Alternate for WBC2.5/A-3S4

Passives
, ,
1

Hi Team

I am looking for alternate part of WBC2.5/A-3S4. Can anyone suggest alternate?

Regards
Srikanth Kacchu

2

I have not located a cross in the Digi-Key system

3

Can you please check if this part is alternate?

28C0236-0BW-10 Laird-Signal Integrity Products | Filters | DigiKey

4

Your question is a bit confusing but if I understand correctly
There is no direct cross however M8694-ND is an alternative option.

5

Hi Robert

Thank you very much for the suggestion. Can I use this for 10A load current?

Regards
Srikanth Kacchu

6

The data sheet for WBC2.5/A-3S4 shows it uses 0.6mm diameter wire. That size wire is only suitable for 5A.

The M8694-ND data sheet shows it uses the same size wire and Bourns says it is rated for 5A.

7

Hi Paul

Thanks for the information.

Can you please suggest 10A rated part?

Regards
Srikanth Kacchu

8

I didn’t find any similar type components rated @ 10A in my parametric search.

9

Hi, I am sorry the 5A is the highest current rating in these ferrite beads, regardless of the impedance. We did carry some 7A, but they are all obsolete from the manufacturer. Glenda

10

Hi Paul / Glenda

Thanks for your support. In one of the old design, WBC2.5/A-3S4 is used for 10A load. Datasheet of WBC2.5/A-3S4 did not mention the current rating. I couldn’t understand how they have used it for 10A. Can you please clarify?

Regards
Srikanth Kacchu

11

Yes, Ferroxcube doesn’t specify the current rating for the wire. I suspect it is because that is a common standard specification based only on the diameter of the uninsulated solid copper wire, so they assume it doesn’t need to be put in the data sheet.

5 Amps is the standard maximum current specification for that diameter solid copper wire when used in a chassis.

The standards assume specific target maximum temperatures, ambient & wire, as well as other factors. It may be that the circuit designer has engineered the system to operate correctly even though that tiny piece of wire is used outside normal standard specifications. Alternatively it was an engineering mistake.