Metric vs English

[jdiven]

I was wondering, how many of my English measuring countrymen  (or country ladies) have found that working in the metric system is easier.  I have a scientific and medical bacground, so I am comfortable with both.  Finding centers, intervals and multiples are much easier in a 10 based system.  

 

Just a thought.

J. Diven

[DBorgens]

J.

While working in Germany now, I've become reacquainted with working in the metric system. It is easier to work in. But the harder part is getting a feel for the sizes or, "Just how small is 0,25 mm really?". In terms of modeling, it all comes down to scale. 1/64 or 1/48 don't lend themselves to decimals very well. I appreciate that many modelers must put up with the English system due to the predominate kit scales.

 

Honestly, I could work either way. I would just have to get new scales and calipers. Hey, more tools! What's wrong with that?

 

Dave B

[Jaager]

The math is certainly easier.  And also coming from a similar background, I can utilize either.  Volume, I can "see" either.  Weight,  up to pound, I am more comfortable with metric, grains are absurd.  Pounds and tons I "see" better than metric.  Distance - kilometers I do not "see" - miles I do.   1/32" - 1/8" - 1/4"  etc I "see" much better than mm or cm. 

 

For wood thickness, an electronic digital caliper beats any sort of calculation.

 

 

For English and US vessels,  English data is what we get.  For other European, before Napoleon, it is an idiosyncratic  national measure per country,  but the only scantlings that I have seen are English.   Since the physical properties of wood, iron and copper are universal,  using the English data for any ship of comparable size should not take us too far astray.

[robnbill]

I primarily use metric in my builds although for some things, such as scale rope, I use inches. No reasoning other than it is what I do.

 

I find working in metric much easier.

[NenadM]

Even I am not from English measuring territory, my plans are 

 

I feel totally lost in space when see something like this

 

 

To much mathematics to calculate how particular part has to be in millimeters in all it`s dimensions

 

It was more easy to re-scale plans which I have as *.pdf file to my scale as precise it can be, and then, at zoom level 100% use ruler or Adobe tools to measure what I need.

[Mike Y]

Oh please not this again...

[ofencer29350]

in france we use the metric and when i see inche or something else i lost my mind ,i become mad because  for us it'is illogical ,but i think it is what  the way we are educated....

[jud]

Imperial was fine growing up, but did not like the fractions even if working with them is not a problem to me. Then I learned about using decimal feet, which is my preference today, like it for the same reasons noted about the advantages of the metric system, base 10. Have no trouble with metric other than  today when working on equipment when both metric and imperial sizes are use for fasteners on the same machine, autos being the worst, need two sets of tools to work on many of them. Converting some plans I received a few days ago to cad, WW2 design so feet, inches and fractions of an inch are used, they get converted to decimal feet quickly.

jud

[Morgan]

Bring it back down to earth folks, one simple rule for an Englishman, you can measure length and weight in anything you are comfortable with, but beer must be by the pint

Gary

[Altduck]

The French use metric now, but in my clock repair days, old French movements were stamped with the pendulum length - in Pouce & Ligne.

 

[mrjimmy]

 

OK, picture this..........

 

You are the CEO of a major corporation based in the United States, with many sattelite businesses around the globe.  You make the decision to make the conversion from Imperial to Metric in all of your US factories (the global enterprises are already metric, of course).  So, you call in your top advisors to explain what you would like to do adjust your businesses to match the rest of the world.

 

The first problem that popped up was the cost of converting all of the existing billions of drawings and blueprints to metric.  Next came the VP of Manufacturing who commented on the cost of changing all of the tooling to metric, instructing hundreds of thousands of factory workers how to adjust their thinking when using the metric system (which most never before had to use), and the added rework costs to repair parts made wrongly due to Drafting errors made during the change over.

 

When the long and grueling meeting with all of his cronies was finally over, and they realized the costs related to this project, what do you think the decision would be?  I wonder if this is why the US never crossed over to metric........

 

Jim

[Rick01]

But the old system certainly made your mental arithmetic better - coal is £3, 7s , 6p per hundredweight what is the price of  4 and three quarter tons .

 

Ahhh the good old  age of 11+ exams !!

 

 

20 cwt = 1 ton 12 pence = 1 shilling 20 shillings = 1 pound. 

so

[(20 x 4) + 15] x  3 pound 7s 6d = ?

Quite simple really.

 

Rick

[trippwj]

£320 12s 6d

Now what did I win?

 

Ummmm....a lump of coal?  Postage due, of course.  Taxes and duties payable upon receipt. 

[trippwj]

 o dear I am just an old got moaning robin

 

Not hardly, Robin!  I have, over my various endeavors for the past too many years of my working life, had the need to work in metric, imperial, and the International System of Units (successor to the metric system).  Each has it's place.  As others have noted, I can "see" a foot, a yard and so on.  I grew up using the imperial system (though I never did get the difference back in the day between a US and a Canadian gallon, but I digress).

 

I like the precision of metric, but do not like the loss of fidelity when converting.  Most period ship plans were laid out in some variety of imperial units (although those varied over time and across nations), as were the ratios and derived dimensions (such as keel for tunnage).  Those don't always convert so nicely to metric - try converting a number like 127 & 87/95 tun (note this is not to be confused with a weight of a ton/tonne, but rather a cargo capacity of a tun, as determined by the regulations of the time) to a metric equivalent!

 

I guess what I am saying is that, as has been pointed out by others, working in a measurement system that one is familiar with is the most important - fighting a measurement system while also trying to get reasonable measurements for a build is counter-productive.  Trying to convert some measurements from old systems to others is, likewise, a potential source for error to creep in. 

[Altduck]

Let's go back to early shipbuilding.

 

When Noah build the ark by "cubits" everything was simple and straightforward.

 

And it's spiraled downhill into confusion ever since.

 

 

Richard

[AON]

And all this time I thought English was a language and Imperial was the system of measurement 

 

I find metric is easier but somehow I still screw it up.

[flyer]

Although I live the metric system I still find it difficult to think of flight altitude and -speed other than in feet and knots. The only finicky thing is to transmit speed in my head from knots into mph (have to work via kmh). It all depends what you are used to.

 

However, it doesn't need different measurement systems to screw things up. Some 10 years ago they built a bridge across the Rhine river with one end in Germany and the other one in Switzerland. About to meet in the middle they found a difference in deck height of 54cm (21 1/4 ")! After some hard head scratching and deep recalculating they found that Germany and Switzerland indeed use different reference levels - Germany using sea level based on the North Sea and Switzerland on the Mediterranean. Now the good thing was that somebody realised in the planning stage that this difference exists and is exactly 27cm (10 3/4"). Unfortunately the correction was added on the wrong side...

 

Cheers

peter

[mrjimmy]

 

Please don't misunderstand my ranting and raving about the metric system; I am definitely in favor of the adoption, but as most Americans can and do understand, it is cost prohibitive.  We just thank God that we don't have to put up with the pound of British Sterling....... long live the US dollar.

 

Jim

[wefalck]

Having moved hither and thither between the 'Continent' and the Uk for the past thirty years, I am reasonably familiar with both systems (I even remember the six pence, thre'pence, and shilling coins from my first visit to England and the confusion it caused, when new and old coins were used in parallel ...). However, values such as 5/32 get me - I can cope, though, with quarters, eighths, sixteens ... and pints of course.

 

What few people realise: the Imperial system has gone metric a long time ago ! In fact it is defined, using the metric system as a reference, the guardian of which is the International Institute of Weights and Measures in Sévres near Paris (a stone-throw from where I live).

 

Talking about stones: giving a person's weight in stones absolutely gets me - no feel at all for that measure.

[jud]

wefalck, how do you get along with 2 bits, 4 bits or 6 bits ? Most in this country will give you a blank look if you start using that method of describing coinage, yet many were using that method when I was younger..

jud

[DBorgens]

Jud, for two bits I'll jump in. Just remember there are two kinds of countries in the world. Those on the metric system and those who have walked on the moon (PURELY IN JEST!)

I like both systems.

 

Dave B

[jud]

Like your 25 cent opinion Dave.

jud.

[trippwj]

Just as an aid in your future endeavors in converting measurements, I offer the three tables below extracted from the 1838 edition of The Nautical Magazine and Naval Chronicle... a Journal of Papers on Subjects Connected with Maritime Affairs. Simpkin, Marshall & Company. https://books.google.com/books?id=QAV1riauZOQC.

 

 

 

 

Remember - not all feet are created equal!

 

:P :rolleyes:

[wefalck]

Until the adoption of the metric system throughout (continental) Europe in the last quarter of the 19th century, every major city had its own 'foot'. One has to pay attention when using old books and drawings to verify which 'foot' was actually used. The location of publishing or the nationality of the writer does not necessariyl mean that the respective foot was used. I remember preparing a drawing for a model from an 1860s book published in Hamburg and naively assuming that Hamburg Feet were used - when everything was ready, I discovered the small-print saying, that the author used Imperial measures (probably to be make things easier for international readers).

[markjay]

Great! Thanks for posting and the download works easily on Windows 8.

[texxn5]

What is the program extension or how did you run it.  I tried on Windows 10 and can't get it to work.  This looks like an incredibly nice tool to have when working with Metrics.

Thanks,

John

[Mike Y]

There is also a good model scale converter for the iphone, that can also convert between different units at the same time: https://itunes.apple.com/us/app/model-scaler/id528641484?mt=8

[jud]

Many conversion tables and charts available today. I use my HP 48GX to convert using the values I have in my head for the units I find myself using, not there, I know where to find a table. The trick is to know the definition of the units you are using, but then, most will be fine without knowing the fine details found in definitions.

jud

Edited May 22, 2016 by jud

[texxn5]

Thanks, I'll try that.  When it came up in the file, it showed "file" as the type extension.  That was why I asked.  It doesn't have an xls or an msi extension.  It asks me what I want to open it with, but none of the options would open it.  I'll probably download it again and try.

Thanks again,

John

[texxn5]

AEW, thanks, after redownloading it worked fine.  Might have gotten corrupted somewhere, as initially it was not a zip file.

John