Searching \ for '[EE:] is it possible to get 0.01uF with polarity?' in subject line. ()
Make payments with PayPal - it's fast, free and secure! Help us get a faster server
FAQ page: www.piclist.com/techref/index.htm?key=possible+get+001uf
Search entire site for: 'is it possible to get 0.01uF with polarity?'.

Exact match. Not showing close matches.
PICList Thread
'[EE:] is it possible to get 0.01uF with polarity?'
2007\01\28@184033 by Tal Go

flavicon
face
Hello to all

I found in some schematics on the 'net a 0.01uF capacitor with polarity. I
must admit that I didn't heard about this component, can anyone point to a
web site that I can see a capacitor like that?

Thanks

Tal

2007\01\28@194042 by Richard Prosser

picon face
I have seen RF caps of around this value which have an "earth" marked
at one end (& which corresponds to the outermost film) but not
polarised caps.

RP

On 29/01/07, Tal Go <spam_OUTtalgoTakeThisOuTspamusb.co.il> wrote:
> Hello to all
>
> I found in some schematics on the 'net a 0.01uF capacitor with polarity. I
> must admit that I didn't heard about this component, can anyone point to a
> web site that I can see a capacitor like that?
>
> Thanks
>
> Tal
>
> -

2007\01\29@050417 by Mike Harrison

flavicon
face
On Mon, 29 Jan 2007 01:45:09 +0200, you wrote:

>Hello to all
>
>I found in some schematics on the 'net a 0.01uF capacitor with polarity. I
>must admit that I didn't heard about this component, can anyone point to a
>web site that I can see a capacitor like that?

I suspect it is just lazy schematic drawing, using the same symbol.
The lowest value polarized cap I've seen os a 0.1uf tantalum bead.

AFAIK there are no electrical advantages in using a polarised cap over a non-polarized one - at
larger sizes they are used for their size and cost advantages, although ceramics have been pushing
up the typical cross-over point in recent years, especially in performance-sensitive areas like
DC/DC converters where ceramics of 10uf and higher are commonplace.



2007\01\29@101510 by alan smith

picon face
maybe describe the circuit or if you have a schematic.....might be easier to determine if it really needs a polorized cap?
 
 So, if what Mike says is true...and I pretty much agree since caps are just plates with dielectric seperation...why do tantalums blow if inserted backwards (ive seen the results)

Mike Harrison <.....mikeKILLspamspam@spam@whitewing.co.uk> wrote:
 
AFAIK there are no electrical advantages in using a polarised cap over a non-polarized one - at
larger sizes they are used for their size and cost advantages, although ceramics have been pushing
up the typical cross-over point in recent years, especially in performance-sensitive areas like
DC/DC converters where ceramics of 10uf and higher are commonplace.




---------------------------------
Sucker-punch spam with award-winning protection.
Try the free Yahoo! Mail Beta.

2007\01\29@103856 by M. Adam Davis

face picon face
Mike didn't say that capacitors shouldn't have polarization, he simply
said that if you have a polarized cap and an unpolarized one with
similar characteristics, there is no electrical reason to choose one
over the other.

The reason polarized caps fail in reverse is due to the composition of
the cap.  The breakdown voltage in one direction is much lower than in
the other direction due to the two (usually different types) of
films/materials used for each electrode, and the dielectric inbetween.

The charge carriers work well when the electrons congregate on one
film, and not so well with the electrons form on the other plate.

They are popular because the composition allows for a higher
capacitance in a smaller area - among other reasons.

-Adam

On 1/29/07, alan smith <micro_eng2spamKILLspamyahoo.com> wrote:
{Quote hidden}

> -

2007\01\29@110611 by Rich

picon face
The only application I can think of off the top of my head would be a high
frequency DC to DC converter with a polarity change.  Is that the
application?

{Original Message removed}

2007\01\29@141930 by Bill Clawson
picon face
Their schematic is using an electrolytic cap, but as
others have said, it shouldn't be critical if you use
a non-polarized cap as a replacement.  The thing you
must consider is what voltage the cap will be exposed
to, and then refine your search for a 0.01uF cap at
the appropriate voltage rating.  If you don't mind,
could you reply with a link to the schematic in
question?  

Thanks,

Bill

--- Tal Go <EraseMEtalgospam_OUTspamTakeThisOuTusb.co.il> wrote:

{Quote hidden}

> --

2007\01\29@151253 by Tal Go

flavicon
face
Hi all..

The reason I notice the cap polarity was non working NE555 one-shot circuit.
so I look for more info to see what is wrong, then I saw the cap polarity
issue. at the begging I thought that the value of the cap is wrong but I
check again in the datasheet and I began to suspect that maybe the authors
did some trick to operate the on shot correctly with this bizarre cap...

After my second look at the data sheet I notice that my problem was missing
pull-up resistor on the trigger pin. with out it the output is going crazy
:-)

btw, here is the link that made this mess:
http://www.utm.edu/staff/leeb/3b3.htm

There are more links with this mistake but I didn't save it ...I think most
of them use the same schematic program.

Tal

{Original Message removed}

2007\01\29@154804 by Andre Abelian

flavicon
face
Tal

Lowest I could find is 0.1 uf
www.chemi-con.co.jp/pdf/catalog/al-e1001g/al-smg-e-060905.pdf
0.01uf sounds like ceramic cap.

Andre


{Original Message removed}

More... (looser matching)
- Last day of these posts
- In 2007 , 2008 only
- Today
- New search...