Talk:Turbomolecular pump

message: I'm not an experienced Wikipedia editor, and I have tried my best. I'm still not satisfied with the content in the page, but perhaps it has at least become better. I welcome anyone to make any changes they consider appropriate.
SundarKanna 07:34, 25 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Blade thickness has nothing to do with high pressure operation - power consumption is so high when you get into pressures anywhere close to a millibar that the pump won't run at full speed. The blade thickness is set by considerations of fatigue, creep, manufacturing, and strength if the pump is accidentally vented to atmosphere. Pdf27 (talk) 14:11, 18 January 2008 (UTC)

text: My understanding is that turbomolecular pumps have flat blades designed to operate in particulate flow. (vacuum) Turbopumps have airfoil-shaped blades designed to operate in continuum flow. (typically high pressure.)--Yannick 17:07, 5 August 2007 (UTC)

text: Correct. Turbomolecular pumps stop working completely when pressure gets high enough to move into continuum flow - they only work in molecular flow. Pdf27 (talk) 14:11, 18 January 2008 (UTC)

text: I agree with all comments. A careful reading of the first comment on the turbopump article shows no inconsistancy. TM pumps are usually _called_ turbopumps unless it is necessary to distinguish the 2 types. While technically misleading, that is the vernacular usage among vacuum workers. Turbopump is just easier to say than turbomolecular pump. Generally this communicates that the pump in question is not a diffusion, ion or cryopump; rather it is a mechanical pump.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 131.243.35.178 (talk) 01:38, 11 September 2009 (UTC)

message: I checked Amazon.com and found that Cole-Parmer charge $3758 USD for the bare pump alone with no integral controller, while a complete "turbomolecular system" runs $7380. 99.40.197.2 (talk) 18:35, 7 June 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Cost 

message: Multiple editors are adding images for pumps made by Aligent.
* 2015-10-21,  (editor has no edits outside of this article), :File:Agilent TwisTorr Pumps.jpg
* 2015-10-13, , :File:Agilent TwisTorr Rotor.jpg
* 2015-07-20,  (editor's only other edits are to Agilent Technologies), :File:Agilent TwisTorr molecular drag.png
These appear to be for the purposes of promotion, and Wikipedia is not to be used for promotion.
Furthermore, there appears to be a connection between the photographer of this image and the image itself. I have documented this at :Commons:File talk:Agilent TwisTorr Pumps.jpg.
On a related note, I removed the brand-names from the captions of two if of the images.  They aren't necessary for this article.  The brands are on the image's page descriptions on the Wikimedia Commons and one image has the brand showing on the pump itself (I am tempted to remove that image completely for that very reason). davidwr/(talk)/(contribs) 22:42, 22 October 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: Highly agree with you regarding the removal of the image that shows the brand name on the pump.Ikazakov (talk) 08:05, 23 October 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: While both images have the brand displayed, only :File:Pfeiffer turbopump.jpg has it big enough to be legible as seen on this page.  I was going to just upload a version of the image with the brand edited out, but after reading the article, I didn't see any text discussing either "thin film deposition systems" or "organic electronics research" so I just edited it out (note: the typo "reorganic" was inserted by this edit at 11:47, 16 April 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Use of images that appear to be for promotional purposes