# Metrication.

Page 1 of 3
• posted on February 21, 2011, 9:51 pm
Anybody ever attempt to do woodworking or carpentry using metric measurements?
I attempted it once after a fellow woodworker convinced me he liked it better and it was easier. I got so confused and gave up due to worrying about wrecking my project supplies.
I admit I have been screwed many times on using a feet and inch tape measure, like this. - Measure fitting spot at 5'6" - go to wood piece - pick up other tape measure - measure 56" - cut wood - fit piece into spot - swear a lot - remeasure spot - wonder WTF happened? - repeat until tape measure breaks glass in window.
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
• posted on February 21, 2011, 10:00 pm
On 2/21/2011 3:51 PM, Josepi wrote:

I have worked at a couple of chemical plants that were all metric. It is far easier for me than inches/feet. I don't know why I don't use it at home other than the fact that I would constantly have to convert in order to purchase something for any project I am working on. Many things now are measured in both inches/feet AND metric, so I may have to dig out my old metric tape and have a go at it.
The other thing that keeps me from changing is the construction calculator which will do either one, but takes a lot of the worry out of calculations in inches/feet.
--
Robert Allison
New Braunfels, TX
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
• posted on February 22, 2011, 12:20 am
I figure the North American's only need to convert the plywood and sheet goods to metric to start the whole thing off.
2x4" dimensional lumber...who cares? It is already specified as metric in code books and other documents.
The stud spacing and so many downstream items are all based on the 48 x 96" plywood and sheet goods. Chnage those and the rest will follow.
-------------------------------- "Robert Allison" wrote in message
I have worked at a couple of chemical plants that were all metric. It is far easier for me than inches/feet. I don't know why I don't use it at home other than the fact that I would constantly have to convert in order to purchase something for any project I am working on. Many things now are measured in both inches/feet AND metric, so I may have to dig out my old metric tape and have a go at it.
The other thing that keeps me from changing is the construction calculator which will do either one, but takes a lot of the worry out of calculations in inches/feet.
--
Robert Allison
New Braunfels, TX
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
• posted on February 22, 2011, 4:58 am
On 2/21/2011 6:20 PM, Josepi wrote:

By the way, what was so confusing about the metric system for you? Hard to stop at 10?
--
Robert Allison
New Braunfels, TX
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
• posted on February 22, 2011, 1:35 pm
IIRC the number of digits in the measurement was the problem remembering.
If I measured something that was fifty nine and thirteen sixteenth inches, I could usually remember it until I got to the saw. I can envision the reading on the tape measure.
If I measured something in metric sizes say 1519 mm, or 1.519 m, I seemed to get two digits reversed sometimes, or forgot one digit by the time I got to the saw. I am sure it was just lack of practice. It felt like a lot of numerical precision and hard to carry in my head for the few seconds.
Although the old system was carrying the same number of digits (and more formatting info) in my head it felt like it was in convenient, expected, groups that could be more easily remembered. Then there is always just the comfort of the system you can envision in your brain.
I am sure with more practice it would become second nature. I have to convert foreignheat temperatures to C to think how warm they are now. That has only been a few decades of getting comfortable with the system here. Some still don`t feel comfortable with C temperatures due to lack of exposure.
--------------------------
"Robert Allison" wrote in message
By the way, what was so confusing about the metric system for you? Hard to stop at 10?
--
Robert Allison
New Braunfels, TX
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
• posted on February 22, 2011, 5:59 pm
On 2/22/2011 7:35 AM, Josepi wrote:

It is far easier to say 151.9 centimeters.
--
Robert Allison
New Braunfels, TX
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
• posted on February 22, 2011, 12:00 pm
On 2/21/2011 4:00 PM, Robert Allison wrote:

Interesting read on the subject: "Measuring America", on how civilizations are built by systems of measurement and how strongly political and economic factors are involved.
--
www.e-woodshop.net
Last update: 4/15/2010
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
• posted on February 21, 2011, 10:12 pm
I went to the Foreign Depot for some two-by-fours, but they were a lot smaller than I expected...
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
• posted on February 22, 2011, 1:20 am

Yeah, about 1-1/2" (1-5/8" swelled, wet pressure-treated tubafores) by 3-1/2" since the Sixties.
-- The more passions and desires one has, the more ways one has of being happy. -- Charlotte-Catherine
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
• posted on February 22, 2011, 1:30 am
I think someone should invent/make a pair of special glasses, such that when one looks at imperial measured stuff, they see it in metric... and, with the same glasses, vice versa. That would save everyone some time and headaches.
Besides, what if we can only count up to 9?
Sonny
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
• posted on February 22, 2011, 1:47 am
Perfect! Metric typically uses base 10 and 0 to 9 are all the digits you need to understand!
No more dividing by 12, or 16th of an inch. We saw you cheating a few times, counting the 32nds after the inch line instead of multiplying it out and adding one.
How many times have we gone to the saw, repeating out loud, "one 32nd shy of 11/16"?
LOL
-------------------- "Sonny" wrote in message
I think someone should invent/make a pair of special glasses, such that when one looks at imperial measured stuff, they see it in metric... and, with the same glasses, vice versa. That would save everyone some time and headaches.
Besides, what if we can only count up to 9?
Sonny
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
• posted on February 22, 2011, 1:52 am
The only two countries in the world that don't mandate the use of the metric system are the US and Myanmar (Burma).
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
• posted on February 22, 2011, 6:52 am

Typically? What are some of the other bases?
R
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
• posted on February 22, 2011, 9:47 am
In article

Well, our computers use base 2
--
Stuart Winsor

Midland RISC OS show - Sat July 9th 2011
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
• posted on February 22, 2011, 9:49 am

Never, it was always 3/32nd short of 3/4 :-)
--
Stuart Winsor

Midland RISC OS show - Sat July 9th 2011
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
• posted on February 22, 2011, 2:08 am

For the humour-impaired, they were about 1.5 cm by 3.5 cm.
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
• posted on February 22, 2011, 2:34 am

Crap, that's only roughly 5/8" by 1-3/8". Not even humorous.
-- The more passions and desires one has, the more ways one has of being happy. -- Charlotte-Catherine
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
• posted on February 21, 2011, 10:58 pm

All the time these days
--
Stuart Winsor

Midland RISC OS show - Sat July 9th 2011
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
• posted on February 22, 2011, 12:38 pm
wrote:

Drywall in Europe comes in 4x8ft sheets: Directly from the website of a big box store (Gamma):
# size 122x61 or 244x122 cm. # thickness 9-12-15-18 mm.
--
Best regards
Han