Store Spare RAM in Anti-Static Bag

I just increased the RAM in my Studio XPS 8100 from 4GB to 6GB. No
problem. I had to replace a pair of 1GB modules with a pair of 2GB
modules, so now I have two sticks of RAM for which I have no use.

Maybe I'm superstitious, but I want to hold on to the old memory
modules, just in case something goes wrong with the new memory. Which
isn't likely, but anyway...

The new memory (from Crucial) arrived on a tray sealed inside a plastic
case. The plastic case got destroyed in the act of opening it. Can I
store the old RAM inside an anti-static bag?

Daddy

On Sun, 30 Jan 2011 23:59:59 -0500, Daddy <> wrote:

>The new memory (from Crucial) arrived on a tray sealed inside a plastic
>case. The plastic case got destroyed in the act of opening it. Can I
>store the old RAM inside an anti-static bag?
>
You can but for RAM you may be safer with a static shielding bag (and
that may be what you have).

'Anti static' bags often look like a polythene bag with a tint and
they are (were) often used for things like floppy drives.

Static shielding bags are the near black bags you often get RAM, HDD
and addon cards in and are much safer than the former.

The bag also needs to be 'closed' (folded over) to provide the full
protection (I have been handed cards half in / out a static shielding
bag). ;-(

Once in the right bag then they can put in a box for physical
protection.

For pairs / groups of RAM modules I often put one module in, fold the
bag over, add another, fold the bag over etc. This keeps the modules
apart and reduces the risk of any mechanical damage from each other.

None of this may matter though /if/ you didn't maintain good
antistatic practice whilst changing the modules (the damage may
already have been done and may bite you at some time in the future).
;-(

Cheers, T i m

T i m wrote:
> On Sun, 30 Jan 2011 23:59:59 -0500, Daddy <> wrote:
>
>> The new memory (from Crucial) arrived on a tray sealed inside a plastic
>> case. The plastic case got destroyed in the act of opening it. Can I
>> store the old RAM inside an anti-static bag?
>>
> You can but for RAM you may be safer with a static shielding bag (and
> that may be what you have).
>
> 'Anti static' bags often look like a polythene bag with a tint and
> they are (were) often used for things like floppy drives.
>
> Static shielding bags are the near black bags you often get RAM, HDD
> and addon cards in and are much safer than the former.
>
> The bag also needs to be 'closed' (folded over) to provide the full
> protection (I have been handed cards half in / out a static shielding
> bag). ;-(
>
> Once in the right bag then they can put in a box for physical
> protection.
>
> For pairs / groups of RAM modules I often put one module in, fold the
> bag over, add another, fold the bag over etc. This keeps the modules
> apart and reduces the risk of any mechanical damage from each other.
>
> None of this may matter though /if/ you didn't maintain good
> antistatic practice whilst changing the modules (the damage may
> already have been done and may bite you at some time in the future).
> ;-(
>
> Cheers, T i m

Thanks for that great advice. I never knew there was a difference
between an anti-static bag and a static shielding bag. (It turns out I
have both kinds.)

Daddy

"T i m" wrote:
> [....]
> 'Anti static' bags often look like a polythene bag with a tint and
> they are (were) often used for things like floppy drives.
>
> Static shielding bags are the near black bags you often get RAM, HDD
> and addon cards in and are much safer than the former.

What's the difference besides the name? Anything called
"anti-static" would be conductive to prevent static charges
from collecting on its surface, and anything called "static shielding"
would also be conductive to prevent static charges from entering
the bag. I would bet that any plastic bag made of metallized
mylar sheet (such as what encloses new hard drives) would
serve well under either nomenclature.

*TimDaniels*

On Mon, 31 Jan 2011 10:22:18 -0800, "Timothy Daniels"
<> wrote:

>"T i m" wrote:
>> [....]
>> 'Anti static' bags often look like a polythene bag with a tint and
>> they are (were) often used for things like floppy drives.
>>
>> Static shielding bags are the near black bags you often get RAM, HDD
>> and addon cards in and are much safer than the former.
>
> What's the difference besides the name?

A lot.

> Anything called
>"anti-static" would be conductive to prevent static charges
>from collecting on its surface,

True.

> and anything called "static shielding"
>would also be conductive to prevent static charges from entering
>the bag.

Again true.

> I would bet that any plastic bag made of metallized
>mylar sheet (such as what encloses new hard drives) would
>serve well under either nomenclature.

And true again, so that would be 'static shielding'?

So, we have 'anti-static' materials ... that don't produce and will
try to distribute any electrostatic charges but /would not/ protect
any static sensitive materials from an electrostatic discharge as a
metalised film container might by providing a 'Faraday Cage'.

I do like (well, I don't) these tips that often come with electronic
gear where they tell you to 'touch something metal to earth yourself
before opening ...' but no mention of continuing to do so after that
initial touch? Not that you should be continually properly 'grounded'
(ie, zero ohms) whilst working on anything of course.

Cheers, T i m

In news:ii6jpk$f62$,
Daddy typed on Mon, 31 Jan 2011 10:17:07 -0500:
> Thanks for that great advice. I never knew there was a difference
> between an anti-static bag and a static shielding bag. (It turns out I
> have both kinds.)
>
> Daddy

If no antistatic bags around, tin foil works too.

--
Bill
Gateway M465e ('06 era)
Centrino Core2 Duo 1.83G - 2GB - Windows XP SP3

On Wed, 2 Feb 2011 07:03:56 -0600, "BillW50" <> wrote:

>In news:ii6jpk$f62$,
>Daddy typed on Mon, 31 Jan 2011 10:17:07 -0500:
>> Thanks for that great advice. I never knew there was a difference
>> between an anti-static bag and a static shielding bag. (It turns out I
>> have both kinds.)
>>
>> Daddy
>
>If no antistatic bags around, tin foil works too.

Back in the day, whilst at BT Factories and during the early use of
CMOS ICs I saw a load of what looked like new IC's in the skip.

It turned out they had a delivery of these new fangled 'chips' and the
storeman sat there painstakingly unwrapping a load from the little
foil wraps and lobbing the chips in the plastic storage bins before
someone stopped him ...

Cheers, T i m

In news:,
T i m typed on Wed, 02 Feb 2011 13:38:59 +0000:
> On Wed, 2 Feb 2011 07:03:56 -0600, "BillW50" <> wrote:
>
>> In news:ii6jpk$f62$,
>> Daddy typed on Mon, 31 Jan 2011 10:17:07 -0500:
>>> Thanks for that great advice. I never knew there was a difference
>>> between an anti-static bag and a static shielding bag. (It turns
>>> out I have both kinds.)
>>>
>>> Daddy
>>
>> If no antistatic bags around, tin foil works too.
>
> Back in the day, whilst at BT Factories and during the early use of
> CMOS ICs I saw a load of what looked like new IC's in the skip.
>
> It turned out they had a delivery of these new fangled 'chips' and the
> storeman sat there painstakingly unwrapping a load from the little
> foil wraps and lobbing the chips in the plastic storage bins before
> someone stopped him ...
>
> Cheers, T i m

ROTFL! Those old CMOS chips were really sensitive to static too. Back in
the 80's, I had a keyboard that looked a bit dusty. Pulled out the
vacuum cleaner and dusted it off. Oops! That blew out the I/O CMOS chip
in the computer. :-O

--
Bill
Gateway M465e ('06 era)
Centrino Core2 Duo 1.83G - 2GB - Windows XP SP3

On Wed, 2 Feb 2011 07:52:34 -0600, "BillW50" <> wrote:

>
>ROTFL! Those old CMOS chips were really sensitive to static too. Back in
>the 80's, I had a keyboard that looked a bit dusty. Pulled out the
>vacuum cleaner and dusted it off. Oops! That blew out the I/O CMOS chip
>in the computer. :-O

Ooops indeed.

Talking of static, I have read suggestion that the wire to 'chip' that
provides the personality (65W / 90W etc) in these Dell laptop power
adaptors is effectively an aerial and therefore /could/ introduce some
high level noise into the chip, killing it?

Then with the chip dead the laptop stops charging (but will still
run).

I mention that because the replacement battery turned up for daughters
Latitude D520 today and whilst the BIOS / system sees it, (it marks
the original as 'not present') it still isn't charging it (and it says
the genuine Dell charger is 'not present')?

The modular battery still seems to be charging but I'm not sure if
that is self sufficient (ie, doesn't use the charging circuitry of the
primary battery).

Cheers, T i m

In news:,
T i m typed on Wed, 02 Feb 2011 19:25:40 +0000:
> Talking of static, I have read suggestion that the wire to 'chip' that
> provides the personality (65W / 90W etc) in these Dell laptop power
> adaptors is effectively an aerial and therefore /could/ introduce some
> high level noise into the chip, killing it?
>
> Then with the chip dead the laptop stops charging (but will still
> run).
>
> I mention that because the replacement battery turned up for daughters
> Latitude D520 today and whilst the BIOS / system sees it, (it marks
> the original as 'not present') it still isn't charging it (and it says
> the genuine Dell charger is 'not present')?
>
> The modular battery still seems to be charging but I'm not sure if
> that is self sufficient (ie, doesn't use the charging circuitry of the
> primary battery).

Yes I could see that wire and acting like an aerial and thus killing the
chip. And this problem interests me greatly. And does the laptop run
without any battery installed and run straight off of the AC? I have a
610 here that won't charge the battery and won't run without the
battery. And if the battery is drained, the laptop won't fire up at all.

--
Bill
Gateway M465e ('06 era)
Centrino Core Duo 1.83G - 2GB - Windows XP SP3