First I was wrong including meter in my question.
Second I see also NIST let the use of plural for
volt ampere and ohm :(
http://physics.nist.gov/Pubs/SP811/sec06.html
Third 10 V is correct not 10 volts :)
Just a question about the use of the right
S.I. rules and style conventions in the
English Technical Writing.
Why I always see (and in this forum too):
volts ohms meters
and not
volt ohm meter ?
Thanks,
Renzo Del Fabbro
Hi All ,
mine was just a "statistical question"
for know if there is some tendence in the new physics books
or courses, tired to follow the Franklin convention,
to use the real electrons movement in a solid conductor.
...so what can U tell me about university books and courses?
Thanks
I have studied on italian and english books at university
and I have always found the universal use of "conventional current" ( from + to - )
Now I see lots of web pages use the real electonic flow
(from - to +) so I'd like to know if there's a new trend in the university use.
Thanks
I know something about the single parts but I'd like to understand their layout ... so, for example, I'd like to know what "rikman" means when he writes... "(IDG) mounted directly onto the engine's auxillary gearbox" .
I'd like to see a real-scheme where there r the physical...
Thanks rikman
But I'd like a doc like this :
http://www.teijinseiki.co.jp/topics/20020802_presentation.pdf
( but in English .... of course :)
Ciao,
Renzo
thank you wktaylor
but I'd like something more !
I just know turbojet aircraft for ex at take-off 12,000 RPM
6,000 RPM cruising, 3,000 RPM at landing, and so the alternator must be drive through a "constant speed drive" but I'd like to see the layout.
(BTW: sorry for my BAD english!:)