On Sun, 13 Mar 2005 10:03:28 -0300, Gerhard Fiedler wrote:

>William ChopsWestfield wrote:
>
>>>> Nobody seems to have a problem with milli-seconds
>>>> or nano-seconds, so why should nano-Farads be any different?
>>>>
>> Perhaps in the fuzzy print found on components, n and u look (looked?)
>> too much alike?  6u8 or 8n9 ?
>
>There might have been reasons to make the /component prints/ a certain way.
>Even though I think when you can't distinguish between an "n" and a "u",
>you might have other problems in reading the print -- and I can't recall
>any problems related to that with the components I used 35 years ago. 
>

The use of nF is a relatively recent occurrence in the US. It was
common practice at most companies to omit capacitance units on
schematics and  show capacitor values only in uF and pF, which were
called uuF at the time. (Please bear in mind, this was while the earth
was still cooling, according to my kids.)

A cap marked 0.01 clearly wasn't in pF and a cap marked 200 wasn't in
uF (unless it was an electrolytic which would be indicated by the '+'
on the terminal and/or the curved line in the symbol).


Regards, Bob

-- 
http://www.piclist.com PIC/SX FAQ & list archive
View/change your membership options at
http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/piclist