Page 1 of 2

Metric versus Imperial, DONT study it.

Posted: Wed Apr 16, 2014 6:06 pm
by Suzsmokeyallan
Speaking of metric versus imperial,,, In countries located in the western hemisphere that had metrication forced on the populace, here we are 40 years later and certain things still have not changed.

Almost all packaging still has imperial weights and measures right alongside the metric equivalent, and in a lot of cases the package is an imperial size so the metric number is not a rounded up numerical value.

In Alberta Canada (metric country) sometimes you cannot find a retractable tape with the metric scale alongside the imperial scale, only the imperial scale, I've seen Home Depot and Rona do this already. I have however found retractable tapes at Wally World in Florida that were dual scale,, hmmmmm,,, USA going metric??

Again, in Alberta Canada its nearly impossible to find a metric drill bit set. In Barbados (metric country) they were selling the metric bits separately for a while within the last few years, now we are suddenly all imperial again. :|

Most rubber and vinyl hose you buy by the foot is still imperial sized.

Most floor tiles are still measured in inches.

Most stoves and ovens are still sized by width height and depth in inches.

Most refrigerators and freezers are sold in cubic feet internally as well as external inch dimension sizing.

Washers and dryers are measured externally in inches and also by the how much pounds the drum can hold.

Most home and commercial A/C units are still sized by BTUs or imperial Tons.

Most vehicle rims are still in inches yet magically the tyre profiles are now metric,????

Most wiper blades are in inches with a metric equivalent odd number (my truck carries a blade thats 22 inches long which is 559 mms, really)

Round headlamps are still sized in inches.

In the UK they are a metric country, BUT the speed limit signs are still in Mph. All UK vehicles since the late 70s have dual scale speedos which is obviously for travel to the mainland where all speed limit sign are in Kmh. Oh and those little blue and white motorway diagonal white line signs to count down the impending exits distance are still measured in yards.

Drywall and plywood sheets are still measured in inches.

Fluorescent tubes are still measured in inches

Single doors in a house still come in 28, 32 or 36 inches wide and are 80 inches tall.
The hinges on them are sized in either three or four inch tall dimensions.

Paint still comes in gallon sized containers that now hold less as its now litres inside the gallon container.

No matter where the basic garden tap comes from, the replaceable rubber washers are still in inches.

The thread for the tap or garden hose is not a metric thread, a metric one was tested a few years ago but it confused people who refused to buy a tap just to match their new metric hose fitting. Which incidentally, the hose is measured in inches for its diameter and length.

Glass louvres are still made in four and six inch formats.

Screw bulbs still do not have a metric threading.

Shipping containers are still imperial sized.

Modern TVs still show a diagonal screen size in inches on the box.

Matresses are still sized in inches.

CDs are still sized in inches.

Standing fans are sized by the blades diameter which are still measured in inches.

Pet soda bottles are metric sized, as in one liter, two liter etc, but the caps threading is not metric.

Cabinetry hardware handles for drawers still use inch measurements for the hole spacings.

Your average AA battery for example is half inch across and two inches long.

Most house windows are inch sized, the main standard opening size for a house is still a 48 inch by 48 inch window.

In the UK however, the Crittal window company (one of the oldest) still make the same imperial window sizings from the companies inception, but now those imperial sized numbers are all converted to non rounded millimeter figures.

Waste water PVC pipe still comes in inches, with a metric equivalent odd figure for conversion.

Whos got more oddities to share.

Re: Metric versus Imperial, DONT study it.

Posted: Thu Apr 17, 2014 12:12 am
by Fritz500
"He who wants by the yard, but tries by the inch, should be kicked by the foot."


Metricate that!

Re: Metric versus Imperial, DONT study it.

Posted: Thu Apr 17, 2014 1:05 am
by GT750Battleship
Fritz500 wrote:"He who wants by the yard, but tries by the inch, should be kicked by the foot."


Metricate that!
:up: :lol: I like it :D

Re: Metric versus Imperial, DONT study it.

Posted: Thu Apr 17, 2014 6:42 am
by Suzsmokeyallan
Too funny, thanks for that Fritz. OZ was one country where they went at metrication full tilt, speedometers on many cars back as far as the late 70s only had the Kmh scale, there was no dual scale.

I was caught in the middle of it all as a young lad, just when I'd got the imperial all sorted out before the age of 10, suddenly I was told forget all of that and learn this. Remember the mantra 'The number ten is your best friend' nope not really, even today we still argue.

I still like the imperial system and I see nothing really wrong with it UNTIL weights and measures start getting into small sizes.
Only then do you have my total agreement on the system.

There is a unit of measurement in the imperial system where they refer to chains for distance, chains???? what happened on that day, someone forgot to bring a tape measure?

Imagine this following scenario for the silly fun of it.
Oh look guys I forgot my tape, but theres a chain lying over there so lets use that, and by imperial decree from now on everyone should have a chain just like this one to measure by for this particular process/distance. :lol: :lol: :lol:

Re: Metric versus Imperial, DONT study it.

Posted: Thu Apr 17, 2014 7:21 am
by GT750Battleship
:lol: 8) Hi Allan...did you know that 50 Leagues =277.8km ? :cry:
Cheers,
Roger.
GT750A

Re: Metric versus Imperial, DONT study it.

Posted: Thu Apr 17, 2014 7:56 am
by tz375
A chain is a unit of length. It measures 66 feet, or 22 yards, or 100 links, or 4 rods (20.1168 m). There are 10 chains in a furlong, and 80 chains in one statute mile. An acre is the area of 10 square chains (that is, an area of one chain by one furlong). The chain has been used for several centuries in Britain and in some other countries influenced by British practice.

OR ....


The stone is a unit of measure equal to 14 pounds avoirdupois (about 6.35 kg) used in Great Britain and Ireland for measuring human body weight.

In many Northwestern European countries the stone was formerly used for trade, though its value ranged from about 5 to 40 local pounds (3 to 15 kg). With the advent of metrication from the mid-19th century on, it was superseded by the kilogram. It remained in limited use for trade in the United Kingdom and in Ireland until prohibited by the Weights and Measures Act.

But people still measure their body weight in Stones in the UK.

Metric is just so much easier -especially at sizes less than 1 inch :?

Re: Metric versus Imperial, DONT study it.

Posted: Thu Apr 17, 2014 10:02 am
by ConnerVT
Come into my world. We are working on 20nm and 14nm technologies, and a common measurement unit is the Angstrom (1 Angstrom = 0.1nm).

GLOBALFOUNDRIES

Sand to Silicon Video

Re: Metric versus Imperial, DONT study it.

Posted: Thu Apr 17, 2014 10:49 am
by Suzsmokeyallan
Yeah Richard but which pitch/size of chain were they using? as we all know even traditional chains open links come in different sizes so the 100 links can be longer or shorter with the wrong chain. :shock:

Those rods were also used in fields, you planted certain crops and harvested them in quantities by rods. Potatoes being a crop still laid out and harvested in rods.

Then there are those who cant make up their mind so the figures change at will on packaging.
16 oz is supposed to be 454 grams, yet I've seen it wander from 453 to 454 and 455 for no apparent reason
32 oz should be 908 grams if 16 oz is 454, yet I see 906, 907 as common printing, yet hardly ever see 908 grams

That stone thing never caught on for me with regards to weight, as you duly noted the stones can be bigger or smaller at anytime and therefore lighter or heavier. Local pounds might vary in weight compared to foreign ones too for sarcasms sake. It was a bit too crazy how they came up with these really old systems of weight and measurment.
Metric is just so much easier -especially at sizes less than 1 inch :?
Thankfully thats the only real benefit of it I like.

Then you get some real oddities, like a ball bearing with a metric OD and an imperial ID, ooooh how nice.

So ConnerVT when you break that Angstrom of 0.1mm into 100 parts what do you call those fractions.

Re: Metric versus Imperial, DONT study it.

Posted: Thu Apr 17, 2014 1:40 pm
by Alan H
I thought you being an Aussie would have known that a chain is the length of a cricket pitch Allan.

Re: Metric versus Imperial, DONT study it.

Posted: Thu Apr 17, 2014 3:01 pm
by ConnerVT
Suzsmokeyallan wrote:So ConnerVT when you break that Angstrom of 0.1nm into 100 parts what do you call those fractions.
Really damn small.

Next step down is picometers, and a Hydrogen atom is around 25pm big (small?). Starts getting real difficult to read the scale at that pont. :wink:

Re: Metric versus Imperial, DONT study it.

Posted: Thu Apr 17, 2014 4:22 pm
by jabcb
ConnerVT wrote:
Suzsmokeyallan wrote:So ConnerVT when you break that Angstrom of 0.1nm into 100 parts what do you call those fractions.
Really damn small.

Next step down is picometers, and a Hydrogen atom is around 25pm big (small?). Starts getting real difficult to read the scale at that pont. :wink:
That's still big when you consider the Planck scale and a length of one Planck length.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Planck_length

Re: Metric versus Imperial, DONT study it.

Posted: Fri Apr 18, 2014 2:32 am
by Craig380
My old woodwork class teacher often used to use a 'bug's whisker' as a unit of measurement. I never found out what that equated to in thousandths of an inch, nor in tenths of a millimetre ... :roll:

Re: Metric versus Imperial, DONT study it.

Posted: Fri Apr 18, 2014 8:08 am
by tz375
Where does a Poofteenth fit on the Metric-Imperial scale? It's a lot smaller than a scosh which is a relative term and not an absolute measurement.

Re: Metric versus Imperial, DONT study it.

Posted: Fri Apr 18, 2014 3:31 pm
by Alan H
Craig380 wrote:My old woodwork class teacher often used to use a 'bug's whisker' as a unit of measurement. I never found out what that equated to in thousandths of an inch, nor in tenths of a millimetre ... :roll:
Similar to a gnat's cock I think. It's fairly small anyway.

Like torqueing bolts up - ft/lbs or kg/metres, newton metres etc.
I usually go TAF scale.

Re: Metric versus Imperial, DONT study it.

Posted: Sun Apr 20, 2014 7:04 pm
by H2RICK
I can work both ways.......I'm bi-measure you might say. :roll: :lol:

However, I do wish I had some of my old exercise books/scribblers from early grade school.
The back cover had EVERY Imperial measure on it that you could imagine......or at least that I could imagine.:lol:
Because my dad was in the Royal Canadian Navy during WWII, I was always fascinated by purely nautical measurements e.g. "cable" = 608 feet or "fathom" = 6.08 feet or "knot" = 1.151 statute miles per hour......and so on.