Date: Fri Jun 5 15:39:26 2009

Author: Sam Sampere

Subject: Re: Osheroff demo update

Post:

--_000_872257DA0045A549B529D020D289F87501E4676CEASUEX07MBX07ad_
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

I used OFHC. Then bunches of taplers commented that OFHC was overkill and g=
ot great results with 100 grade copper. I didn't look up the difference in =
conductivity between the two at 77K.

Sam



From: tap-l-owner@lists.ncsu.edu [mailto:tap-l-owner@lists.ncsu.edu] On Beh=
alf Of chuck britton
Sent: Friday, June 05, 2009 3:22 PM
To: tap-l@lists.ncsu.edu
Subject: Re: [tap-l] Osheroff demo update

Anybody comparing 'standard' Cu with OFHC Cu??

(Oxygen-Free High Conductivity Cu)

OFHC was the only Cu used in our Low Temp lab for heat exchangers and such.

Osheroff woulda used OFHC.

On Jun 5, 2009, at Jun 5(Fri) 2:31 , zigpeacock@aol.com wrote:


BC, at Utah we have both .5inch and 2inch thick pieces and the 2 inch is no=
ticably better than the thinner piece.
They are both 6 inch, the cooling is definetly speeded up and uses les=
s LN2 when the Copper well smeared with vacuum grease. [I have lots of Vacu=
um grease.]
Zig

--_000_872257DA0045A549B529D020D289F87501E4676CEASUEX07MBX07ad_
Content-Type: text/html; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable










******

******I used OFHC. Then bunches of taplers commented that OFHC was
overkill and got great results with 100 grade copper. I didn?t look u= p
the difference in conductivity between the two at 77K.******

****** ******

******Sam******

****** ******

****** ******

****** ******

*******From:* tap-l-owner@lists.ncsu.edu
[mailto:tap-l-owner@lists.ncsu.edu] *On Behalf= Of *chuck britton
*Sent:* Friday, June 05, 2009 3:22 PM
*To:* tap-l@lists.ncsu.edu
*Subject:* Re: [tap-l] Osheroff demo update******

****** ******

******Anybody comparing 'standard' Cu with OFHC Cu??******

****** ******

****** &= nbsp; &nbs= p; ************(Oxygen-Free
High Conductivity Cu)******

****** ******

******OFHC was the only Cu used in our Low Temp lab for
heat exchangers and such.******

****** ******

****** &= nbsp; ************Osheroff woulda used OFHC.******

****** ******

******On Jun 5, 2009, at Jun 5(Fri) 2:31 , zigpeacock@aol.com
<3D"mailto:zigpeacock@aol.com"> wrote:= ******

******

******

******BC, at Utah we have both .5inch and 2inch thick pieces= and the 2
inch is noticably better than the thinner piece.
They a= re both 6 inch, the cooling is definetly speeded up and
uses less LN2 when the Copper well smeared with vacuum grease. [I have
lots of Vacuum grease.]******

****** Zig******



******--_000_872257DA0045A549B529D020D289F87501E4676CEASUEX07MBX07ad_--

******

******

Back