2 PSU failures in 4 days

Page 2 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

westom

Senior member
Apr 25, 2009
517
0
71
green wire reads 3.0 then when i press power button goes to 0

grey wire reads 0 in all instances
Ok. Power controller has a full five volts (purple wire). When the power switch is pressed, green wire goes to zero (which it should not because the number should be something above zero. If reporting an exact number, then the defect has been identified.)

When the green wire goes below 0.7 volts, then the power supply should react. It doesn't. So the power supply is defective. Numbers 3.0 and 0 imply which part of the supply is defective. The power on control circuit connected to the green wire is (apparently) drawing too much power. Both the 3 volts and 0 volts on that wire should read higher. Especially zero which should read higher but well below 0.7 volts.

If damage was created by something external, then damaged power on control circuits would be due to a transient via the green wire. Quite unlikely. Such damage cannot be cause by AC mains transients without causing damage to other intermediate circuits - ie the power supply that connects to the purple wire. Most failures are due to manufacturing defects. This appears to be a classic manufacturing defect.

Information from the failed second supply could better refine or confirm what is seen here.

A power on control circuit and power controller are driven (powered) by a supply connected to the purple wire. That supply is apparently OK. Undamaged by transients on AC mains. Power controller maintains purple wire voltage above 2.4 for more than 10 seconds. So the failed power supply is not being ordered off by that power controller. A supply that powers red, orange, and yellow wires is not powering on. The supply that constantly powers circuits even when power is off is undamaged.

To answer another question, notice many parts of that machine are powered even when the computer is off. Therefore power off is not protection from AC main transients. But in your case, the numbers do not suggest that type of damage.

Your AC receptacle is three prongs. So you should have measured voltages between each two prongs with something (ie a heater) also powered from that adjacent duplex outlet. Measurements are most informative when a load exists. Assume the heater draws 10 amps. So your numbers say the receptacle is maybe 150 feet from the breaker box is 12 AWG wire. Or 90 feet from the breaker box if 14 AWG. If the wire is significantly shorter, then some splice in that circuit is not as 'firm' as it should be. Connections are sufficient. One may not be as good as it should be. Again, facts obtained because you provided numbers (although I had to assume the heater current).

If your AC voltage is changing (with relevance), then incandescent bulbs will obviously change intensity. That 'tool' can accurately identify voltage changes. All electronics are perfectly happy even when a bulb dims to 50% intensity. But voltage variations that severe are potentially harmful to motorized appliances (furnace, refrigerator, air conditioner). Your numbers should read within 7% of 120 volts to protect motorized appliances. Electronics do not care since electronics are more robust.

Not listed are voltages to the safety ground prong. If that wire is solidly connected to the breaker box, then nothing on that wire can cause computer failure.
 

westom

Senior member
Apr 25, 2009
517
0
71
extremely informative, thank you westom.
Appreciate that, in technology, everything must come with numbers. Subjective recommendations can even make a 100% different conclusion. First indication of a questionable answer is one without also saying 'why with numbers'.

Second, best evidence comes from a dead body. You probably will not be able to provide those facts even if you have a tool (multimeter) that can start the job. Only better techs could say what part or subsystem is damaged. Based upon your numbers, we could only identify the likely suspects inside an obviously defective supply. An autopsy of that supply would say so much more.

Unfortunately, most computer techs do not even know how a power supply works; let alone know how electricity works. Could not say what interior part failed. Hopefully warranty replacement people might be more informative. But since most all computer techs do not want to know, then most supply vendors cannot be bothered to provide that information.

Well, at least you have learned what the various components in a power system do. And how to quickly confirm if a part is defective.

Third, in rereading that previous post, I forgot to mention what the gray wire does. Once a power supply powers on, then the supply monitors each critical voltage. If any one voltage is defective, then the Power Good signal (as another also described) tells the power controller to not let a CPU execute. CPU will not execute even one BIOS instruction until its power controller permits execution.

Power controller will not permit execution if the gray wire does not exceed 2.4 volts. Reliable operation (another example of why meter voltages say more) means that voltage must well exceed 2.4 volts and less than 5.
 

ywycbt

Junior Member
Aug 26, 2011
16
0
0
One last question westom, something that has been bugging me. I understand your explanation and it makes perfect sense, but what is bothering me is that it seems I would have to be extremely unlucky to have two defects within a 4 day span. Especially since the power supply you helped me test did work in the computer for about 6 hours before I went to sleep. Now I did not test the first PSU because it was already submitted for warranty before I made any posts. However, it was the exact same symptoms, power light on motherboard good, computer would not turn on, PSU fan would not spin up with paperclip test. Previously you said that "then damaged power on control circuits would be due to a transient via the green wire" which was quite unlikely. But given that I had two power supplies have seemingly the exact same thing happen to them within 4 days of each other the first week I moved into my new place, does this, in your mind, make this option more likely? Or is it still more likely that they both had a defect and by coincidence happened so close together. Not knowing how transients work, I have no idea to know if they are 1:1,000,000 rare or if perhaps that is what I might be looking at due to the two separate failures. Thanks again!
 

westom

Senior member
Apr 25, 2009
517
0
71
... it seems I would have to be extremely unlucky to have two defects within a 4 day span. Especially since the power supply you helped me test did work in the computer for about 6 hours before I went to sleep. Now I did not test the first PSU because it was already submitted for warranty before I made any posts. However, it was the exact same symptoms, power light on motherboard good, computer would not turn on, PSU fan would not spin up with paperclip test.
That also bothered me. However the same symptoms could be cause by different failures in different parts of both supplies. As long as the tiny 'purple wire' supply in both supplies works OK, then symptoms would be similar.

I can only conclude from facts provided. Two completely different failures in both supplies can cause similar symptoms. Also, the most frequent time for manufacturing defects to occur is during first hours. Also called infant mortality. Those are trends. Can only provide enough to say where to first look for facts.

Without numbers for the first supply, we can only speculate. An example of why we get numbers for all failures so as to avoid future failures. It probably does not report anything useful. But still, get numbers for the wall receptacle's 'line to safety ground' and 'neutral to safety ground'. If for no other reason, to learn. However it also might (a long shot) report something relevant.

Possible that second supply is a classic infant mortality. And the first is a different defect. I don't like that conclusion without better facts. But infant mortality is a frequent failure mode.
 

ywycbt

Junior Member
Aug 26, 2011
16
0
0
you were right again, readings from line to ground is 121, neutral to ground is 0, which I believe is perfectly normal. Thanks again for the help!
 

westom

Senior member
Apr 25, 2009
517
0
71
you were right again, readings from line to ground is 121, neutral to ground is 0, which I believe is perfectly normal. Thanks again for the help!
I suspect those were made with no load. The voltage 'neutral to safety ground' should be above 0; maybe one volt. For example, if the safety ground was actually missing, then it might measure 0 volts. With the heater as a load, that maybe one volt difference reports a connection exists from receptacle safety ground to a bus bar inside a breaker box.

Not that I expect something relevant to the failure. But it does not hurt to check.
 

westom

Senior member
Apr 25, 2009
517
0
71
neutral to ground with load was 1.0 volt, as predicted

Number of usual suspects is quickly diminishing. So far, only reason that explains failures is manufaturing defects. And that, unfortunately, is little more than speculation. Useful will be to learn what a new supply does. Once that supply is installed, then measure it to confirm the new supply is more than sufficient.

Not described previously was how to best measure the red, orange and yellow wires IF a supply starts. Attempt to multitask to as many peripherals as possible. For example, play complex graphics (ie a movie), while downloading from the internet, while playing sound loudly, while searching the hard drive, while powering some USB devices, while ...

With this maximum possible load, then measure a red, orange, and yellow wires. Defects (or an undersized supply) become most apparent when a maximum load exists.
 

bryanl

Golden Member
Oct 15, 2006
1,157
8
81
I'm also suspecting a manufacturing defect since both models could be based on one basic design and use exactly the same PC board. I've seen products where the same component was defective in each sample, in one case the same wire lead of a certain capacitor.