What no 27nF ??
in [Design]
|
From: Joerg on 10 Jun 2010 22:24 Uwe Hercksen wrote: > > > Joerg schrieb: > >> What I really don't like is their habit to show lots of products with >> no stock and the remark "no longer stocked". What's the point in doing >> that? Make the selection look bigger on paper? > > Hello, > > they had them before and when they tried to delete them within the > database, they got a database anomaly error warning. > Maybe they need a new IT guy then? :-) -- Regards, Joerg http://www.analogconsultants.com/ "gmail" domain blocked because of excessive spam. Use another domain or send PM.
From: Ian Bell on 11 Jun 2010 06:08 On 10/06/10 12:23, Uwe Hercksen wrote: > > > Ian Bell schrieb: > >> Thanks for that. I searched Farnell for 27nF and I get no results, yet >> I just tried 0.027uF and up they pop - you would think Farnell would >> know better. > > Hello, > > a well done search engine would accept 1000000 �F, 1000 mF, 1 F and even > 0.001 kF. ;-) > Have you tried 27000 pF too? > > Bye > Yes I tried 27000pF, 27nF and 0.027uF and get different results for each. Cheers Ian
From: Uwe Hercksen on 11 Jun 2010 07:30 Ian Bell schrieb: > Yes I tried 27000pF, 27nF and 0.027uF and get different results for each. Hello, it looks like they simply use a text field for the capacity value in the database instead of using a numerical valuea nd the unit F. Some capacitors own the attribute 27000pF, others 27nF and some 0.027uF. But using a numerical value of the capacity would require an input parser capable of processing 27000pF, 27nF and 0.027uF, of course also F, mF and for completeness also kF. May be in the future MF and GF is necessary too. ;-) Bye
From: Jeroen Belleman on 11 Jun 2010 09:16 Uwe Hercksen wrote: > > > Ian Bell schrieb: > >> Yes I tried 27000pF, 27nF and 0.027uF and get different results for each. > > Hello, > > it looks like they simply use a text field for the capacity value in the > database instead of using a numerical valuea nd the unit F. > Some capacitors own the attribute 27000pF, others 27nF and some 0.027uF. > But using a numerical value of the capacity would require an input > parser capable of processing 27000pF, 27nF and 0.027uF, of course also > F, mF and for completeness also kF. May be in the future MF and GF is > necessary too. ;-) It's not like parsing or printing numbers with multiplier prefixes is hard or anything! In my opinion, compilers, calculators, spreadsheets, databases, anything that pretends to be able to read or write numbers should be able to do it. But almost none do. Spice makes an attempt, but gets 'M' wrong by a factor of 10^9. Gnuplot does it too, with mixed success and poor convenience. I have my own conversion functions, which I use everywhere. I know of no others. Pathetic. Anyone wants to lobby to get this introduced into libc and excel? Jeroen Belleman
From: Grant on 11 Jun 2010 18:01 On Fri, 11 Jun 2010 15:16:45 +0200, Jeroen Belleman <jeroen(a)nospam.please> wrote: >Uwe Hercksen wrote: >> >> >> Ian Bell schrieb: >> >>> Yes I tried 27000pF, 27nF and 0.027uF and get different results for each. >> >> Hello, >> >> it looks like they simply use a text field for the capacity value in the >> database instead of using a numerical valuea nd the unit F. >> Some capacitors own the attribute 27000pF, others 27nF and some 0.027uF. >> But using a numerical value of the capacity would require an input >> parser capable of processing 27000pF, 27nF and 0.027uF, of course also >> F, mF and for completeness also kF. May be in the future MF and GF is >> necessary too. ;-) > >It's not like parsing or printing numbers with multiplier prefixes >is hard or anything! In my opinion, compilers, calculators, >spreadsheets, databases, anything that pretends to be able to read >or write numbers should be able to do it. > >But almost none do. > >Spice makes an attempt, but gets 'M' wrong by a factor of 10^9. >Gnuplot does it too, with mixed success and poor convenience. I >have my own conversion functions, which I use everywhere. I know >of no others. Pathetic. > >Anyone wants to lobby to get this introduced into libc and excel? What, proper metric SI handling in US based software? Shirley you jest! :o) I'd like a calculator with eng units and proper rounding, like the old HPs had, but then I haven't bought an HP calc for a long time, the last one I had, I wore out the power switch -- non-repairable as it was direct to PCB copper and had worn it away over time. As to the M in spice, I think it started way back before case sensitivity became the norm for proper OSs. So one has to RTFM to find M is a 'meg' instead -- I've got far worse issues using LTSpice effectively than that. Not a spice user, so LTSpice is my first experience of it, I can do simple stuff so far, but still prefer pencil, paper and calculator for design work. It was good for playing with a snubber circuit recently, but I to guess parameters for a motor's inductance based on observation with a Tek DPO, certainly was a lot faster than rat's nesting and observation for that situation. The two local companies I buy from, Farnell and RS Components, their web sites show a lack of electronic knowledge by the database people. Farnell mostly get value ordering correct, but unfortunately their data entry people frequently mix up micro and milli -- most obvious when looking for small power inductors. One knows a 12MH can't be, but then it seems random whether it's a uH or mH, need to view details to check. RS don't bother getting values in order, it's confusing looking through alpha sorted values, especially recently when what I was after were milliohm resistors mixed up with the two and three digit k and M values. Caps I have less problems with, not noticed a problem finding particular values. Can remember learning nF decades ago, there was still a lot of mF and mmF for uF and pF about when I was a teenager, so retraining the eyes to interpret nF and more recently mF was difficult enough to be aware of. I still like dismantling stuff, saw an odd low value resistor last night, black brown read silver gold, one could see the turn and a half of resistance wire under the paint, so 12 milliohm 5% is my guess. Didn't measure it as I haven't put together a four wire low R tester yet. Grant. -- http://bugs.id.au/
First
|
Prev
|
Next
|
Last
Pages: 1 2 3 4 Prev: Low cost anemometer, I need some help Next: You'd think someone would make... |