i'm giving up metric

[Anonymous]

Further to my post on page 2 advocating the dozenal numerical system and David C's post I have just ordered a Bobsrule - sounds like the answer to me!

Brad

 

[Shivers]

Further to my post on page 2 advocating the dozenal numerical system and David C's post I have just ordered a Bobsrule - sounds like the answer to me!

Brad

hey brad that is a good system,& should be excellent for your own work,but if for instance you have to copy something made in metric/imperial,---or work off designer/architech plans then the translation is going to be horrendous.imagine programing machines for this if the product design comes in already made out in either of the former,
It'll be a hard job also getting cad programs to adopt this as an alternative because engineers/designers/architechs aren't woodworkers so there will be no emphasis on bobcad.
Another one would be contracting work from builders,you'd be sure to get some sideways glances if bob is mentioned,

It is a good system--but alas not transfereable across all trades/disciplines.


regards

shivers.

 

[Vormulac]

Ah guineas - always seemed to add a bit of class 8) 8)

Paul

Is a counterfeit one a guinea-foul?
Sorry.

Ok, it's all been covered here, but for sake of joining in, here's my twopennorth.
Born in the early 70's, so educated in Metric, but absolutely everything outside school was Imperial - so I have an incredibly bizarre mismatch of measuring conventions in my head.

I know my weight in stones and pounds, not kilos, but when I'm cooking I have to convert everything to grams before I know where I am.
I am six feet and two inches tall and I couldn't begin to tell you what that is in metres - however - if I am required to do any measuring, or anything I do in diy or woodworking it has to be in millimetres.
Long distance is miles, short distances (under half a mile or so) in metres (and I really do hate seeing car speedometers in kph, it's just *wrong* somehow).

I have tried to get on board with Imperial in respect to woodworking, but it's just un-natural to want to measuring something in 1/32ths of something; I mean seriously, what's easier, looking at something and realising you want an 8mm drill bit, or a sixteen and three quarter sixty fourths drill bit? Obviously you prefer the system you grew up with, but anyone who can objectively say the latter in the example above is clearly not well. :lol: And I do say that with a grin on my face and it is meant affectionately, you may all be completely barking but I loves ya! :wink:

Vormulac (who, after consulting a calculator would seem to be 1.8796 Metres tall - there we go, much easier than 6'2"...)

 

[Alf]

Tombo, don't let the power of the dark side tempt you, use the force and venture forth with the decimal people.

Ah hah, you see that's why metric is ultimately doomed - decimal people go round in tens while imperialists go round by the dozen and can overwhelm them with superior numbers. :lol: :wink:

Cheers, Alf

 

[Shivers]

Tombo, don't let the power of the dark side tempt you, use the force and venture forth with the decimal people.

Ah hah, you see that's why metric is ultimately doomed - decimal people go round in tens while imperialists go round by the dozen and can overwhelm them with superior numbers. :lol: :wink:

Cheers, Alf

& remember in spinal tap that going to eleven is better than ten--so twelve has to be better---we need some bobamps now!!.

shivers.

 

[wrightclan]

... I mean seriously, what's easier, looking at something and realising you want an 8mm drill bit, or a sixteen and three quarter sixty fourths drill bit? Obviously you prefer the system you grew up with, but anyone who can objectively say the latter in the example above is clearly not well. :lol: ...

Ah but, that's because the latter in your example is a fictitious conglomeration of numbers and fractions that makes no sense. :wink: Real numbers and fractions make as much sense as real numbers and decimals; because thay both represent real values. BTW 8mm is basically 5/16. :wink:

Brad

P.S. Happy Birthday Colin. \/ \/

 

[Anonymous]

FWIW :roll:
I have tried, really I have to get on with metric, but it is too abstract, the system doesnt help you by relating measurement to the actual physical scale of the world around you in useful increment's or units. to make any sense of metric I STILL have to break up a metre say into smaller more useful units (or fraction's) that I can relate to the physical world about me for comparison. EG 350 mm same as hi hat cymbal's diam (to get a visual help as I know that size in my minds eye), 100 mm = 4 inches, 2.5 meter "same" as a sheet of ply etc. I like subdivision its natural cells divide and subdivide

Can you imagine saying lets go down the pig and trumpet for a swift demi-demi-litre :roll:

PS WHY does the decimal zero have so much power it is NOTHING yet increase's a number 10 fold or reduces it tenfold depending on which direction it goes?

 

[Shivers]

Summary for me --- imperial is faster to work with.

metric is easy to make grand mistakes with--it's not that i can't use it--it's just more fussy/time consuming,
the increments are to small,- & one has the tendency to try & make components to the mm which invariably never comes out accurate,- more often than not comes out undersized.

with imperial i can aim for a slight oversized piece using imperical judgement & if it does come out oversized- trim it.

Probably my idiocentric ways but it works for me.


shivers

 

[Vormulac]

FWIW :roll:
I have tried, really I have to get on with metric, but it is too abstract,

That does make me laugh (in a good way, Mr Spanton), it clearly comes down to what everyone says about the best system being one that suits you; but the concept that measurements based on 1/32ths or 1/64ths of something are somehow less abstract than a denary system (the basis of our numerical system for hundreds of years) I find rather odd.
This is not a criticsm in any way, Hell, from my earlier post you can tell I'm in no position to talk! :lol:

Perhaps we are all just pleasantly quirky?

V.

 

[Scrit]

.....then the translation is going to be horrendous.imagine programing machines for this if the product design comes in already made out in either of the former,
It'll be a hard job also getting cad programs to adopt this as an alternative because engineers/designers/architechs aren't woodworkers so there will be no emphasis on bobcad.

CAD programs and CNC machines can easily accommodate any mearurement system you like, so long as there is a values conversion factor. The only downside is that CAD and CNCs tend to like decimal everything, e.g. 1,03in 3.55mm, etc - even BobCAD - bot that's because it's much quicker th key-in decimals IMHO

I sidestep the issue a lot of the time by simply using a rod........ no measurement system at all :lol:

Scrit

 

[Shivers]

I sidestep the issue a lot of the time by simply using a rod........ no measurement system at all :lol:

Scrit

Agree ,otoh this works nicely with a small shop,imagine having a large plant where everybody has different backgrounds in the trade,a bit of a nightmare to convey info(bobsize this is).


The rod is also great for small/medium sized jobs,but impossible to implement on a very large & varied custom comercial job where 10 15 guys are working on same job(too many rods needed)

 

[Anonymous]

Further to my post on page 2 advocating the dozenal numerical system and David C's post I have just ordered a Bobsrule - sounds like the answer to me!

Brad

hey brad that is a good system,& should be excellent for your own work,but if for instance you have to copy something made in metric/imperial,---or work off designer/architech plans then the translation is going to be horrendous.imagine programing machines for this if the product design comes in already made out in either of the former,
It'll be a hard job also getting cad programs to adopt this as an alternative because engineers/designers/architechs aren't woodworkers so there will be no emphasis on bobcad.
Another one would be contracting work from builders,you'd be sure to get some sideways glances if bob is mentioned,

It is a good system--but alas not transfereable across all trades/disciplines.


regards

shivers.

Not a problem for me, Shivers!

I don't use CAD
I don't use CNC
Every time I've had to work off architects' plans so much has been changed by the time I get to work that the plans are in the bin!

And I'm well used to sideways glances from builders when they see me using a mallet instead of a hammer. :lol:

Generally, I use rods and don't use measurements much at all - just for calculating sizes of componants.

Cheers
Brad

 

[CYC]

FWIW :roll:
I have tried, really I have to get on with metric, but it is too abstract, the system doesnt help you by relating measurement to the actual physical scale of the world around you in useful increment's or units. to make any sense of metric I STILL have to break up a metre say into smaller more useful units (or fraction's) that I can relate to the physical world about me for comparison.

You can't adapt to it, you were raised with imperial, that's it. Don't blame the metrics for it. As many tried to say you visualise with what you were thought first.
My parents still speak in Old French francs for currency! This is 2 currency ago!!!! (New francs then Euro). They just can't adapt. May be age doesn't help :wink:

I certainly do resent the metricalisation which is being imposed for no good reason other than to establish enforced global collectivism and keep beauracrat's busy. I'd feel exactly the same if inche's/cubitts/cun's etc were being imposed the same way. I wouldnt object to mini meter's if I had a CHOICE as to wether I wanted to use them, or not as the case may be.

Who's forcing you? In fact many have said all the tools are imperial centric coming from the USA.

Now the beauracrat's are telling us their metric system is "superior" And sadly lots of people believe it .

I don't know about telling us it's superior, but I believe it's easier to learn. what's easier to understand and learn for a little child:
2+3=5
or
3/16 + 18/32 = Wait where's my calculator!

 

[promhandicam]

3/16 + 18/32 = Wait where's my calculator!

I think your example is part of the problem - I guess those used to using imperial would never think of using a calculator (a slide rule perhaps). Even though I, like many use both and probably tend towards metric I can still work out in my head that the above is 3/4. It amazes me that for many people even the 2 + 3 example requires the use of a calculator. On many occasions I've bought 10 of a particular item at say 25p each and the shop assistant has been amazed that I have already put down the correct change before they have entered the amount in to the till!!

FWIW I think the problem in the UK is that we have tried, unsuccessfully, to convert from imperial to metric, but on the manufacturing side it was too costly to convert all the production lines. So we now have a 454g jar of jam, because it was cheaper to change the label than it was to change the production of the jars. I just can't see that imperial measurements will ever be completely obsolete as even in countries that in theory only use the metric system, you can generally only buy cloth in yards - to give just one example.

After all that, I'm in need of a 568ml

Steve

 

[Adam]

a 454g jar of jam, Steve

Cough, splutter, as we hurdle headlong into an entirely new area of thread. Oh well, now you've opened the can...... I can only sell Honey in 1Lb jars, or multiples of 4 oz, 8oz, 12 oz etc, although I label them 454g, 340g, 227g etc.

Lets open it up to pints vs half or (litres) glasses of beer?

And pints of milk just to open it up a bit.

Adam

 

[wrightclan]

I don't know about telling us it's superior, but I believe it's easier to learn. what's easier to understand and learn for a little child:
2+3=5
or
3/16 + 18/32 = Wait where's my calculator!

Ok, which is easier:

Divide 5/16 by 5.

or

Divide 8mm by 5?

:wink:

By the way, the correct way to write your above fraction example is:

3/16 + 9/16. Much easier now, isn't it? :-k

Actually, I find this whole idea of equating imperial with fractions and metric with decimals a bit odd. I was taught at school to do maths in decimals and fractions. I was taught to use imperial measurements and metric measurements and to convert between the two. It never occurred to me, until I lived over here and heard widespread usage of terms such as 'decimalisation,' that the metric/imperial debate had anything to do with a fraction/decimal debate. Do they even teach fractions over here anymore? Guess I should ask my kids? :-k

If the whole issue is decimalisation, why don't we go the whole hog and make a circle 100 degrees? Or make a clock 10 very long hours? Or try and do something about the pesky fact that our earth orbits the sun in 365-1/4 days? Surely with modern technology, we could put our brains together and develop technology to change the earth's orbit?

Brad :wink:

 

[Shivers]

I don't know about telling us it's superior, but I believe it's easier to learn. what's easier to understand and learn for a little child:
2+3=5
or
3/16 + 18/32 = Wait where's my calculator!

Ok, which is easier:

Divide 5/16 by 5.

or

Divide 8mm by 5?

:wink:

By the way, the correct way to write your above fraction example is:

3/16 + 9/16. Much easier now, isn't it? :-k

Actually, I find this whole idea of equating imperial with fractions and metric with decimals a bit odd. I was taught at school to do maths in decimals and fractions. I was taught to use imperial measurements and metric measurements and to convert between the two. It never occurred to me, until I lived over here and heard widespread usage of terms such as 'decimalisation,' that the metric/imperial debate had anything to do with a fraction/decimal debate. Do they even teach fractions over here anymore. Guess I should ask my kids? :-k

Brad

I think the problem has more to do with those in mid forties whom were subjected to changing the plan mid stream in the early days,the kids back then(myself included)had done 5,6 yrs of one system -but were then told to drop that & learn another,this maybe lead to being master of neither until trade work came along.

A hiccup of the system.


regards ---shivers.

 

[wrightclan]

Shivers,

I guess my question is: why did the powers that be think you need to drop one to learn the other?

Brad

 

[promhandicam]

a 454g jar of jam, Steve

Cough, splutter, as we hurdle headlong into an entirely new area of thread.
Adam

:? the title of the thread is "i'm giving up metric" so I thought it OK to talk about things other than mm, cm, m, km, thou, inches, feet, yards, furlongs, miles.

Oh and dividing 8mm by 5 = 8/5 = 1 3/5 = 1.6mm (hope my train of thought makes sense) so either is easy if you understand fractions and mental arithmetic - or is should that be arithmetric :lol:

Steve

 

[Jake]

They didn't.