Cruisers & Sailing Forums (https://www.cruisersforum.com/forums/)
-   Off Topic Forum (https://www.cruisersforum.com/forums/f80/)
-   -   Convenience of the metric system (https://www.cruisersforum.com/forums/f80/convenience-of-the-metric-system-136055.html)

henryk 09-11-2014 20:56

Re: Convenience of the metric system
 
I came from metric to imperial system some over 20 years ago. It was hard at the beginning , but I managed only a part of it, in the construction field. I'm a tile layer by trade and use inches and feet every day, but when there is odd adding to do, than i use metric. it's easier to ad 65cm+ 65cm=130 versus 23 and 7/8+23 and 7/8. Than I found that it easier to subtract when calculating on the tape measure ! 23 and 7'8 + 23and78=48 less than a 1/4+23 and 7/8=72 less than 3/8. When it comes to car and boat mechanics i still didn't get over inches. When #13 is bit to small, I go for #14 or 15, but when 9/16 is to small or to big, I'm lost. I should be looking for 9/17, or 9/15

avb3 09-11-2014 21:08

Re: Convenience of the metric system
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by henryk (Post 1674087)
I came from metric to imperial system some over 20 years ago. It was hard at the beginning , but I managed only a part of it, in the construction field. I'm a tile layer by trade and use inches and feet every day, but when there is odd adding to do, than i use metric. it's easier to ad 65cm+ 65cm=130 versus 23 and 7/8+23 and 7/8. Than I found that it easier to subtract when calculating on the tape measure ! 23 and 7'8 + 23and78=48 less than a 1/4+23 and 7/8=72 less than 3/8. When it comes to car and boat mechanics i still didn't get over inches. When #13 is bit to small, I go for #14 or 15, but when 9/16 is to small or to big, I'm lost. I should be looking for 9/17, or 9/15

Here is a song/video that tells your story for you :)

Corb Lund: Hard On Equipment (Tool For The Job) on Vimeo

jongleur 09-11-2014 22:19

Re: Convenience of the metric system
 
avb3:

Thanks for that. I laughed and laughed.

StuM 09-11-2014 23:56

Re: Convenience of the metric system
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Benz (Post 1674034)
By the way, since Lars keeps asking, a Nautical mile (the only sort of mile worth using), is 6,000 feet long. 2,000 yards. 1,000 fathoms. Line usually comes in 600 foot spools. 100 fathoms. One-tenth, in short, of a mile.

Hey, who stole the other 76 ft (or 80 if you are so inclined) :whistling:

K_V_B 10-11-2014 00:50

Re: Convenience of the metric system
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Benz (Post 1674034)
Because they based it on 10, which as has been pointed out is far less versatile than base 12. Because when they realized that the earth is oblate, so their scheme of dividing the distance from equator to pole failed, they didn't simply cut their losses and scrap the whole deal; they persisted in trying to find SOMETHING that would be a meter long. Metal rod failed. Couple other things failed. Finally settled on some arcane wavelength of something or other in a dark basement in a vaccuum--how many people can replicate that to check up on whether their meter stick is correct?

You're being silly right?

Quote:

Turns out it's easier to exhume the body of an English monarch to get the measurements of a yard down again!
Turns out that the official, legal defintion of "1 yard" is 0.9144 meters. The official definitions of all "US Customary Units" are in terms of SI units. The official defintion of "1 pound" is 0.45359237 kg.


Quote:

Because it was invented mostly to spite the English by some Frenchmen who wouldn't use anything invented by their enemies, and moreover, had the effrontery to want the Prime Meridian to pass through Paris!
The idea of a "metric" system is quite older then the French revolution. In fact, Jefferson was in favor of a new system of measurements as well, based on multiples of 10. And tried to get in introduced in the US. He was one of the inspirators for the French scientists that invented the metric system. Anyway, did you know that France was also the first country to abolish the metric system?


Quote:

By the way, since Lars keeps asking, a Nautical mile (the only sort of mile worth using), is 6,000 feet long. 2,000 yards. 1,000 fathoms. Line usually comes in 600 foot spools. 100 fathoms. One-tenth, in short, of a mile.
Actually a nautical mile originally was defined as 1/21600 of the circumference of the earth measured on a meridian... You still think that basing a unit on a dimension of our planet is such a silly idea?
The problem with that definition however is indeed that this leads to varying lengths depending on how you define the circumference of the earth. As a result for a long time a UK nautical mile was 6080 feet, and a US nautical mile was slightly longer, at 6080.20 feet.
However, the official internationally agreed upon definition of a nautical mile is now 1852 meters (exact), which comes to about 6,076.1155 feet.

Quote:

Also, Noah may have been a terrible navigator--he used a raven as a navigational instrument, after all!--but when he ran aground, him and his family were the only ones left. So he was kind of still the best navigator of his epoch.
Of course, when you make up a story it's easy to make the hero the "best" in ways crucial to the plot...-

K_V_B 10-11-2014 00:53

Re: Convenience of the metric system
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Benz (Post 1673984)
The argument that the US, and all others still using Sensible measurements, should switch to Metric because the entire rest of the world is using it is specious.

Just like the argument that you should learn English because everybody else in the world does?
that's specious too?

martinworswick 10-11-2014 01:31

Re: Convenience of the metric system
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Benz (Post 1673984)
even if you could express so simple a concept as one-third (a very exact measurement, by the way) without forever chasing an infinitely repeating decimal (that little bar at the top of whichever the last decimal you cared to go to is, after all, a resounding admission of failure);

a third of what? sure you'll get a infinate number if you try to divide,lets say 10 but so will you if try to divide 10 inches by 3.

i'm a carpenter,english and know both systems,give me millimetres over fractions anyday-and ask american tradesman who regularly use add/divide/subtract fractions what they do and a lot will pull out the app on the smartphone.

goboatingnow 10-11-2014 02:47

Re: Convenience of the metric system
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Reiziger (Post 1673190)
In the UK they "almost" converted to Metric, the problem now for example Copper Tube, you can buy Metric and Imperial. Although close they don't fit together.

:smile:They also still drive on the wrong site of the road...


LegallyThe UK has converted, but you will always get legacy materials

goboatingnow 10-11-2014 02:52

Re: Convenience of the metric system
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Nicholson58 (Post 1673990)
I prefer 'furlongs per fortnight' A professor challenged us, "I don't care what units you use as long as they are correct". He spent a long time inventing conversions in order to correct the exam.

Use of metrics by us old farts, including us old-fart-engineers is a good way to crash land your spacecraft into Mars - a proven fact.

BTW, the reason for not converting as I see it - the US is packed with machinery & machine tools built to last or be rebuilt indefinitely, that have SAE scales and mechanisms made 10 or 100 turns to the inch. The conversion would obsolete billions in machine tools and cause the purchase of trillions in foreign made machines. I work in a machine shop making custom machinery. Its not happening. The inertia is too great. We buy (rarely) new machines that are programmable for multiple scales.


Simply because there is legacy equipment, in itself is no barrier to converting to metric. Many countries have done it.

My experience in engineering and science is the US is basically metric anyway.

nimblemotors 10-11-2014 02:55

Re: Convenience of the metric system
 
Fractions are just as simple as meters, it is just they don't express them conveniently, if they used 64 as the denominator, then 1/2 is '32', and 5/8 is '40' and wrenches and bolts can be specified with a single number, not a fraction, like how sheet metal gauges are specified, or "AN" fittings.

We could have a base 8 number system, if you just use fingers and not thumbs, and then kids could count to 24 with 8 fingers and 2 thumbs.. :)

goboatingnow 10-11-2014 03:33

Re: Convenience of the metric system
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by nimblemotors (Post 1674181)
Fractions are just as simple as meters, it is just they don't express them conveniently, if they used 64 as the denominator, then 1/2 is '32', and 5/8 is '40' and wrenches and bolts can be specified with a single number, not a fraction, like how sheet metal gauges are specified, or "AN" fittings.

We could have a base 8 number system, if you just use fingers and not thumbs, and then kids could count to 24 with 8 fingers and 2 thumbs.. :)


OK ask an average joe to add 3/32 nds + 7/64 +1 /8

now ask him him to say add 1.25 + 1.5 + 1.3, see who gets the answer correct

IN fact in the US, decimal fractions of inches are the most common of measurements in engineering etc, in essence a pseudo metrification

Fractions are not as simple.

Wotname 10-11-2014 03:41

Re: Convenience of the metric system
 
OK ask an average joe to add 3/32 nds + 7/64 +1 /8

So that's 6 + 7 + 8

Hmm... 21/64

Make it harder next time :)

Benz 10-11-2014 04:03

Re: Convenience of the metric system
 
Wow, far too many replies to tackle individually before work. Just a few things:
I disagree that anyone has proven that the whole world is right about this one. See the Noah story.
Speaking of Noah, I didn't make that up. You can read all about it in God's Word, where we also get the notion of the seven day week and the 24-hour day.
No, I wasn't being silly about what the length of a meter is. How many people have the equipment to measure the wavelength of whatever it is in a vaccuum ready-to-hand? How many colleges or scientific institutions have it? It's a really hard thing to measure, but without it how are all their balls-accurate metric rulers calibrated? The same way as a yardstick. So there is no more accuracy there than anywhere else.
It matters not that someone made the "official" measurement of a mile or inch or foot some string of metrical numbers--they existed long before that; it was probably done so that the people who refuse to think in anything BUT metric could do their conversions more easily. I have NEVER needed to convert a mile to kilometers, or an inch to cm.
It's good to hear the French were the first to ban Metrics. Too bad they jumped back on the bandwagon. As for the space race--without offence to the Native Americans, most technology in this country can be traced back to European roots--many of us came from there, after all. So you can't say that the moon race was accomplished by Germans, though someone of German descent worked on the program. It was an American rocket which made it to the moon, sent from a country who had not yet given themselves over wholesale to the metric system, while Russia, which had, lost.
Lots of replies, again, but no one has addressed the measurement of days, nor celestial navigation, or UTM grids.

Canibul 10-11-2014 04:15

Re: Convenience of the metric system
 
So....by your reckoning after "The Flood" only Noah's family was left alive, huh?

So.....why are we all different colors? Mrs. Noah messing around with the livestock?

Sand crab 10-11-2014 04:21

Re: Convenience of the metric system
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by martinworswick (Post 1674167)
i'm a carpenter,english and know both systems,give me millimetres over fractions anyday-and ask american tradesman who regularly use add/divide/subtract fractions what they do and a lot will pull out the app on the smartphone.

Actually us old school guys have used a Constuction Master calculator for years.
Enlarged Image - <\/TITLE><\/HEAD><BODY bgcolor="white" onLoad="if (self.resizeTo)self.resizeTo((document.images[0].width+10),(500))" topmargin="4" leftmargin="0" rightmargin="0" bottommargin="0"><table width=""'+document.images[0].width+'" border="0

They have been made for about 30 years and make feet inches and fractions easy. And just press that M key and it converts to metric. You can get a CM phone app but I'd rather use the CM itself because it's way cheaper to replace after construction abuse than my phone.

So what size is a 4'X8' sheet of plywood over there? And a 2X4?

Sand crab 10-11-2014 04:54

Re: Convenience of the metric system
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Canibul (Post 1674203)
So....by your reckoning after "The Flood" only Noah's family was left alive, huh?

So.....why are we all different colors? Mrs. Noah messing around with the livestock?

Your bible states that your god was going to destroy all humanity but took an exception with Noah. The bible couldn't possibly be wrong? It rained for 40 days and 40 nights and the flood waters covered the highest mountains on earth. Only Noah and his family survived. Then his sons were commanded to repopulate the earth but was the only woman left Noah's wife? Incest. Eeewwww.

Or the more logical approach is that the species evolved through evolution and the darker skinned people developed a natural pigment to safeguard the skin from the sun. As humans migrated from these tropics to colder lands they lost the darker pigment because they wore more clothes.

And by the way the ark was alleged to be 300 cubits long. A cubit is the length from your elbow to the tip of your middle finger or about a foot and a half so the ark was 450' long and 75' wide and 3 stories high. Now that's a lot of wood!

StuM 10-11-2014 05:40

Re: Convenience of the metric system
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by nimblemotors (Post 1674181)
We could have a base 8 number system, if you just use fingers and not thumbs, and then kids could count to 24 with 8 fingers and 2 thumbs.. :)

Actually, they would count to 30 :)

HappyMdRSailor 10-11-2014 05:51

Re: Convenience of the metric system
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by bgallinger (Post 1673728)
Who needs metric when America can send a B-52 bomber up to 35,000 ft., fly at 500 mph with a payload of 24,500 pounds, then drop a 750 Lb. bomb through a 3 ft. x 3ft. window!
Nuff said.

Damn straight Skippy! :thumb:

Quote:

Originally Posted by dpddj (Post 1673995)
I have an engineer's tape measure that I love to pull out for others to use. It is in tenths of feet. You want to watch someone scratch their head?
But then ....I love RPN, too.

I use one of these too... and LOVE it...
AND...
RPN!!! :thumb:

twoblocktom 10-11-2014 05:55

If you have trouble with fractions, try working with a dry waller! 9/16= half inch strong, 11/16= 5/8 strong, give me that damn tape!

HappyMdRSailor 10-11-2014 06:04

Re: Convenience of the metric system
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by twoblocktom (Post 1674235)
If you have trouble with fractions, try working with a dry waller! 9/16= half inch strong, 11/16= 5/8 strong, give me that damn tape!

HA HA!

Good one! :thumb:

valhalla360 10-11-2014 06:04

Re: Convenience of the metric system
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by K_V_B (Post 1673580)
No, the meter is 1,650,763.73 wavelengths of the orange-red emission line in the electromagnetic spectrum of the krypton-86 atom in a vacuum.
Before that it was the length of a bar kept somewhere in Paris.
Before that they indeed took 1/10000000 of the distance from the equator to the pole, because that ended up a good size, about the length of a pace...
Incidentally the nautical mile is defined in a similar way, as the length of one arc minute measured on the equator. This gives all kinds of advantages when doing astronomical navigation. For the same reason surveyors in metric countries will measure angles in "gon", of which 400 go in a circle...

The bar and the wavelength are just attempts to correct a faulty unit. It didn't change where intent of the definition. It was faulty in that it had no intuitive value to humans and the earth is not a perfect sphere.

The foot has only one of those faults. It's intuitive but had to be standardized since not everyones feet are exactly the same length (I'm lucky, with shoes on I'm usually within 1/4")

A meter is actually not very close to a pace. Based on the original definition of a mile, a step is around 2.64' A meter is 3.281' (24% error). You could argue that romans were shorter than modern people but I have to occasionally pace out distances for work so I have a specific pace I use to be consistent. I'm 6'2" with fairly long legs and use a pace that is a bit longer than my normal walking pace. It's actually really close to 3'. For most of the guys in my surveying class, were pretty close to 2.7' (2% variance from the standard roman army pace)

I'm in engineering and deal with surveyors. I'm comfortable moving back and forth between systems but never have I heard of a "gon". Maybe it's similar to a Smoot.

Don't get me wrong. Metric has it's uses.
- If there are a lot of unit conversions involved and I'm doing hand calculations, metric is nice because the calculations are simpler. The downside is I often don't have an intuitive sense of what the answer should be so it doesn't provide a backcheck. I have to convert the answer to english units and then see if it makes sense.
- If there are few unit conversions or I'm doing them with a computer that could care less if it's base 10, I prefer english as it's not any harder to calculate and I usually have a good intuitive sense of what the answer should be.

valhalla360 10-11-2014 06:05

Re: Convenience of the metric system
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by avb3 (Post 1673998)
My uncle was a civil engineer who emigrated to Canada in the mid-50's from Germany.

Of course, he was not used to the Imperial system used then in Canada. One of his first jobs was to estimate concrete requirements for a large public works program.

Back in the day of the slide rule (which I now have), he converted the specifications to metric, did whatever magic engineers do, and once he had he result, converted that end result back to Imperial measurements.

His company won the bid. He often talked about that before he passed away.

Oddly, I spent the first 5yrs of my engineering career doing the exact opposite in the late 90's.

barnakiel 10-11-2014 08:39

Re: Convenience of the metric system
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Benz (Post 1674034)
Because they based it on 10, which as has been pointed out is far less versatile than base 12. (...)

But 12 is a decimal notation number, and in decimal notation 10 is the base.

In other words, what you doing is trying to tell me, in English, that English is not a good base for this Forum, because French is more versatile.

Ille est*.

Now what?

(*)- Google translate.

(Google translate is a web based translation service based on English)

Back to square one. You need bigger guns, or else your guns are aimed the wrong way.

b.

Canibul 10-11-2014 08:40

Re: Convenience of the metric system
 
One nice convenience of the metric system is that my 41 foot yacht when I'm bragging boat becomes only 12M or 39 ft. when I'm quoting length to a marina for dockage fees. Things seem to change around 40 ft.

David M 10-11-2014 08:57

Re: Convenience of the metric system
 
I learned both systems pretty well. If I was king I would have the Metric system in the USA. With the Metric system everything divides by 10...which is usually easy math to do in your head. We did though send a man to the Moon using the Imperial system and nobody else has done that yet.

Island Time O25 10-11-2014 08:59

Re: Convenience of the metric system
 
IMO, the main reason for staying with old style non-metric system is psychological. It is cozy, fuzzy and warm as we can all relate to a foot, a yard or an inch but meters, millimeters and kilometers are cold, impersonal and highly theoretical. :smile:

Actually from the economic point of view a wholesale conversion to metric system would be a boom to the economy and would allow our physical plant, tools and some such to leapfrog directly from 19th century into 21st.

David M 10-11-2014 09:08

Re: Convenience of the metric system
 
Agree with Island Time. Additionally, it would make US products more marketable overseas.

Lars_L 10-11-2014 09:23

Re: Convenience of the metric system
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by bgallinger (Post 1673728)
Who needs metric when America can send a B-52 bomber up to 35,000 ft., fly at 500 mph with a payload of 24,500 pounds, then drop a 750 Lb. bomb through a 3 ft. x 3ft. window!
Nuff said.

I have 0.15 mile to my busstop. If you measure in imperial units, how do you say? 0.15 mi or 264 yd? (I shall admit that I used the computer for the convertsion).


I fully understand way the engeneers use the metrick system and use there brain for the construction and let the PR department take care of the conversion.

Island Time O25 10-11-2014 09:43

Re: Convenience of the metric system
 
The most compelling reason to switch to metric that I have heard in my lifetime was this:

"Human penis size.
...while fully erect ones have an average length of 6 inches (15 cm) and a diameter of 1.5 inches (3.8 cm), resulting in an erect circumference of 4.71 inches (12.0 cm)
" (wiki)

Don't know about others but to me 15 sounds much better than 6. :biggrin:

pete33458 10-11-2014 09:45

Re: Convenience of the metric system
 
As a scientist born and raised in the USA, I use either without a thought (like two languages), but there is no question which is better and easier (so I won't even bother to state it!). Sadly, imperial measurements are like the 1-cent coin, too politically unpopular for anyone to stand up and do the right thing. I guess everyone knows that the scrap value of a 1-cent coin is more than its face value? As a silent protest (because anything else is a waste of time), I throw every penny I get into the recycling bin, if everyone did that they would quickly stop making them! Sadly, it won't do me any good to go to the local hardware and ask for 30 meters of 5mm galvanized wire...

pete

avb3 10-11-2014 10:08

Re: Convenience of the metric system
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Wotname (Post 1674193)
OK ask an average joe to add 3/32 nds + 7/64 +1 /8

So that's 6 + 7 + 8

Hmm... 21/64

Make it harder next time :)

Exactly.

However, in all seriousness, metric is much easier to deal with. That being said, I would suspect that child learning to have to reduce those fractions to the largest common denominator before adding the numerator makes for better math skills. You and I an do that in our heads, many can't as they may not even know the process.

Cheechako 10-11-2014 10:14

Re: Convenience of the metric system
 
I need to buy a new riding lawnmower . I have a large yard. Should I buy a 105 cm version or the 135cm?

Blue Stocking 10-11-2014 10:25

Re: Convenience of the metric system
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by conachair (Post 1673935)
If only they had the balls to go for it back then instead of running scared from industry.... ;)

(dives for cover,, )

Probably soon, the resistance came from the automobile industry. Except for Ford, all the others now belong to metric countries anyway. :whistling:

Island Time O25 10-11-2014 10:42

Re: Convenience of the metric system
 
Actually the conversion was scheduled in the early 70s (under Nixon I believe) to take 10 years to complete by the early 80s. And it was almost done but Reagan was under the heavy influence of the industry (not just auto) and backtracked on that commitment big time. I was in high school in the late 70s and remember our shop teacher b*tching about it but still teaching us in metric as well.

Funny but that non transition was one of the reasons why US autos in the 80s and beyond were a tough sell to the Europeans and Asians as they are totally tooled for metric. It's one thing to sell a 15inch sreen computer which will be obsolete before needing a non-metric tool to service it but to try to sell a car with thousands of non-metric parts to a metric market is a non starter. So once again our industry "leaders" shot themsleves in the foot by their total myopic approach to the big picture.

jeepbluetj 10-11-2014 10:52

Re: Convenience of the metric system
 
Even though they resisted it, U.S. automakers are all pretty much metricized now anyway - for the very reason that to produce for a world market you need to use metric tooling. I haven't found any imperial fasteners on my '08 Ford escape. My 1999 jeep is about half-and-half. My 2000 ford van is mostly metric. The kia, well, it's metric of course.

As a 'merican, I wish we would have metricized in the 70s. Water freezes at 32? Boils at 2whatever? That's kinda silly. And, I wouldn't need two sets of every wrench and socket in my toolkit.

martinworswick 10-11-2014 11:07

Re: Convenience of the metric system
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Sand crab (Post 1674205)
Actually us old school guys have used a Constuction Master calculator for years.
Enlarged Image - <\/TITLE><\/HEAD><BODY bgcolor="white" onLoad="if (self.resizeTo)self.resizeTo((document.images[0].width+10),(500))" topmargin="4" leftmargin="0" rightmargin="0" bottommargin="0"><table width=""'+document.images[0].width+'" border="0

They have been made for about 30 years and make feet inches and fractions easy. And just press that M key and it converts to metric. You can get a CM phone app but I'd rather use the CM itself because it's way cheaper to replace after construction abuse than my phone.

So what size is a 4'X8' sheet of plywood over there? And a 2X4?

I live in New Zealand now, and its 2400x1200 for some and 2440x1220 for others,hangover i guess.framing timber comes in 90x45,140x45 and so on,a lot of the old guys here still use inches when refering to framing but pretty much everything else on site is in metric

K_V_B 10-11-2014 11:15

Re: Convenience of the metric system
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Benz (Post 1674201)
Speaking of Noah, I didn't make that up.

We know you didn't make that one up. A couple of guys in the middle east a long time ago did.

Quote:

No, I wasn't being silly about what the length of a meter is. How many people have the equipment to measure the wavelength of whatever it is in a vaccuum ready-to-hand? How many colleges or scientific institutions have it? It's a really hard thing to measure, but without it how are all their balls-accurate metric rulers calibrated?
The same way as a yardstick. So there is no more accuracy there than anywhere else.
Maybe you should ook up how "yard" is defined, and how it has been defined in the US for the last century and a half... And why.


Quote:

It was an American rocket which made it to the moon, sent from a country who had not yet given themselves over wholesale to the metric system, while Russia, which had, lost.
Oh now, russia lost the race to the moon because it was metric?
May I point out to you that at the moment the US does not have the capability to send people in space, let alone to the moon. Russia or China however...

Quote:

Originally Posted by valhalla360 (Post 1674240)
The bar and the wavelength are just attempts to correct a faulty unit. It didn't change where intent of the definition. It was faulty in that it had no intuitive value to humans and the earth is not a perfect sphere.

No, defining a unit in a way that does not require the existence of a physical object is superior to one that does. As the Brits found out when a fire in the house of parliament destroyed their standards. De US has defined their customary units in function of metric units since then.

Quote:

The foot has only one of those faults. It's intuitive but had to be standardized since not everyones feet are exactly the same length (I'm lucky, with shoes on I'm usually within 1/4")
The foot is not intuitive at all. Not to me. But then "intuitive" is highly subjective. When the foot was a common unit in Europe it's length varied from 250mm to 370mm. That's how intuitive it was...
The metric was designed by the French in order to facilitate trade, as up to then every town in Europe had it's own definition of "foot".
(Btw, royal body parts never played a role in the definition of the length of a foot)
It's only since the mid 20ieth century that the US foot is officially the same length as the UK foot! (A feat that was achieved by defining the Yard as being 0.9144m)

Quote:

I'm in engineering and deal with surveyors. I'm comfortable moving back and forth between systems but never have I heard of a "gon". Maybe it's similar to a Smoot.
Maybe you used a different term, or the usage was uncommon where you work. I went to school in Dutch. When checking out theodolites from the equipment room we would always check that the clerk hadn't slipped us the one T2 that had a 360 circle. All the others had 400 "gon" circles. in continental Europe that is the norm.
Edit: See this:
Gradian - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Where metric is very useful is when cooking. When a recipe is all g and ml all I need is a scale. When "cups" and "tablespoons" and "ounces" come in it gets awfully complicated.

goboatingnow 10-11-2014 11:17

Re: Convenience of the metric system
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by martinworswick (Post 1674450)
I live in New Zealand now, and its 2400x1200 for some and 2440x1220 for others,hangover i guess.framing timber comes in 90x45,140x45 and so on,a lot of the old guys here still use inches when refering to framing but pretty much everything else on site is in metric

Here , Everyone at my timber yard, will buy timber in imperial, so a 8x4 sheet of chip is just that , as is a 2x4. however the actual timber size is metric

I grew up pre-decimalisaton, so its was all L.S.D land anyway ( and no not the drug - silly)

Dave

jeepbluetj 10-11-2014 11:34

Re: Convenience of the metric system
 
Even here in 'merica, when I go buy a 2x4, it's not 2" by 4" anyway. So the imperial one is "wrong" too. 90x45 actually makes more sense than knowing a 2x4 is really 1 1/2 x 3 1/2.

Richard_W 10-11-2014 11:35

Re: Convenience of the metric system
 
I was raised and educated in metric system in Europe. I learned the imperial system in Canada and then I went back to metric when Canada converted from imperial to metric. Then, I had fallen back to imperial after moving to US.

I don't care which system I use for measurement and calculations, both are familiar to me. What I hate is having two sets of wrenches and sockets, and second guessing what system was use for screws and bolts on my boat. Even supposedly metric hardware, like Volvo Penta, has some imperial screws and bolts thrown in by the boat manufacturer. It's a mess ... I suppose.


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 12:47.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2021, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.


ShowCase vBulletin Plugins by Drive Thru Online, Inc.