Talk:Capacitor types

message: There is no justification for defining ultracapacitors as being different from supercapacitors, the terms are use intechangably in the literature. As this now appears to make a distintion between then I suggest that the passage be removed. However if someone has objectios to that please comment here, and we will sort this out. DV8 2XL 02:49, 3 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: In that case, merge the two paras together explaining the similarity of the 2 terms.--Light current 15:17, 3 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Ultracapacitors 

message: ELCO redirects here, but is not mentioned in the text. Could someone add it in the appropriate place? Is it an electrolytic capacitator? Piet 10:46, 7 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  ELCO 

message: The article includes a section about E3, E6, E12 preferred values, and this duplicates information in a separate article called Preferred number (also redirected from Preferred values). It seems to me some of the text under Capacitors (component) could be removed. I have put a link to the Preferred number article, but I leave it to someone else to decide how much to take out. It is worth leaving in some of the historic discussion I think, and also the discussion of the wide tolerance of some capacitor types which is why the E3 or E6 values are used.Sangwine 19:18, 19 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Preferred values 

message: I have always experienced it as a nuisance, but in the table of types, it is listed as an advantage of electrolytic capacitors. - douglas bagnall
:Changed table hdg to Features instead of Advantages.--Light current 15:05, 17 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Doesn't help.  Still a positive spin, and now it seems odd to have "Features" vs "Disadvantages" instead of the more usual "Advantages" vs "Disadvantages".  I'd vote for polarization to be moved from "Advantages" to "Disadvantages" unless some direct advantage to polarization can be pointed out.  It seems to me to be a necessary nuisance- the advantage is not the polarization but rather the lower cost that results from its use. --Treekids (talk) 15:31, 24 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Why is polarisation considered an advantage? 

message: The link to images is good (when it works), except that it only has current pics, no historic -- but it would be much better to have such little example images in the article itself.  I'm sorry not to see  images anywhere of the old six-dot mica packages.-69.87.199.150 13:22, 14 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Images 

message: The section on marking should acknowledge polarity as an issue, and mention ways it is marked.-69.87.199.150 13:22, 14 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Polarity 

message: "Alternating current oil-filled Capacitors" uses "Oil-impregnated paper" as dielectric. But in features: "Usually PET or polypropylene film dielectric." !  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Vladislav Pogorelov (talk • contribs) 03:27, 20 February 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Erron in table "Fixed capacitor comparisons" (Alternating current oil-filled Capacitors) 

message: I removed the copypaste tag. The Semec Web page claims a copyright of 2008, the table here has been in the article since the glory days of User:Light Current in 2005.  This table is more comprehensive than the entries at the target Web page. Edits such as  adding a phrase about RF properties of polystyrene capacitors, more than a year after the page was created and two years before the copyright date on the target Web page, make me confident that the copypaste material was taken from Wikipedia, not added to it. --Wtshymanski (talk) 00:25, 5 August 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: I think you are right. I felt the opposite. To me it seemed more likely that a Wikipedia user copied all of Semec's table and integrated it into the Wikipedia article, rather than Semec selectively copying some of the Wikipedia table and integrating it into their page. However the copyright date *is* 2008 on the Semec page, and that is convincing along with the added phrase, so I won't add the copypaste back without further evidence. --JAC4 (talk) 03:31, 5 August 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: Removed copypaste tag 

message: Hi, a lot of work is done, now the revised article is ready.
The old article Types of capacitor contains a lot of discrepancies, f. e. 
Under the sub-header “Types of dielectric” a lot of different things are mixed. It contains
* general dielectric materials like: Air-gap, Ceramic, Glass, Paper, Vacuum, 
* detailed  dielectric materials like: C0G, NP0, X7R, X8R, Polycarbonate, Polyester, Polystyrene, Polypropylene, PTFE or Teflon
* capacitor types like: Electrolytic capacitors, Polymer capacitors, Trimmer, Double-layer capacitors, 
* “home-made” capacitors like: Gimmick, Printed circuit board,  
* very special customized types like: integrated circuits, 
The sequence of the capacitor types in the table “Fixed capacitor comparisons” are not methodic, f. e. Paper, Metallized paper and Alternating current oil-filled capacitors as well as Direct current oil-filled and Kraft capacitor paper belong together. Additional capacitor types and application capacitor names are mixed. 
Especially the comments to paper capacitors sounds like written in the 1950th and are old fashioned and partly obsolete.
Under the sub-header “Non-ideal properties of practical capacitors” some properties are described, which are standardized and in datasheets specified as “rated values”. 
In the new edition of this article I have tried to follow strictly the industrial and the standardized view of the most important industrial produced capacitors.  Greetings --Elcap (talk) 09:20, 14 December 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  New revised article 

message: None of the capacitor datasheets I've read this week use the word "proof".
Is "voltage proof" (used 8 times in this article) yet another synonym for "working voltage", "rated voltage", "operating voltage", "guaranteed voltage", "nominal voltage", "the voltage written on the capacitor", etc.?
Would this article be easier to understand if we replaced "voltage proof" with one of those synonyms?
--DavidCary (talk) 17:36, 3 January 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  voltage proof 

message: Class 1, Memory backup, discharge current in mA = 1 • C (F)
Class 2, Energy storage, discharge current in mA = 0.4 • C (F) • V (V)
Class 3, Power, discharge current in mA = 4 • C (F) • V (V)
Class 4, Instantaneous power, discharge current in mA = 40 • C (F) • V (V)
:Are these minimum requirements, typical values or what? And how come the diagram provided shows Class 4 range having a higher internal resistance than class 3? Ssscienccce  (talk) 11:46, 21 July 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: Please feel free and contact the standardization group for answering your questions --Elcap (talk) 20:16, 22 July 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  IEC standard 62391-1 application classes 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified  on Capacitor types. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120619003041/http://www.kemet.com:80/kemet/web/homepage/kfbk3.nsf/vaFeedbackFAQ/242F5F2E69DCEC7485256EDF004CA495 to http://www.kemet.com/kemet/web/homepage/kfbk3.nsf/vaFeedbackFAQ/242F5F2E69DCEC7485256EDF004CA495
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20130806054025/http://www.avx.com/docs/techinfo/soltant.pdf to http://www.avx.com/docs/techinfo/soltant.pdf
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 12:55, 14 November 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 3 external links on Capacitor types. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20141222044332/http://services.eng.uts.edu.au/cempe/subjects_JGZ/eet/Capstone%20thesis_AN.pdf to http://services.eng.uts.edu.au/cempe/subjects_JGZ/eet/Capstone%20thesis_AN.pdf
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120813020215/http://electrochem.cwru.edu/encycl/art-c03-elchem-cap.htm to http://electrochem.cwru.edu/encycl/art-c03-elchem-cap.htm
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20071012093202/http://www.national.com/rap/Application/0%2C1570%2C28%2C00.html to http://www.national.com/rap/Application/0%2C1570%2C28%2C00.html
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 10:30, 30 July 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: A cheap, new type of super capacitor has just been invented at MIT: https://newatlas.com/architecture/mit-concrete-supercapacitor Basvossen (talk) 01:02, 3 August 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Concrete super capacitor