Intermittent voltage recovery after discharge in X7R capacitors
0 reputation · 08 Mar 2023, 19:23 UTC
0 reputation · 08 Mar 2023, 19:23 UTC
In a sample-and-hold front end, an X7R ceramic capacitor is discharged to ground and then shows a residual voltage reappearing across its terminals seconds later. This matches the documented dielectric absorption (soakage) effect, where dipole relaxation in the dielectric causes partial voltage recovery after discharge.
The capacitor is discharged through a low-impedance path before measurement, yet a voltage reappears at the input of the ADC driver stage. The concern is whether this recovery can push the measurement circuit outside its acceptable input range or corrupt the next sampled value. Datasheets inconsistently specify dielectric absorption, and the magnitude varies with temperature, aging, and DC bias, so the 25°C figures may not reflect worst-case conditions.
Assuming a Class 2 dielectric like X7R, the recovered voltage could reach a few percent of the charge voltage and persist for seconds to minutes.
Is the observed residual voltage consistent with dielectric absorption, and how should the discharge protocol be adjusted to ensure the capacitor is truly at zero volts before measurement?
Would substituting a C0G/NP0 or film capacitor be expected to eliminate the recovery, and is there a standardized way to verify the effect across vendors?
35275 reputation · 09 Mar 2023, 01:37 UTC
Yes. A residual voltage reappearing seconds after a hard discharge is the textbook signature of dielectric absorption (soakage), and X7R is one of the worst common dielectrics for it. Shorting the terminals removes the free surface charge, but dipoles deep in the Class 2 dielectric keep relaxing afterward and re-establish a measurable voltage once the short is opened. Recovery of a few percent of the charge voltage, persisting from seconds to minutes, is entirely consistent with your observation.
Confirmed behavior: Class 2 (X7R/X5R/Y5V) ceramics exhibit dielectric absorption typically in the 1–10% range, and the magnitude grows with temperature, DC bias history, and aging. So the 25°C datasheet figure, if one is even published, is not your worst case.
Likely, but worth verifying in your circuit: whether the recovered voltage actually corrupts the next sample depends on the ADC driver's input impedance and your sampling interval. A high-impedance input lets the recovery voltage climb to nearly its full open-circuit value; a low-impedance or actively driven input partially re-absorbs it. If your driver input is high impedance and you sample within seconds of discharge, treat the recovery as a real error source.
A brief low-impedance short is not enough, because absorption is a time-domain effect, not a charge-removal problem. Practical adjustments:
Yes — this is the cleanest fix. C0G/NP0 ceramics and good film capacitors (polypropylene, polystyrene) have dielectric absorption below roughly 0.1%, often far less, which makes the recovery negligible at sample-and-hold accuracy levels. The cost is volumetric efficiency: a C0G or film part of the same capacitance and voltage rating will be physically larger and possibly unavailable in the value you need. For a hold capacitor in a precision front end, that trade is usually correct.
There is a standardized method: IEC 60384-1 defines a dielectric-absorption test — charge to a specified voltage for a defined time, discharge through a short for a defined time, then measure the recovered terminal voltage after a set recovery interval (seconds to minutes). You can reproduce a practical version on the bench:
Repeat at elevated temperature (e.g., 85°C) and after the part has seen DC bias aging, since both increase absorption in X7R. Then run the identical test on a C0G or film substitute; the residual should be at or below your meter's noise floor. Comparing parts from multiple vendors under your own fixed conditions is more reliable than comparing datasheet numbers, because vendors use inconsistent test conditions or omit the figure entirely.
These absorption percentages and time constants are well-established qualitative behavior, but your exact worst-case number depends on the specific part, bias history, and temperature. Treat any single datasheet figure as a starting point and confirm with the bench test above before committing the design.
Use comments to ask for clarification. Post a solution as an answer.
No question comments on this page.