Falcon030 dead after Centuriontech CT60/CT60PSU incident - investigation begins

[Maximilian]

The main problem is the design, you should never have mains and low voltage together this close.
It is very bad design, and this is exactly what you would expect to happen...

Having a better quality switch does not solve the issue.

[exxos]

The main problem is the design, you should never have mains and low voltage together this close.
It is very bad design, and this is exactly what you would expect to happen...

Having a better quality switch does not solve the issue.

100% agree.

[redpixel]

I'm usually a big Centuriontech fan, but seems like this design might have been a bit flawed... However I think it's unfair to accuse him of using "cheap Chinese" switches/power modules, in my experience he always uses quality parts. I have the 2025 version of CT60PSU, but I haven't used it much. The switch he used on mine is a DPDT Alco A203 (manufactured in Japan), rated for 250 V AC. Hard to find much more data about it though. I think it's the same as TE part 2267079-5 (https://www.te.com/en/product-2267079-5.html), which has a dielectric strength of 1000 Vrms,min. The AC/DC power bricks are from CUI Inc (USA).

I agree that it's risky to route mains and a 3.3 V logic-level signal through the same switch though, and it would've been nice if he'd have put an optocoupler or something in-between. It's a bit worrying that the PSU used in the blown-up computer which is on its way to you exxos seems to have been the 2025 version. Will be interesting to hear your findings!

[kohli79]

Sorry, I’m a bit confused at the moment. The power supply was fine on my end and was included in the parcel. Pavel checked it and didn’t find any faults. All voltages were correct. It was down to that rather poor-quality switch. There’s also a new PSU version from 2025. I still have the previous model.
I’m curious to see what happens once the parcel with the Falcon arrives, and what the real problem was.

That psu looks like onof those cheap China ones?

The problem seems to be "flashover" mains voltage on the mains switch to the CT60 mode select wire.

OK, I see.

No, that power supply doesn’t look like a cheap Chinese product. It strikes me as high quality. According to Centuriontech, it’s a well-known European brand. At least that’s the case with my version. I’m not sure about the current one.

The link shows the current model.
https://centuriontech.eu/product/ct60psu/

[exxos]

No, that power supply doesn’t look like a cheap Chinese product. It strikes me as high quality. According to Centuriontech, it’s a well-known European brand. At least that’s the case with my version. I’m not sure about the current one.

Fair point, and worth clarifying, I wasn't implying it is a cheap Chinese one either way, more asking the question based on images posted. I've seen modules that look identical to Meanwell but aren't, which is exactly why checking for an actual brand marking matters, and even then it comes down to where it was actually sourced from, since fake branded ones do the rounds too.

What I'm really trying to understand is the timeline. Three revisions in, something clearly changed along the way, and I don't know what the original module in the first design actually was or where it came from. If it turns out to be unbranded, no-name, that would ring alarm bells for me, I wouldn't use something like that to power an expensive Falcon. So that's the clarification I'm after, not an accusation, just trying to understand what's actually been used across these PSU designs.

[kohli79]

No, that power supply doesn’t look like a cheap Chinese product. It strikes me as high quality. According to Centuriontech, it’s a well-known European brand. At least that’s the case with my version. I’m not sure about the current one.

Fair point, and worth clarifying, I wasn't implying it is a cheap Chinese one either way, more asking the question based on images posted. I've seen modules that look identical to Meanwell but aren't, which is exactly why checking for an actual brand marking matters, and even then it comes down to where it was actually sourced from, since fake branded ones do the rounds too.

What I'm really trying to understand is the timeline. Three revisions in, something clearly changed along the way, and I don't know what the original module in the first design actually was or where it came from. If it turns out to be unbranded, no-name, that would ring alarm bells for me, I wouldn't use something like that to power an expensive Falcon. So that's the clarification I'm after, not an accusation, just trying to understand what's actually been used across these PSU designs.

[peters]

Unfortunately the world is flooded with cheap, badly made components, fake components etc. It's hard to know what we are buying.

[exxos]

Unfortunately the world is flooded with cheap, badly made components, fake components etc. It's hard to know what we are buying.

That is true. I only really buy header pins from China these days. Most items I buy come from mouser now. Theres so many cheap clones of stuff on Aliexpress as well, even if they claim a branded part, I wouldn't even trust it. You have to be so careful these days.

But even so, even "reputable" manufacturers can sell total junk. I've posted about capacitors before. Not exactly cheap, but the spec can be so bad they can be worse than the ones you're swapping on the psu etc. People don't often look at the specs, they just go with brand and think they are getting quality, when it's not always the case.

[exxos]

I saw this while looking at CT60psu around the internet..

https://atari.sk/atari-falcon-060-ct60e ... n-ct60psu/

I'll copy the images for when the external link dies..

Looks like this was the earlier design he replaced. It even had a seperate switch on that one! So at least in terms of switching arrangement, his earlier design was way safer than his newer design.

For some reason he stopped using that triple output psu. It's difficult to tell but he seemed to use CUI brand next, I've never heard of them but IIRC mouser sold them. Then he changed to Meanwell. Anyone guess on why he changed them.

spinace1-768x576.jpg (64.33 KiB) Viewed 38 times

spinace2-768x576.jpg (66.77 KiB) Viewed 38 times

power_console-768x576.jpg (126.31 KiB) Viewed 38 times

CT60_top_before_close-768x515.jpg (109.64 KiB) Viewed 38 times

falcon060_power_switch-768x576.jpg (66.19 KiB) Viewed 38 times

[exxos]

I'm usually a big Centuriontech fan, but seems like this design might have been a bit flawed... However I think it's unfair to accuse him of using "cheap Chinese" switches/power modules, in my experience he always uses quality parts.
...
I agree that it's risky to route mains and a 3.3 V logic-level signal through the same switch though, and it would've been nice if he'd have put an optocoupler or something in-between. It's a bit worrying that the PSU used in the blown-up computer which is on its way to you exxos seems to have been the 2025 version. Will be interesting to hear your findings!

Sorry, missed this post somehow, thanks for digging those part numbers out.

To clarify, I wasn't accusing him of using cheap Chinese parts specifically, that's just where my mind naturally goes when I see something failing repeatedly, because that's usually the pattern with failures I come across. I don't actually know what he used or where it was sourced from, I was just asking the question. A proper branded part like an Alco switch isn't something I'd expect to be the weak link either, so that's useful info to have confirmed.

Good spec on the switch too, 1000 Vrms dielectric strength sounds fine on paper for isolation between the contacts, but that only covers the switch itself in isolation. It doesn't help once you've routed a low voltage logic line right next to the mains tags on the same body, that's a PCB/wiring layout problem rather than a component quality one. Even a well rated switch can arc or flash over to an adjacent pin if the clearance and creepage distances around it haven't been designed with that in mind.

Worth throwing into the mix as well, this is pure speculation on my part, but we don't actually know if those power modules, or any other modules used across the various revisions, produce back EMF when they're switched off. That can rise to several thousand volts depending entirely on how the module itself is designed internally, and it's not something I've looked into personally. Only one Falcon so far seems to have actually died, with no other reports of the switch itself failing as a component, so it's worth considering whether a turn-off spike that isn't being suppressed could be behind it, rather than the switch being at fault at all. Just putting it out there as a possible explanation alongside the flashover theory, not a conclusion.it needs investigating.

Once the Falcon and PSU arrive I'll get the switch out and have a proper look at it myself, be good to confirm exactly what's there rather than going off photos.

Only other thing is I've not been well the past few days, so it may delay me getting into the full inspection, just a heads up in case it takes a bit longer than expected to post an update.