PCs plagued by bad capacitors

purrkur · Post by **purrkur** » Fri Nov 11, 2005 2:11 pm

Problems with bad caps on motherboards seems to be a neverending story

hyperspace · Post by **hyperspace** » Sat Nov 12, 2005 11:21 am

Man, I thought we wouldn't see something like this so soon.

I haven't been to find a good local electronic repair service, so I'm going to send my two BP6s to Bad Caps.

KliK · Post by **KliK** » Sat Nov 12, 2005 1:33 pm

there is an old englishman saying that says: I'M NOT SO POOR, TO BUY CHEAP!!!

or, now you know why some MBO cost more than the cheap ones...but they also work!
and it's not then MBOs, it goes for everything...for example my 500$ sky jacket...it look almost new, never had any problems with it, and in fact i don't know if i would ever wore that jacket out!!! maybe if i was in alaska i would, but not in mediteranian!!!

purrkur · Post by **purrkur** » Sat Nov 12, 2005 1:56 pm

KliK wrote:or, now you know why some MBO cost more than the cheap ones...but they also work!

I would argue that Intel designed and produced motherboards are on the expensive side of the motherboard price range and Apple charges a premium for their pretty average machines. Neither has been excluded from this problem.

I don't necessarily think that this has to do with cheap. I have heard two reasons for this problem. The first is that the electrolyte in the cap is of poor quality and the second is that there is too much fluid electrolyte in the caps. I know that even the more respected cap manufacturers have had issues.

In other words I think the problem is more complicated than being at risk when you have bought a cheap motherboard.

KliK · Post by **KliK** » Sat Nov 12, 2005 2:29 pm

purrkur wrote:
KliK wrote:or, now you know why some MBO cost more than the cheap ones...but they also work!
I would argue that Intel designed and produced motherboards are on the expensive side of the motherboard price range and Apple charges a premium for their pretty average machines. Neither has been excluded from this problem.

I don't necessarily think that this has to do with cheap. I have heard two reasons for this problem. The first is that the electrolyte in the cap is of poor quality and the second is that there is too much fluid electrolyte in the caps. I know that even the more respected cap manufacturers have had issues.

In other words I think the problem is more complicated than being at risk when you have bought a cheap motherboard.

of course not, the problem is the same...but if you buy a cheap MBO, than it has small and low quality caps on it...if you buy an expensive ones, they have bigger caps, which don't have to be better quality, but they are OVERDESIGNED...and that means they can be stresses over the limit, and they won't bulge or sthg else...

so if you can't make sthg with more quality, you just put a bigger one in, which can take a load more easily...and that is the most common thing...(as a mechanical engineer i can understand it)

purrkur · Post by **purrkur** » Sat Nov 12, 2005 3:19 pm

KliK wrote:but they are OVERDESIGNED...and that means they can be stresses over the limit, and they won't bulge or sthg else...

Hmmm. Caps have more than one function in electronics. In power supplies and voltage regulators the larger caps usually serve as voltage stabilizers. A cap is often very much dependent on other components around it or other components are dependent on it - to fill a certain function. A cap will "charge" like a battery and then release their charge when needed. Other components (and the specifications of the cap itself) will, for example, rule how fast or slow the cap charges or discharges. This timing factor is usually of importance and is a part of the design of the cirquit that the cap is a part of. So I don't really agree with your "overdesigned" principle. Putting a larger cap in the place of a smaller won't necessarily mean that things will work better. In fact, you may screw things up royally if you are not careful.

KliK wrote:so if you can't make sthg with more quality, you just put a bigger one in, which can take a load more easily...

Like I said, it is not a matter of being able to take the load more easily. There are more factors involved than just load, and I really fail to see the load factor you are talking about. What specifics of the cap are you talking about? Are you saying that a 12 volt cap that is specified at 1000microF is better at taking "the load" more easily than a 12 volt cap rated at 100microF? Because if that is your point then I fail to see your point. Two such components have a number of parameters that are different that might screw up things like I mentioned before.

And like I also mentioned, if one of the problems for bulging/leaking caps is too much electrolyte liquid in them then they are bound to break no matter how you design your circuit. Such a problem is something I would consider to be a manufacturer production problem.

KliK wrote:and that is the most common thing...(as a mechanical engineer i can understand it)

What do I know, I am just a lowly electronics technician

purrkur · Post by **purrkur** » Sat Nov 12, 2005 3:32 pm

Just found this article that shows bad caps on a graphics adapter.

KliK · Post by **KliK** » Sun Nov 13, 2005 10:55 am

purrkur wrote:
KliK wrote:but they are OVERDESIGNED...and that means they can be stresses over the limit, and they won't bulge or sthg else...
Hmmm. Caps have more than one function in electronics. In power supplies and voltage regulators the larger caps usually serve as voltage stabilizers. A cap is often very much dependent on other components around it or other components are dependent on it - to fill a certain function. A cap will "charge" like a battery and then release their charge when needed. Other components (and the specifications of the cap itself) will, for example, rule how fast or slow the cap charges or discharges. This timing factor is usually of importance and is a part of the design of the cirquit that the cap is a part of. So I don't really agree with your "overdesigned" principle. Putting a larger cap in the place of a smaller won't necessarily mean that things will work better. In fact, you may screw things up royally if you are not careful.

i agree with you about that!
but that is why you can overdesign some system to have 20% or 33% (at best) bigger caps, and it will work...in some instances even better than the original...
best example is the BP6! when i have been surfing the net, i found guy selling bigger capacitors for it...even in EC10 problem, a bigger capasitor might work! the problem is, not to put 10miliF, but you put 1500microF...and the stuff works... (got to send you more links about that!)

purrkur wrote:
KliK wrote:so if you can't make sthg with more quality, you just put a bigger one in, which can take a load more easily...
Like I said, it is not a matter of being able to take the load more easily. There are more factors involved than just load, and I really fail to see the load factor you are talking about. What specifics of the cap are you talking about? Are you saying that a 12 volt cap that is specified at 1000microF is better at taking "the load" more easily than a 12 volt cap rated at 100microF? Because if that is your point then I fail to see your point. Two such components have a number of parameters that are different that might screw up things like I mentioned before.

And like I also mentioned, if one of the problems for bulging/leaking caps is too much electrolyte liquid in them then they are bound to break no matter how you design your circuit. Such a problem is something I would consider to be a manufacturer production problem.

you miss the bigg picture...the OVERDESIGN is not to put the to big capacitor in place, but to put the safty factor inside...so in example of 100microF, you won't put the 1000miliF...
but, maybe the circut will work better with 200microF or 500microF; instead of 100microF mentioned...but that depends on the type of the circut, etc.

and about the leaking...all capacitors have more or less electrolyte liqiud inside...but when they are pushed to run OVER THE LIMIT, they will bulge...so if you put a SLIGHTLY BIGGER ONE in that place, it will be more durable, 'cause of the stress of the curcut will have on it!
for example: if on a circut 100microF cap bulges in exactly 1 year, a 200microF cap will bulge (or won't) after more than 1 year (that means 1 year and few more months!)

purrkur wrote:
KliK wrote:and that is the most common thing...(as a mechanical engineer i can understand it)
What do I know, I am just a lowly electronics technician

good, so is my theory right?! you know better...you are the electronics guy, so can you teach me a little?!

hyperspace · Post by **hyperspace** » Sun Nov 13, 2005 11:17 am

The primary problem with the "Bad" capacitors was the electrolyte formulae. An Asian company (Chinese, I think) copied or "stole" an electrolyte formulae and sold it to some of the major capacitor companies.

More details...

Overclocking or "stressing" does not cause the problem experienced by so many. We have had no less than 3 different computers at work with bad capacitors. No overclocking.

KliK · Post by **KliK** » Sun Nov 13, 2005 2:25 pm

on the same page...

This is what your kit will contain to successfully rebuild your Abit BP6. The kit contains 25 capacitors, itemized as follows:
Quantity Value Voltage Diameter
12 1500uF 10v 8mm
12 1000uF 10v 8mm
1 1200uF 6.3v 8mm

The 1200uF caps is for the EC10 mod. Some swear by 1500uF's, and others swear by 470uF... I've tried them all, and have found that 1200uF or 1000uF is the most adequate. If you wish to have a different value for EC10, just let me know what value you want and I'll modify the kit accordingly.
---------------------------
This is what your kit will contain to successfully rebuild your Abit VP6. The kit contains 23 capacitors, itemized as follows:
Quantity Value Voltage Diameter
15 1500uF 6.3v or 10v 10mm
4 1000uF 16v 10mm
4 1000uF 10v 10mm

so in this case, they don't up the caps value (microF), but they up the voltage they can withstand!

hyperspace · Post by **hyperspace** » Mon Nov 14, 2005 10:46 am

KliK wrote:... so in this case, they don't up the caps value (microF), but they up the voltage they can withstand! ...

Some companies may not make a 6.3v "version". So, 10v is closest voltage to 6.3v. I don't think it is for stress, instability or overclocking.

davd_bob · Post by **davd_bob** » Wed Nov 16, 2005 6:51 am

Like our illustrious leader(Derek) stated, its the recipe they used for the goo in the caps that is causing this round of failures...just like when the BP6 and VP6 were being manufactured.

I think no matter how much you "overdesign" is irrelevant if the componant is bad. It seems like the stuff kinda 'spoils after time nomatter how its used but possably heat may cook it into failure at a faster rate.

BTW, for anyone out there that doesn't already know, officially NO manufacturer will support overclocking. If you want your CPU to be faster they prefer that you just buy a newer faster CPU.

(edited 11/16)My bad, The credit for showing the bad recipe should have been given to Hyperspace instead of Derek. They are both leaders in the field.

KliK · Post by **KliK** » Thu Nov 17, 2005 6:31 pm

so you are saying that those are just like italian and frrench cars: NO MATHER HOW BIG IS IT, IT ALLWAYS FULL OF SHIT!!!

davd_bob · Post by **davd_bob** » Thu Nov 17, 2005 11:59 pm

KliK wrote:so you are saying that those are just like italian and frrench cars: NO MATHER HOW BIG IS IT, IT ALLWAYS FULL OF SHIT!!!

yup, that just about covers it...if your talking about bad caps and not leaders.

david

Post by **Derek** » Fri Nov 18, 2005 12:37 am

davd_bob wrote:Like our illustrious leader(Derek) stated, its the recipe they used for the goo in the caps that is causing this round of failures...just like when the BP6 and VP6 were being manufactured.

I can't take credit for that!