Metric vs Imperial units

Post here all non technical related topics about Formula One. This includes race results, discussions, testing analysis etc. TV coverage and other personal questions should be in Off topic chat.
Pup
Pup
50
Joined: 08 May 2008, 17:45

Re: Metric vs Imperial units

Post

xpensive wrote:
Pup wrote:
xpensive wrote:The original meter was based on one forty-millionth of the earth's circumferance, you can read all about it on Wiki Pup.
Oh snap. Now it all makes sense. :lol:
That is not the point Pup, it's just yet another xample of how you "imperials" can't even get your facts straight,
which is a clear indication that you basically have no idea of what you are talking about.
As usual, X, your logic is undeniable. But at least can we agree that WB is even more wrong?

Mystery Steve
Mystery Steve
3
Joined: 25 Sep 2009, 07:04
Location: Cincinnati, OH, USA

Re: Metric vs Imperial units

Post

richard_leeds wrote:Consistancy is key as the guys on Apollo 13 found out.
Apollo 13? That explosion was due to damaged insulation in wiring in their cryogenic tanks. Maybe you're thinking of the mars lander that crashed because the engineers mixed up miles and meters?

User avatar
mep
29
Joined: 11 Oct 2003, 15:48
Location: Germany

Re: Metric vs Imperial units

Post

Wasn't there a Ariane explosion because of this units desaster?

Just_a_fan
Just_a_fan
593
Joined: 31 Jan 2010, 20:37

Re: Metric vs Imperial units

Post

mep wrote:Wasn't there a Ariane explosion because of this units desaster?
One of NASA's Mars probes I think. One part was 'thinking' in metric, the other was 'thinking' in USic. Not sure what the planet was thinking other than 'ouch!' when the probe piled in a bit too quickly... #-o
If you are more fortunate than others, build a larger table not a taller fence.

User avatar
strad
117
Joined: 02 Jan 2010, 01:57

Re: Metric vs Imperial units

Post

How many tons did it weigh/ And was it short tons?? long tons?? metric tons? :lol: :lol: :lol:
To achieve anything, you must be prepared to dabble on the boundary of disaster.”
Sir Stirling Moss

autogyro
autogyro
53
Joined: 04 Oct 2009, 15:03

Re: Metric vs Imperial units

Post

strad wrote:How many tons did it weigh/ And was it short tons?? long tons?? metric tons? :lol: :lol: :lol:
Does anyone else think that they have the same discusion at Mercedese every time they have a meeting.

User avatar
mep
29
Joined: 11 Oct 2003, 15:48
Location: Germany

Re: Metric vs Imperial units

Post

Just_a_fan wrote:
mep wrote:Wasn't there a Ariane explosion because of this units desaster?
One of NASA's Mars probes I think. One part was 'thinking' in metric, the other was 'thinking' in USic. Not sure what the planet was thinking other than 'ouch!' when the probe piled in a bit too quickly... #-o
Yea that one is definetly caused by the units mishmatch but I think there
is a series of this kind of incidents.
autogyro wrote:
strad wrote:How many tons did it weigh/ And was it short tons?? long tons?? metric tons? :lol: :lol: :lol:
Does anyone else think that they have the same discusion at Mercedese every time they have a meeting.
When Mercedes really is the boss in this team than there is only the metrical system and no discusion about it.
Everybody complaining about is free to go.

User avatar
strad
117
Joined: 02 Jan 2010, 01:57

Re: Metric vs Imperial units

Post

I believe he's thinking of a telescope,,the Hubble maybe.
To achieve anything, you must be prepared to dabble on the boundary of disaster.”
Sir Stirling Moss

Saribro
Saribro
6
Joined: 28 Jul 2006, 00:34

Re: Metric vs Imperial units

Post

How many furlongs to the hogshead is everyone's car gettin here anyway?

[EDIT]
Google tells me it's 26344 for me, btw :).

Giblet
Giblet
5
Joined: 19 Mar 2007, 01:47
Location: Canada

Re: Metric vs Imperial units

Post

Metric and Imperial can not get along. This is easily evidenced by tape measures that have both markings.

They are near impossible to use effectively while working.
Before I do anything I ask myself “Would an idiot do that?” And if the answer is yes, I do not do that thing. - Dwight Schrute

User avatar
jddh1
0
Joined: 29 Jan 2007, 05:30
Location: New York City

Re: Metric vs Imperial units

Post

I'd rather have the world be entirely based in metric.

I was looking at a motorcycle engine the other day and it was 96 cubic inch. I told my buddy that it looked like a 1.6L to me. Went back in the office to make the calculation and it turned out my eye was right, it was a 1.6L engine. Thing is, I'm used to metric. Studying Physics, Mathematics, and other sciences, it's easier to run all calculations in metric. Only the engin sciences are running imperial here in the states. (I'm talking about sciences now, not applications.)

I hope that one day in my lifetime we can switch to metric in the States.

However, at the end of the day, if I want to build a fence around my house, I don't care what you use to measure distances and materials. As long as the end result is what I want, i'll be happy.

User avatar
PlatinumZealot
556
Joined: 12 Jun 2008, 03:45

Re: Metric vs Imperial units

Post

To me it's not even the size of the unit, but the consistency and ease of use.

Example: Using a tape to measure the height of a railing.. "The height is 47 and .. three quar.. no. 47 and 13 over sixtee... no wait..47 and twenty..wait! 47 (picks out magnifying glass)..*deep breath* 47 and 53 over 64 inches!" Of course fractions is not the issue. It is just the convention of using fractions and weird factors in the imperial units. I mean I have a machinist's ruler that has the inches in decimal.

Then you have weight in imperial.. Other than pounds for personal weight I don't even use that stuff :lol: . 16 and 32 and 20 and all these things.. to much to remember.

I think nature intended for humans to use the metric system.
The density of water is roughly 1000kg/cubic meter.
The viscosity of water is 0.001 pascal second at 20 degrees CELSIUS.
Water freezes at 0 degrees C. It boils at 100C
Atmospheric pressure is about 100 kPa

Nice clean easy numbers.
In calculations there are no weird factors to use. Just multiply till your hearts content.
🖐️✌️☝️👀👌✍️🐎🏆🙏

☄️ Myth of the five suns. ☄️

☀️☀️☀️☀️☀️
LxVxFxHxN

xpensive
xpensive
214
Joined: 22 Nov 2008, 18:06
Location: Somewhere in Scandinavia

Re: Metric vs Imperial units

Post

Just_a_fan wrote:
mep wrote:Wasn't there a Ariane explosion because of this units desaster?
One of NASA's Mars probes I think. One part was 'thinking' in metric, the other was 'thinking' in USic. Not sure what the planet was thinking other than 'ouch!' when the probe piled in a bit too quickly... #-o
I seem to remember this was the case, NASA was metric of course, but Lockheed the sub-contractor was imperial, why they confused Nm with lbft. They are close in values, but different enough to have an impact on a mission to Mars;

One lbft equals 1.356 Nm

Regarding fractions, I can't see how that belong, when you can easily use 1/3 in metrics if you wish to be precise?

And jd, don't worry, the US is going metric, inch by inch, but my American mistress is still a 36-24-35!
"I spent most of my money on wine and women...I wasted the rest"

User avatar
WhiteBlue
92
Joined: 14 Apr 2008, 20:58
Location: WhiteBlue Country

Re: Metric vs Imperial units

Post

xpensive wrote:And jd, don't worry, the US is going metric, inch by inch.
You are probably right. An ever increasing amount of things Americans use is being made in China and at one point the Chinese will not bother to use imperial measurements.
Formula One's fundamental ethos is about success coming to those with the most ingenious engineering and best .............................. organization, not to those with the biggest budget. (Dave Richards)

aterren
aterren
1
Joined: 13 Jul 2009, 05:31

Re: Metric vs Imperial units

Post

Just The Problem

Neither the familiar system of Feet and Inches nor the Metric system of meters and millimeters are suited to the type of measurement and calculation woodworkers and other craftspeople use day in day out.

The Solution
A system of measurement that retains Feet and Inches and then divides the Inch into 24 parts.

The Argument
The Metric system excels at smaller measurement while Feet and Inches are better suited to larger. Because of these innate characteristics I have always used both, often in awkward combination. The Metric system’s only real asset is the particular size of the millimeter. This happens to be an ideal “small” unit of measure. Smaller than a 1/16" and larger than a 1/32", it can be distinguished easily without reading glasses while at the same time is fine enough to be a basic increment of woodworking precision.

In every other respect the Metric system is inadequate. There can be no rational argument in favor of a system that divides and multiplies by tens. It is perhaps not surprising that we break the day into 24 hours rather than 20, the hour intoU 60 minutes rather than 100 and so on. By the same token we divide the circle into 360 degrees rather than 100 or 1000. It is because the basic building block of twelve is vastly more versatile than ten, whose capacity for easy division by five and multiplication by ten is a talent I cannot remember ever having needed in 25 years of woodworking. Hell the only reason to post this is to fuel on the fire with a new system.

Feet and Inches supply a manageable series of larger increments. Feet and Inches break up what in the Metric system tend to be long easily corrupted numbers into readily recalled chunks. For example a Metric length of 2286mm equals 7 feet 6 inches. While 2286 might easily become 2268 in our fallible memories, it is hard to not notice 7 feet 6 inches becoming 6 feet 7 inches. The inspired division of the foot into 12 inches rather than 10 allows easy division into halves, thirds and quarters.

The great failing of Feet and Inches is the multitude of unsatisfactory fractions that make addition, subtraction and division an exercise in mental agility and provide ample opportunity for error. Nobody can quickly and reliably add 11 7/16" and 4 5/32" then divide the result by two, let alone three.

With our new rulers all these issues become a thing of the past and we find a system that combines the best of both of the old without any of their failings. This is achieved by employing the 1/24" as the basic increment. The 1/24" is a useful increment in a number of ways. Like the foot, which can be easily divided into halves, thirds, quarters, sixths and twelfths, an inch made up of 1/24th’s can be divided into halves, thirds, quarters, sixths, eights, and twelfths (try that with the metric system). The 1/24" is very close in size to the millimeter and so has the same natural advantage as an ideal small unit. These rulers allow us to take advantage of the largely forgotten 1/24" and elevate it to its rightful place as a core unit of measurement.to confuse the units discussion by introducing bobsrule.

It might be good for woodworking and the legality plank. :)