3
\$\begingroup\$

I'm trying to repair this SMPS board. It converts 220VAC into 15VDC. The circuit is based on KA5L0380R power switch.

enter image description here

The input 1A subminiature fuse of the circuit is blown. To find other broken components, I started desoldering the parts from the input side of the circuit and testing them

enter image description here

I discovered that the value of this MKP capacitor (C12), as measured by the multimeter, does not match the value written on it (0.1 uF = 100nF).

enter image description here

What is the role of this capacitor? Could it be the cause of the blown fuse?

What would happen if I completely remove this capacitor from the circuit and do not replace it?

\$\endgroup\$

2 Answers 2

3
\$\begingroup\$

For reference, a typical schematic can be found on page 13 of this datasheet (similar but unrelated part); or on numerous appnotes, or schematic collection sites.

https://www.onsemi.com/download/data-sheet/pdf/fsq0370rla-d.pdf

In this case, it appears there is an inlet fuse, MOV ("TNR"), inrush thermistor / NTC, X cap, common-mode choke, then FWB (D8) and one electrolytic capacitor (with no additional filtering components near it -- L1-R2 and L3-R8 are shown in parallel so that one can choose which components should be installed; basically, this would be the simplified form, jumpering them out, since the CMC and stuff handle filtering on the AC side instead). Likely the particulars of the control output circuits differ as well, but the major components will be common.

The most likely components to fail are electrolytic capacitors (they dry out over time, particularly when hot), and semiconductors (due to exceeding ratings, or some aging failures). MOVs can also wear (but it looks fine from here, clean bright blue?).

Often, semiconductors fail as a cascade mechanism, for example the switch IC is working harder because the capacitors are failing, and eventually its ratings are exceeded and it dies; the fuse is taken out, but in the process, a good thousand amperes or so rushes through the rectifier, transformer, etc., so those components are at risk as well. If using a separate controller IC (rather than the integrated kind here), that may be destroyed, along with related resistors. Sometimes the output side capacitors or diode fail, and the resulting poor load (excess peak voltage, or a short circuit condition) stresses the power switch to failure.

The component in question is a 0.1µF 10% 310VAC MKP, metallized polypropylene film capacitor. As you can guess from the tolerance, its value should be 0.09-0.11µF. Clearly out of spec and in need of replacement.

X type capacitors are generally designed to fail open, by a process called "self healing". This gradually degrades the value (lower C, higher ESR) until it ceases to be useful. Likely this has happened here. Healing occurs in response to excessive voltages such as mains surge, which is expected to occur throughout the life of a product, making this component a wear item as well.

These can also fail simply by oxidation: the metallization is extremely thin (~100nm!), and mere O2 / H2O diffusion into the capacitor gradually oxidizes it (aluminum into its non-conductive oxide), resulting in the same sort of failure mechanism, without any "healing" events occurring at all. (This typically takes over a decade to occur.)

Would it work without? Perhaps. This capacitor, along with the CMC and any related components, filter out switching noise from the circuit, before it reaches the mains network (lots of long wires -- one heck of an antenna). Maybe the unit itself would operate (clearly it's capable of running in the presence of its internal noise, though the presence of this capacitor does affect that a bit, still), but maybe connected or nearby equipment wouldn't. Maybe radio reception would be knocked out, maybe on bands you aren't even aware of (there are licensed, commercial and emergency bands, for various purposes, all across the dial!).

\$\endgroup\$
5
  • \$\begingroup\$ Are you sure that "X type capacitors are generally designed to fail open" ?! I think the opposite is the case: allaboutcircuits.com/technical-articles/… \$\endgroup\$
    – Meysam
    Commented Sep 24, 2023 at 19:28
  • 1
    \$\begingroup\$ "Generally" being the important word there; also, the link is not discussing component behavior, but what can be tolerated of a component in that location (prescriptive vs. descriptive confusion). Safety doesn't care if it's a capacitor, resistor or waddledeesistor, just that its failure doesn't cause a safety issue. X type capacitors therefore are permitted to fail shorted; whether they do so more often than not, is a different matter. \$\endgroup\$ Commented Sep 24, 2023 at 19:39
  • \$\begingroup\$ @TimWilliams what is a waddledeesistor? \$\endgroup\$
    – dasman
    Commented Sep 25, 2023 at 17:02
  • \$\begingroup\$ @dasman Evoking Lewis Carroll, a made-up term for any generic kind of component. Actually... I'm not sure what the etymology of "waddledee" is, I forget if that's from Carroll or something else. \$\endgroup\$ Commented Sep 25, 2023 at 17:37
  • 1
    \$\begingroup\$ @TimWilliams Fiddle dee dee comes to mind. Google Ngrams. Since about 1840. I managed to correctly ascertain it intended meaning :-) . \$\endgroup\$
    – Russell McMahon
    Commented Sep 28, 2023 at 3:09
3
\$\begingroup\$

That's an X2-rated capacitor. Those are intended to die by shorting (and in that way taking out a fuse), so you should check its resistance to see whether that is what it did.

They usually buffer against EMI/RFI problems. If it died, there was an excessive problem. Removing instead of replacing it will then cause more expensive and extensive parts of the circuitry to blow in case of a repeat of the problem.

\$\endgroup\$
8
  • 3
    \$\begingroup\$ This isn't quite correct. On the contrary, they are designed to fail open, by a process called "self healing". This gradually degrades the value (lower C, higher ESR) until it ceases to be useful; that seems to be part of what's happened here. They can also fail by simply oxidation (the metallization gradually ceases to be), in the absence of any exceptional stresses (such as mains surge). \$\endgroup\$ Commented Sep 24, 2023 at 14:42
  • 1
    \$\begingroup\$ @Meysam You did, and it does! \$\endgroup\$ Commented Sep 24, 2023 at 14:50
  • 1
    \$\begingroup\$ @TimWilliams I find it surprisingly hard to find details anywhere but I thought one of the differences between X and Y ratings was that Y-rated capacitors have to die open while X-rated capacitors can also short out. Either have to die "unspectacularly", without mechanical deformation or even flames. \$\endgroup\$
    – user107063
    Commented Sep 24, 2023 at 17:00
  • 1
    \$\begingroup\$ @Meysam I'd measure the resistance to figure out whether it developed a short. Assuming that it is allowed to do so... Either way, it seems way out of spec by now and warrants replacement. \$\endgroup\$
    – user107063
    Commented Sep 24, 2023 at 17:02
  • 1
    \$\begingroup\$ @Meysam Well, it should end up in the Gigaohm range at least if it is fine. But it is normal to change under measurement and only end up very high. Assuming the measurement happens with constant current, the change rate in ohms/second is the inverse of its capacitance. \$\endgroup\$
    – user107063
    Commented Sep 24, 2023 at 17:21

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service and acknowledge you have read our privacy policy.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.