Eng-Tips is the largest engineering community on the Internet
Intelligent Work Forums for Engineering Professionals
America Has Two Feet. It’s About to Lose One of Them 1
- Thread starter drawoh
- Start date
BrianPetersen
Mechanical
I rode a motorcycle in Australia last year, first experience with driving/riding on the left. Only times I made a mistake was when there was no one else around due to not having a visual cue, although that also meant that it wasn't a problem. The rental car that I drove first had a bigger nuisance...the mirrored stalks! Got wipers when I wanted turn signals many times.
JohnRBaker
Mechanical
As I've noted before, officially we're already on the metric system, it's just voluntary. Besides, right now I'm afraid that if we tried to get people to use it more widely, we'd be accused of some sort of anti-American plot. And I fear it would fall along the same political lines as certain issues are now dividing us, like ignoring science and pushing conspiracy theories.
John R. Baker, P.E. (ret)
EX-Product 'Evangelist'
Irvine, CA
Siemens PLM:
UG/NX Museum:
The secret of life is not finding someone to live with
It's finding someone you can't live without
John R. Baker, P.E. (ret)
EX-Product 'Evangelist'
Irvine, CA
Siemens PLM:
UG/NX Museum:
The secret of life is not finding someone to live with
It's finding someone you can't live without
I doubt the US will ever really convert to metric. They were supposed to in 1975 I think. I graduated high school that year. They never will because it would require way too much expense and headaches. If the government (and thereby the tax-payer) would very heavily subsidize businesses it may occur but even then I doubt it. the US has too much to convert that is not easily converted.
They converted rebar so far, that is not hard to do. They converted nuts and bolts on vehicles, that is not hard to do.
Look at plumbing, can't reduce the diameter of a pipe in the direction of flow. How do you replace a section of damaged 8" pipe?
While lumber itself is easy to convert, the use of lumber is not easy. Try selling metric lumber when all remodels will require the old system. If you open up the first metric lumber mill, you better have deep pockets. Cabinets would no longer be 24"x36" as a standard.
Luckily, I am pretty good at converting parts per million and roof slopes to their metric equivalents.
They converted rebar so far, that is not hard to do. They converted nuts and bolts on vehicles, that is not hard to do.
Look at plumbing, can't reduce the diameter of a pipe in the direction of flow. How do you replace a section of damaged 8" pipe?
While lumber itself is easy to convert, the use of lumber is not easy. Try selling metric lumber when all remodels will require the old system. If you open up the first metric lumber mill, you better have deep pockets. Cabinets would no longer be 24"x36" as a standard.
Luckily, I am pretty good at converting parts per million and roof slopes to their metric equivalents.
JohnRBaker
Mechanical
I had to buy a couple of sheets of furniture grade plywood at Home Depot a couple of months ago and I noticed that while the 48 x 96 inch size was unchanged, that it came in thicknesses of 5.2mm, 12mm and 18mm. Not a 100% conversion, but it's a move in that direction.
John R. Baker, P.E. (ret)
EX-Product 'Evangelist'
Irvine, CA
Siemens PLM:
UG/NX Museum:
The secret of life is not finding someone to live with
It's finding someone you can't live without
John R. Baker, P.E. (ret)
EX-Product 'Evangelist'
Irvine, CA
Siemens PLM:
UG/NX Museum:
The secret of life is not finding someone to live with
It's finding someone you can't live without
- Thread starter
- #29
dauwerda,
You do realise that a three inch pipe is not three inches in diameter? If we were to re-designate what we now call 3"[ ]pipe as 80mm[ ]pipe, we would be more accurate.
I designed and built back steps for my house mostly out of 2[×]6s, relying on the lumber tables in my first semester mechanics of materials textbook. This claims that the size is 1[‑]5/8 by 5[‑]5/8". You know you are getting old when...
--
JHG
You do realise that a three inch pipe is not three inches in diameter? If we were to re-designate what we now call 3"[ ]pipe as 80mm[ ]pipe, we would be more accurate.
I designed and built back steps for my house mostly out of 2[×]6s, relying on the lumber tables in my first semester mechanics of materials textbook. This claims that the size is 1[‑]5/8 by 5[‑]5/8". You know you are getting old when...
--
JHG
Of course I realize that - it wasn't my example. I was commenting on the fact that Canada seems to be figuring out how to deal with the "standard size" issue, so the US should be able to figure it out as well.
Perhaps Ron247's use of pipe is not a good example of the issue, the standard cabinet size may be better.
I believe the point being made is that it is nice to use even increments for standard sizes, so new standard sizes would need to be made using even increments of the metric dimensions, which would not align perfectly with the current even increments that are used with imperial dimensions.
The example that comes to mind for me is the standard plywood size - in the US it is 4'x8' which is approximately 1220mmx2440mm in metric - not nice even increments. The metric "equivalent" would be 1200x2400 I believe. Both sizes would have to be made available during the transition period - which would have to last years to ensure that existing items could still be repaired or added to.
Perhaps Ron247's use of pipe is not a good example of the issue, the standard cabinet size may be better.
I believe the point being made is that it is nice to use even increments for standard sizes, so new standard sizes would need to be made using even increments of the metric dimensions, which would not align perfectly with the current even increments that are used with imperial dimensions.
The example that comes to mind for me is the standard plywood size - in the US it is 4'x8' which is approximately 1220mmx2440mm in metric - not nice even increments. The metric "equivalent" would be 1200x2400 I believe. Both sizes would have to be made available during the transition period - which would have to last years to ensure that existing items could still be repaired or added to.
So how would someone go about getting full size lumber? I ran into that problem years ago. The 2 X 4 of today was too small.
I already need two sets of tools to work on my car, for the small part remaining that I can work on. Had to buy a special socket to replace the oxygen sensor.
I believe the biggest thing would be land sizes and recording of old deeds.
Lets see, in some parts of Texas, the land size was measured by how far someone go while riding a mule while smoking two cigars (or something like that).
Standardize that.
Also I noticed that tires are in inch diameters, and mm width.
I already need two sets of tools to work on my car, for the small part remaining that I can work on. Had to buy a special socket to replace the oxygen sensor.
I believe the biggest thing would be land sizes and recording of old deeds.
Lets see, in some parts of Texas, the land size was measured by how far someone go while riding a mule while smoking two cigars (or something like that).
Standardize that.
Also I noticed that tires are in inch diameters, and mm width.
JohnRBaker
Mechanical
You have to ask for what they call 'dimensional' lumber. I bought some 1 x 4 last year for another project where I actually needed it to be 1 x 4, and I had no problem finding it at Home Depot.
John R. Baker, P.E. (ret)
EX-Product 'Evangelist'
Irvine, CA
Siemens PLM:
UG/NX Museum:
The secret of life is not finding someone to live with
It's finding someone you can't live without
John R. Baker, P.E. (ret)
EX-Product 'Evangelist'
Irvine, CA
Siemens PLM:
UG/NX Museum:
The secret of life is not finding someone to live with
It's finding someone you can't live without
davidbeach
Electrical
So what you bought was probably a 4/4 x 16/4 board, not a 1 x 4. That fact that no nominal size of anything I'm familiar with is the actual size makes that whole transition much easier. The same thing can have two nominal dimensions, one in customary units and one in SI units, but the thing actually has one size. The actual metrification would occur when you start cutting it to length in SI units rather than in customary units.
JohnRBaker
Mechanical
John R. Baker, P.E. (ret)
EX-Product 'Evangelist'
Irvine, CA
Siemens PLM:
UG/NX Museum:
The secret of life is not finding someone to live with
It's finding someone you can't live without
The pipe example I used is a real problem with metric conversion. Regardless of the actual diameter of an 8" pipe, there is no "standard" metric pipe of equivalent diameter. So if you splice an 8" line with a standard metric size pipe (not some custom diameter that is really close to 8"), you are decreasing the diameter on one end or the other of a splice. This is more a sewage application than pure fluid flow.
while we can physically make metric lumber, a standard metric wall stud would not be 1.5"x3.5"x92.625". It would be some even number of millimeters that may be somewhat close to those dimensions but not close enough. They also space framing at 60 cm on center, not 24" on center. Therefore, real metric sheet material is not 8' long. The point I am making, it without heavy $$$ subsidies, no one wants to convert their plant operation and an oppressive law that forced the issue would not go over well.
Standardization has to do with nice round numbers when possible not just labeling something two different ways. But give them 25.4 centimeters and they will take a 1.6 kilometers, I always say. Did I convert that right? Let me check with a Denver Bronco fan to see.
while we can physically make metric lumber, a standard metric wall stud would not be 1.5"x3.5"x92.625". It would be some even number of millimeters that may be somewhat close to those dimensions but not close enough. They also space framing at 60 cm on center, not 24" on center. Therefore, real metric sheet material is not 8' long. The point I am making, it without heavy $$$ subsidies, no one wants to convert their plant operation and an oppressive law that forced the issue would not go over well.
Standardization has to do with nice round numbers when possible not just labeling something two different ways. But give them 25.4 centimeters and they will take a 1.6 kilometers, I always say. Did I convert that right? Let me check with a Denver Bronco fan to see.
SkipVought
Aerospace
With regard to the metric system in the USA, in 1977 my older son came home with math homework that was entirely metric to metric conversions. I asked him if his teacher ever gave them conversions that included English units and he replied, "No!"
I made an appointment with Miss Jeski, his sixth grade math teacher, and in our session, she informed me that next year the United States would be converting all units of measure from English to Metric. We had a little discussion about how absurd that assumption was and how ill prepared her students would be if her current approach were to be followed.
Later I assumed that she must have seen some distorted reporting [say it ain't so!] in the news media about...
The Metric Conversion Act is an Act of Congress that U.S. President Gerald Ford signed into law on December 23, 1975.
...or maybe she jumped to a conclusion?
Skip,
[sub]
![[glasses]](/data/assets/smilies/glasses.gif "[glasses] [glasses]")
Just traded in my OLD subtlety...
for a NUance!![[tongue]](/data/assets/smilies/tongue.gif "[tongue] [tongue]")
[/sub]
I made an appointment with Miss Jeski, his sixth grade math teacher, and in our session, she informed me that next year the United States would be converting all units of measure from English to Metric. We had a little discussion about how absurd that assumption was and how ill prepared her students would be if her current approach were to be followed.
Later I assumed that she must have seen some distorted reporting [say it ain't so!] in the news media about...
The Metric Conversion Act is an Act of Congress that U.S. President Gerald Ford signed into law on December 23, 1975.
...or maybe she jumped to a conclusion?
Skip,
[sub]
Just traded in my OLD subtlety...for a NUance!
[/sub]- Thread starter
- #37
dauwerda said:
I am Canadian, based in Toronto. A company I used to work for had a new building custom designed. I saw the drawings. The architects worked in metric [—] metres and millimetres. Everything was converted to feet and inches for the builders.
--
JHG
That's because washing machines are related to US customary units
TTFN (ta ta for now)
I can do absolutely anything. I'm an expert! faq731-376 forum1529 Entire Forum list
TTFN (ta ta for now)
I can do absolutely anything. I'm an expert! faq731-376 forum1529 Entire Forum list
To convey a measurement, the reader needs to be able have a feel of what that is. Most people in the US have a washing machine, and have a good idea what size that is.
An inch is about the size of the length between two of my finger joints. A millimeter is how much?
A yard is about one large step. A foot is the outside size of a size 10 or 11 shoe.
Never learned that stuff about the metric system, but really learned the English system in shop, where I had to use the measurements.
An inch is about the size of the length between two of my finger joints. A millimeter is how much?
A yard is about one large step. A foot is the outside size of a size 10 or 11 shoe.
Never learned that stuff about the metric system, but really learned the English system in shop, where I had to use the measurements.
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
- Question
- Locked
- Question