Author Topic: Why not ban AWG  (Read 56182 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Bloch

  • Supporter
  • ****
  • Posts: 440
  • Country: dk
Why not ban AWG
« on: October 13, 2013, 04:08:55 pm »
Why is it the only SUPERPOWER country  keep using AWG ?


Then i did see this https://www.eevblog.com/forum/beginners/how-to-meassure-awg/?topicseen  :palm: Why not just give in to the meter system like us that already did see the light
« Last Edit: October 13, 2013, 04:19:25 pm by Bloch »
 

Offline c4757p

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 7805
  • Country: us
  • adieu
Re: Why not ban AWG
« Reply #1 on: October 13, 2013, 04:12:03 pm »
If people wanted to switch, they would. It works just fine.
No longer active here - try the IRC channel if you just can't be without me :)
 

Offline Bloch

  • Supporter
  • ****
  • Posts: 440
  • Country: dk
Re: Why not ban AWG
« Reply #2 on: October 13, 2013, 04:18:05 pm »
 

Offline zapta

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 6004
  • Country: us
Re: Why not ban AWG
« Reply #3 on: October 13, 2013, 04:25:25 pm »
Why is it the only SUPERPOWER country  keep using AWG ?

Good point. It should be added to the Metric Conversion Act .

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metric_Conversion_Act

;-)
Drain the swamp.
 

Offline mtdoc

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 3581
  • Country: us
Re: Why not ban AWG
« Reply #4 on: October 13, 2013, 04:48:20 pm »

Good point. It should be added to the Metric Conversion Act .

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metric_Conversion_Act

;-)

Yeah, I remember being taught the metric system in the 6th grade (1973-4) and being told that it would soon be the only system used.... ::)
 

Online Monkeh

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 6393
  • Country: gb
Re: Why not ban AWG
« Reply #5 on: October 13, 2013, 04:53:46 pm »

Good point. It should be added to the Metric Conversion Act .

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metric_Conversion_Act

;-)

Yeah, I remember being taught the metric system in the 6th grade (1973-4) and being told that it would soon be the only system used.... ::)

Blame pilots.
 

Offline SeanB

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 15388
  • Country: za
Re: Why not ban AWG
« Reply #6 on: October 13, 2013, 05:21:06 pm »
Pilots use metric, but this can cause confusion if you are not aware of the system in use with regards to the readings. See the Gimli glider for more.
 

Offline madires

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 5244
  • Country: de
  • A qualified hobbyist ;)
Re: Why not ban AWG
« Reply #7 on: October 13, 2013, 05:25:33 pm »
Yeah, I remember being taught the metric system in the 6th grade (1973-4) and being told that it would soon be the only system used.... ::)

AFAIK Liberia and the US are the only ones left. Myanmar has annouced to switch to the metric system. But we should be glad that the US government didn't invent imperial versions for A, V and Ohms  >:D
« Last Edit: October 13, 2013, 05:45:37 pm by madires »
 

Offline c4757p

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 7805
  • Country: us
  • adieu
Re: Why not ban AWG
« Reply #8 on: October 13, 2013, 05:40:52 pm »
AFAIK Liberia and the US are the only ones left. Myanmar has annouced to switch to the metric system.

The worst part: Once the U.S. is the only country left, that will only serve to make the Imperial* system even more Ahmurrican. We'll never be able to get rid of it... :scared:

*Shh... don't tell them which Empire the Imperial system is from...
No longer active here - try the IRC channel if you just can't be without me :)
 

Offline Bloch

  • Supporter
  • ****
  • Posts: 440
  • Country: dk
Re: Why not ban AWG
« Reply #9 on: October 13, 2013, 05:44:53 pm »
But we should be glad that the US goverment didn't invent imperial versions for A, V and Ohms  >:D


They need it bad then  >:D


Let make some proposals......
 

Offline c4757p

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 7805
  • Country: us
  • adieu
Re: Why not ban AWG
« Reply #10 on: October 13, 2013, 05:49:13 pm »
Imperial A, V, Ohm? That's simple. All you need to do is relate electricity to the hydraulic analogy. Electric potential will be measured in Pounds / PSI equivalent water pressure, current in Gallons per Minute equivalent water flow, resistivity in Inches (squared) equivalent resistive pipe diameter, or alternatively using a scaled version of AWG, and resistance in Feet resistive pipe length at a standardized diameter (standards vary by state).

Anyone want to take a shot at capacitance?

I'm off to bleach and boil my brain now.
No longer active here - try the IRC channel if you just can't be without me :)
 

Online Monkeh

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 6393
  • Country: gb
Re: Why not ban AWG
« Reply #11 on: October 13, 2013, 05:52:15 pm »
Pilots use metric, but this can cause confusion if you are not aware of the system in use with regards to the readings. See the Gimli glider for more.

Not for altitude or speed they don't. Feet and knots. (yes, I know knots are scaled to metric units, they're still not kilometres per hour)
« Last Edit: October 13, 2013, 05:54:05 pm by Monkeh »
 

Offline madires

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 5244
  • Country: de
  • A qualified hobbyist ;)
Re: Why not ban AWG
« Reply #12 on: October 13, 2013, 05:55:36 pm »
*Shh... don't tell them which Empire the Imperial system is from...

The metric system is a child of the French Revolution. Vive la révolution! :-)
 

Offline c4757p

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 7805
  • Country: us
  • adieu
Re: Why not ban AWG
« Reply #13 on: October 13, 2013, 05:57:21 pm »
Yes, created by the French and used by various types of Socialists and Commies.</sarcasm> We'll never be able to switch...
No longer active here - try the IRC channel if you just can't be without me :)
 

Offline ampdoctor

  • Frequent Contributor
  • **
  • Posts: 265
  • Country: us
Re: Why not ban AWG
« Reply #14 on: October 13, 2013, 06:15:12 pm »
The reason we don't give up the ghost over here can be summed up in one word. Construction! Every building, every plumbing fitting and fixture, every conduit of bulk cable, etc has been based on imperial measures for a couple hundred years. Nothing would work and nothing would fit together properly. It's one thing for say the auto mfg's to change tap sizes and use different bolts. It's another matter entirely when you're talking about 1000 sheets of drywall, $10,000.00 worth of kitchen and bathroom fixtures, reengineering roof trusses, stud spacing on walls, mating up with existing infrastructure, and the list goes on. That's just for one moderately sized house.  Multiply that by maybe 100 million and include industrial/commercial buildings. Now figure in the amount of redundant stock all the contractors and retailers would need to carry.  The costs would run into the trillions if not hundreds of trillions.  With that kind of money on the line nobody is going to change a damn thing over here when we have a system that works fine as is.  I guarantee if you owned a home in the states for 5 years you'd be cursing the metric system in no time flat!


 

Offline madires

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 5244
  • Country: de
  • A qualified hobbyist ;)
Re: Why not ban AWG
« Reply #15 on: October 13, 2013, 06:18:01 pm »
Yes, created by the French and used by various types of Socialists and Commies.</sarcasm> We'll never be able to switch...

Long time ago length was measured in cubits, and how long a cubit was differed from town to town. At old town halls over here you can find special stones fixed in the buildings wall showing the official length of the local cubit. That was done to mitigate discussions at the market place when sellers or buyers came from another town. The metric system saved us from that nightmare.

PS: NASA uses the metric system.
 

Offline Kryoclasm

  • Regular Contributor
  • *
  • Posts: 175
  • Country: us
  • KL3DL
Re: Why not ban AWG
« Reply #16 on: October 13, 2013, 06:27:54 pm »
The Imperial system has been standardized since 1842.

Anyway, only folks who can't seem to do base 12 math have a problem with it.  8)
“I predict that very shortly the old-fashioned incandescent lamp, having a filament heated to brightness by the passage of electric current through it, will entirely disappear.” -Nikola Tesla
 

Offline IntegratedValve

  • Regular Contributor
  • *
  • !
  • Posts: 187
Re: Why not ban AWG
« Reply #17 on: October 13, 2013, 06:32:11 pm »
Not only this, our guns are measured in inches too.  :-DD
 

Offline Rasz

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 2361
  • Country: 00
    • My random blog.
Re: Why not ban AWG
« Reply #18 on: October 13, 2013, 06:48:20 pm »
If people wanted to switch, they would. It works just fine.

signed: NASA
Who logs in to gdm? Not I, said the duck.
My fireplace is on fire, but in all the wrong places.
 

Offline madires

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 5244
  • Country: de
  • A qualified hobbyist ;)
Re: Why not ban AWG
« Reply #19 on: October 13, 2013, 06:50:29 pm »
The reason we don't give up the ghost over here can be summed up in one word. Construction! Every building, every plumbing fitting and fixture, every conduit of bulk cable, etc has been based on imperial measures for a couple hundred years.

I'll tell you something funny. We still use Zoll, which is the same as inch, quite often for metal tubing instead of the nice metric specifications for those. And it becomes even more weird. For the first tubing Zoll meant the inner diameter of the tube but the important thing for plumbing is the outer diameter to make the tubes fit together. The old tubes had thick metal and were about 33mm in diameter (1 Zoll tube). Later tubes had better metal so the thickness decreased and the inner diameter increased. A current 1 Zoll tube has still an outer diameter of 33mm but an inner of about 30mm.
 

Offline c4757p

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 7805
  • Country: us
  • adieu
Re: Why not ban AWG
« Reply #20 on: October 13, 2013, 06:50:47 pm »
PS: NASA uses the metric system.

Of course. The metric system is common in the worldwide scientific community. Outside the scientific community is quite different.
No longer active here - try the IRC channel if you just can't be without me :)
 

Offline Zbig

  • Frequent Contributor
  • **
  • Posts: 875
  • Country: pl
Re: Why not ban AWG
« Reply #21 on: October 13, 2013, 07:01:59 pm »
At the risk of diverting a perfectly good "General Chat" thread into EE regions, I remember how confused I was when while designing my first PCB, I learned that you can get these screw terminals (and a whole metric ton of other components) both in "imperial" (2.54 mm pin spacing) and normal, civilized (:box:) versions (2.5 mm spacing). Chances are, I'd probably manage to order and use the "wrong" one, happily unaware of the issue, hadn't I needed longer than 2-3 pin terminals.
 

Offline eKretz

  • Frequent Contributor
  • **
  • Posts: 822
Re: Why not ban AWG
« Reply #22 on: October 13, 2013, 07:29:24 pm »
Pilots use metric, but this can cause confusion if you are not aware of the system in use with regards to the readings. See the Gimli glider for more.

Not for altitude or speed they don't. Feet and knots. (yes, I know knots are scaled to metric units, they're still not kilometres per hour)

How are knots scaled to metric units? Knots are nautical miles per hour, and a nautical mile was based on one minute of longitude at the equator. Where does the metric system come into it?
 

Offline SeanB

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 15388
  • Country: za
Re: Why not ban AWG
« Reply #23 on: October 13, 2013, 07:38:46 pm »
At least with the 2.54 and 2.5 versions a 3-6 way connector used in the other system becomes self locking before soldering.
 

Offline Rick Law

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 2821
  • Country: us
Re: Why not ban AWG
« Reply #24 on: October 13, 2013, 07:47:51 pm »
The Imperial system has been standardized since 1842.

Anyway, only folks who can't seem to do base 12 math have a problem with it.  8)

Actually, it is not quite 12 based.  Gallon, Quart, Pint is really binary.  Weight is base 16 which is binary^4.  Even American football play time is divided in to half, than divided into quarter.

Metric is nice for certain things, but the decimal-base breaks down when used for certain other units: year, month, day, hour, seconds.  However much you juggle the arithmetic, you wont get year as 10 month, month as 10 days...

Unit conversion will be a fact of iife.
 

Offline senso

  • Frequent Contributor
  • **
  • Posts: 949
  • Country: pt
    • My AVR tutorials
Re: Why not ban AWG
« Reply #25 on: October 13, 2013, 07:57:12 pm »
PS: NASA uses the metric system.

Of course. The metric system is common in the worldwide scientific community. Outside the scientific community is quite different.

Explain this if NASA uses metric...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mars_Climate_Orbiter#Cause_of_failure

Or was the switch to metric after the ups?
 

Offline c4757p

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 7805
  • Country: us
  • adieu
Re: Why not ban AWG
« Reply #26 on: October 13, 2013, 08:01:01 pm »
If you click through to the document they cite, you see this:

Quote
The MCO MIB has determined that the root cause for the loss of the MCO spacecraft was the failure to use metric units in the coding of a ground software file, “Small Forces,” used in trajectory models. Specifically, thruster performance data in English units instead of metric units was used in the software application code titled SM_FORCES (small forces).

If I'm reading that correctly, then it was supposed to be in metric, but some programmer improperly used Imperial units in one program.
No longer active here - try the IRC channel if you just can't be without me :)
 

Offline madires

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 5244
  • Country: de
  • A qualified hobbyist ;)
Re: Why not ban AWG
« Reply #27 on: October 13, 2013, 08:03:56 pm »
 

Online Monkeh

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 6393
  • Country: gb
Re: Why not ban AWG
« Reply #28 on: October 13, 2013, 08:42:43 pm »
Pilots use metric, but this can cause confusion if you are not aware of the system in use with regards to the readings. See the Gimli glider for more.

Not for altitude or speed they don't. Feet and knots. (yes, I know knots are scaled to metric units, they're still not kilometres per hour)

How are knots scaled to metric units? Knots are nautical miles per hour, and a nautical mile was based on one minute of longitude at the equator. Where does the metric system come into it?

Because a nautical mile is defined as exactly 1,852 metres.
 

Offline AlfBaz

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 2030
  • Country: au
Re: Why not ban AWG
« Reply #29 on: October 13, 2013, 10:11:52 pm »
I seem to recollect hearing that knots came about from the real old days where they would throw a log over the back of the ship with a rope tied to it. The rope had knots tied in it (don't know how far apart) and they would count how many knots passed over a given time. This meant that you could be travelling at a great rate of knots but if you were sailing into a strong current your actual speed, relative to land mass, was a great deal slower
 

Offline c4757p

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 7805
  • Country: us
  • adieu
Re: Why not ban AWG
« Reply #30 on: October 13, 2013, 10:18:14 pm »
I seem to recollect hearing that knots came about from the real old days where they would throw a log over the back of the ship with a rope tied to it. The rope had knots tied in it (don't know how far apart) and they would count how many knots passed over a given time.

Not how many passed, how many were above the water, IIRC. More speed = more rope tension = log rises up and exposes more knots.
No longer active here - try the IRC channel if you just can't be without me :)
 

Offline westfw

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 3193
  • Country: us
Re: Why not ban AWG
« Reply #31 on: October 13, 2013, 10:27:39 pm »
Quote
Imperial A, V, Ohm? That's simple. All you need to do is relate electricity to the hydraulic analogy.
No, no.  It's important in the imperial system that units NOT be related to other units, or at least not in any sensible way.  That would make things too easy during conversion.  (I remind you: 1 mile = 5280 ft !)
So we could start, say, by defining the "imperial farad" as the capacitance of two metal plates with 1 acre of area placed 1 inch apart (in vacuum, of course.)  If I did my math right, that's about 1.4uF, so it's actually a useful magnitude (unlike the NORMAL Farad, which is much too large!)
 

Offline c4757p

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 7805
  • Country: us
  • adieu
Re: Why not ban AWG
« Reply #32 on: October 13, 2013, 10:29:40 pm »
Quote
Imperial A, V, Ohm? That's simple. All you need to do is relate electricity to the hydraulic analogy.
No, no.  It's important in the imperial system that units NOT be related to other units, or at least not in any sensible way.  That would make things too easy during conversion.

If relating electric potential to water pressure makes conversion easier for you, you are a mathematics, physics and unit conversion wizard!
No longer active here - try the IRC channel if you just can't be without me :)
 

Offline AlfBaz

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 2030
  • Country: au
Re: Why not ban AWG
« Reply #33 on: October 13, 2013, 10:51:23 pm »
Not how many passed, how many were above the water, IIRC. More speed = more rope tension = log rises up and exposes more knots.
LOL this from people who though the earth was flat and thought it was trendy to wear a bird on the shoulder ;D
 

Offline c4757p

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 7805
  • Country: us
  • adieu
Re: Why not ban AWG
« Reply #34 on: October 13, 2013, 10:55:37 pm »
;D It actually strikes me as a perfectly good way to measure speed through water, though if you wanted it to be linear you'd need a conversion table...
No longer active here - try the IRC channel if you just can't be without me :)
 

Offline AlfBaz

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 2030
  • Country: au
Re: Why not ban AWG
« Reply #35 on: October 13, 2013, 11:02:34 pm »
...and then of course you would have to take water samples if you were sailing near river outlets or polar caps as the water density would change as the salinity changed
 

Offline c4757p

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 7805
  • Country: us
  • adieu
Re: Why not ban AWG
« Reply #36 on: October 13, 2013, 11:03:58 pm »
Enough to make a non-negligible difference? Remember, the precision here is "knots on a rope"...
No longer active here - try the IRC channel if you just can't be without me :)
 

Offline Rufus

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 2094
Re: Why not ban AWG
« Reply #37 on: October 13, 2013, 11:08:48 pm »
;D It actually strikes me as a perfectly good way to measure speed through water, though if you wanted it to be linear you'd need a conversion table...

But they didn't do that. They counted knots in a line paid out from a reel during a period measured by a sand glass.
 

Offline dfmischler

  • Frequent Contributor
  • **
  • Posts: 548
  • Country: us
Re: Why not ban AWG
« Reply #38 on: October 13, 2013, 11:09:50 pm »
 

Offline c4757p

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 7805
  • Country: us
  • adieu
Re: Why not ban AWG
« Reply #39 on: October 13, 2013, 11:11:36 pm »
But they didn't do that. They counted knots in a line paid out from a reel during a period measured by a sand glass.

That does seem like a better way. I should have clarified that my "IIRC" included "take with a fistful of salt", I heard that from one old pilot who may or may not know anything about things not directly related to aviation.....
No longer active here - try the IRC channel if you just can't be without me :)
 

Offline TopLoser

  • Supporter
  • ****
  • Posts: 1901
  • Country: gb
Re: Why not ban AWG
« Reply #40 on: October 13, 2013, 11:12:41 pm »
Plus there is the little complication of tidal flow, are we measuring absolute or relative speed? Quite possible to be doing 20 knots and not making any progress or even going backwards!
 

Offline rolycat

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 1090
  • Country: gb
Re: Why not ban AWG
« Reply #41 on: October 13, 2013, 11:26:35 pm »
The reason we don't give up the ghost over here can be summed up in one word. Construction! Every building, every plumbing fitting and fixture, every conduit of bulk cable, etc has been based on imperial measures for a couple hundred years. Nothing would work and nothing would fit together properly. It's one thing for say the auto mfg's to change tap sizes and use different bolts. It's another matter entirely when you're talking about 1000 sheets of drywall, $10,000.00 worth of kitchen and bathroom fixtures, reengineering roof trusses, stud spacing on walls, mating up with existing infrastructure, and the list goes on. That's just for one moderately sized house.  Multiply that by maybe 100 million and include industrial/commercial buildings. Now figure in the amount of redundant stock all the contractors and retailers would need to carry.  The costs would run into the trillions if not hundreds of trillions.  With that kind of money on the line nobody is going to change a damn thing over here when we have a system that works fine as is.  I guarantee if you owned a home in the states for 5 years you'd be cursing the metric system in no time flat!

That's not a reason - it's an excuse. The British construction industry, like many others, converted to the metric system without crippling costs. In most cases the conversion was a 'soft' one - the new dimensions were specified in metric, but no physical changes were required. Plasterboard (drywall to Yanks) is now officially 13mm thick, but many builders still call it half-inch.

Americans are just stupidly attached to their old familiar systems, even if they don't make sense. So are Brits, of course. We still use miles on the roads, and woe betide any pub trying to serve beer by the litre instead of the pint.
 

Offline AlfBaz

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 2030
  • Country: au
Re: Why not ban AWG
« Reply #42 on: October 13, 2013, 11:42:11 pm »
They have been teaching the metric system here since '72. At school I hardly ever heard of inches, pounds etc. What a shock when I joined the work force...

I use to wonder why old blokes in the construction industry liked to measure things in inches, I thought it was because they were brought up with it but now that I'm over 40 and tape measures still come with inches and millimetres I know the real reason.... The numbers are easier to see in the inch scale :)
 

Offline Phaedrus

  • Frequent Contributor
  • **
  • Posts: 714
  • Country: us
Re: Why not ban AWG
« Reply #43 on: October 14, 2013, 03:26:38 am »
We really just need to redo the whole numerical system. Just scrap the whole lot of it and use dozenal instead.

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
X = 10
E = 11
10 = 12



Then we can keep the nice power rule found in metric (but in duodecimal), but have the easy divisibility (1,2,3,4,6,12) of imperial! We can even keep the same base units. We just have to redefine the prefixes... And reeducate the whole planet to a different numerical system.  :-//


EDIT: While we're at it we should take the opportunity to fix electrical charge notation so that electrons have a positive charge, and current flow follows the flow of electrons, rather than the reverse of it. This would make a lot of things make more sense. Also, we can rename the Positron to the Negatron, which just sounds cooler.
« Last Edit: October 14, 2013, 03:32:23 am by Phaedrus »
"More quotes have been misattributed to Albert Einstein than to any other famous person."
- Albert Einstein
 

Offline Stonent

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 3824
  • Country: us
Re: Why not ban AWG
« Reply #44 on: October 14, 2013, 03:30:19 am »
I don't mind the metric system, but I really don't like celcius. I feel it isn't fine grained enough to be every day useful.
Yes it makes logical sense but it doesn't seem to make practical sense.

If we really want to do this right, lets just switch to Kelvin and leave it at that.
The larger the government, the smaller the citizen.
 

Offline AlfBaz

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 2030
  • Country: au
Re: Why not ban AWG
« Reply #45 on: October 14, 2013, 03:34:13 am »
lets just switch to Kelvin and leave it at that.
unfortunately for you the temperature difference from 1 degree kelvin to the next is still as "grainy" (and the same) as 1 degree celsius to the next
 

Offline Phaedrus

  • Frequent Contributor
  • **
  • Posts: 714
  • Country: us
Re: Why not ban AWG
« Reply #46 on: October 14, 2013, 03:35:26 am »
I don't mind the metric system, but I really don't like celcius. I feel it isn't fine grained enough to be every day useful.
Yes it makes logical sense but it doesn't seem to make practical sense.

If we really want to do this right, lets just switch to Kelvin and leave it at that.

Dozenal would fix that as well, because you'd get 144 degrees between freezing and boiling, and the notation would still be 0 - 100! You get more resolution for free.




(I'm joking, by the way)
"More quotes have been misattributed to Albert Einstein than to any other famous person."
- Albert Einstein
 

Offline edavid

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 2990
  • Country: us
Re: Why not ban AWG
« Reply #47 on: October 14, 2013, 03:59:47 am »
That's not a reason - it's an excuse. The British construction industry, like many others, converted to the metric system without crippling costs. In most cases the conversion was a 'soft' one - the new dimensions were specified in metric, but no physical changes were required. Plasterboard (drywall to Yanks) is now officially 13mm thick, but many builders still call it half-inch.

What's the point of this kind of soft conversion?  You still need 13mm screws, 13mm plywood, and everything else (and presumably 6mm everything as well).  Why not just continue to measure it in inches?

Quote
Americans are just stupidly attached to their old familiar systems, even if they don't make sense. So are Brits, of course. We still use miles on the roads, and woe betide any pub trying to serve beer by the litre instead of the pint.

I don't see where the stupidity comes in.  Why should the US convert, especially as we can see from the British example that there's little benefit?  Don't forget that the US economy is almost as large as Europe's, so we certainly don't have to convert.
 

Offline c4757p

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 7805
  • Country: us
  • adieu
Re: Why not ban AWG
« Reply #48 on: October 14, 2013, 04:00:48 am »
Celsius isn't fine-grained enough for everyday use? Can you honestly feel a 1F difference? I'm hard pressed to discern an 1C difference!

-30C: please kill me
-20C: holy shit it's cold!
-10C: damn, it's chilly today!
0C: snowman weather
10C: light jacket weather
20C: room temperature
30C: pretty warm
35C: damn, it's warm today!
37C: holy shit it's hot!
40C: please kill me

Disclaimer: Opinions vary by region. Just ask someone from northern Canada. But I refuse to believe northern Canadians exist.

Kill Me to Kill Me is a 70 degree spread. Not enough for you? :P

I've also become quite good at estimating the fives from 45 to 80, a useful range for electronics.
« Last Edit: October 14, 2013, 04:03:21 am by c4757p »
No longer active here - try the IRC channel if you just can't be without me :)
 

Offline Stonent

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 3824
  • Country: us
Re: Why not ban AWG
« Reply #49 on: October 14, 2013, 04:02:15 am »
lets just switch to Kelvin and leave it at that.
unfortunately for you the temperature difference from 1 degree kelvin to the next is still as "grainy" (and the same) as 1 degree celsius to the next

Yeah I know. I just want to mess up both sides.

We could always go to Rankine!
The larger the government, the smaller the citizen.
 

Offline c4757p

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 7805
  • Country: us
  • adieu
Re: Why not ban AWG
« Reply #50 on: October 14, 2013, 04:04:26 am »
No longer active here - try the IRC channel if you just can't be without me :)
 

Offline Stonent

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 3824
  • Country: us
Re: Why not ban AWG
« Reply #51 on: October 14, 2013, 04:11:34 am »
Celsius isn't fine-grained enough for everyday use? Can you honestly feel a 1F difference? I'm hard pressed to discern an 1C difference!

-30C: please kill me
-20C: holy shit it's cold!
-10C: damn, it's chilly today!
0C: snowman weather
10C: light jacket weather
20C: room temperature
30C: pretty warm
35C: damn, it's warm today!
37C: holy shit it's hot!
40C: please kill me

Disclaimer: Opinions vary by region. Just ask someone from northern Canada. But I refuse to believe northern Canadians exist.

Kill Me to Kill Me is a 70 degree spread. Not enough for you? :P

I've also become quite good at estimating the fives from 45 to 80, a useful range for electronics.

90+ Hot
80s decently warm
70s nice
60s cool
50s brisk
40s cold
30s freezing
and so on.
The larger the government, the smaller the citizen.
 

Offline Fsck

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 1157
  • Country: ca
  • sleep deprived
Re: Why not ban AWG
« Reply #52 on: October 14, 2013, 04:14:57 am »
Celsius isn't fine-grained enough for everyday use? Can you honestly feel a 1F difference? I'm hard pressed to discern an 1C difference!

-30C: please kill me
-20C: holy shit it's cold!
-10C: damn, it's chilly today!
0C: snowman weather
10C: light jacket weather
20C: room temperature
30C: pretty warm
35C: damn, it's warm today!
37C: holy shit it's hot!
40C: please kill me

Disclaimer: Opinions vary by region. Just ask someone from northern Canada. But I refuse to believe northern Canadians exist.

Kill Me to Kill Me is a 70 degree spread. Not enough for you? :P

I've also become quite good at estimating the fives from 45 to 80, a useful range for electronics.

30C is please kill me now.

-40C is just a cold winter.
-50C is basically instafrostbite weather
If you happen to be doing research in antarctica:
-60C is I'd rather die than go outside
-70C is go outside and freeze to death
-80C is basically the same as -70C
"This is a one line proof...if we start sufficiently far to the left."
 

Offline c4757p

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 7805
  • Country: us
  • adieu
Re: Why not ban AWG
« Reply #53 on: October 14, 2013, 04:16:51 am »
I prefer my "just a cold winter" a few more degrees away from my "instafrostbite", TYVM! :-DD
No longer active here - try the IRC channel if you just can't be without me :)
 

Offline Fsck

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 1157
  • Country: ca
  • sleep deprived
Re: Why not ban AWG
« Reply #54 on: October 14, 2013, 04:20:15 am »
I prefer my "just a cold winter" a few more degrees away from my "instafrostbite", TYVM! :-DD

it's only mild frostbite on anything exposed.
"This is a one line proof...if we start sufficiently far to the left."
 

Offline Bloch

  • Supporter
  • ****
  • Posts: 440
  • Country: dk
Re: Why not ban AWG
« Reply #55 on: October 14, 2013, 05:09:08 am »
Don't forget that the US economy is almost as large as Europe's, so we certainly don't have to convert.


No you don't, and it make a nice import wall :-)


I don't see where the stupidity comes in.  Why should the US convert, especially as we can see from the British example that there's little benefit?

The benefit comes then changing units.

All i do is move the decimal point. Very easy also then adding numbers....

13mm + 2cm+2m = 13+20+2000 =[/size] 2033mm

Is easier  than example inch + feet + miles



Is it true that drill size is like awg ?. I mean no easy relation to inch ?
« Last Edit: October 14, 2013, 05:20:53 am by Bloch »
 

Offline ludzinc

  • Supporter
  • ****
  • Posts: 489
  • Country: au
    • My Misadventures In Engineering
Re: Why not ban AWG
« Reply #56 on: October 14, 2013, 05:17:11 am »
The reason we don't give up the ghost over here can be summed up in one word. Construction! Every building, every plumbing fitting and fixture, every conduit of bulk cable, etc has been based on imperial measures for a couple hundred years. Nothing would work and nothing would fit together properly. It's one thing for say the auto mfg's to change tap sizes and use different bolts. It's another matter entirely when you're talking about 1000 sheets of drywall, $10,000.00 worth of kitchen and bathroom fixtures, reengineering roof trusses, stud spacing on walls, mating up with existing infrastructure, and the list goes on. That's just for one moderately sized house.  Multiply that by maybe 100 million and include industrial/commercial buildings. Now figure in the amount of redundant stock all the contractors and retailers would need to carry.  The costs would run into the trillions if not hundreds of trillions.  With that kind of money on the line nobody is going to change a damn thing over here when we have a system that works fine as is.  I guarantee if you owned a home in the states for 5 years you'd be cursing the metric system in no time flat!

Not a problem.  A foot = 300mm and everything is now ordered in multiples of 300mm, not multiples of a foot.

Works here in Oz....
 

Offline Bored@Work

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 3932
  • Country: 00
Re: Why not ban AWG
« Reply #57 on: October 14, 2013, 05:21:52 am »
I don't mind the metric system, but I really don't like celcius. I feel it isn't fine grained enough to be every day useful.

That is what the decimal point was invented for. 22.034°C  Is that fine-grained enough for you? Of course, in polite company it is the decimal comma 22,034°C, but let's don't go there.
I delete PMs unread. If you have something to say, say it in public.
For all else: Profile->[Modify Profile]Buddies/Ignore List->Edit Ignore List
 

Offline casper.bang

  • Frequent Contributor
  • **
  • Posts: 311
  • Country: dk
  • Pro SE, amateur EE.
    • BangBits
Re: Why not ban AWG
« Reply #58 on: October 14, 2013, 05:33:44 am »
That's the problem with a superpower, they don't have to conform to anyone, which you can see signs of a lot of other places as well, i.e. their refusal to join the Haag war-crimes tribunal. In the case of the US, they're further held back by that annoying thing called "patriotism" which we can basically translate to "I don't have to think critically if I plant my nations flag on my porch".

In Canada, unfortunately they are stuck in some double-world due to their strong business relations with the US. So while air temperature is measured in Centigrade, water temperature is measured in Fahrenheit; content of bottles and cans are measured in ounces while gasoline is measured in liters etc etc.

It is my understanding though, that this is changing slowly and that most professional engineers in the US work with the metric system, after some pretty spectacular failures, most known probably the NASA Mars Climate Orbiter.
 

Offline Kremmen

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 1283
  • Country: fi
Re: Why not ban AWG
« Reply #59 on: October 14, 2013, 05:41:05 am »
Hmm. I haven't really paid attention since it is not my problem, but didn't the UK switch to metric some years ago? Putting the attitude issues to one side, they in principle then had just this same challenge so how did it work there if it is impossible to do in the US? Could it be that numbers are just numbers and if you say have a drywall sheet that is 2.748 by 1.118 meters (or whatever, i haven't calculated)  is numerically "inconvenient" but otherwise no different.
On a personal level, i am quite OK with imperial dimensions based on inch/feet etc. What gets me is the bloody obsession to measure things with "gauges" of this and that. That has got nothing to do with measuring things in either inches or millimeters, rather it comes from standardizing some medieval production processes. The metric system is at least applied consistently so you don't have gauges, you got linear dimensions which are the right choice in that you can directly use them in calculations. You either can't do that with gauges at all or then you have to carry the baggage of including the gauge definition in every calculation which is just plain moronic.
Nothing sings like a kilovolt.
Dr W. Bishop
 

Offline GeoffS

  • Supporter
  • ****
  • Posts: 1267
  • Country: au
Re: Why not ban AWG
« Reply #60 on: October 14, 2013, 05:54:12 am »
When I went to school, it was all the imperial system, metric only got a fleeting mention. This also included money in the pre decimal currency days prior to 1966.
There was a short period during the introduction of the metric system where you would convert from one to the other but after a while, you didn't need to.
It's not as big a deal as some make out.

 

Offline westfw

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 3193
  • Country: us
Re: Why not ban AWG
« Reply #61 on: October 14, 2013, 07:03:58 am »
Quote
Can you honestly feel a 1F difference?
Yes.  My house gets too cold, and then thermostat trips and the heater goes on till it's too warm, and then it goes off again.  All within +/-1 F, or a total range of about 1C.  Adding a decimal would take another whole display digit; unacceptably costly, you know.

BTW, WRT C "ambient temperature", I heard somewhere "tepid twenties, thirsty thirties, fiery forties."
 

Offline Caca

  • Contributor
  • Posts: 19
  • Country: cz
Re: Why not ban AWG
« Reply #62 on: October 14, 2013, 07:51:11 am »
Srsly doesn't it take some weird constans when you calculate other things from imperial? In metric it's mostly just mul/div of the units used >:D
 

Offline mariush

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 3953
  • Country: ro
  • .
Re: Why not ban AWG
« Reply #63 on: October 14, 2013, 08:10:42 am »
I think these pretty much sum up the whole thing





though volume and area comparisons are the other way around (unless i'm that screwed up after a sleepless night)
« Last Edit: October 14, 2013, 08:16:27 am by mariush »
 

Offline KJDS

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 2442
  • Country: gb
    • my website holding page
Re: Why not ban AWG
« Reply #64 on: October 14, 2013, 09:35:33 am »
i like using which ever unit gives an easy number, so a sheet of paper is about 12 inches long, that's easier than 300mm. My soldering iron bit is 1mm wide, that's easier than a fraction of an inch, however the traces on the board are 6 thou wide.

As for temperature, when it's cold its celcius, so about 0 degrees C, however when it's hot I'd far rather it was 80 degrees F.

In the UK, we have both older imperial plumbing and more modern metric stuff and adaptors to connect the two are readily available. I believe that the French stuck with imperial rather than suffering the change.

Offline peter.mitchell

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 1568
  • Country: au
Re: Why not ban AWG
« Reply #65 on: October 14, 2013, 09:50:05 am »
i like using which ever unit gives an easy number, so a sheet of paper is about 12 inches long, that's easier than 300mm. My soldering iron bit is 1mm wide, that's easier than a fraction of an inch, however the traces on the board are 6 thou wide.

As for temperature, when it's cold its celcius, so about 0 degrees C, however when it's hot I'd far rather it was 80 degrees F.

In the UK, we have both older imperial plumbing and more modern metric stuff and adaptors to connect the two are readily available. I believe that the French stuck with imperial rather than suffering the change.

But a sheet of paper isn't 300mm nor is it 12 inches, it's 297mm, and I legitimately think it is a really important number to remember (trust me on that).

As for temperature, since it is so subjective, I just usually respond with "urrrh" *shrug*.
 

Offline Fsck

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 1157
  • Country: ca
  • sleep deprived
Re: Why not ban AWG
« Reply #66 on: October 14, 2013, 09:57:54 am »
i like using which ever unit gives an easy number, so a sheet of paper is about 12 inches long, that's easier than 300mm. My soldering iron bit is 1mm wide, that's easier than a fraction of an inch, however the traces on the board are 6 thou wide.

As for temperature, when it's cold its celcius, so about 0 degrees C, however when it's hot I'd far rather it was 80 degrees F.

In the UK, we have both older imperial plumbing and more modern metric stuff and adaptors to connect the two are readily available. I believe that the French stuck with imperial rather than suffering the change.

But a sheet of paper isn't 300mm nor is it 12 inches, it's 297mm, and I legitimately think it is a really important number to remember (trust me on that).

As for temperature, since it is so subjective, I just usually respond with "urrrh" *shrug*.

you're wrong. it's 279.4mm long aka 11 inches.
« Last Edit: October 14, 2013, 10:17:12 am by Fsck »
"This is a one line proof...if we start sufficiently far to the left."
 

Offline rolycat

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 1090
  • Country: gb
Re: Why not ban AWG
« Reply #67 on: October 14, 2013, 10:15:27 am »

But a sheet of paper isn't 300mm nor is it 12 inches, it's 297mm, and I legitimately think it is a really important number to remember (trust me on that).

you're wrong. it's 297.4mm long aka 11 inches.

No, you're wrong.

11 inches is 279.4mm, which is only the height of a sheet of paper in North America and a few other countries.

Most of the world uses ISO international standard sizes, the most common of which is A4,  297 x 210 mm.
« Last Edit: October 14, 2013, 10:18:40 am by rolycat »
 

Offline Fsck

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 1157
  • Country: ca
  • sleep deprived
Re: Why not ban AWG
« Reply #68 on: October 14, 2013, 10:16:24 am »

But a sheet of paper isn't 300mm nor is it 12 inches, it's 297mm, and I legitimately think it is a really important number to remember (trust me on that).

you're wrong. it's 297.4mm long aka 11 inches.

No, you're wrong.

11 inches is 279.4mm, which only the height of a sheet of paper in North America and a few other countries.

Most of the world uses ISO international standard sizes, the most common of which is A4,  297 x 210 mm.

yeah, I transposed the digits, which is what happens at 4am
"This is a one line proof...if we start sufficiently far to the left."
 

Offline casper.bang

  • Frequent Contributor
  • **
  • Posts: 311
  • Country: dk
  • Pro SE, amateur EE.
    • BangBits
Re: Why not ban AWG
« Reply #69 on: October 14, 2013, 10:59:26 am »
Most of the world uses ISO international standard sizes, the most common of which is A4,  297 x 210 mm.
Indeed, it was a nightmare to find standard A4 in north america even in the office mega-stores like Staples etc. I had to get it special cut and pay a smaller fortune for it.
 

Offline KJDS

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 2442
  • Country: gb
    • my website holding page
Re: Why not ban AWG
« Reply #70 on: October 14, 2013, 11:12:20 am »
Most of the world uses ISO international standard sizes, the most common of which is A4,  297 x 210 mm.
Indeed, it was a nightmare to find standard A4 in north america even in the office mega-stores like Staples etc. I had to get it special cut and pay a smaller fortune for it.

I've had to produce documents with custom borders so that they'd print out ok in the UK and North America.

Offline Kjelt

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 5828
  • Country: nl
Re: Why not ban AWG
« Reply #71 on: October 14, 2013, 02:04:23 pm »
Quote
The British construction industry, like many others, converted to the metric system without crippling costs. 
Great, now if they would please start driving on the right side of the road or stay on their island with their cars where the steering wheel and the driver are on the wrong side  :-DD
 

Offline peter.mitchell

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 1568
  • Country: au
Re: Why not ban AWG
« Reply #72 on: October 14, 2013, 02:39:43 pm »

But a sheet of paper isn't 300mm nor is it 12 inches, it's 297mm, and I legitimately think it is a really important number to remember (trust me on that).

you're wrong. it's 297.4mm long aka 11 inches.

No, you're wrong.

11 inches is 279.4mm, which is only the height of a sheet of paper in North America and a few other countries.

Most of the world uses ISO international standard sizes, the most common of which is A4,  297 x 210 mm.


God dammit 'murrica
 

Offline rolycat

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 1090
  • Country: gb
Re: Why not ban AWG
« Reply #73 on: October 14, 2013, 02:45:51 pm »
Quote
The British construction industry, like many others, converted to the metric system without crippling costs. 
Great, now if they would please start driving on the right side of the road or stay on their island with their cars where the steering wheel and the driver are on the wrong side  :-DD

Both the steering wheel and the driver in our cars are on the right side. Clearly, therefore, it is yours which are on the wrong side.

You guys only drive where you do because you got owned by Napoleon and he ordered it. That's the main reason the British trounced him at Waterloo, you know - so we could stick with the proper traffic system  ;D
 

Offline Kjelt

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 5828
  • Country: nl
Re: Why not ban AWG
« Reply #74 on: October 14, 2013, 02:56:27 pm »
Quote from: rolycat
You guys only drive where you do because you got owned by Napoleon and he ordered it. That's the main reason the British trounced him at Waterloo, you know - so we could stick with the proper traffic system  ;D 
Yeah well besides income tax Napoleon was not so bad with his naming systems and standards  ;) Else we would still be measuring everything with our feet, ellbows, thumbs and who knows what else and all be called Jan's son here in Holland.
But the main reason traffic WAS left is probably (source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Right-_and_left-hand_traffic)
Quote
Some historians, such as C. Northcote Parkinson, believed that ancient travellers on horseback generally rode on the left side of the road. As more people are right-handed, a horseman would thus be able to hold the reins with his left hand and keep his right hand free—to offer in friendship to passing riders or to defend himself with a sword, if necessary.
But if you have paid attention there are not many horses used as means of transportation and if you need the right hand now in a car, it is very handy for shifting gears (and giving other traffic contributors the middle finger)  ;D I believe even Jeremy from top gear had that belief (not sure though).
 

Offline rolycat

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 1090
  • Country: gb
Re: Why not ban AWG
« Reply #75 on: October 14, 2013, 03:15:40 pm »
Quote from: rolycat
You guys only drive where you do because you got owned by Napoleon and he ordered it. That's the main reason the British trounced him at Waterloo, you know - so we could stick with the proper traffic system  ;D 
Yeah well besides income tax Napoleon was not so bad with his naming systems and standards  ;) Else we would still be measuring everything with our feet, ellbows, thumbs and who knows what else and all be called Jan's son here in Holland.
But the main reason traffic WAS left is probably (source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Right-_and_left-hand_traffic)
Quote
Some historians, such as C. Northcote Parkinson, believed that ancient travellers on horseback generally rode on the left side of the road. As more people are right-handed, a horseman would thus be able to hold the reins with his left hand and keep his right hand free—to offer in friendship to passing riders or to defend himself with a sword, if necessary.
And legend has it that the switch to riding on the right in Europe was made because Napoleon was left-handed.

Quote
But if you have paid attention there are not many horses used as means of transportation and if you need the right hand now in a car, it is very handy for shifting gears (and giving other traffic contributors the middle finger)  ;D I believe even Jeremy from top gear had that belief (not sure though).
Fortunately I am also left-handed   8)
 

Offline madires

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 5244
  • Country: de
  • A qualified hobbyist ;)
Re: Why not ban AWG
« Reply #76 on: October 14, 2013, 03:38:19 pm »
Both the steering wheel and the driver in our cars are on the right side. Clearly, therefore, it is yours which are on the wrong side.

That might be true. But what about driving on the street? Since we're driving on the right side it's obvious you're doing something wrong. Pun intended :-)
 

Offline SLJ

  • Frequent Contributor
  • **
  • Posts: 656
  • Country: us
  • Antique Test Equipment Collector
    • Steve's Antique Technology
Re: Why not ban AWG
« Reply #77 on: October 14, 2013, 03:50:50 pm »
When the US made a feeble attempt to switch they changed some military specifications.  A hammer that previously had a 12.0 inch handle was redesigned with a 30.48 centimeter (still 12 inch) handle.

Offline G7PSK

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 3698
  • Country: gb
  • It is hot until proved not.
Re: Why not ban AWG
« Reply #78 on: October 14, 2013, 05:41:36 pm »
The British started driving on the left of the road due to an arbitrary dictat made by the city of London over traffic congestion on London bridge. Not the present bridge the one that burnt down (as in the nursery rhyme)
The traffic was so bad over the bridge that horses and carts were getting tangled and blocking traffic flow over the narrow bridge  as there was no regulation at the time as to where in the road any one went, so a regulation was made as to which side of the bridge traffic went the left was chosen as it was thought that it would be a good idea to pass whip hand to whip hand the rest O london continued as normal for some considerable time but slowly every one just started to keep to the same side of the road when they left the bridge so driving on the left of the road became the norm.
Napoleon dictated that every one drive on the other side of the road from the British as Britain and france were at war with each other (What's changed) Probably a case of  so out of bloody minded that as Britain drove/rode on the left the French would do it the other way around.
 

Offline rolycat

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 1090
  • Country: gb
Re: Why not ban AWG
« Reply #79 on: October 14, 2013, 06:52:53 pm »
Apparently (but don't quote me on this), the latest ISS docking (CYGNUS space craft) failed on the first attempt because the ISS was using one measurement scale (metric) and the CYGNUS craft was using a different one (imperial).

So they had to back CYGNUS away from the ISS for a week or so whilst they altered the software on the CYGNUS space craft to use the metric system.

oops!

Whenever someone begins an assertion with 'apparently', it's time to do some fact-checking...

This has nothing to do with metric vs. imperial, for once.

The problem was with the GPS data. The American craft was using an old date format offset from 1980 which was incompatible with the 1999-based Japanese system on the ISS.

More details here, if you are interested:

http://www.nasaspaceflight.com/2013/09/cygnus-cots-graduation-iss-berthing/
 

Offline c4757p

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 7805
  • Country: us
  • adieu
Re: Why not ban AWG
« Reply #80 on: October 14, 2013, 07:05:01 pm »
When the US made a feeble attempt to switch they changed some military specifications.  A hammer that previously had a 12.0 inch handle was redesigned with a 30.48 centimeter (still 12 inch) handle.

This is one of the few "real" arguments I hear against the metric system here. All the numbers become nasty because all the stubborn dickheads refuse to change physical sizes.
No longer active here - try the IRC channel if you just can't be without me :)
 

Offline Stonent

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 3824
  • Country: us
Re: Why not ban AWG
« Reply #81 on: October 14, 2013, 07:10:35 pm »
I'm sure changing molds and forgings gets expensive. I'd be fine with dual labeling though.
The larger the government, the smaller the citizen.
 

Offline Dongulus

  • Regular Contributor
  • *
  • Posts: 231
  • Country: us
Re: Why not ban AWG
« Reply #82 on: October 14, 2013, 07:12:07 pm »
Poor old imperial system doesn't deserve the trash talk it gets. In general, each of the units occupy their own domain with little cross between. For example:
Distant location: Use miles
Visible/walking distance: Use feet/yards
Dimensions of small object: Use inches
Difficult to see: Use mils

For cases that fall between these domains, I never see decimal values so conversion factor doesn't often come into play. For example, if someone is 5ft 9in tall, I can imagine a length of 5 feet and I could imagine 9 inches above that. I don't try to imagine 5.75 feet.

I would imagine this is the same for all of you used to the metric system. Why would anyone need to factor in the fact that there are 1000 meters in a kilometer if just measuring height or some furniture? Why should I care that there are 1000 mm in a meter when fitting parts for a pcb?
 

Offline c4757p

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 7805
  • Country: us
  • adieu
Re: Why not ban AWG
« Reply #83 on: October 14, 2013, 07:13:38 pm »
If people could accept a little rounding it wouldn't be an issue. 12" is close enough to 30cm to just call it that... but then you'd have people screaming for their 4.8 millimeters. :-\

Look on any dual-labeled package. They always say things like "10 fl oz / 295.735 mL" |O
No longer active here - try the IRC channel if you just can't be without me :)
 

Offline c4757p

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 7805
  • Country: us
  • adieu
Re: Why not ban AWG
« Reply #84 on: October 14, 2013, 07:15:06 pm »
For cases that fall between these domains, I never see decimal values so conversion factor doesn't often come into play. For example, if someone is 5ft 9in tall, I can imagine a length of 5 feet and I could imagine 9 inches above that. I don't try to imagine 5.75 feet.

I would imagine this is the same for all of you used to the metric system. Why would anyone need to factor in the fact that there are 1000 meters in a kilometer if just measuring height or some furniture? Why should I care that there are 1000 mm in a meter when fitting parts for a pcb?

Tell that to Grandma when she's trying to figure out how many tablespoons are in a cup.
No longer active here - try the IRC channel if you just can't be without me :)
 

Offline Dave

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 1262
  • Country: si
  • I like to measure things.
Re: Why not ban AWG
« Reply #85 on: October 14, 2013, 07:19:09 pm »
and if you need the right hand now in a car, it is very handy for shifting gears (and giving other traffic contributors the middle finger)  ;D
Not to mention giving a friendly wave to the guy that let you into the lane, adjusting the air conditioning, switching songs on the radio, dialing a phone number (and before you start yelling, yes, hands-free bluetooth audio), putting on sunglasses, keeping a girl's leg warm, ... ;)
<fellbuendel> it's arduino, you're not supposed to know anything about what you're doing
<fellbuendel> if you knew, you wouldn't be using it
 

Offline rolycat

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 1090
  • Country: gb
Re: Why not ban AWG
« Reply #86 on: October 14, 2013, 07:48:54 pm »
For cases that fall between these domains, I never see decimal values so conversion factor doesn't often come into play. For example, if someone is 5ft 9in tall, I can imagine a length of 5 feet and I could imagine 9 inches above that. I don't try to imagine 5.75 feet.

I would imagine this is the same for all of you used to the metric system. Why would anyone need to factor in the fact that there are 1000 meters in a kilometer if just measuring height or some furniture? Why should I care that there are 1000 mm in a meter when fitting parts for a pcb?

Tell that to Grandma when she's trying to figure out how many tablespoons are in a cup.

Ooh, I know this one. There are 16 tablespoons in a cup.
Hang about. According to Google, there are 13.3228 Imperial tablespoons in a US cup.
No, wait. It seems that there are 14.08 UK tablespoons in a metric cup.

Let's see, a tablespoon is about 20ml in Australia, about 15ml in the US, exactly 17.7581714 ml in the UK (Thanks, Google)...

It's a good thing Imperial cups aren't in use anymore, or things could have become complicated.

What was the question again?




 

Offline Kremmen

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 1283
  • Country: fi
Re: Why not ban AWG
« Reply #87 on: October 14, 2013, 08:39:13 pm »
Poor old imperial system doesn't deserve the trash talk it gets. In general, each of the units occupy their own domain with little cross between. For example:
Distant location: Use miles
Visible/walking distance: Use feet/yards
Dimensions of small object: Use inches
Difficult to see: Use mils

It is of course immaterial what the exact size of a unit is. An inch is an inch and a cm is a cm. One is not "better" than the other and each is equally ugly when expressed as a multiple of the other. Where the SI system has got it right however is the consistency of defining quantities within the system using powers of ten, and defining units using other units so you end up with multipliers of 1 nearly always. It is a true system in other words.
What i see as the curse of the imperial system is precisely this lack of systemic approach. Imperial dimensions are domain specific and while they work inside a problem domain, they do not do so well universally. Add to that historical and regional variations in identically named units and the brothel is ready go into business...

Quote
For cases that fall between these domains, I never see decimal values so conversion factor doesn't often come into play. For example, if someone is 5ft 9in tall, I can imagine a length of 5 feet and I could imagine 9 inches above that. I don't try to imagine 5.75 feet.

Sorry but that is just BS. Maybe it works for you in this particular case but generally we who are accustomed to calculating in SI units look round eyed at the swamps of conversion factors and magic multipliers that the imperial formulas are full of. Yes you can do it but to me it looks like pulling wisdom teeth via your asshole. The only semi good argument i have heard for imperial measurements is that a wee dram tastes better than a wee 3 or 4 cl (whatever dram was, i forget).

Quote
I would imagine this is the same for all of you used to the metric system. Why would anyone need to factor in the fact that there are 1000 meters in a kilometer if just measuring height or some furniture? Why should I care that there are 1000 mm in a meter when fitting parts for a pcb?

No, actually it is not the same at all, and this is the point i have been trying to make. It is a completely different mindset where you live in a world where there is one unit of measurement per one physical quantity. You then just apply the prefix that scales the unit reasonably. Dimensions for more complex quantities are (almost) logically derived from simple ones using the units of those simpler dimensions. It is a system you can and learn to trust so much that it effectively becomes invisible; if someone needs a 3 mm thick piece of aluminium sheet there is no ambiguity and no need to memorize gauges of this and gauges of that; diameters or radii of drill holes are not suddenly given in fractional presentation and wire sizes in yet another gauge making no sense to those who only know linear dimension units. If i need to find out whether a 1.5 mm^2 wire will carry a given current without overheating, i plug that cross section (or any other cross section) into the formula without first converting it from a presentation unusable, or usable only with extra unhelpful and unneeded conversions. If i need a liter of oil for my car or lawnmower, i don't need to worry whether it is a EU liter or someone else's liter, even when traveling.
The ultimate point perhaps is that you _never_ need to worry/wonder whether you are using the "best" or "correct" dimensions in a calculation. Say you start figuring the distance from earth to the sun in millimeters and later realize that this was perhaps not the optimal choice after all, no problemo. Just divide by 10^6 i.e. shift the decimal point 6 digits and you are in kilometers.

---
Sorry, didn't mean to rant.
Nothing sings like a kilovolt.
Dr W. Bishop
 

Offline Zbig

  • Frequent Contributor
  • **
  • Posts: 875
  • Country: pl
Re: Why not ban AWG
« Reply #88 on: October 14, 2013, 10:15:55 pm »
Poor old imperial system doesn't deserve the trash talk it gets. In general, each of the units occupy their own domain with little cross between. For example:
Distant location: Use miles
Visible/walking distance: Use feet/yards
Dimensions of small object: Use inches
Difficult to see: Use mils

For cases that fall between these domains, I never see decimal values so conversion factor doesn't often come into play. For example, if someone is 5ft 9in tall, I can imagine a length of 5 feet and I could imagine 9 inches above that. I don't try to imagine 5.75 feet.

I would imagine this is the same for all of you used to the metric system. Why would anyone need to factor in the fact that there are 1000 meters in a kilometer if just measuring height or some furniture? Why should I care that there are 1000 mm in a meter when fitting parts for a pcb?

It deserves all the trash talk it gets and then some. If anything, your attempt at rationalizing this only seems to make it worse and that's immediately obvious to anyone who hasn't been forced to put up with this "system" ;) Why not introduce yet another unit for "cycling distance", equal to circumference of a 26" bike wheel? And another one for "kind of difficult to see but still sort of possible if you squint your eye just right", equal to the standardized diameter of a Caucasian female's pubic hair? This, and using body parts as measurement units seems little passé in 2013. There are many downsides to living where I live but I'm glad I didn't have to dedicate significant amount of my limited brainpower to deal with this utter nonsense.
 

Offline Stonent

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 3824
  • Country: us
Re: Why not ban AWG
« Reply #89 on: October 14, 2013, 10:41:42 pm »
I often just substitute similar but imprecise measurements that are close. Liters and Quarts, Yards and Meters.

I can mentally estimate distances in imperial units fairly easy it would take a while for me to convert myself where I could do that in anything other than smaller metric units.

Since nearly everything on passenger cars is metric now in the US, I can reasonably eye-ball a bolt and guess the size.
I suppose if I have to start using kilometers, I'll cheat and pretend a kilometer is half a mile when estimating a distance.

I do worry if they try to force carpenters to metric that it will cause lots of problems with integrating with existing homes and also getting incorrect measurements because they are so used to what they do that it's automatic.
The larger the government, the smaller the citizen.
 

Offline westfw

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 3193
  • Country: us
Re: Why not ban AWG
« Reply #90 on: October 14, 2013, 10:46:42 pm »
Quote
A4 paper  297 x 210 mm.
You see, this is the part of metric that I don't understand.  There are all these lovely decimal units, and then the actual goods end up "297mm" long, or sold "per 250g"

I'm sure changing molds and forgings gets expensive. I'd be fine with dual labeling though.
Job creation !
 

Offline c4757p

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 7805
  • Country: us
  • adieu
Re: Why not ban AWG
« Reply #91 on: October 14, 2013, 10:49:12 pm »
Quote
A4 paper  297 x 210 mm.
You see, this is the part of metric that I don't understand.  There are all these lovely decimal units, and then the actual goods end up "297mm" long, or sold "per 250g"

It's a 1:sqrt(2) aspect ratio. That way, if you cut/fold it in half it maintains the same aspect ratio.
« Last Edit: October 14, 2013, 10:50:46 pm by c4757p »
No longer active here - try the IRC channel if you just can't be without me :)
 

Offline AlfBaz

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 2030
  • Country: au
Re: Why not ban AWG
« Reply #92 on: October 14, 2013, 10:52:24 pm »
I have a vague notion that a meter, the basic unit of distance is derived as the wavelength of krypton (didn't know the French were big on superman), but what's the definition of a yard or inch or whatever the basic distance unit is in imperial?
 

Offline Stonent

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 3824
  • Country: us
Re: Why not ban AWG
« Reply #93 on: October 14, 2013, 10:54:10 pm »
Quote
A4 paper  297 x 210 mm.
You see, this is the part of metric that I don't understand.  There are all these lovely decimal units, and then the actual goods end up "297mm" long, or sold "per 250g"

I'm sure changing molds and forgings gets expensive. I'd be fine with dual labeling though.
Job creation !

I think the purpose of metric should be to simplify, not make more complex. Why 297 x 210 and not 300x200? US letter paper is 8.5x11 which is a fairly round amount.

I did find it irritating when Coke came up with the 1/2 liter bottle. For the longest time it seemed (at least in my area) that Coke machines sold cans for 75 cents and 20oz bottles for $1.00. Now that the 1/2 liter bottles are out there, it seems that 1.50 for the 20oz bottles is the new norm since many machines can't accommodate the smaller bottles.
The larger the government, the smaller the citizen.
 

Offline c4757p

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 7805
  • Country: us
  • adieu
Re: Why not ban AWG
« Reply #94 on: October 14, 2013, 10:56:21 pm »
I think the purpose of metric should be to simplify, not make more complex. Why 297 x 210 and not 300x200? US letter paper is 8.5x11 which is a fairly round amount.

I just said that - a sqrt(2):1 aspect ratio allows you to keep the same ratio when folding or cutting in half. A0 has an area of one square meter, A1 is 1/2 of that, A2 one half of A1, and so on.

Damn, that took a couple brainfarts to get right :-\
« Last Edit: October 14, 2013, 10:59:30 pm by c4757p »
No longer active here - try the IRC channel if you just can't be without me :)
 

Offline Stonent

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 3824
  • Country: us
Re: Why not ban AWG
« Reply #95 on: October 14, 2013, 10:58:31 pm »
I have a vague notion that a meter, the basic unit of distance is derived as the wavelength of krypton (didn't know the French were big on superman), but what's the definition of a yard or inch or whatever the basic distance unit is in imperial?

A yard is 3 feet, a foot is 12 inches.
Initially the foot was supposedly the length of a king's food. I don't know if that's true or not.

A mile was based on a Latin term from ancient Rome for the length of 1000 paces of a soldier.
The larger the government, the smaller the citizen.
 

Offline jiggles

  • Newbie
  • Posts: 4
Re: Why not ban AWG
« Reply #96 on: October 14, 2013, 10:58:55 pm »
I use a rather horrible version of both. Small lengths: Metric, Hight and large distances: Imperial, Anything else is what mood I am in at the time! ^-^
 

Offline Stonent

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 3824
  • Country: us
Re: Why not ban AWG
« Reply #97 on: October 14, 2013, 11:01:42 pm »
I think the purpose of metric should be to simplify, not make more complex. Why 297 x 210 and not 300x200? US letter paper is 8.5x11 which is a fairly round amount.

I just said that - a sqrt(2):1 aspect ratio allows you to keep the same ratio when folding or cutting in half. A0 has an area of one square meter, A1 is 1/2 of that, A2 one half of A1, and so on.

Damn, that took a couple brainfarts to get right :-\

Yeah we posted at around the same time so you got in the explanation before my comment posted.
The larger the government, the smaller the citizen.
 

Offline Stonent

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 3824
  • Country: us
Re: Why not ban AWG
« Reply #98 on: October 14, 2013, 11:02:19 pm »
I use a rather horrible version of both. Small lengths: Metric, Hight and large distances: Imperial, Anything else is what mood I am in at the time! ^-^

 :-+
The larger the government, the smaller the citizen.
 

Offline Zbig

  • Frequent Contributor
  • **
  • Posts: 875
  • Country: pl
Re: Why not ban AWG
« Reply #99 on: October 14, 2013, 11:03:05 pm »
I did find it irritating when Coke came up with the 1/2 liter bottle. For the longest time it seemed (at least in my area) that Coke machines sold cans for 75 cents and 20oz bottles for $1.00. Now that the 1/2 liter bottles are out there, it seems that 1.50 for the 20oz bottles is the new norm since many machines can't accommodate the smaller bottles.

Well of course if you were forced to deal with "imperial" for significant part of your life, it gets awkward to adjust to anything other. Change resistance is a normal human thing. But this doesn't make the Flintstone-metrics any less ass-backwards :P

EDIT:
I just realized that perhaps I missed the point of your post a little. Sorry for that, it's little late here.
« Last Edit: October 14, 2013, 11:09:47 pm by Zbig »
 

Offline AlfBaz

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 2030
  • Country: au
Re: Why not ban AWG
« Reply #100 on: October 14, 2013, 11:21:54 pm »
Initially the foot was supposedly the length of a king's food. I don't know if that's true or not.
So NIST have his foot in a glass case?
 

Offline Stonent

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 3824
  • Country: us
Re: Why not ban AWG
« Reply #101 on: October 14, 2013, 11:43:03 pm »
Initially the foot was supposedly the length of a king's food. I don't know if that's true or not.
So NIST have his foot in a glass case?

I wouldn't think so, we haven't had a king in well over 200 years.
The larger the government, the smaller the citizen.
 

Offline Zbig

  • Frequent Contributor
  • **
  • Posts: 875
  • Country: pl
Re: Why not ban AWG
« Reply #102 on: October 14, 2013, 11:52:50 pm »
Just a one more silly little mental exercise from my side for all the defendants of the flawed reasoning behind that inches and miles & co. are totally fine because you don't ever have a practical need to mix such a vastly different values.

1 inch equals a 1/63360 mile, right? It doesn't have to be "round" because an "inch of something" is so differrent from a "mile of something" that you just don't compare or mix them in practice, you say? ;)

Well, 1 picofarad equals 10^-6 microfarads. Now imagine that someone used similar broken logic for capacitors and that the big electrolytics are measured in "Capacitons" and small, ceramic ones are measured in "Tinysparks" (which wouldn't be that much more cheesy than "foot"). And that for no apparrent reason, 1 Capaciton equals 83291.6912 Tinysparks. Deal with that. What kind of mental tricks would you use to convince yourself and others that there is a method in this madness? ;) Have fun calculating your RC filter :)

The simple fact is that non-divisible, arbitrary-multiplies nonsense just has to die and the sooner the better  :box:
« Last Edit: October 14, 2013, 11:55:26 pm by Zbig »
 

Offline Dongulus

  • Regular Contributor
  • *
  • Posts: 231
  • Country: us
Re: Why not ban AWG
« Reply #103 on: October 15, 2013, 01:22:08 am »
Okay, okay. Yeesh, I need to explain myself better.  :palm:  Let me clarify that I would not in any way be advocating the imperial system over the metric system in any circumstance. In fact, to call imperial units a system is much too generous. Imperial units is a religion. It was passed to my generation from a previous one and to them from a previous one and so on with no rational other than "because that's the way it is". If I was raised with the metric system as my sole tool for measurement, then I would be arguing along side everyone else here, and I would have a much easier time doing so.  ;)

There certainly is no contest as to which convention is more convenient for calculations; there's proof in the fact that every single science and engineering class I have ever taken in my life used metric units. I know that the members of this forum are a group of scientifically minded people, to whom calculations are a regular practice, and the convenience of the metric system is all important. However, for the general population, of whom the vast majority possess no more than a high school diploma (U.S. public school system, mind you), calculations are not a regular exercise. In addition, much construction work is guided by rules of thumb and established practices rather than formalized mathematics.

What I wanted to get across is that however stupid our units may seem, they are perfectly capable of communication measurements with little ambiguity, at least intranationally. Trading miles for kilometers, feet and yards for meters, and inches for centimeters simply offers no advantage to the majority of Americans. This is why every intent to switch to metric has been a complete failure.

My belief is that we will be entrenched in our imperial units hole until our Chinese overlords take over in which case we'll use whatever they have.  ;D

 

Offline Fsck

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 1157
  • Country: ca
  • sleep deprived
Re: Why not ban AWG
« Reply #104 on: October 15, 2013, 01:28:30 am »
Initially the foot was supposedly the length of a king's food. I don't know if that's true or not.
So NIST have his foot in a glass case?

I wouldn't think so, we haven't had a king in well over 200 years.

the foot is defined from the meter
"This is a one line proof...if we start sufficiently far to the left."
 

Offline Kryoclasm

  • Regular Contributor
  • *
  • Posts: 175
  • Country: us
  • KL3DL
Re: Why not ban AWG
« Reply #105 on: October 15, 2013, 01:32:54 am »
the foot is defined from the meter

Um, the foot is defined from the inch which is  defined from the 3 barley corn standard.

Now, to be fair, we have also used the metric standard to give it a second standard to refer to  in case someone loses or eats the barley corns.  :phew:
« Last Edit: October 15, 2013, 01:35:23 am by Kryoclasm »
“I predict that very shortly the old-fashioned incandescent lamp, having a filament heated to brightness by the passage of electric current through it, will entirely disappear.” -Nikola Tesla
 

Offline Fsck

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 1157
  • Country: ca
  • sleep deprived
Re: Why not ban AWG
« Reply #106 on: October 15, 2013, 01:48:45 am »
the foot is defined from the meter

Um, the foot is defined from the inch which is  defined from the 3 barley corn standard.

Now, to be fair, we have also used the metric standard to give it a second standard to refer to  in case someone loses or eats the barley corns.  :phew:

no, the foot is defined as exactly 0.3048 meters, from which we experimentally derive the meter from its definition: “The meter is the length of the path traveled by light in vacuum during a time interval of 1/299 792 458 of a second.”  per http://www.bipm.org/en/CGPM/db/17/1/

the foot was *historically defined* from inches. it's no longer a valid definition as the standard for the inch is derived from the foot which is derived from the meter. it's basically semantics.

(if the nist site was functioning, I'd give you the nist link for the foot but....)
« Last Edit: October 15, 2013, 01:51:44 am by Fsck »
"This is a one line proof...if we start sufficiently far to the left."
 

Offline Stonent

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 3824
  • Country: us
Re: Why not ban AWG
« Reply #107 on: October 15, 2013, 01:49:49 am »
the foot is defined from the meter

Um, the foot is defined from the inch which is  defined from the 3 barley corn standard.

Now, to be fair, we have also used the metric standard to give it a second standard to refer to  in case someone loses or eats the barley corns.  :phew:

But what if we can never find John Galt, what will be the point?  ;)
The larger the government, the smaller the citizen.
 

Online Monkeh

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 6393
  • Country: gb
Re: Why not ban AWG
« Reply #108 on: October 15, 2013, 01:50:19 am »
the foot is defined from the meter

Um, the foot is defined from the inch which is  defined from the 3 barley corn standard.

Now, to be fair, we have also used the metric standard to give it a second standard to refer to  in case someone loses or eats the barley corns.  :phew:

no, the foot is defined as exactly 0.3048 meters, from which we experimentally derive the meter from its definition: “The meter is the length of the path traveled by light in vacuum during a time interval of 1/299 792 458 of a second.”

(if the nist site was functioning, I'd give you the nist link but....)

No, it's defined as a third of one yard. In metric that is 30.48 centimetres.
 

Offline AlfBaz

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 2030
  • Country: au
Re: Why not ban AWG
« Reply #109 on: October 15, 2013, 01:57:17 am »
Can we stop using centimetres please, this is an engineering forum not a seamstress/tailor forum... it's either millimetres or metres >:D
 

Offline Fsck

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 1157
  • Country: ca
  • sleep deprived
Re: Why not ban AWG
« Reply #110 on: October 15, 2013, 01:57:36 am »
the foot is defined from the meter

Um, the foot is defined from the inch which is  defined from the 3 barley corn standard.

Now, to be fair, we have also used the metric standard to give it a second standard to refer to  in case someone loses or eats the barley corns.  :phew:

no, the foot is defined as exactly 0.3048 meters, from which we experimentally derive the meter from its definition: “The meter is the length of the path traveled by light in vacuum during a time interval of 1/299 792 458 of a second.”

(if the nist site was functioning, I'd give you the nist link but....)

No, it's defined as a third of one yard. In metric that is 30.48 centimetres.

we need access to http://physics.nist.gov/Pubs/SP447/app9.pdf%E2%80%8E
"This is a one line proof...if we start sufficiently far to the left."
 

Offline AlfBaz

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 2030
  • Country: au
Re: Why not ban AWG
« Reply #111 on: October 15, 2013, 02:01:01 am »
Wiki recons that at some time in thepast most countries agreed to making a yard equal to exactly 0.9144 metres
 

Offline Fsck

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 1157
  • Country: ca
  • sleep deprived
Re: Why not ban AWG
« Reply #112 on: October 15, 2013, 02:17:05 am »
the foot is defined from the meter

Um, the foot is defined from the inch which is  defined from the 3 barley corn standard.

Now, to be fair, we have also used the metric standard to give it a second standard to refer to  in case someone loses or eats the barley corns.  :phew:

no, the foot is defined as exactly 0.3048 meters, from which we experimentally derive the meter from its definition: “The meter is the length of the path traveled by light in vacuum during a time interval of 1/299 792 458 of a second.”

(if the nist site was functioning, I'd give you the nist link but....)

No, it's defined as a third of one yard. In metric that is 30.48 centimetres.

and the yard is defined from the meter which is where the derived definitions come from.
in the end you end up with an imperial length = meter equivalent definition
"This is a one line proof...if we start sufficiently far to the left."
 

Offline Kryoclasm

  • Regular Contributor
  • *
  • Posts: 175
  • Country: us
  • KL3DL
Re: Why not ban AWG
« Reply #113 on: October 15, 2013, 02:33:32 am »
no, the foot is defined as exactly 0.3048 meters, from which we experimentally derive the meter from its definition: “The meter is the length of the path traveled by light in vacuum during a time interval of 1/299 792 458 of a second.”  per http://www.bipm.org/en/CGPM/db/17/1/

the foot was *historically defined* from inches. it's no longer a valid definition as the standard for the inch is derived from the foot which is derived from the meter. it's basically semantics.

My only sticking point the where you say, and I'll shorten the thought..."imperial is derived from metric".

More accurately it is agreed that an imperial measurement is now defined as having a metric equivalent. Thus, the "foot is defined as exactly 0.3048 meters".

I know I'm splitting hairs.  :P
“I predict that very shortly the old-fashioned incandescent lamp, having a filament heated to brightness by the passage of electric current through it, will entirely disappear.” -Nikola Tesla
 

Offline sacherjj

  • Frequent Contributor
  • **
  • Posts: 993
  • Country: us
Re: Why not ban AWG
« Reply #114 on: October 15, 2013, 02:54:46 am »
I bought a tape measure that was combo 'merican inches, feet, 16" stud placement and mm on the other side.  Then I used it to make my tool bench and was writing down things like 1234, 843, 234.  Not 48 1/16, 92 5/8.  It was awesome, even as comfortable I am with construction with imperial.  But impossible to work with anyone else unless we all have tapes like this, and really has to be on both sides to not get annoying.  I wish we would bite the bullet and do it.
 

Offline c4757p

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 7805
  • Country: us
  • adieu
Re: Why not ban AWG
« Reply #115 on: October 15, 2013, 03:01:53 am »
Then I used it to make my tool bench and was writing down things like 1234, 843, 234.  Not 48 1/16, 92 5/8.

When I have to measure lengths and I'm restricted to Imperial units, I make them as close to metric as I can by measuring everything in only inches and sixteenths. It's just sad that we think 5' 3-1/4" is a perfectly valid measurement; I call that 63"4. It's close enough for most things.
No longer active here - try the IRC channel if you just can't be without me :)
 

Offline echen1024

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 1660
  • Country: us
  • 15 yo Future EE
Re: Why not ban AWG
« Reply #116 on: October 15, 2013, 03:03:36 am »
We might as well go back to bushels, pecks, and fortnights. Hey, for a society that still measures length in body parts, that's not too bad...
I'm not saying we should kill all stupid people. I'm just saying that we should remove all product safety labels and let natural selection do its work.

https://www.youtube.com/user/echen1024
 

Offline sacherjj

  • Frequent Contributor
  • **
  • Posts: 993
  • Country: us
Re: Why not ban AWG
« Reply #117 on: October 15, 2013, 03:23:37 am »
Then I used it to make my tool bench and was writing down things like 1234, 843, 234.  Not 48 1/16, 92 5/8.

When I have to measure lengths and I'm restricted to Imperial units, I make them as close to metric as I can by measuring everything in only inches and sixteenths. It's just sad that we think 5' 3-1/4" is a perfectly valid measurement; I call that 63"4. It's close enough for most things.

1mm is more than accurate enough for construction and good for rough wood working.  Fine wood working is down to below 1/64th and fractions of a mm.  Like that notation idea though, 63"4., but seems like it would be 63"1 as in 1/4. 
« Last Edit: October 15, 2013, 03:27:47 am by sacherjj »
 

Offline iloveelectronics

  • Frequent Contributor
  • **
  • Posts: 937
  • Country: hk
Re: Why not ban AWG
« Reply #118 on: October 15, 2013, 03:32:22 am »
Just curious...do people in the UK still commonly use "stone" as the unit for weight?
My email address: franky @ 99centHobbies . com
My eBay store: http://stores.ebay.com/99centhobbies
 

Online Monkeh

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 6393
  • Country: gb
Re: Why not ban AWG
« Reply #119 on: October 15, 2013, 03:34:06 am »
Just curious...do people in the UK still commonly use "stone" as the unit for weight?

For bodyweight, yes.
 

Offline Bored@Work

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 3932
  • Country: 00
Re: Why not ban AWG
« Reply #120 on: October 15, 2013, 05:03:19 am »
Initially the foot was supposedly the length of a king's food. I don't know if that's true or not.
So NIST have his foot in a glass case?

I wouldn't think so, we haven't had a king in well over 200 years.

So? If the French managed to keep the various prototype meter bars for centuries, you could keep a rotten foot of some king for two centuries. And you could make dual use of the rotten foot

1) Length specification

2) Establishment of a scale for the smell of rotten Wisconsin cheese (For the completion of the standardization of cheese. The one where the US regulates the size of holes in cheese. To protect US consumers from being swindled out of their cheese if sold cheese with too large holes ...)
I delete PMs unread. If you have something to say, say it in public.
For all else: Profile->[Modify Profile]Buddies/Ignore List->Edit Ignore List
 

Offline Bored@Work

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 3932
  • Country: 00
Re: Why not ban AWG
« Reply #121 on: October 15, 2013, 05:13:55 am »
Can we stop using centimetres please, this is an engineering forum not a seamstress/tailor forum... it's either millimetres or metres >:D

centi is a valid SI prefix. Nothing wrong with it, it just doesn't get as much love in engineering as it should get.
I delete PMs unread. If you have something to say, say it in public.
For all else: Profile->[Modify Profile]Buddies/Ignore List->Edit Ignore List
 

Offline AlfBaz

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 2030
  • Country: au
Re: Why not ban AWG
« Reply #122 on: October 15, 2013, 05:28:22 am »
centi is a valid SI prefix.
So is deci.
Quote
it just doesn't get as much love in engineering as it should get.
Probably because the only time you hear centimetres is when you are being measured up for clothes and the numbers just keep on climbing :P
 

Offline Tepe

  • Frequent Contributor
  • **
  • Posts: 571
  • Country: dk
Sv: Re: Why not ban AWG
« Reply #123 on: October 15, 2013, 05:44:36 am »
So is deci.
In Sweden candy is sold by the hektogram
ceterum censeo systemd-inem esse delendam
 

Offline Bored@Work

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 3932
  • Country: 00
Re: Why not ban AWG
« Reply #124 on: October 15, 2013, 05:46:35 am »
centi is a valid SI prefix.
So is deci.
Quote
it just doesn't get as much love in engineering as it should get.
Probably because the only time you hear centimetres is when you are being measured up for clothes and the numbers just keep on climbing :P

Ah no. Here e.g. TV screen sizes are specified in cm*. In fact, a lot of household stuff is, so is some DIY building material.

* Fun fact. We "always" did specify TVs in cm, but computer monitors in inch. Until the EU stepped in and reminded everyone that measures used for trading with consumers MUST be metric. So computer monitors were suddenly specified in cm, too. Similar with hard disks. Which got some people a bit angry (namely the manufacturers and importers of computer gear). So they lobbied the EU ind the EU had to give in and now allows to use imperial units again- But only if the metric unit is also given, and the metric unit is given prominently (e.g. first, before the imperial one, or in a larger font).
I delete PMs unread. If you have something to say, say it in public.
For all else: Profile->[Modify Profile]Buddies/Ignore List->Edit Ignore List
 

Offline TMM

  • Frequent Contributor
  • **
  • Posts: 437
  • Country: au
Re: Why not ban AWG
« Reply #125 on: October 15, 2013, 07:46:12 am »
Apparently (but don't quote me on this), the latest ISS docking (CYGNUS space craft) failed on the first attempt because the ISS was using one measurement scale (metric) and the CYGNUS craft was using a different one (imperial).

So they had to back CYGNUS away from the ISS for a week or so whilst they altered the software on the CYGNUS space craft to use the metric system.

oops!
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mars_Climate_Orbiter
Heheh. Silly 'murricans and their imperial units.
 

Offline Kjelt

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 5828
  • Country: nl
Re: Why not ban AWG
« Reply #126 on: October 15, 2013, 07:54:43 am »
Imperial units is a religion. It was passed to my generation from a previous one and to them from a previous one and so on with no rational other than "because that's the way it is".
The imperial system is/was an english system, you guys broke off all relations with your declaration of independence, why keep that of all things  :D

Can you imagine that you would not have switched to the decimalisation standard for your money? You would have something pre 1971 english like 12 cents in a dime 20 dimes in a dollar. Good luck. :D

« Last Edit: October 15, 2013, 08:06:57 am by Kjelt »
 

Offline G7PSK

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 3698
  • Country: gb
  • It is hot until proved not.
Re: Why not ban AWG
« Reply #127 on: October 15, 2013, 08:01:20 am »
Can we stop using centimetres please, this is an engineering forum not a seamstress/tailor forum... it's either millimetres or metres >:D

centi is a valid SI prefix. Nothing wrong with it, it just doesn't get as much love in engineering as it should get.

Millimeters are and meters are used in engineering to avoid mistakes. If you used centimeters and the labeling was not clear they could be mistaken for millimeters or Meters  so all smaller measurements are made in millimeters and larger one's in meters and in general it can be easily deduced from the drawing what is meant even if the unit is not marked on the drawing. 
 

Offline Kjelt

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 5828
  • Country: nl
Re: Why not ban AWG
« Reply #128 on: October 15, 2013, 08:02:23 am »
You see, this is the part of metric that I don't understand.  There are all these lovely decimal units, and then the actual goods end up "297mm" long, or sold "per 250g"
I think the paper size was an US A4 standard which was globally adapted since all printers/typewriters etc. came from the US  ;)

The prices in european supermarkets on the shelves are usually sublabeled per kg and ofcourse the price of the weight in the package it is sold.
Every unit needs subunits to be workable, or can you imagine having only €10 and €100 bills? Now in Europe the moneytary subunits are seperated in 1,2,5 which is different then in our country before the euro where it was 1, 2.5 , 5 this is still after 10 years sometimes getting used to as are our typical names for the coin money which are abandoned.
 

Offline Kremmen

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 1283
  • Country: fi
Re: Why not ban AWG
« Reply #129 on: October 15, 2013, 08:47:33 am »
Quote
A4 paper  297 x 210 mm.
You see, this is the part of metric that I don't understand.  There are all these lovely decimal units, and then the actual goods end up "297mm" long, or sold "per 250g"
But isn't that nice: you are free to use whatever measurement is appropriate, instead of being constrained to the nearest multiple of some arbitrary base unit whether it is optimal or not.
But seriously, the logic behind paper sizes was explained already, and as to the sold "per ..." thing, for retail items the unit price is always given (i.e. the price per kilo or liter or whatever). That greatly facilitates comparing the true prices of items, both between different brands and between package sizes of the same brand. I have been surprised more times than i can count...
Nothing sings like a kilovolt.
Dr W. Bishop
 

Offline Rerouter

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 4616
  • Country: au
  • Question Everything... Except This Statement
Re: Why not ban AWG
« Reply #130 on: October 15, 2013, 09:20:29 am »
Or they could just standardize on inches if they are so resistant to metric,

1 thou = 1 Milli-inch
1 foot = 12 inches
1 yard = 36 inches
1 mile = 63.36 kilo-inches etc

thinking in powers of 10 you can suddenly see how odd the mile looks,

1 gallon = 231 cubic inches
1 quart = 57.75 cubic inches
1 pint = 28.875 cubic inches

the gallon while not a nice number is round, the others not so much,

for mass, lets forget any round numbers on the power of 10 scale,

1 short tonne = 110.92 mega-cubic inches of water
1 pound = 27.73 cubic inches of water
1 ounce = 1.73 cubic inches of water

 ::)


 

Offline NANDBlog

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 4644
  • Country: nl
  • Current job: ATEX certified product design
Re: Why not ban AWG
« Reply #131 on: October 15, 2013, 11:58:33 am »
Especially in PCB design, I have preatty bad time working because the imp system. Some manufacturers just cannot make the drawings in mm, even if they would just write there that they made something 120 mil big. They could have just write there 3.048mm, and I would gladly ignore that 48 um, unless it is that important. Instead, I have to take the calculator out, move the reference point, and pull my hair off until I become bald. And it continues on different levels. recently I've seen LFM as air flow. Nobody had any idea how much is that. I'm pretty sure that even americans have no idea how to work with their derived units. They are fine until they use yards, and feet, but when it became pounds per cubic feet or farenheit per milliwatt per square inch, it is basically over. It becomes a combination of inappropriately chosen ratios, and you cannot convert, nor imagine it.
Same deal with PCBs. Whoever decided that it is a good idea to write track width in mil, must be insane. I mean the 0.1mm grid just works so flawlessly to design a whole (not HDI) PCB...
 

Offline Phaedrus

  • Frequent Contributor
  • **
  • Posts: 714
  • Country: us
Re: Why not ban AWG
« Reply #132 on: October 15, 2013, 03:17:12 pm »
"More quotes have been misattributed to Albert Einstein than to any other famous person."
- Albert Einstein
 

Offline grumpydoc

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 2740
  • Country: gb
Re: Why not ban AWG
« Reply #133 on: October 15, 2013, 03:19:41 pm »
Celsius isn't fine-grained enough for everyday use? Can you honestly feel a 1F difference? I'm hard pressed to discern an 1C difference!

-30C: please kill me
-20C: holy shit it's cold!
-10C: damn, it's chilly today!
0C: snowman weather
10C: light jacket weather
20C: room temperature
30C: pretty warm
35C: damn, it's warm today!
37C: holy shit it's hot!
40C: please kill me

Disclaimer: Opinions vary by region.
Indeed, for instance there's the Geordie night out scale:

-30C: T-shirt
-20C: T-shirt
-10C: T-shirt
0C: T-shirt
10C: T-shirt
20C: T-shirt
30C: T-shirt
35C: T-shirt
37C: T-shirt
40C: T-shirt

:)

 

Offline c4757p

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 7805
  • Country: us
  • adieu
Re: Why not ban AWG
« Reply #134 on: October 15, 2013, 03:34:37 pm »
You use decibels, don't you?

You can hardly call that a prefixed unit, though... have you ever seen somebody use the bel proper?
No longer active here - try the IRC channel if you just can't be without me :)
 

Offline rolycat

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 1090
  • Country: gb
Re: Why not ban AWG
« Reply #135 on: October 15, 2013, 03:39:46 pm »
Just curious...do people in the UK still commonly use "stone" as the unit for weight?

For bodyweight, yes.

No we don't. I don't use it and most doctors/healthcare people I have spoken to use kilogrammes, at least in records. Only laypeople use stones.

Laypeople are exactly who the questioner was referring to, since he asked whether stones were 'commonly' used.

The first match on Google UK for "body weight chart" is on the NHS website, which I would suggest is fairly authoritative. The standard axes and the grid on the chart use measurements of stones and feet/inches, while the metric equivalents are relegated to the top and right.




 

Offline c4757p

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 7805
  • Country: us
  • adieu
Re: Why not ban AWG
« Reply #136 on: October 15, 2013, 03:41:39 pm »
No we don't. I don't use it and most doctors/healthcare people I have spoken to use kilogrammes, at least in records. Only laypeople use stones.

My mother is a nurse and uses metric units regularly. This is here in the Land of Measuring Shit with Some Dude's Body Parts. It's all about the laypeople.
No longer active here - try the IRC channel if you just can't be without me :)
 

Offline casper.bang

  • Frequent Contributor
  • **
  • Posts: 311
  • Country: dk
  • Pro SE, amateur EE.
    • BangBits
Re: Why not ban AWG
« Reply #137 on: October 15, 2013, 06:49:22 pm »
No we don't. I don't use it and most doctors/healthcare people I have spoken to use kilogrammes, at least in records. Only laypeople use stones.

Good to hear. However, when I watch Embarrassing bodies they do appear to talk "stones" which sounds odd.
 

Offline free_electron

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 7403
  • Country: us
    • SiliconValleyGarage
Re: Why not ban AWG
« Reply #138 on: October 15, 2013, 08:35:21 pm »
Indeed, for instance there's the Geordie night out scale:

-30C: T-shirt
-20C: T-shirt
-10C: T-shirt
0C: T-shirt
10C: T-shirt
20C: T-shirt
30C: T-shirt
35C: T-shirt
37C: T-shirt
40C: T-shirt

:)

Here's my scale:

-30C: i heard this exists but i don't believe it
-20C: i heard this exists but i don't believe it
-10C: i heard this exists but i don't believe it
0C: i heard this exists but i don't believe it
10C: a cold morning in California
20C: a cold morning in California
30C: Pool time + barbeque
35C: Pool time + barbeque
37C: Absolutely pool time + Barbeque
40C: Time to kick on the Airconditioning


Now, as why the OP has problems with arbitrary waveform generators ... i guess he's still stuck in oscillators made from glass balloons containing a heating element and some scrap metal...
Professional Electron Wrangler.
Any comments, or points of view expressed, are my own and not endorsed , induced or compensated by my employer(s).
 

Offline SeanB

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 15388
  • Country: za
Re: Why not ban AWG
« Reply #139 on: October 15, 2013, 08:47:09 pm »
-30 to 0C is the inside of the freezer and the fridge, where you keep the meat for the BBQ and the drinks for same.......

Then again, I did a few years in a small town, where the weather was predictable. 6AM sun rises, it is 18C in winter and 25C in summer. 7AM it is 20C in winter and 30C in summer. 10AM it is 40C. 1PM it is 43C. We had a big problem with upcountry people coming here in winter ( Kruger national park) and dropping dead from heatstroke, while we were complaining how cold 20C was and using jerseys.
 

Offline AlfBaz

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 2030
  • Country: au
Re: Why not ban AWG
« Reply #140 on: October 15, 2013, 09:31:09 pm »
40C is damn hot... Our plants certainly don't like it
 

Offline KJDS

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 2442
  • Country: gb
    • my website holding page
Re: Why not ban AWG
« Reply #141 on: October 16, 2013, 09:01:11 am »
No we don't. I don't use it and most doctors/healthcare people I have spoken to use kilogrammes, at least in records. Only laypeople use stones.

Good to hear. However, when I watch Embarrassing bodies they do appear to talk "stones" which sounds odd.

Everyone in England will use stones and pounds for bodyweight.

The weight of cricket bats is also given in pounds and ounces.

Offline grumpydoc

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 2740
  • Country: gb
Re: Why not ban AWG
« Reply #142 on: October 16, 2013, 09:52:16 am »
Quote
Everyone in England will use stones and pounds for bodyweight.

Most, yes, although I know my weight in kg and would have to convert it mentally if you wanted Imperial.

The system I have most difficulty with, however, is the US practice of quoting body weight in pounds which I have to convert to either kg or stones+lbs before I have any concept of what it means.

I can't cope with engine capacities in cubic inches either :)
 

Online vk6zgo

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 5365
  • Country: au
Re: Why not ban AWG
« Reply #143 on: October 16, 2013, 03:59:51 pm »
Why is it the only SUPERPOWER country  keep using AWG ?


Then i did see this https://www.eevblog.com/forum/beginners/how-to-meassure-awg/?topicseen  :palm: Why not just give in to the meter system like us that already did see the light

Back in the day,in Oz,we had to contend with both AWG (we called it B&S),& SWG,which was the Brit gauge standard.
They were not very compatible,& conversion charts were few & far between.

Of course,wire companies had the charts,& transformer winders,but the rest of us were battling.

Micrometers were rare,as they were expensive,so direct measurement was usually out of the question.
The standard trick,if you had a sample of both which looked pretty similar,was to wind,say.10-20 turns on a round former,& measure the length occupied by the winding.
If it was close,you could say it was near enough.

Most hobbyists just guessed! ;D

We also had the delights of Brit stuff with BSF,and/or Whitworth.and/or UNF bolts,plus BA screws,often all in the same piece of equipment!

Small screws in German equipment used very fine threads which were in no way compatible with the equally metric threads used in Japanese stuff.

Then there were the American screws,which,although nominally Imperial,bore no resemblance to Whitworth/UNC.or SAE/UNF.

You always lost one,& they were unobtainium!!
I nearly lost a couple off my Tektronix 7613 yesterday!!
 

Offline Stonent

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 3824
  • Country: us
Re: Why not ban AWG
« Reply #144 on: October 16, 2013, 06:12:08 pm »
Just curious...do people in the UK still commonly use "stone" as the unit for weight?

For bodyweight, yes.

No we don't. I don't use it and most doctors/healthcare people I have spoken to use kilogrammes, at least in records. Only laypeople use stones.
Ay! Let's go down pub and get some 473 milliliters!
The larger the government, the smaller the citizen.
 

Offline rolycat

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 1090
  • Country: gb
Re: Why not ban AWG
« Reply #145 on: October 16, 2013, 06:46:39 pm »
Ay! Let's go down pub and get some 473 milliliters!

Eh up lad, proper English folk don't muck abaht with them poncy little Yankee pints.

(Not all of us talk like comedy Yorkshiremen, either).

There are about 568 millilitres in a proper Imperial pint.
 

Offline senso

  • Frequent Contributor
  • **
  • Posts: 949
  • Country: pt
    • My AVR tutorials
Re: Why not ban AWG
« Reply #146 on: October 16, 2013, 07:26:18 pm »
At least here you can have 250cc, 300cc, 500cc and 1000cc beers(minus the foam  :-DD )
 

Online vk6zgo

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 5365
  • Country: au
Re: Why not ban AWG
« Reply #147 on: October 17, 2013, 02:42:29 am »
At least here you can have 250cc, 300cc, 500cc and 1000cc beers(minus the foam  :-DD )

Back in the day in Oz,we could buy our beer in "glasses","middies","schooners" & "pots".

After metrication,they were all specified in metric terms,so all was well.

Now,we seem to have creeping re-Imperialisation--------you can't buy your beer in traditional measures,it's all in PINTS for Pete's sake!!!

I believe all the little "Trendoids" think it makes them more sophisticated-------even if they haven't been to London,they can pretend!! ;D

To add insult to injury,as the "Pint" pots don't show capacity,I don't know if we are getting full-blooded Pommy Pints,or wimpy US- style ones! ;D

 

Offline DutchGert

  • Frequent Contributor
  • **
  • Posts: 257
  • Country: nl
Re: Why not ban AWG
« Reply #148 on: October 17, 2013, 01:13:17 pm »
 

Offline casper.bang

  • Frequent Contributor
  • **
  • Posts: 311
  • Country: dk
  • Pro SE, amateur EE.
    • BangBits
Re: Why not ban AWG
« Reply #149 on: October 17, 2013, 01:37:48 pm »
Ohh well, given the super huge unfathomable debts of the US and the fact that > 34% is owned by metric nations, I predict a reform sometime in the next decade when that number sneaks above 50% and the US becomes new territory of China, Japan, Brazil etc.  :-DD
 

Offline Phaedrus

  • Frequent Contributor
  • **
  • Posts: 714
  • Country: us
Re: Why not ban AWG
« Reply #150 on: October 17, 2013, 03:34:26 pm »
Back in the day in Oz,we could buy our beer in "glasses","middies","schooners" & "pots".

No barrels?

No, just 55 gallon drums.
"More quotes have been misattributed to Albert Einstein than to any other famous person."
- Albert Einstein
 

Offline Kryoclasm

  • Regular Contributor
  • *
  • Posts: 175
  • Country: us
  • KL3DL
Re: Why not ban AWG
« Reply #151 on: October 17, 2013, 06:16:26 pm »
Ohh well, given the super huge unfathomable debts of the US and the fact that > 34% is owned by metric nations, I predict a reform sometime in the next decade when that number sneaks above 50% and the US becomes new territory of China, Japan, Brazil etc.  :-DD

I hate to agree with you, but you are right.

Can anyone really understand 17 TRILLION?  :-//

1.7 × 1013

That's the same as...

68,000,000 : Houses @ $250,000 each
364,555Kg of GOLD @ $1,322 per ounce.
283,333 : Gulfstream 5 business Jets @ $60,000,000 each

Wrap that around you brain.... that is how much DEBT we have.   :scared:

Oh, yesterday our wonderful president signed a bill that will get us another "credit card" so we pay our bills"  :palm:
« Last Edit: October 17, 2013, 06:18:19 pm by Kryoclasm »
“I predict that very shortly the old-fashioned incandescent lamp, having a filament heated to brightness by the passage of electric current through it, will entirely disappear.” -Nikola Tesla
 

Offline Excavatoree

  • Frequent Contributor
  • **
  • Posts: 841
  • Country: us
Re: Why not ban AWG
« Reply #152 on: October 17, 2013, 06:22:44 pm »
Ohh well, given the super huge unfathomable debts of the US and the fact that > 34% is owned by metric nations, I predict a reform sometime in the next decade when that number sneaks above 50% and the US becomes new territory of China, Japan, Brazil etc.  :-DD

I hate to agree with you, but you are right.

Can anyone really understand 17 TRILLION?  :-//

1.7 × 1013

That's the same as...

68,000,000 : Houses @ $250,000 each
364,555Kg of GOLD @ $1,322 per ounce.
283,333 : Gulfstream 5 business Jets @ $60,000,000 each

Wrap that around you brain.... that is how much DEBT we have.   :scared:

Oh, yesterday our wonderful president signed a bill that will get us another "credit card" so we pay our bills"  :palm:

Michael Bloomberg says that the US government can borrow an infinite amount of money - so all the debt fear mongers are wrong.

We shouldn't, however, be able to buy a large soda.  17 trillion in debt?  No problem.  25 oz soda?  Big problem. 

Sorry, I suppose that should be 740 ml soda? big problem.
 

Offline ampdoctor

  • Frequent Contributor
  • **
  • Posts: 265
  • Country: us
Re: Why not ban AWG
« Reply #153 on: October 17, 2013, 07:59:01 pm »

Michael Bloomberg says that the US government can borrow an infinite amount of money - so all the debt fear mongers are wrong.

We shouldn't, however, be able to buy a large soda.  17 trillion in debt?  No problem.  25 oz soda?  Big problem. 

Sorry, I suppose that should be 740 ml soda? big problem.

Nope, you're wrong. It'll be 34 trillion in 8 years. It's increasing exponentially. The only unit of measure that's going to count in the near future is the troy oz...wherever the hell that imperial unit came from.
 

Offline Kjelt

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 5828
  • Country: nl
Re: Why not ban AWG
« Reply #154 on: October 17, 2013, 08:34:45 pm »
Can anyone really understand 17 TRILLION?  :-//
1.7 × 1013   
There are aprox. 315 million people living in the US? Then each person has a debt of $55000.-
I heard how much interest the US pays per day and that was almost 10 times more (each day) then our government is fighting over the coming year to save on their expenses. Weird world.
 

Offline casper.bang

  • Frequent Contributor
  • **
  • Posts: 311
  • Country: dk
  • Pro SE, amateur EE.
    • BangBits
Re: Why not ban AWG
« Reply #155 on: October 17, 2013, 09:21:57 pm »
Michael Bloomberg says that the US government can borrow an infinite amount of money - so all the debt fear mongers are wrong.

Classical viewpoint from a remaining super power. While the US$ is a reference point, and the US has thus held a unique position being able to print and borrow money like no other, it does not come entirely without consequences. For one thing, debt holders want larger interest payments to compensate for what they perceive as an increasing risk that they won't be repaid (no shit Sherlock!). Secondly, this is amplified by the decline of the US$, meaning it's loosing its leading position as a reference. The world has a lot at stake in the continued stability of the American economy, but as US manufactures move more and more business to Mexico, Brazil and other emerging markets, it's not hard to imagine China getting upset and further raising interests or demanding payments. The supposedly richest country and greatest democracy in the world can't even get their own economy and house in order. It's thought-provoking how it has come to this and that (at least some in) the US find this a viable and responsible strategy for such a long time.
 

Offline Rerouter

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 4616
  • Country: au
  • Question Everything... Except This Statement
Re: Why not ban AWG
« Reply #156 on: October 18, 2013, 01:51:32 am »
based on the chart, what happen in 2001? it looked to be stabilizing around 1995-2000
 

Offline GeoffS

  • Supporter
  • ****
  • Posts: 1267
  • Country: au
Re: Why not ban AWG
« Reply #157 on: October 18, 2013, 01:56:42 am »
We're wandering a long way from AWG here  :)
 

Offline AlfBaz

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 2030
  • Country: au
Re: Why not ban AWG
« Reply #158 on: October 18, 2013, 02:14:55 am »
We're wandering a long way from AWG here  :)
Don't see how, AWG American Wasteful Governance seems right on topic
 

Offline BravoV

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 6781
  • Country: 00
  • +++ ATH1
Re: Why not ban AWG
« Reply #159 on: October 18, 2013, 02:23:31 am »
We're wandering a long way from AWG here  :)
Don't see how, AWG American Wasteful Governance seems right on topic

 :clap:   

Ingenious work  :-+ , now GeoffS doesn't have any excuse to lock or censor this thread anymore. LOL ... :-DD  :-DD  :-DD

Offline GeoffS

  • Supporter
  • ****
  • Posts: 1267
  • Country: au
Re: Why not ban AWG
« Reply #160 on: October 18, 2013, 02:43:10 am »
We're wandering a long way from AWG here  :)
Don't see how, AWG American Wasteful Governance seems right on topic

 :clap:   

Ingenious work  :-+ , now GeoffS doesn't have any excuse to lock or censor this thread anymore. LOL ... :-DD  :-DD  :-DD

I'm a moderator, I don't NEED a reason  >:D
 

Offline BravoV

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 6781
  • Country: 00
  • +++ ATH1
Re: Why not ban AWG
« Reply #161 on: October 18, 2013, 03:07:30 am »
Damn, I forgot about that, ok, you win !  :scared:

Online vk6zgo

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 5365
  • Country: au
Re: Why not ban AWG
« Reply #162 on: October 18, 2013, 04:12:51 am »
Back in the day in Oz,we could buy our beer in "glasses","middies","schooners" & "pots".

No barrels?

No, just 55 gallon drums.

That'd be 44 gallon drums in real gallons! ;D
« Last Edit: October 18, 2013, 04:22:29 am by vk6zgo »
 

Offline SeanB

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 15388
  • Country: za
Re: Why not ban AWG
« Reply #163 on: October 18, 2013, 07:09:25 pm »
GeoffS, I see the post count for you is now 777 posts, very nice there.

actually at work I have a wire size gauge that has all wire sizes from about 20 SWG to 0SWG.
 

Offline IanB

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 9692
  • Country: us
Re: Why not ban AWG
« Reply #164 on: October 19, 2013, 02:07:56 am »
Ay! Let's go down pub and get some 473 milliliters!

Hmm, even in Yorkshire they speak English. It's "Let's go down to the pub". Now in the local manner of speech you might have to listen hard to catch the abbreviated sound of the word "the" in that sentence, but it's still there. Typically you might write it as "Let's go down to t'pub." Phonetically, the sound of t' is like a glottal stop.
I'm not an EE--what am I doing here?
 

Offline G7PSK

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 3698
  • Country: gb
  • It is hot until proved not.
Re: Why not ban AWG
« Reply #165 on: October 19, 2013, 10:13:41 am »
I found the answer to wire gauges, get a slide rule thingy, like this one. I have actually had it for years but just found it again at the back of a draw.
 

Offline Anks

  • Frequent Contributor
  • **
  • Posts: 252
  • Country: gb
    • www.krisanks.wordpress.com
Re: Why not ban AWG
« Reply #166 on: October 19, 2013, 08:13:56 pm »
They have the gear stick the next to the driving wheel and there massive v8's somehow produce less BHP that a Nissan micra.

Too long in the tooth the imperial system will be around for along time yet.
 

Offline nukie

  • Frequent Contributor
  • **
  • Posts: 777
  • Country: au
Re: Why not ban AWG
« Reply #167 on: October 19, 2013, 11:44:49 pm »
I don't mind measurements in decimals i can tell between a 3mm and a 3.3mm drill bit or a 0.5" drill bit but I can't do fractions its mind screwing. I can't do miles or lbs. I can do Km but not Kg I hardly ever get weight right by feel. It's really down to what you are used to.

And AWG is fine I like it as a standard for wires. It's simple and effective. As long as there is a conversion chart I see no problem with standards. It's almost like language without all the customs.
 

Offline Bloch

  • Supporter
  • ****
  • Posts: 440
  • Country: dk
Re: Why not ban AWG
« Reply #168 on: October 20, 2013, 05:53:53 am »
And AWG is fine I like it as a standard for wires. It's simple and effective. As long as there is a conversion chart I see no problem with standards. It's almost like language without all the customs.


Ok so do you want all the non English speaking eevblog members to write in our own language ?

Yes now i see it .... much easier and better  ::)
 

Offline casper.bang

  • Frequent Contributor
  • **
  • Posts: 311
  • Country: dk
  • Pro SE, amateur EE.
    • BangBits
Re: Why not ban AWG
« Reply #169 on: October 20, 2013, 06:29:58 am »
I don't mind measurements in decimals i can tell between a 3mm and a 3.3mm drill bit or a 0.5" drill bit but I can't do fractions its mind screwing. I can't do miles or lbs. I can do Km but not Kg I hardly ever get weight right by feel. It's really down to what you are used to.

And AWG is fine I like it as a standard for wires. It's simple and effective. As long as there is a conversion chart I see no problem with standards. It's almost like language without all the customs.

Som Bloch pointerer neget fint, så har du nok problemer med at forstå denne tekst fordi den er udtrykt i et andet sprog end den internationale standard. Konverteringer er fyldt med fejl, jeg gætter på at Google og Bing oversættere vil have deres hyr med denne danske tekst.
 

Offline nukie

  • Frequent Contributor
  • **
  • Posts: 777
  • Country: au
Re: Why not ban AWG
« Reply #170 on: October 20, 2013, 06:42:19 am »
My point is units and measurements is a lot easier to convert than languages. I'm not saying that multi standards is good but it is not so bad that it must be ban. Of course it will be good that everyone communicates in the same way but the perfect world isnt going to happen. Btw I grew up in the metric world but I try to embrace imperial system as much as I could which is not easy.
 

Offline IanB

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 9692
  • Country: us
Re: Why not ban AWG
« Reply #171 on: October 20, 2013, 06:49:47 am »
Som Bloch pointerer neget fint, så har du nok problemer med at forstå denne tekst fordi den er udtrykt i et andet sprog end den internationale standard. Konverteringer er fyldt med fejl, jeg gætter på at Google og Bing oversættere vil have deres hyr med denne danske tekst.

Google translate suggests "neget" should be "noget".

It also thinks "hyr" is wrong, but it doesn't have a better suggestion...
I'm not an EE--what am I doing here?
 

Offline W8LV

  • Regular Contributor
  • *
  • Posts: 62
  • Country: us
  • W8LV (and sometimes W8LV/VE3) USA/Canada
Re: Why not ban AWG
« Reply #172 on: October 20, 2013, 07:57:44 am »
I have always found it a puzzlement that we haven't switched to metric in the U.S, also recalling being taught the Metric System in the '70's and being told we were going to switch. I HATE goofy, goofy things like 5/8ths wrenches. But we buy pop in two litre bottles. "Not quite" Twelve gallons of gas for my (metric) Toyota Prius. Why not just call it 25 litres and be done with it? There IS a switch on my dash that converts the speedometer to kilometres.. Helpful when driving in Canada...but alas, the odometer can't be switched from miles. Ugggh. Pounds and Fahrenheit? Goofy concepts, for sure! But Nautical Miles "seem" to make sense, when you figure it into the degrees of a circle in regards to degrees of Latitude. But then again, we have Daylight Savings time, and I am sure in spite of it, Greenwich NEVER gets closer to, or further away from us just because it's Winter. Or Summer.
Maybe we should go with Coordinated Swatch Time!
;-)

Best Regards from W8LV in Pickaway County, Ohio, USA.

Best Regards from W8LV in Pickaway County, Ohio, USA
 

Offline Tepe

  • Frequent Contributor
  • **
  • Posts: 571
  • Country: dk
Re: Why not ban AWG
« Reply #173 on: October 20, 2013, 08:16:16 am »

Google translate suggests "neget" should be "noget".

It also thinks "hyr" is wrong, but it doesn't have a better suggestion...
"neget" should have been "meget".
"hyr" means difficulty, have a job with.
ceterum censeo systemd-inem esse delendam
 

Offline Dongulus

  • Regular Contributor
  • *
  • Posts: 231
  • Country: us
Re: Why not ban AWG
« Reply #174 on: October 23, 2013, 07:11:53 pm »
based on the chart, what happen in 2001? it looked to be stabilizing around 1995-2000

G.W. Bush went into office.
 


Share me

Digg  Facebook  SlashDot  Delicious  Technorati  Twitter  Google  Yahoo
Smf