Page 2 of 3
wrote:

It's not. But when DESIGNING in metric, everything is done in tens or tenths, hunreds or hundredths. So 1MM is .01CM, none of the silly 12 inches to a foot, 3 feet to a yard, 36 inches to a yard etc, and none of the .125 inches to the 1/8 inch. You design to the .1meter or .01meter, or 12.5mm or whatever and never need to convert by anything more complicated than moving decimal points to convert from one unit to another.

On Mon, 13 Feb 2012 23:04:27 -0500, "Mike Marlow"

He did, and he blatantly overlooked the metric RCH. Ptooie, how many thou was that?

-- Fear not those who argue but those who dodge. -- Marie Ebner von Eschenbach

Don't worry, we'll just use nanometers, micrometers, or maybe picometers.

If we wanted to really confuse things, we could apply the SI prefixes to inches.

Puckdropper

I've seen it - nano-inch. Definitely not an officiam measurement - 1 billionth of an inch (10 to the -9) but coloquially about a 10th of an RCH, give or take a 10th!

Unfortunately, it is also wrong, or at least inaccurate. 1 mm=0.1 cm, not 0.01 cm. For woodworking, 0.525 mm is the same as 0.5 mm, or 0.0206692913 inch, or however many in fractional inches. 0.525 mm is orders of magnitude different from 3/8".

You got me Han. Moved the decimal point one too far. MM to CM is 1 point. (factor of 10) CM to M is 2 points (factor of 100) M to Km is 3 point (factor of 1000)

When were they other than chrome-plated plastic? As for the tape markings, Stanley hit it right decades ago. Simple 1" and 1/16" ticks and bold numbers can't be improved upon. Extra metric or otherwise scales on the opposite edge just increase your chances of error.

#### Site Timeline

- posted on February 14, 2012, 3:56 am

It's not. But when DESIGNING in metric, everything is done in tens or tenths, hunreds or hundredths. So 1MM is .01CM, none of the silly 12 inches to a foot, 3 feet to a yard, 36 inches to a yard etc, and none of the .125 inches to the 1/8 inch. You design to the .1meter or .01meter, or 12.5mm or whatever and never need to convert by anything more complicated than moving decimal points to convert from one unit to another.

- posted on February 14, 2012, 4:43 am

He did, and he blatantly overlooked the metric RCH. Ptooie, how many thou was that?

-- Fear not those who argue but those who dodge. -- Marie Ebner von Eschenbach

- posted on February 14, 2012, 5:22 am

Don't worry, we'll just use nanometers, micrometers, or maybe picometers.

If we wanted to really confuse things, we could apply the SI prefixes to inches.

Puckdropper

--

Make it to fit, don't make it fit.

Make it to fit, don't make it fit.

- posted on February 14, 2012, 12:41 pm

Puckdropper <puckdropper(at)yahoo(dot)com> wrote in

That would then be Silly Itsy SAE ...

That would then be Silly Itsy SAE ...

--

Best regards

Han

email address is invalid

Best regards

Han

email address is invalid

Click to see the full signature.

- posted on February 15, 2012, 3:44 am

I've seen it - nano-inch. Definitely not an officiam measurement - 1 billionth of an inch (10 to the -9) but coloquially about a 10th of an RCH, give or take a 10th!

- posted on February 14, 2012, 3:07 pm

On 14 Feb 2012 05:22:22 GMT, Puckdropper
*<puckdropper(at)yahoo(dot)com> wrote:*

Yabbut, the term "RCH" has such a wonderful je ne sais quoi about it.

How about using "portions of a parsec"?

-- Fear not those who argue but those who dodge. -- Marie Ebner von Eschenbach

Yabbut, the term "RCH" has such a wonderful je ne sais quoi about it.

How about using "portions of a parsec"?

-- Fear not those who argue but those who dodge. -- Marie Ebner von Eschenbach

- posted on February 14, 2012, 5:05 am

On 2/13/2012 9:56 PM, snipped-for-privacy@snyder.on.ca wrote:

Ok, but why would I WANT TO do that??? It's damned difficult to eyeball 2 mm vs 3, But dividing spaces into successive halves is easy. I can reliably estimate 3/23" Half way between 1/16 and 1/8.

Call them silly if you want, but I'm not buying it as long as Greenwich runs on base 60/60/24/30,31,29or maybe 29.

Although I have to admit getting away from pounds/shillings/pence/ha'pennies was a good idea. Shame it's not working so well.

Ok, but why would I WANT TO do that??? It's damned difficult to eyeball 2 mm vs 3, But dividing spaces into successive halves is easy. I can reliably estimate 3/23" Half way between 1/16 and 1/8.

Call them silly if you want, but I'm not buying it as long as Greenwich runs on base 60/60/24/30,31,29or maybe 29.

Although I have to admit getting away from pounds/shillings/pence/ha'pennies was a good idea. Shame it's not working so well.

- posted on February 14, 2012, 5:08 am

On 2/13/2012 11:05 PM, Richard wrote:

AND! Even the type is so obvious anybody would catch it. That's not so obvious in mm.

AND! Even the type is so obvious anybody would catch it. That's not so obvious in mm.

- posted on February 14, 2012, 11:26 am

On Mon, 13 Feb 2012 23:04:27 -0500, "Mike Marlow"

It is. Working with wood and present dimensional material is not, but designing a new machined part is a snap. If you start with rough lumber, you can plane it to 19mm easy enough but with a 2 x 4 you'd be off .1 from a round number. 38.1 x 88.9

Designing a new part and new machined tool, metric is a snap with very few less than full mm dimensions.

It is. Working with wood and present dimensional material is not, but designing a new machined part is a snap. If you start with rough lumber, you can plane it to 19mm easy enough but with a 2 x 4 you'd be off .1 from a round number. 38.1 x 88.9

Designing a new part and new machined tool, metric is a snap with very few less than full mm dimensions.

- posted on February 14, 2012, 12:47 pm

wrote:

On the other hand, lumber being very anal retentive in nomenclature, width x length in mm of sheets of plywood, wallboard, or whatever is really interesting 122x244cm

On the other hand, lumber being very anal retentive in nomenclature, width x length in mm of sheets of plywood, wallboard, or whatever is really interesting 122x244cm

--

Best regards

Han

email address is invalid

Best regards

Han

email address is invalid

Click to see the full signature.

- posted on February 14, 2012, 1:44 pm

216.151.153.189:

With metric measurements, exact size should be easy, right? Do the manufacturers still try to sell 18mm plywood that's only 17.2mm?

Puckdropper

With metric measurements, exact size should be easy, right? Do the manufacturers still try to sell 18mm plywood that's only 17.2mm?

Puckdropper

--

Make it to fit, don't make it fit.

Make it to fit, don't make it fit.

- posted on February 14, 2012, 2:06 pm

Puckdropper <puckdropper(at)yahoo(dot)com> wrote in

Do they still sell 1 lb coffeecans with 12 oz of loosely ground coffee?

Do they still sell 1 lb coffeecans with 12 oz of loosely ground coffee?

--

Best regards

Han

email address is invalid

Best regards

Han

email address is invalid

Click to see the full signature.

- posted on February 14, 2012, 12:40 pm

Unfortunately, it is also wrong, or at least inaccurate. 1 mm=0.1 cm, not 0.01 cm. For woodworking, 0.525 mm is the same as 0.5 mm, or 0.0206692913 inch, or however many in fractional inches. 0.525 mm is orders of magnitude different from 3/8".

--

Best regards

Han

email address is invalid

Best regards

Han

email address is invalid

Click to see the full signature.

- posted on February 15, 2012, 3:39 am

You got me Han. Moved the decimal point one too far. MM to CM is 1 point. (factor of 10) CM to M is 2 points (factor of 100) M to Km is 3 point (factor of 1000)

- posted on February 15, 2012, 3:32 am

On Mon, 13 Feb 2012 23:04:27 -0500, "Mike Marlow"

It is. You just need to re-boot your brain and forget everything you knew about measurement units except TEN. How many mm in a Km? 1000000. just 1000 in a meter and 1000 meters in a Km. Try that with inches in a mile.

How many conversion factors do you need to know? 12 inches in a foot, and 5280 feet in a mile, for 63360 inches per mile. Now, how many Cm in a Km? move the decimal point and you have 100000. How many yard in a mile? 1760. How many meters in a Km? Move the decimal point - 1000. How many rods in a mile? or chains? or furlongs?

Then you go to area. How many square meters in a Hectare? 1000000 (1000 X 1000 = 1 sq Km) How many square yards in a square mile? (section) (1760X1760=) 3097600 How many square yards in an acre? 4840 How many acres in a section? 640

Then you go to weight.

How many grams in a tonne? A tonne is 1000 Kg - so 1000 X 1000 again. Grams in a Kg? - 1000. Oz in a pound? 16 lbs in a ton? 2000 Oz in a ton? 2000X16 = 32000 Unless you are talking precious metals or pharmaceuticals.

Liquid measure? How many ml in a liter? 1000 Compared to how many oz in a quart (which one?) or cup, or pint. And how many cupc in a pint, or quart, or gallon???

Yes, the metric system IS simple.

And easier to be more accurate. 1mm is just less than .039" .5mm is like .017, more or less, and .1mm is .0039, so .01mm os .0004, rounded up. - and you Americans measure in fractions instead of decimals. The smallest common measurement is the 64th of an inch - about .016" - or .4mm

Multiply that by 5, for 5/64 - or multiply .4mm by 5 and get 2mm.

Which is simplest???????

It is. You just need to re-boot your brain and forget everything you knew about measurement units except TEN. How many mm in a Km? 1000000. just 1000 in a meter and 1000 meters in a Km. Try that with inches in a mile.

How many conversion factors do you need to know? 12 inches in a foot, and 5280 feet in a mile, for 63360 inches per mile. Now, how many Cm in a Km? move the decimal point and you have 100000. How many yard in a mile? 1760. How many meters in a Km? Move the decimal point - 1000. How many rods in a mile? or chains? or furlongs?

Then you go to area. How many square meters in a Hectare? 1000000 (1000 X 1000 = 1 sq Km) How many square yards in a square mile? (section) (1760X1760=) 3097600 How many square yards in an acre? 4840 How many acres in a section? 640

Then you go to weight.

How many grams in a tonne? A tonne is 1000 Kg - so 1000 X 1000 again. Grams in a Kg? - 1000. Oz in a pound? 16 lbs in a ton? 2000 Oz in a ton? 2000X16 = 32000 Unless you are talking precious metals or pharmaceuticals.

Liquid measure? How many ml in a liter? 1000 Compared to how many oz in a quart (which one?) or cup, or pint. And how many cupc in a pint, or quart, or gallon???

Yes, the metric system IS simple.

And easier to be more accurate. 1mm is just less than .039" .5mm is like .017, more or less, and .1mm is .0039, so .01mm os .0004, rounded up. - and you Americans measure in fractions instead of decimals. The smallest common measurement is the 64th of an inch - about .016" - or .4mm

Multiply that by 5, for 5/64 - or multiply .4mm by 5 and get 2mm.

Which is simplest???????

- posted on February 15, 2012, 5:40 am

wrote in message wrote:

It is. You just need to re-boot your brain and forget everything you knew about measurement units except TEN. How many mm in a Km? 1000000. just 1000 in a meter and 1000 meters in a Km. Try that with inches in a mile.

How many conversion factors do you need to know? 12 inches in a foot, and 5280 feet in a mile, for 63360 inches per mile. Now, how many Cm in a Km? move the decimal point and you have 100000. How many yard in a mile? 1760. How many meters in a Km? Move the decimal point - 1000. How many rods in a mile? or chains? or furlongs?

Then you go to area. How many square meters in a Hectare? 1000000 (1000 X 1000 = 1 sq Km) How many square yards in a square mile? (section) (1760X1760=) 3097600 How many square yards in an acre? 4840 How many acres in a section? 640

Then you go to weight.

How many grams in a tonne? A tonne is 1000 Kg - so 1000 X 1000 again. Grams in a Kg? - 1000. Oz in a pound? 16 lbs in a ton? 2000 Oz in a ton? 2000X16 = 32000 Unless you are talking precious metals or pharmaceuticals.

Liquid measure? How many ml in a liter? 1000 Compared to how many oz in a quart (which one?) or cup, or pint. And how many cupc in a pint, or quart, or gallon???

Yes, the metric system IS simple.

And easier to be more accurate. 1mm is just less than .039" .5mm is like .017, more or less, and .1mm is .0039, so .01mm os .0004, rounded up. - and you Americans measure in fractions instead of decimals. ===================================================================Actually, fractions are only used by the construction trades and others who don't require great accuracy. The engineering disciplines use either metric or decimal inch. The scientific community has been using metric as standard for many years. Yes, the metric system is a far better system but many resist it because they are used to the imperial system. As an engineer, I really didn't want to see the change either for that reason. At some point though, people are going to have to suffer a little and change over. Not only is it easier to use and to teach, our mechanical products would be much more attractive to foreign buyers. Right now, if one was to buy a piece of American machinery, they have to factor in the cost of tools that may not have any other use. I'm retired, go ahead and switch. :)

The smallest common measurement is the 64th of an inch - about .016" - or .4mm

Multiply that by 5, for 5/64 - or multiply .4mm by 5 and get 2mm.

Which is simplest???????

It is. You just need to re-boot your brain and forget everything you knew about measurement units except TEN. How many mm in a Km? 1000000. just 1000 in a meter and 1000 meters in a Km. Try that with inches in a mile.

How many conversion factors do you need to know? 12 inches in a foot, and 5280 feet in a mile, for 63360 inches per mile. Now, how many Cm in a Km? move the decimal point and you have 100000. How many yard in a mile? 1760. How many meters in a Km? Move the decimal point - 1000. How many rods in a mile? or chains? or furlongs?

Then you go to area. How many square meters in a Hectare? 1000000 (1000 X 1000 = 1 sq Km) How many square yards in a square mile? (section) (1760X1760=) 3097600 How many square yards in an acre? 4840 How many acres in a section? 640

Then you go to weight.

How many grams in a tonne? A tonne is 1000 Kg - so 1000 X 1000 again. Grams in a Kg? - 1000. Oz in a pound? 16 lbs in a ton? 2000 Oz in a ton? 2000X16 = 32000 Unless you are talking precious metals or pharmaceuticals.

Liquid measure? How many ml in a liter? 1000 Compared to how many oz in a quart (which one?) or cup, or pint. And how many cupc in a pint, or quart, or gallon???

Yes, the metric system IS simple.

And easier to be more accurate. 1mm is just less than .039" .5mm is like .017, more or less, and .1mm is .0039, so .01mm os .0004, rounded up. - and you Americans measure in fractions instead of decimals. ===================================================================Actually, fractions are only used by the construction trades and others who don't require great accuracy. The engineering disciplines use either metric or decimal inch. The scientific community has been using metric as standard for many years. Yes, the metric system is a far better system but many resist it because they are used to the imperial system. As an engineer, I really didn't want to see the change either for that reason. At some point though, people are going to have to suffer a little and change over. Not only is it easier to use and to teach, our mechanical products would be much more attractive to foreign buyers. Right now, if one was to buy a piece of American machinery, they have to factor in the cost of tools that may not have any other use. I'm retired, go ahead and switch. :)

The smallest common measurement is the 64th of an inch - about .016" - or .4mm

Multiply that by 5, for 5/64 - or multiply .4mm by 5 and get 2mm.

Which is simplest???????

- posted on February 14, 2012, 4:47 am

On Mon, 13 Feb 2012 23:02:56 -0500, "Mike Marlow"

It only happens when I'm matching board lengths and I measure the first board. If it lines up precisely with the metric side of the tape and is in between ticks on the imperial, I use the metric scale. Not a prob.

-- Fear not those who argue but those who dodge. -- Marie Ebner von Eschenbach

It only happens when I'm matching board lengths and I measure the first board. If it lines up precisely with the metric side of the tape and is in between ticks on the imperial, I use the metric scale. Not a prob.

-- Fear not those who argue but those who dodge. -- Marie Ebner von Eschenbach

- posted on February 14, 2012, 5:07 am

On 2/13/2012 10:47 PM, Larry Jaques wrote:

I do that one too. But I wasn't going to admit it first...

I do that one too. But I wasn't going to admit it first...

- posted on February 14, 2012, 12:48 am

When were they other than chrome-plated plastic? As for the tape markings, Stanley hit it right decades ago. Simple 1" and 1/16" ticks and bold numbers can't be improved upon. Extra metric or otherwise scales on the opposite edge just increase your chances of error.

- posted on February 14, 2012, 2:13 pm

On 2/13/2012 6:48 PM, Father Haskell wrote:

the two 12 footers that my dad had my whole growing up were metal cased. I remember him buying replacement tapes for them several times. I'll bet he still has them somewhere in his array of stuff.

the two 12 footers that my dad had my whole growing up were metal cased. I remember him buying replacement tapes for them several times. I'll bet he still has them somewhere in his array of stuff.

--

Steve Barker

remove the "not" from my address to email

Steve Barker

remove the "not" from my address to email

Click to see the full signature.

- OT: Robatoy Final Farewell
- - next thread in Woodworking Forum

- Thoughts, comments wanted about jointer knife settings
- - previous thread in Woodworking Forum

- Carpenter work | Woodworking services
- - newest thread in Woodworking Forum

- Rot in window sill
- - last updated thread in Woodworking Forum

- Temperature system of the USA
- - the site's newest thread. Posted in Home Repair