After several calls to the factory I was able to find someone who had a book
on the codes. Here's what he gave me when he figured out what number was
important.
2116 = 1uF @ 50V
2064 = 6.8uF @ 35V
2139 = 18uF @ 50V
2031 = 22 uF @ 15V
2017 = 33uF @ 10V
2004-J = 47uF @ 6V
2035 = 68uF @ 15V
2021 = 100uF @ 10V
I've measured several on two different capacitor meters and all read close
to what the factory told me. I wonder why they coded the values with
numbers that don't make any sense? Military intellligence?
73
Hank WD5JFR

"Henry Kolesnik" wrote in message
news
At a hamfest I picked up a bunch of what I think are axial lead tubular
metal case tantalum capacitors by Kemet. Case size B and C. I'm going to
call Kemet tomorrow but in the mean time I wonder if anyone can decipher
the
code the capacitance and voltage.
+M 39003 01-2035 7440MB 31433 JM, it measures 70 microfarads
+M390003 01-2021 7452MD 31433 MW , it measures 17 microfards
M390003 01-K 2017 7426MA 31433 JA, it measures 33 microfarads

From the Kemet website I know that M390003 is mil-spec and the 31433 is
the
source code whatever that means. I think the last two letters are the
date
code but the 01-XXX and XXMX escape me but I'd guess it's the stuff I want
to know! Any help appreciated.

73
Hank WD5JFR

In article om,
"Henry Kolesnik" wrote:

After several calls to the factory I was able to find someone who had a book
on the codes. Here's what he gave me when he figured out what number was
important.
2116 = 1uF @ 50V
2064 = 6.8uF @ 35V
2139 = 18uF @ 50V
2031 = 22 uF @ 15V
2017 = 33uF @ 10V
2004-J = 47uF @ 6V
2035 = 68uF @ 15V
2021 = 100uF @ 10V
I've measured several on two different capacitor meters and all read close
to what the factory told me. I wonder why they coded the values with
numbers that don't make any sense? Military intellligence?
73
Hank WD5JFR

The numbers, like 2116, are just sequencial numbers on a very large
table that covers many pages in a manual. The numbers make sense
when you have the manual.

Al

--
There's never enough time to do it right the first time.......

On Mon, 08 Mar 2004 21:44:10 GMT Al wrote:

In article om,
"Henry Kolesnik" wrote:

After several calls to the factory I was able to find someone who had a book
on the codes. Here's what he gave me when he figured out what number was
important.
2116 = 1uF @ 50V
2064 = 6.8uF @ 35V
2139 = 18uF @ 50V
2031 = 22 uF @ 15V
2017 = 33uF @ 10V
2004-J = 47uF @ 6V
2035 = 68uF @ 15V
2021 = 100uF @ 10V
I've measured several on two different capacitor meters and all read close
to what the factory told me. I wonder why they coded the values with
numbers that don't make any sense? Military intellligence?

The numbers, like 2116, are just sequencial numbers on a very large
table that covers many pages in a manual. The numbers make sense
when you have the manual.

Okay, but why pick an identifiction method that requires a manual?
Most other components this size, including theirs, just have the
relevant numbers printed on them.

-
-----------------------------------------------
Jim Adney
Madison, WI 53711 USA
-----------------------------------------------

In article ,
Jim Adney wrote:

On Mon, 08 Mar 2004 21:44:10 GMT Al wrote:

In article om,
"Henry Kolesnik" wrote:

After several calls to the factory I was able to find someone who had a
book
on the codes. Here's what he gave me when he figured out what number was
important.
2116 = 1uF @ 50V
2064 = 6.8uF @ 35V
2139 = 18uF @ 50V
2031 = 22 uF @ 15V
2017 = 33uF @ 10V
2004-J = 47uF @ 6V
2035 = 68uF @ 15V
2021 = 100uF @ 10V
I've measured several on two different capacitor meters and all read close
to what the factory told me. I wonder why they coded the values with
numbers that don't make any sense? Military intellligence?

The numbers, like 2116, are just sequencial numbers on a very large
table that covers many pages in a manual. The numbers make sense
when you have the manual.

Okay, but why pick an identifiction method that requires a manual?
Most other components this size, including theirs, just have the
relevant numbers printed on them.

-
-----------------------------------------------
Jim Adney
Madison, WI 53711 USA
-----------------------------------------------

OK, let me give you a few example lines from the manual:

uF Case tol. Failure Rate (%/1000hrs) DC Leakage in uA
Code % 1.0 0.1 0.01 0.001 25C 85C 125C

5.6 A 5 5001 5201 5401 5601 0.3 6 7.5
5.6 A 10 2241 2481 2721 2961 0.3 6 7.5
6.8 A 5 5002 5202 5402 5602 0.3 6 7.5
6.8 A 10 2242 2482 2722 2962 0.3 6 7.5
6.8 A 20 2243 2483 2723 2963 0.3 6 7.5

So a M38003/01-5001 is unique. I left out the dissipation factor for
simplicty.

As you can see, there is much more information in this code number than
just the capacitance value and the voltage. When a component is bought
to this specification, it will meet it. If you buy a random FF uF VV
volt capacitor, you have no clue as to what you have with respect to
leakage, reliability, dissipation factor and the like.

al

--
There's never enough time to do it right the first time.......

On Tue, 09 Mar 2004 14:28:56 GMT Al wrote:

In article ,
Jim Adney wrote:

Okay, but why pick an identifiction method that requires a manual?
Most other components this size, including theirs, just have the
relevant numbers printed on them.

OK, let me give you a few example lines from the manual:

uF Case tol. Failure Rate (%/1000hrs) DC Leakage in uA
Code % 1.0 0.1 0.01 0.001 25C 85C 125C

5.6 A 5 5001 5201 5401 5601 0.3 6 7.5
5.6 A 10 2241 2481 2721 2961 0.3 6 7.5
6.8 A 5 5002 5202 5402 5602 0.3 6 7.5
6.8 A 10 2242 2482 2722 2962 0.3 6 7.5
6.8 A 20 2243 2483 2723 2963 0.3 6 7.5

So a M38003/01-5001 is unique. I left out the dissipation factor for
simplicty.

As you can see, there is much more information in this code number than
just the capacitance value and the voltage. When a component is bought
to this specification, it will meet it. If you buy a random FF uF VV
volt capacitor, you have no clue as to what you have with respect to
leakage, reliability, dissipation factor and the like.

I have a similar page here from the Sprague/Vishay catalog. In this
case it just happens to be for some caps which I picked up surplus
which are marked M39006/25-xxxx.

In this case the xxxx code pins down the tolerance and failure rate,
just as the Kemet does above (note that everything else above is the
same.) OTOH, the Sprague/Vishay caps are also labeled with their C and
V ratings, as well as the tolerance. Only the failure rate is left
unexplained. There is also an H-code for high vibration which you
might need the catalog page to interpret.

BTW, both manufacturers have a code for an M failure rate, which is
1.0% per 1000 hours. I find it hard to believe that anyone would buy
such a device, especially the military. The ones I got were the R
rate, .01% per 1000 hours. Those are the best that they offer and I'll
bet those are the only ones that ever get sold.

So I still don't think it's too much to ask that the most important
data be printed out separately.

Obviously, I don't tend to think like the military....

-
-----------------------------------------------
Jim Adney
Madison, WI 53711 USA
-----------------------------------------------

Jim Adney wrote:
. . .
So I still don't think it's too much to ask that the most important
data be printed out separately.

Obviously, I don't tend to think like the military....

-
-----------------------------------------------
Jim Adney
Madison, WI 53711 USA
-----------------------------------------------

While you've got a legitimate point, you've got to realize the function
of the part number. If you're a technician servicing a piece of military
gear, you replace a 20035942 *ONLY* with a 20035942, not *ANY* other
capacitor, regardless of its value. To order a replacement, you put in a
requisition for a 20035942. Now, it's vital to you that the capacitors
in the stock bin or coming in from the supply system have 20035942
printed on them, but it's not important that the value is. The
technician can find the value in the parts list in the manual and likely
on the schematic. The stark fact is that the military supply system
wasn't created and isn't maintained for the convenience of the ham who's
working on surplus gear.

You'll actually find this is true throughout the industry, with many
ICs, for example, having only the customer's part numbers on them. Go to
a flea market anywhere around here where I live, and you'll find lots of
components with only Tektronix part numbers on them. You'll also find
lots of folks locally who can tell you what they are, at least
generically. I'm sure the same thing is true for HP and Palo Alto,
Motorola and Phoenix, and so forth.

It's not that you don't think like the military -- it's just that when
they developed their stock system they didn't take into consideration
the inconvenience it would cause you, me, and other hobbyists.

Roy Lewallen, W7EL

I was a GCA radar tech in the RCAF in the 1960s and in one of the excercises
(war games) we had to find and fix a fault so the incoming aircraft
wouldn't crash, it was zero visibility . Sometimes it was as easy as a bad
or loose tube, but some seargents had subchassis with cold solder joints,
shorted black beauty capacitors or fried resistors. Time was critcal as the
weather was closing fast and the aircraft was low on fuel. Sometimes the
excercise left us without many parts, partially functional test equpt, and
only partial manuals. To better simulate battle conditions, one end of the
hut could be on fire and CO2 smoke to hinder visibilty! A shorted .01 uF
400VDC black beauty was easliy replaced with a .01 uF 600VDC or .02 a fried
22K 1/2 watt with a 22K 2 watt or something close. Color codes were quite
useful in many cases. The objective was to save the aircraft using limited
resources. Today I don't think we see component level repair in the field
but in battle anything may be necessary for survival. I'd much rather have
something with component values rather than a bunch of codes that required
decifering. I still contend this is a result of "military intelligence."
And the codes make it tough on us hobbyists but we not under a critical time
crunch and with the Internet it's usually a piece of cake.
73
Hank WD5JFR
"Roy Lewallen" wrote in message
...
Jim Adney wrote:
. . .
So I still don't think it's too much to ask that the most important
data be printed out separately.

Obviously, I don't tend to think like the military....

-
-----------------------------------------------
Jim Adney
Madison, WI 53711 USA
-----------------------------------------------

While you've got a legitimate point, you've got to realize the function
of the part number. If you're a technician servicing a piece of military
gear, you replace a 20035942 *ONLY* with a 20035942, not *ANY* other
capacitor, regardless of its value. To order a replacement, you put in a
requisition for a 20035942. Now, it's vital to you that the capacitors
in the stock bin or coming in from the supply system have 20035942
printed on them, but it's not important that the value is. The
technician can find the value in the parts list in the manual and likely
on the schematic. The stark fact is that the military supply system
wasn't created and isn't maintained for the convenience of the ham who's
working on surplus gear.

You'll actually find this is true throughout the industry, with many
ICs, for example, having only the customer's part numbers on them. Go to
a flea market anywhere around here where I live, and you'll find lots of
components with only Tektronix part numbers on them. You'll also find
lots of folks locally who can tell you what they are, at least
generically. I'm sure the same thing is true for HP and Palo Alto,
Motorola and Phoenix, and so forth.

It's not that you don't think like the military -- it's just that when
they developed their stock system they didn't take into consideration
the inconvenience it would cause you, me, and other hobbyists.

Roy Lewallen, W7EL

On Tue, 09 Mar 2004 19:59:19 -0800 Roy Lewallen
wrote:

Jim Adney wrote:
. . .
So I still don't think it's too much to ask that the most important
data be printed out separately.

Obviously, I don't tend to think like the military....

While you've got a legitimate point, you've got to realize the function
of the part number. If you're a technician servicing a piece of military
gear, you replace a 20035942 *ONLY* with a 20035942, not *ANY* other
capacitor, regardless of its value. To order a replacement, you put in a
requisition for a 20035942. Now, it's vital to you that the capacitors
in the stock bin or coming in from the supply system have 20035942
printed on them, but it's not important that the value is. The
technician can find the value in the parts list in the manual and likely
on the schematic.

If I'm that tech, how do I correlate that p/n with this cap on the
schematic? Does the schematic have both the value AND the p/n on it?

I understand your point about using the exact replacement, but I don't
see why a part should not have BOTH sets of data. To me, that seems
like it adds a lot of value to the part.

-
-----------------------------------------------
Jim Adney
Madison, WI 53711 USA
-----------------------------------------------

I was a GCA radar tech in the RCAF in the 1960s and in one of the excercises
(war games) we had to find and fix a fault so the incoming aircraft
wouldn't crash, it was zero visibility . Sometimes it was as easy as a bad
or loose tube, but some seargents had subchassis with cold solder joints,
shorted black beauty capacitors or fried resistors. Time was critcal as the
weather was closing fast and the aircraft was low on fuel. Sometimes the
excercise left us without many parts, partially functional test equpt, and
only partial manuals. To better simulate battle conditions, one end of the
hut could be on fire and CO2 smoke to hinder visibilty! A shorted .01 uF
400VDC black beauty was easliy replaced with a .01 uF 600VDC or .02 a fried
22K 1/2 watt with a 22K 2 watt or something close. Color codes were quite
useful in many cases. The objective was to save the aircraft using limited
resources. Today I don't think we see component level repair in the field
but in battle anything may be necessary for survival. I'd much rather have
something with component values rather than a bunch of codes that required
decifering. I still contend this is a result of "military intelligence."
And the codes make it tough on us hobbyists but we not under a critical time
crunch and with the Internet it's usually a piece of cake.
73
Hank WD5JFR
"Roy Lewallen" wrote in message
...
Jim Adney wrote:
. . .
So I still don't think it's too much to ask that the most important
data be printed out separately.

Obviously, I don't tend to think like the military....

-
-----------------------------------------------
Jim Adney
Madison, WI 53711 USA
-----------------------------------------------

While you've got a legitimate point, you've got to realize the function
of the part number. If you're a technician servicing a piece of military
gear, you replace a 20035942 *ONLY* with a 20035942, not *ANY* other
capacitor, regardless of its value. To order a replacement, you put in a
requisition for a 20035942. Now, it's vital to you that the capacitors
in the stock bin or coming in from the supply system have 20035942
printed on them, but it's not important that the value is. The
technician can find the value in the parts list in the manual and likely
on the schematic. The stark fact is that the military supply system
wasn't created and isn't maintained for the convenience of the ham who's
working on surplus gear.

You'll actually find this is true throughout the industry, with many
ICs, for example, having only the customer's part numbers on them. Go to
a flea market anywhere around here where I live, and you'll find lots of
components with only Tektronix part numbers on them. You'll also find
lots of folks locally who can tell you what they are, at least
generically. I'm sure the same thing is true for HP and Palo Alto,
Motorola and Phoenix, and so forth.

It's not that you don't think like the military -- it's just that when
they developed their stock system they didn't take into consideration
the inconvenience it would cause you, me, and other hobbyists.

Roy Lewallen, W7EL

On Tue, 09 Mar 2004 19:59:19 -0800 Roy Lewallen
wrote:

Jim Adney wrote:
. . .
So I still don't think it's too much to ask that the most important
data be printed out separately.

Obviously, I don't tend to think like the military....

While you've got a legitimate point, you've got to realize the function
of the part number. If you're a technician servicing a piece of military
gear, you replace a 20035942 *ONLY* with a 20035942, not *ANY* other
capacitor, regardless of its value. To order a replacement, you put in a
requisition for a 20035942. Now, it's vital to you that the capacitors
in the stock bin or coming in from the supply system have 20035942
printed on them, but it's not important that the value is. The
technician can find the value in the parts list in the manual and likely
on the schematic.

If I'm that tech, how do I correlate that p/n with this cap on the
schematic? Does the schematic have both the value AND the p/n on it?

I understand your point about using the exact replacement, but I don't
see why a part should not have BOTH sets of data. To me, that seems
like it adds a lot of value to the part.

-
-----------------------------------------------
Jim Adney
Madison, WI 53711 USA
-----------------------------------------------