Maker Pro
Maker Pro

That state of metric conversion in the US

C

cameo

Jan 1, 1970
0
I seem to remember that a few dacades ago (maybe in the '70s) there was
some kind of federal push to convert the country to the metric system by
a certain date that is already in the past. As it's painfully obvious by
now, not much came out of that initial excitement.

Why do you think it is that the US public so resistant to such a change
when the metric system is so much simpler? Much of the rest of the
industrialized world is already on the metric system and not following
their lead just impedes international commerce.
 
G

Gib Bogle

Jan 1, 1970
0
I seem to remember that a few dacades ago (maybe in the '70s) there was
some kind of federal push to convert the country to the metric system by
a certain date that is already in the past. As it's painfully obvious by
now, not much came out of that initial excitement.

Why do you think it is that the US public so resistant to such a change
when the metric system is so much simpler? Much of the rest of the
industrialized world is already on the metric system and not following
their lead just impedes international commerce.

Think "Freedom Fries"
 
R

rickman

Jan 1, 1970
0
I seem to remember that a few dacades ago (maybe in the '70s) there was
some kind of federal push to convert the country to the metric system by
a certain date that is already in the past. As it's painfully obvious by
now, not much came out of that initial excitement.

Why do you think it is that the US public so resistant to such a change
when the metric system is so much simpler? Much of the rest of the
industrialized world is already on the metric system and not following
their lead just impedes international commerce.

I think I discussed this recently in one of the groups. I remember
distinctly (or as well as I am capable of remembering) that in the 70's
we agreed to move to metric coordinated with Canada. It was a
multi-step program with information and education being the first two
steps. We even required the US auto makers to add metric to the
speedometers. But when it came to actually changing something (I think
speed limits was the first thing to change) we told Canada to go on
without us and we'd catch up... which we *never* did.

I expect there was too much push back from the average Joe. Heck, I
worked at a company just a few years ago that made push to talk radios
for the US military. I was surprised that the mechanical engineers were
still using inches and converting all the metric stuff rather than doing
it all in metric!

Converting is inevitable, but perhaps not until it starts to make an
economic impact. By then China will be running things and we will just
be the tail on the dog.
 
T

Tim Williams

Jan 1, 1970
0
I use metric frequently in my work, but apparently metric fasteners are
still a few cents more expensive than standard over here, so there's still
economic pressure, however slight, to continue using them.

Metric is kind of nice because you can "make your own" when it comes to
magic sizes and stuff. Sometimes you want, say, a plate that's 1/4 or
3/8" thick, but it just doesn't look quite right -- visually appealing.
Instead, you could specify 5, 7.5, 10, etc. mm thickness, or other odd
values, assuming it's in stock of course -- and potentially get more
elegant proportions and whatnot. This is analogous to working in
conventional vs. Exx series R/L/C component values: some ratios are easy
to get (factor of 2 = 1k:2k vs. 1k:2.2k off by 10%), others not so much.
On further analysis, one would probably find it's a wash, in the end.

Insert usual blurb about the inch technically being metric (i.e., so
effing what, specify 6.35mm bolts instead).

Tim
 
T

T

Jan 1, 1970
0
I seem to remember that a few dacades ago (maybe in the '70s) there was
some kind of federal push to convert the country to the metric system by
a certain date that is already in the past. As it's painfully obvious by
now, not much came out of that initial excitement.

Why do you think it is that the US public so resistant to such a change
when the metric system is so much simpler? Much of the rest of the
industrialized world is already on the metric system and not following
their lead just impedes international commerce.


What most in the U.S. don't realize is that we've already gone mostly
metric. 500ml bottles, a lot of dry measure in grams now, and bolts on
cars are all metric, right down the the lug nuts.

The only thing we haven't made the jump for is distance and temperature.
The old English measures still hold.
 
I seem to remember that a few dacades ago (maybe in the '70s) there was
some kind of federal push to convert the country to the metric system by
a certain date that is already in the past. As it's painfully obvious by
now, not much came out of that initial excitement.

Why do you think it is that the US public so resistant to such a change
when the metric system is so much simpler? Much of the rest of the
industrialized world is already on the metric system and not following
their lead just impedes international commerce.

It seems that this is just a way to circumvent any WTO free trade
agreements :-(

You have to make US specific brochures using some strange units.

In the worst case, any mechanical specifications _must_ be specified
as some fraction of an inch (0.025400000000... m).
 
T

Tauno Voipio

Jan 1, 1970
0
I seem to remember that a few dacades ago (maybe in the '70s) there was
some kind of federal push to convert the country to the metric system by
a certain date that is already in the past. As it's painfully obvious by
now, not much came out of that initial excitement.

Why do you think it is that the US public so resistant to such a change
when the metric system is so much simpler? Much of the rest of the
industrialized world is already on the metric system and not following
their lead just impedes international commerce.


The Americans are just a bit slow to apply the decisions of the
Congress: in 1866, the metric system was officially mandated.
 
M

MrTallyman

Jan 1, 1970
0
I seem to remember that a few dacades ago (maybe in the '70s) there was
some kind of federal push to convert the country to the metric system by
a certain date that is already in the past. As it's painfully obvious by
now, not much came out of that initial excitement.

Can you really be that stupid?
Metric conversion DID occur, idiot. Examine ANY CAD package. Look at
ALL Us CAR makers and ALL US AIRCRAFT makers. You know, that place where
MOST of the world buys all their passenger planes.
Why do you think it is that the US public so resistant to such a change

It isn't the public. It is parents and educators. Learn to point your
finger ONLY when you are correct, asshole. Then learn WHERE to point it.
I really can't believe that your blinders are adjusted so tightly that
you cannot see. Oh wait... they are not blinders, you are simply too
goddamned retarded to make valid observations about any fucking thing but
how to wipe your own ass.
when the metric system is so much simpler?

Like you?
Much of the rest of the
industrialized world is already on the metric system

So is the US, you total fucking retard.
and not following
their lead just impedes international commerce.

You are only about as retarded as a person claiming to be educated in a
modern world can get. You are worse than a Windows lover retard trolling
a Linux group.

**** off And DIE, US hating TROLL ****!

Change your nym to retardeo, boy.
 
J

Joerg

Jan 1, 1970
0
rickman said:
I think I discussed this recently in one of the groups. I remember
distinctly (or as well as I am capable of remembering) that in the 70's
we agreed to move to metric coordinated with Canada. It was a
multi-step program with information and education being the first two
steps. We even required the US auto makers to add metric to the
speedometers. But when it came to actually changing something (I think
speed limits was the first thing to change) we told Canada to go on
without us and we'd catch up... which we *never* did.

I expect there was too much push back from the average Joe. Heck, I
worked at a company just a few years ago that made push to talk radios
for the US military. I was surprised that the mechanical engineers were
still using inches and converting all the metric stuff rather than doing
it all in metric!

Surprised? Some of my work is in aerospace. There it's all inches,
pounds, PSI, slugs, knots, feet and so on. To some extent that is even
so in the medical device industry. The topper:

Many catheter datasheet have the length in Centimeters, most of the rest
in imperial units, and the diameter in French (!).

Converting is inevitable, but perhaps not until it starts to make an
economic impact. By then China will be running things and we will just
be the tail on the dog.

If the current administration keeps doing what it is doing, then there
is a high chance of that happening :-(
 
S

SoothSayer

Jan 1, 1970
0
The FCC uses the metric system. I have a km/h scale on my speedometer.

That would be the DOT then, eh? Jeez.

The ONLY place we did not convert that ever mattered was our reluctant
paper industry. So printers have to be able to take euro paper sizing
and naming and US. AND the drivers for those printers and the software
we publish things with.

Then, at the smaller ma and pa shop of whatever genre, it becomes
personal choice, which means "what you were raised on". Hence a
perceived reluctance to change, depending on how one does the analysis.

But nearly all, if not all major companies in the US are metric, or use
some form of dual compliance.

Some folks simply need to wake the **** up, and take the fucking horse
blinders off.
 
I seem to remember that a few dacades ago (maybe in the '70s) there was
some kind of federal push to convert the country to the metric system by
a certain date that is already in the past. As it's painfully obvious by
now, not much came out of that initial excitement.

Why do you think it is that the US public so resistant to such a change
when the metric system is so much simpler?

Because it's not necessary.
Much of the rest of the
industrialized world is already on the metric system and not following
their lead just impedes international commerce.

It does nothing of the kind. NC tools made that argument moot.
 
The Americans are just a bit slow to apply the decisions of the
Congress: in 1866, the metric system was officially mandated.

No, it just shows that American's contempt for Congress isn't a recent
phenomenon. ;-)
 
S

Syd Rumpo

Jan 1, 1970
0
On 16/02/2013 15:40, SoothSayer wrote:

The ONLY place we did not convert that ever mattered was our reluctant
paper industry. So printers have to be able to take euro paper sizing
and naming and US. AND the drivers for those printers and the software
we publish things with.

Fascinating paper facts #273:

A0 paper is defined as 1m^2 with sqrt(2):1 aspect ratio so you can fold
it in half to make A1 which is 1/2 m^2 etc.

So A4 - the usual European printer/copier size - is 1/16 m^2.

So ordinary 80gsm (grams per square metre) printer/copier paper is 5g
per sheet.

Next time you're at a party, you can bring this up to impress the ladies.

You're welcome.
 
T

Tauno Voipio

Jan 1, 1970
0
The US public rarely does any math that involves unit conversions. Two cups of
flour is easily doubled to four cups for a double batch. Feet and square feet is
about the most math that most people do. Imperial units work fine in daily life.

Like the imperial gallon?
 
S

SoothSayer

Jan 1, 1970
0
On 16/02/2013 15:40, SoothSayer wrote:



Fascinating paper facts #273:

A0 paper is defined as 1m^2 with sqrt(2):1 aspect ratio so you can fold
it in half to make A1 which is 1/2 m^2 etc.

So A4 - the usual European printer/copier size - is 1/16 m^2.

So ordinary 80gsm (grams per square metre) printer/copier paper is 5g
per sheet.

Next time you're at a party, you can bring this up to impress the ladies.

You're welcome.


Cool. Thanks.
 
Q

qrk

Jan 1, 1970
0
I seem to remember that a few dacades ago (maybe in the '70s) there was
some kind of federal push to convert the country to the metric system by
a certain date that is already in the past. As it's painfully obvious by
now, not much came out of that initial excitement.

Why do you think it is that the US public so resistant to such a change
when the metric system is so much simpler? Much of the rest of the
industrialized world is already on the metric system and not following
their lead just impedes international commerce.

When gas hit $1.00 per gallon in Hawaii, they converted to liters.
This is the days of mechanical displays. Hawaii stuck to liters for
quite awhile (perhaps in to the 90s) until the Federal gov stepped in
and forced them to back to gallons. So much for the transition to
metric.
 
S

SoothSayer

Jan 1, 1970
0
Imperial gallons make much more sense than US gallons--one gallon of
water weighs exactly 10 pounds.

Cheers

Phil Hobbs


A wine barrel is 32 gallons (probably US), an oil barrel is 42 gallons
(probably Imperial?).

What the heck is the 55 gallon drum (barrel) (probably US) for?
 
S

SoothSayer

Jan 1, 1970
0
When gas hit $1.00 per gallon in Hawaii, they converted to liters.
This is the days of mechanical displays. Hawaii stuck to liters for
quite awhile (perhaps in to the 90s) until the Federal gov stepped in
and forced them to back to gallons. So much for the transition to
metric.


Too many complaining vacationers pissed off at being too stupid to
perform the conversion(s)?

Of course they didn't know that the reason they were pissed off is
because they were too stupid to perform even a relatively simple
'guesstimated' conversion. Pissed at themselves subconsciously, they
complain about it, and eventually some asshole in government who gets
paid way too much for way too little, comes along and makes it appear as
if he is putting things in order.

I think all the station owners should boycott the forced return, and go
back to their metric, liter displayed dispensing pumps.
 
J

Joerg

Jan 1, 1970
0
John said:
The US public rarely does any math that involves unit conversions. Two cups of
flour is easily doubled to four cups for a double batch. Feet and square feet is
about the most math that most people do. Imperial units work fine in daily life.

We do all our engineering calculations in SI units, except packaging and PCB
layout, which is still decimal inches. What's shocking is that any engineering
would still be done in imperial units, but apparently a lot is.

In some engineering fields nearly all of it is done in imperial units.
Aerospace, for example. This is also accepted by overseas customers.

http://www.pw.utc.com/Content/PW2000_Engine/pdf/B-1-5_commercial_pw2000.pdf

Even Europeans use imperial units:

http://www.rolls-royce.com/Images/Trent XWB_tcm92-5753.pdf

Quote "The engine will be available with a thrust of up to 97,000lb".

A challenge is when there is a meeting with university folks as I had
one this week. Everything is metric there. Metric does have a lot of
advantages. A disadvantage is the constant changes in the system.
Pressure was defined in torr, then in atmosphere, then in bars, and then
in hektopascals which have a 1e5 relationship to everything else. Not
1e3 or 1e6 but 1e5. In school they really threw us a curve by notorious
changes. Kilogramm-Force, Kilopond, and when that fell from grace
Newton. It's nuts. One reason why people here in the US cling to
imperial is that stuff deson't change all the time.

So I have a cheat sheet in my desk for European stuff :)
 
Top