The 'u' in 'uF' is supposed to be a 'µ', meaning 'micro'. So 1 microfarad is 1µF is 1uF.
For your original question, micro is greater than nano is greater than pico. So 100nF is not going to be 0.1pF--that would be backward. 100nF is 0.1uF or 100000pF.
One microfarad is one-millionth of a Farad, and is therefore 0.000001F--or more easily written as 1uF.
One nanofarad is one billionth of a Farad, so it would take one thousand nanofarads to make one microfarad. One nanofarad is 1nF or 0.001uF.
One picofarad is one trillionth of a Farad, so it would take one thousand picofarads to make one nanofarad. One picofarad is 1pF or 0.001nF.
What's the reason for not using mF? I had noticed that it never appeared to be mentioned even when it seemed appropriate; does it clash with a different term mF?
Sorry, I misunderstood your explanation. You said some old schematics use mF rather than µF, I didn't realise you meant they used mF to *mean* microfarads.
Boncuk said:
Some countries don't have the "µ" in their alphabet. So mF and µF could be mixed up easily.
Thank You.....I think visual, not technical. If I can get a picture in my mind...I won't forget it..and I understand it...Technical ( just a bunch of #'s ) don't work well with me.