that it's more than a passive reactive load:

                              http://www.pacair.com/mmamps/EB100S/...ool_Manual.pdf
                              Ok. And good to know. But just what IS the load circuit this device is using? Alas, no schematic.
                              "Take two placebos, works twice as well." Enzo

                              "Now get off my lawn with your silicooties and boom-chucka speakers and computers masquerading as amplifiers" Justin Thomas

                              "Being born on third base and thinking that you must have hit a triple is pure delusion!" Steve A

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X