Metric at the NYW.

[Tudor Jones]

I do not monitor this group on a regular basis. Please excuse me if this subject has been discussed before.

Watching Norm Abrams' show on TV, a couple of time he has referred to the width of a sheet of plywood. He says that a piece 3/4 of an inch thick these days is about 1/32 of an inch off.

Comparing my regular ruler with a metric scale, I see the difference between 3/4" and 2cm (or 20mm as the architects say) is just about 1/32 of an inch.

So it appears that Norm is working partly in metric units these days. Think this could be so?

\/ /\ T.P.Jones. / \

[martin]

I believed he is using imported plywood which is 2cm.

[Doug Miller]

Right, nominal 3/4 plywood is actually about 23/32 thick.

Yes, but it's about 1/32" the other direction: 20mm is *more* than 3/4"...

20mm = 0.7874" or a bit over 25/32". 23/32" is a bit over 18mm.

Very doubtful. It's just that the plywood manufacturers figured out that they could make about 4% more plywood (thus about 4% more profit) from the same amount of material by making the sheets about 4% thinner.

-- Regards, Doug Miller (alphageek-at-milmac-dot-com)

[CW]

Eveerybody uses metric. The inch is defined as a fraction of the meter.

[Jeffo]

Sounds like the paint company that I worked for. Someone decided to reduce the size of a gallon by about 2 tablespoons IIRC to increase profits as they say. Hope it was worth the problems/stress it created at the stores. It also happened on the heels of another product change over.

Cheers, Jeffo

[B a r r y]

I'd have no idea if two tablespoons of paint were missing.

Did the missing paint cause major color differences when the stores tinted it?

Imagine how many employees got yelled at, or maybe even fired, for screwing up mixes!

Barry

[Luigi Zanasi]

On Mon, 16 Feb 2004 02:50:59 GMT, [e-mail] (Doug Miller) scribbled:

Thanks for the post. It made me check the conversion. I first thought you were wrong in that 3/4 ply was actually 19 millimetres and 23/32 was an approximation. At least, 3/4 ply is often billed as 19mm here in Kanuckistan. But 19mm is very close to 3/4, just 2 gnat asses (tmTW) smaller than 3/4", and like you said, 23/32 is close to 18mm. So it is a rip off.

Luigi Replace "nonet" with "yukonomics" for real email address

[John Grossbohlin]

From the construction related magazines I've read it seems that the thickness dimensions are nominal and that it's a performance standard that they need to meet. That is, as long as it meets the performance standard of

3/4" it's OK to sell/use even if it measures less than 3/4".

John

[Jeffo]

The only way to tell was that the volume on the label changed, but how many people look at that. The tough part was keeping track of who got what during the change over, making sure they got the same colour in the same paint (was that new or old stock) each time. Of course we won't supposed to let the customer know what's going on. I don't think it was enough of a change to affect the colour, but you never know. Thing is the value of the paint it self is so small compared to all the other costs, but when you're one of the largest paint companies, the savings must add up.

Jeffo

[Silvan]

Kanukistanis can't measure. It's 2.0000327 gnat asses to be exact. Yeesh.

[Luigi Zanasi]

On Tue, 17 Feb 2004 19:44:23 -0500, Silvan scribbled:

And Virginia Yankees can't spell. It's Kanuckistani. Sheesh. ^

Luigi Replace "nonet" with "yukonomics" for real email address

[Larry Jaques]

On Tue, 17 Feb 2004 19:44:23 -0500, Silvan brought forth from the murky depths:

Silly 'Murrican. 2.0000327 gnat's asses = one RCH. Yeesh. Spreak Engrish, Troops. (Still wishing Weegee would send me a Claudia Schiffer $20 bill.)

- Inside every older person is a younger person wondering WTF happened. ---

Website Application Programming

[Andrew May]

That makes sense. Over here in Europe I buy plywood and MDF in 18mm,

15mm and 12mm thicknesses. In the same way our copper pipe is 15mm and 22mm, equating to almost 1/2 inch and 3/4 inch (imperial measurement is inside diameter and metric outside)

Andrew

[Luigi Zanasi]

On Wed, 18 Feb 2004 14:45:12 GMT, Larry Jaques scribbled:

Shouldn't that be 2.0000327 gnats' asses, as a gnat has only one ass, so you would need more than one gnat, which should then be in the plural? That is, if one insists on using the genitive (possessive, Keith). I believe Silvan and my treating "gnat" as an adjectival noun, a common construction in English, is much more elegant and euphonious. Gnat asses it is (are?).

Huh? The only person I see on our $20 bill is the head of the world's most famous dysfunctional family. And a couple of other loons in the back.

If you fold the bill just right around the chin area, you see some nice butt cheeks. Which provided no end of amusement to us as children on the rare occasions we got our hands on paper money. We also used to be able to fold bills so they said "Bank of Banana" but the new designs are preempting that by putting the English version of "Bank of Canada" on top of the French, rather than on the same line.

Luigi Replace "nonet" with "yukonomics" for real email address