12-12-2016, 05:05 PM
Yes, I can see how this has caused confusion. I am on an actual PC now so can paste μF. I was the mF I used that was confusing. I now have constant internet on a small Blackberry mobile but I can't copy and paste on it and so typed microfarad as mF (which I confess is misleading). It would have been better to type:
Microfarad.
Micromicrofarad.
Picofarad.
Nanofarad.
This may help:
If there are a million picofarads in one microfarad, start by 0.5 μF as 500,000 picofarads. Except, sure, nobody uses such a figure but it helps me work down to 0.0005 μF (which you do find in RF capacitor (grid coupling and so forth.)
I used to derive nanofarads from an initial picofarad value but maybe that was a bit long-winded., so now I just think of 0.01 (10 nanofarads).
I'm sorry when I use the Blackberry I can't use the symbols. However, it seems wise to type the whole words.
Microfarad.
Micromicrofarad.
Picofarad.
Nanofarad.
This may help:
If there are a million picofarads in one microfarad, start by 0.5 μF as 500,000 picofarads. Except, sure, nobody uses such a figure but it helps me work down to 0.0005 μF (which you do find in RF capacitor (grid coupling and so forth.)
I used to derive nanofarads from an initial picofarad value but maybe that was a bit long-winded., so now I just think of 0.01 (10 nanofarads).
I'm sorry when I use the Blackberry I can't use the symbols. However, it seems wise to type the whole words.
