Hi Dave,Hi
welcome to the forums
you would be better to use a higher value cap 68uF would be next on the list
Dave
Thanks for your reply. It is so hard to find next value close to original value. That electronic shop offer me 100uF 63V. Is that too big?
gosh shouldnt be hard to find, they are standard values ... any decent electronics parts store would have them
where in the world are you ?
depending on their use in the circuit, most likely OK
what is the circuit ? if its for smoothing yeah cool ... if for some sort of timing
then something closer to the original value would be required
Dave
where in the world are you ?
depending on their use in the circuit, most likely OK
what is the circuit ? if its for smoothing yeah cool ... if for some sort of timing
then something closer to the original value would be required
Dave
- Joined
- Nov 28, 2011
- Messages
- 8,393
56 µF is not a common value. Digikey do supply them though; look at http://www.digikey.com/product-detail/en/EKZE630ELL560MHB5D/565-1720-ND/756236.
Aluminium electrolytic capacitors generally have an initial value tolerance of +/- 20% or worse, and their values vary with temperature and age as well, so there is little point specifying capacitance a value like 56 µF because it's only 19% higher than 47 µF.
The fact that such a specific value was originally used in your board makes me suspect that it's an unusual type of capacitor that is more accurate than a typical electrolytic. Can you post a photo of the original capacitor? Or at least post all the markings on it?
You can make a 56 µF capacitor by connecting a 47 µF capacitor and a 10 µF capacitor in parallel (the values add together, and 57 is close enough to 56) but if the original capacitor was special in some way, this may not be a suitable replacement.
A search of Digikey for other 56 µF capacitors also turned up the following results.
A 56 µF, 63V film capacitor - this type is non-polarised, large, and expensive, and has a 10% initiail value tolerance: http://www.digikey.com/product-detail/en/B32526T0566K/495-4584-ND/3523606
A 56 µF, 75V tantalum capacitor (10% tolerance, very expensive): http://www.digikey.com/product-detail/en/109D566X9075T2/718-1224-ND/1559880
Another 56 µF, 75V tantalum capacitor, military rated (even more expensive): http://www.digikey.com/product-detail/en/M39006/22-0617/1012-1018-MIL/2773724
It might help if you post a photo of the circuit board. We may be able to get an idea of what function the capacitor was used for, which might help us determine what type would be best.
Aluminium electrolytic capacitors generally have an initial value tolerance of +/- 20% or worse, and their values vary with temperature and age as well, so there is little point specifying capacitance a value like 56 µF because it's only 19% higher than 47 µF.
The fact that such a specific value was originally used in your board makes me suspect that it's an unusual type of capacitor that is more accurate than a typical electrolytic. Can you post a photo of the original capacitor? Or at least post all the markings on it?
You can make a 56 µF capacitor by connecting a 47 µF capacitor and a 10 µF capacitor in parallel (the values add together, and 57 is close enough to 56) but if the original capacitor was special in some way, this may not be a suitable replacement.
A search of Digikey for other 56 µF capacitors also turned up the following results.
A 56 µF, 63V film capacitor - this type is non-polarised, large, and expensive, and has a 10% initiail value tolerance: http://www.digikey.com/product-detail/en/B32526T0566K/495-4584-ND/3523606
A 56 µF, 75V tantalum capacitor (10% tolerance, very expensive): http://www.digikey.com/product-detail/en/109D566X9075T2/718-1224-ND/1559880
Another 56 µF, 75V tantalum capacitor, military rated (even more expensive): http://www.digikey.com/product-detail/en/M39006/22-0617/1012-1018-MIL/2773724
It might help if you post a photo of the circuit board. We may be able to get an idea of what function the capacitor was used for, which might help us determine what type would be best.
- Joined
- Nov 28, 2011
- Messages
- 8,393
I wasn't disagreeing with you Dave. 56 µF IS a standard value; it's just not commonly used.I was referring to my alternatives
