"4n7" is not a form in common usage
in many US firms. I hadn't seen it
except in European 'works' ...

In what used to be most mainstream RF work
most of the critical or 'tuning' caps
were in the picoFarad range with the
DC bypass caps in the microFarad range ...
the ease of identifying the difference in
the two on a schematic at a glance is helpful.

When it comrs down to identifying just one
or two caps in a digital circuit the
benefits are lost.

Contrast a receiver schematic sheet full
of 2.7Pf, 3.3pF, ... 27pF, 33pF ... 390pF caps
versus bypass cap values of .005uF, .05uF, .01uF,
et cetra.

Jim



----- Original Message -----
From: "Jinx" <joecolquitt@CLEAR.NET.NZ>
To: <PICLIST@MITVMA.MIT.EDU>
Sent: Monday, March 18, 2002 7:22 PM
Subject: Re: [OT]: nF vs. 1000pF


> Cap-aci-tors ? You mean condensors ?
>
> I get the impression that representation now seems
> to favour the least number of digits
>
> 4n7 not 0.0047u or 4700p
>
> If hand-written "u" (mu with descender), can easily be
> mis-read as p
>
> I've been caught more than once in print by badly
> reproduced decimal points and prefer a letter
>
> With minimal care any format can be understood
>
> --
> http://www.piclist.com hint: PICList Posts must start with ONE topic:
> [PIC]:,[SX]:,[AVR]: ->uP ONLY! [EE]:,[OT]: ->Other [BUY]:,[AD]: ->Ads
>
>

--
http://www.piclist.com hint: PICList Posts must start with ONE topic:
[PIC]:,[SX]:,[AVR]: ->uP ONLY! [EE]:,[OT]: ->Other [BUY]:,[AD]: ->Ads