IBM 5160 XT - C58 capacitor (10uF 16V) is dead; Can it be replaced with a 10uF 50V?

[DaCiRo]

This weekend my IBM 5160 XT would not boot up. I thought it was an issue with the PSU but following steps in the 'Minimum Diagnostic Configuration' guide from Minuzerodegrees (here), turns out that the infamous Tantalum capacitor C58 had died quietly, no blow ups, smoke or no burn marks, ...still looked like new yet dead. After removing it the machined booted up again. This is a 3 legs (-+-) 10uF 16V ceramic capacitor, I am looking for a replacement here in Japan but I find mostly 10uF 50V 2 legs ones. I am aware that I can use the 2 leg capacitor but not sure that replacing it with a 50V rated one will actually work. As far as I know it is possible to change capacitors with others of higher voltage but the step from 16V to 50V... seems quite a jump. Anyone knows if using a 50V capacitor instead of 16V would work?

 

[modem7]

I remember reading a post where someone wrote that it could be a problem with aluminium electrolytics, in certain situations, because above a certain voltage rating, the internal structure of the aluminium electrolytic capacitor was different compared to the lower voltage rated ones. Something like that. But,
1. You are writing of tantalum, not aluminium electrolytic,
2. And the role that the capacitor is acting is a simple filter one.

And so I cannot see a problem with what you propose. Of course, someone may disagree.

 

[modem7]

I have added the C58 failure to the list at [here].

( A page refresh in your browser may be required. )

 

[DaCiRo]

I remember reading a post where someone wrote that it could be a problem with aluminium electrolytics, in certain situations, because above a certain voltage rating, the internal structure of the aluminium electrolytic capacitor was different compared to the lower voltage rated ones. Something like that. But,
1. You are writing of tantalum, not aluminium electrolytic,
2. And the role that the capacitor is acting is a simple filter one.

And so I cannot see a problem with what you propose. Of course, someone may disagree.

Thank you!, makes sense, I will report back once I replace it, hopefully this week.

 

[DaCiRo]

I have added the C58 failure to the list at [here].

( A page refresh in your browser may be required. )

Excellent. Thanks.