Path: utzoo!mnetor!perle!scott
From: scott@perle.UUCP (Scott Allen)
Newsgroups: sci.electronics
Subject: Re: Rational Capacitor Prefixes
Keywords: nF, cap value prefixes
Message-ID: <698@perle.UUCP>
Date: 24 Aug 89 20:02:44 GMT
References: <26043@quacky.mips.COM>
Reply-To: scott@perle.UUCP (Scott Allen)
Organization: Perle Systems Limited  Scarborough, Ontario, Canada
Lines: 25

In article <26043@quacky.mips.COM> vaso@mips.COM (Vaso Bovan) writes:
>This is a plea to rationalize capacitor unit suffixes. Most postings
>give capacitances in terms of pF or uF. Unfortunately, this often means
>capacitances are are stated in inconvenient units. ie caps with the following
>units are given 4700pF ; .0047uF ; .001uF !  It is a nuisance to have to count
>the decimal places, but there is at least one situation where the "dot"
>placement can actually cause mistakes: In photocopying schematics, "dots" are
>added and taken away at random. 0.01uF might easily be mistaken for .001uF.
>
[Remainder of article deleted]

I have often seen resistor values given by using the metric units
prefix in place of the decimal point. e.g: 4.7K ohms is given
as 4K7, 54.9Meg ohms is given as 54M9.

Could we not do the same with capacitors (or any other component)?
In the above examples: 4700pF = 4700p, .0047uF = u0047, .001uF = u001
The 'F' can be dropped as long as we know that it is a capacitor,
unless we want to give the value as a fraction of a Farad.
In this case an F is used in place of the decimal point: .01F = F01

-- 
========= *         Scott Allen          * UUCP:
P E R L E *      Perle Systems Ltd.      *  ...!uunet!mnetor!perle!scott
========= * Scarborough, Ontario, Canada *