[ntp:questions] Re: Use of "Atomic Clock" Nomenclature
"darryl otzen at acterna com" at ntp.isc.org
Sat Jan 21 00:49:30 UTC 2006
Richard B. Gilbert wrote:
> fm at nowhere.invalid wrote:
>> Ulrich Windl <Ulrich.Windl at rz.uni-regensburg.de> wrote:
>>> "Max Power" <mikehack at u.washington.edu> writes:
>>>> Use of "Atomic Clock" Nomenclature
>> It seems that Cs clocks are now forbidden to fly
>> because cs133 is highly flamable (or even does it
>> burn spontaneously ?) in the ambiant air.
> Cesium belongs to the same chemical family as Sodium and Potassium. It
> will burn spontaneously when exposed to air and/or water! I would be
> surprised, however, if the amount of cesium in a cesium beam tube were
> sufficient to be serious problem. And if I were shipping a cesium beam
> tube or an entire cesium clock by air, I would take extreme care in
> packing it. I'm told that the cheapest cesium clocks cost about $40,000
I have shipped caesium oscillators by air, there is a declaration form that gives aproval by the US department of transport to ship them as cargo on
This also worked in Australia and south east asia.
The plane would have to crash before the tube would rupture, and then the small amount of ceasium would be the last of your worries.
It's interesting that they don't have the same concern about rubidium oscillators , I ship a lot more of them around the world.
More information about the questions