Subject: New Scientific Product Search Engine
From: "Joe Bumgarner, Jr."
Date: Tue, 03 Dec 1996 18:06:48 -0500
"Take a Minute, Save an Hour!"
Looking for a hard-to-find product?
Tired of voice mail, fuzzy faxes, phone tag?
Need to contact a vendor?
Then…
Search our database of over 5000 laboratory suppliers. Use SciMail(SM)
to broadcast requests for price quotes, literature, technical/sales
assistance, and more!
Send SciMail… It’s Smart. It’s Easy. It’s FREE!
"http://sciquest.com"
SciQuest - It’s about YOUR time.
We also value your feedback and support so much that we want to give you
free stuff for it!! It's our way of saying thanks for taking the time to
help us. After using our site, go to the "Free Stuff for Feedback"
button and fill out the feedback form. You will receive a free SciQuest
T-shirt or hat if:
-you make a suggestion to improve our site and we adopt your idea.
-we use your email comments in our marketing materials.
-you get a qualified vendor to register online.
-you convince five new users to become a SciQuester (have them put your
userid or name in the Other text box when asked "How Did You Find Out
About SciQuest?" on the "Be a SciQuester" membership form).
____________________________________________________________________
Joe Bumgarner, Jr. SciQuest - "Internet Solutions for Science"
jbumgarner@sciquest.com "http://sciquest.com"
Site Director
Phone: 919-732-5813 FAX: 919-782-3123
____________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: CsI optics on FT-IR
From: fweesner (Forrest Weesner)
Date: 4 Dec 1996 00:08:58 GMT
You are correct concerning the two drawbacks of CsI, but should be Ok if
you keep it protected and are not too concerned with high (better than 1
cm-1) resolution. Also consider 1) probably something like 1% of FTIRs
are shipped with CsI optics 2) Even with CsI the S/N at the low end will
be crummy using std source/detector/purge options. Low-mid
resolution/high concentration samples you will probably be OK,
otherwise....
Ijwindak@umich.edu (James Windak) wrote:
> We need to do both Mid-IR and also Far-IR down to 225 cm-1. We are
> considering an FT-IR with a cesium iodide beamsplitter and detector window
> to do both ranges at once. However, I have heard that there can be
> problems with CsI, that it is more hygroscopic than KBr, and also that it
> is softer and tends to distort or flow over time.
Forrest Weesner...fweesner@students.wisc.edu
