3 ms·
A mistake: you refer to C9 in the monostable section, but it should be C5
by Evidlo 4y ago
A mistake: you refer to C9 in the monostable section, but it should be C5
- ynoxinul 4y agoThanks, fixed it.
- exmadscientist 4y agoAnother mistake that doesn't deserve a top-level comment: the unit abbreviation for "second" is "s", not "S" (that one's the siemens = inverse ohm = former mho, which was a way better unit than the siemens, but that's another discussion...). Thus, "ms" and "ns" rather than "mS" and "nS". This may sound incredibly pedantic, and it is, but it's also one of the tests for attention to detail that I use when interviewing and evaluating an EE candidate, so, y'know, maybe worth learning to get right. Or not, life's short and building stuff out of discretes is more fun. Your call!
- ynoxinul 4y agoThank you, fixed.
- unwind 4y agoHadn't heard of "mho" for conductivity, is that from when Bourne worked with electronics? :) I would oppose a unit that starts with a prefix symbol (m=milli=0.001) on principle.
- exmadscientist 4y ago> I would oppose a unit that starts with a prefix symbol (m=milli=0.001) on principle. The unit name isn't usually important. I think you're talking about the symbol? That's "℧", which has its own problems. But at least it's in Unicode now! Altogether I think the "℧" caused much less trouble than the "S" has. "S" is just stupid... as evidenced by this whole subthread. And, yes, I have read datasheets wrong because of this. Thanks, 14th CGPM!
- deleted 4y ago[deleted]
- deleted 4y ago[deleted]
- aaronmdjones 4y ago> I would oppose a unit that starts with a prefix symbol (m=milli=0.001) on principle The fundamental SI unit of mass is the kilogram (kg).
- pwg 4y agoWikipedia dates the mho to 1883 and Lord Kelvin: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mho#Mho https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mho#Mho