I'm converting to the metric system

[Greg Charles]

I'm just tired of waiting for the rest of the U.S. to make the switch. I'm also tired of having to make conversions when I travel to figure out how hot it is and how far away places are, and, for that matter, I'm tired of crashing landers into Mars. I figure if a few of us really stubborn types go metric, we can slowly get the conversion process back on track. Who's with me?

I've already converted my speedometer to km/h and now I can drive 100 or more on the freeway without worrying about tickets. I can hardly wait to get a metric scale and see how much weight I've lost!

[Sunspace]

Congratulations on shovng things along a bit so that we Canadians can get closer to finishing converting!

You will find that almost every piece of office equipment can handle A4 paper, but it will be very hard to find. You may need to special-order it.

[Tapioca Dextrin]

Why didn't you post this in the pit? Is your hatred of all things non-decimal too mile-d ;)

[runner pat]

Why didn't you post this in the pit? Is your hatred of all things non-decimal too mile-d ;)

Bad Tapioca! No pudding!

[jjimm]

You will find that almost every piece of office equipment can handle A4 paper, but it will be very hard to find. You may need to special-order it.When I need US Letter paper at work, I have to pay a company to cut it for me to order.

But A5, A4, A3 etc., while very clever, aren't actually "metric" per se.

[Mr. Moto]

I've said before - I see no reason for conversion for many things, and for others people already happily use both systems with relative ease.

For instance, it would be problematic in nautical navigation to abandon yards, nautical miles, and knots. Also, when discussing rifle calibers every hunter knows the difference between the 7 mm Remington Magnum and the .308 Winchester.

Then there is the issue of the pint vs. the half-liter. Civilized people land on only one side of this debate.

[racer72]

I'll switch to metric when they pry my SAE tape measure out of my cold dead hands.

[Napier]

Mr. Moto, you cut me to the quick. I deal with both systems with greater ease than most of the people I know, but it is still a great burden, as completely unnecessary and made-up burdens go.

Do you know how many different possible units for heat transfer coefficient there are?

Each detail of these things is a potential source of error, and the time I spend trying to make sure they are all correct and looking for a way to check them is time I can't spend creating something new and useful. Besides, some of the folks I work with give up before they try calculating something, just because there are so many details to keep in line for this one task.

Moreover, there are thousands of different parts that you have to stock or order in both systems, and at least hundreds of other parts whose only job is to adapt from one system to the other.

Every single machine I'm involved with has either a jagged metaphorical line gerrymandered through its soul, separating the SI from the English parts, or else has some ugly compromise somewhere so we can exclude either SI or English parts.

And, finally, most of the world is at odds with most of the hardware stores I can shop in.

[Tapioca Dextrin]

Then there is the issue of the pint vs. the half-liter. Civilized people land on only one side of this debate.

English or American pint?

[Mr. Moto]

Imperial pint, of course. And we know what can happen when beer starts getting sold in half-liters:

There was a shout of laughter, and the uneasiness caused by Winston's entry seemed to disappear. The old man's white-stubbled face had flushed pink. He turned away, muttering to himself, and bumped into Winston. Winston caught him gently by the arm.

'May I offer you a drink?' he said.

'You're a gent,' said the other, straightening his shoulders again. He appeared not to have noticed Winston's blue overalls. 'Pint!' he added aggressively to the barman. 'Pint of wallop.'

The barman swished two half-litres of dark-brown beer into thick glasses which he had rinsed in a bucket under the counter. Beer was the only drink you could get in prole pubs. The proles were supposed not to drink gin, though in practice they could get hold of it easily enough. The game of darts was in full swing again, and the knot of men at the bar had begun talking about lottery tickets. Winston's presence was forgotten for a moment. There was a deal table under the window where he and the old man could talk without fear of being overheard. It was horribly dangerous, but at any rate there was no telescreen in the room, a point he had made sure of as soon as he came in.

''E could 'a drawed me off a pint,' grumbled the old man as he settled down behind a glass. 'A 'alf litre ain't enough. It don't satisfy. And a 'ole litre's too much. It starts my bladder running. Let alone the price.'

George Orwell.

[Greg Charles]

Actually, I'm not looking for a debate on if converting to metric is a good idea. I'm looking for help pushing it through. My theory is that 90% of the problem is laziness.* I've just made a point of setting all my devices that are settable into metric, and I throw metric stats into my conversations. My co-workers are all techno-nerds anyway, so it's a nice way to tweak them.

I also need help with the newsletter -- or possibly the news-A4.


* 5% is fear of gloabalization and 5% is the mistaken idea that we'll have to recalibrate beer, bullets, and football fields.

[Giles]

In my lifetime, I've had to convert from Imperial to metric, then from metric to US customary. I'd rather use metric any time.

And in New South Wales they still have pint glasses, except that they are 570 ml, i.e., a small fraction larger than an imperial pint, so the prole in 1984 would have been happy.

[Napier]

Actually, I'm not looking for a debate on if converting to metric is a good idea. I'm looking for help pushing it through....

Ditto. I keep thinking being reasonable with folks will help.

Or maybe we could require them to use heat transfer coefficients.

[Cat Whisperer]

Congratulations on shovng things along a bit so that we Canadians can get closer to finishing converting!
<snip>
Oh God. I'm designing yards in metric (because I have zero interest in trying to figure out what five sevenths of a half inch is when I can just move a decimal place), and they'll be built in imperial. Bleah. I'm not sure if I'm proud of Canadians having a foot firmly in both worlds or ashamed of us. :confused:

So, yay, OP! You go!

[BrotherCadfael]

I keep thinking that metric is a solution to a problem that really doesn't exist anymore. converting inches to miles is a trivial exercise in this age of automated computation. Yes, there are some advantages to a strict powers-of-ten model - but there are some disadvantages as well.

It just seems that the converting is not as big a priority as it once was.

[elmwood]

You will find that almost every piece of office equipment can handle A4 paper, but it will be very hard to find. You may need to special-order it.

The children's section of IKEA has bundled sheets of A4. Seriously; it's sold as drawing paper.

Thing is, like the metric system, IKEA stores aren't very widespread in the US compared to other Western countries. Shit, Winnipeg is getting an Ikea, but Ingvar essentially said "fœck yøu" to Kansas City, St. Louis, Cleveland and Buffalo/Rochester. That's one for the Pit, though.





(Yes, pedants, I know the œ ligature and ø aren't part of the Swedish alphabet.)

[pretend my name is witty]

I keep thinking that metric is a solution to a problem that really doesn't exist anymore. converting inches to miles is a trivial exercise in this age of automated computation. Yes, there are some advantages to a strict powers-of-ten model - but there are some disadvantages as well.

It just seems that the converting is not as big a priority as it once was.

Just because something's possible on a computer, doesn't mean it's as good as making the underlying system easier to use.

For anyone that performs a lot of calculations (namely, Engineers), the process certainly isn't automated when performing hand calculations. If I'm looking at Imperial Units, I convert them to metric first because I know all the conversions between relevant metric-metric units in my head, and can perform them so. Sure, I can look up (or if I had to, learn) how many cubic inches are in a metric furlong and suchlike, but the process to convert them wouldn't be automated. I'd have to do it on a calculator. It'd take time, and introduce another place for errors to creep in.

I'm sorry, but for your average guy working out how many yards are in so many miles for whatever reason, the type it into google method might produce a 'quick' solution, but it just doesn't make sense for anyone that needs accuracy and efficiency. Not so much a trivial exercise, but an unnecessary and inefficient one.

I can't see any disadvantages to the 'power-of-ten' model other than it might stop kids learning their 12, and other awkward number times tables. But then I grew up with Metric and my multiplication in my head and 'fag-packet' (US dopers, if you think that's rude, it's not) calculation is on par with the old-school Engineers.

The only real 'disadvantage' that I can see, is that people will have to get used to something else. And people are stubborn.

[bengangmo]

Just because something's possible on a computer, doesn't mean it's as good as making the underlying system easier to use.

For anyone that performs a lot of calculations (namely, Engineers), the process certainly isn't automated when performing hand calculations. If I'm looking at Imperial Units, I convert them to metric first because I know all the conversions between relevant metric-metric units in my head, and can perform them so. Sure, I can look up (or if I had to, learn) how many cubic inches are in a metric furlong and suchlike, but the process to convert them wouldn't be automated. I'd have to do it on a calculator. It'd take time, and introduce another place for errors to creep in.

I'm sorry, but for your average guy working out how many yards are in so many miles for whatever reason, the type it into google method might produce a 'quick' solution, but it just doesn't make sense for anyone that needs accuracy and efficiency. Not so much a trivial exercise, but an unnecessary and inefficient one.

I can't see any disadvantages to the 'power-of-ten' model other than it might stop kids learning their 12, and other awkward number times tables. But then I grew up with Metric and my multiplication in my head and 'fag-packet' (US dopers, if you think that's rude, it's not) calculation is on par with the old-school Engineers.

The only real 'disadvantage' that I can see, is that people will have to get used to something else. And people are stubborn.

Heh...well I can remember having to learn my 17 and 35 times tables, as well as my 52 and 19s ....that was fun. But yes, you are right, a base 10 system is natural and computationally better than otheer systems...

[Mangetout]

Just because something's possible on a computer, doesn't mean it's as good as making the underlying system easier to use.Also, as a system, the handling of non-metric measures is further separated from the 'natural' arithmetic operations of a computer.

Sure, integer and floating point operations represent a departure from binary too, but non-metric systems use integer and floating point maths, then add extra layers of complexity.

Not sure if that makes a great deal of difference in practical everyday terms, but to my mind, simpler is better, and less likely to fail - with this sort of thing.

[Napier]

OK, I just opened my conversion package and counted 112 different versions of heat transfer coefficient. That's one hundred and twelve different things that in SI would just be watts per square meter kelvin.

[The Lurker Above]

OK, I just opened my conversion package and counted 112 different versions of heat transfer coefficient. That's one hundred and twelve different things that in SI would just be watts per square meter kelvin.

Oh god, you're bringing back the nightmares of my Heat Transfer final. Our text & most homework assignments were given in an odd mishmash of SI and non-SI units. Final answers up to that point were required to be in SI units so we'd just convert the questions & relevant values from Perry's, the text, etc and were good to go.

On our final exam all questions, references and required answer format were all (different from the coursework) non-SI units. I figured that rather than convert everything to familiar SI, work out the problem, then convert the answer I'd work in the given units and only convert when absolutely required. Halfway through the time I'm only 1/3 of the way through the questions, panicking, and getting obviously-wrong results so I switch to working in SI and finish just in time. It was not my best mark in university.

Moral of the story: the ugly kludge of various non-SI systems might work okay for simple day-to-day stuff but they blow for anything even slightly complicated. And there's a tonne of legacy data/equipment out there that uses it :(

[sevenwood]

Well, if the metric system isn't good enough for the United States, Liberia and Myanmar (AKA Burma) (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metrication), it's not good enough for me!

(Oh, shoot - Liberia and Myanmar may be converting...)

[Johnny Angel]

I have converted most of our household weights and measures to metric. I got most of the gear through eBay. Here's what I recommend:


Thermostat - I did find a bell-type mercury switch thermostat in celsius, but ultimately I just bought and installed a digital one. Comfortable room temperature is about 20 degrees.
Thermometer - Temperature is a thing people often find tricky to get used to. They know about what 80 degrees feels like. Don't try to convert. Just get a thermometer with just celsius on it and hang it outside. My wife and I just set our car's thermometer to celsius and everyday when we went to work we would try to guess the temperature on the way to the car, and then when we turned the car on we'd see who got the closest.
Medical Thermometer - I have a digital one, and I wrote the important temperature ranges on the hard plastic case. These are pretty easy to learn -- the weird numbers you get in Frigginheit are actually converted from round numbers in celsius.
Cooking Thermometer - Since my oven is not ready to be replaced anytime soon, I still use the temperature, though my probe thermometer is set to celsius, and is pre-programmed with the temperature ranges for meats at various levels of done-ness.
Measuring Cups/Spoons - I have spoons and cups with only metric measures. If a recipe calls for a teaspoon, I use 5 ml. For a tablespoon I use 15 m. I don't do much baking, where I'm told proportions need to be more precise, but I generally find 250 ml works wherever you need a 'cup'.
Weight - You want a digital scale anyway. And, since most water-based liquids used in the kitchen are close enough to the density of water not to make a big difference, your tare scale can double as a measuring cup -- 1 gram is 1 ml. We also have a digital scale for weighing people. For a recipe that calls for a pound of ground beef, for example, use half a kilo.
Distance - You'll want a meter stick and a tape measure in only metric -- you want to be able to read from either side of the thing, and if it's mixed units, the metric will be on the less convenient side to use. You'll probably also want a tailor-style measuring tape. Remember that a yard is about a meter long. A standard CD is 12 cm across and 5 cm from the edge to the hole -- the hole itself is 2 cm in diameter.
Tire Pressure - Again, digital is your friend. My car owner's manual specifies optimal pressure in kPa, so one of those PSI dealies wouldn't help me.

I'm sure I'm forgetting something it would be handy to let you know. I'll give it some thought.

[sisu]

Metric is easier for things I have learnt later in life but I still think that soemthing weighs 10 pounds, 22mpg or is 6'2" tall. Metric is better when figuring things out. I love metric.

[Arnold Winkelried]

soemthing weighs 10 pounds, 22mpg or is 6'2" tall.
OK, you got me on that one. What is this thing that weighs 10 pounds, is 6'2" tall and has a fuel efficiency of 22 mpg? Some early penny-farthing bicycle (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Penny-farthing) with a motor?

[mnemosyne]

I hate slugs. That's why I like metric!

My usual technique in dealing with non-metric units in school assignments is to convert to metric, solve, and then convert back to whatever they want the answer in. I find it rather convenient to be able to derive units as I go as well, which I have much more trouble doing in non-metric systems.

[t-bonham@scc.net]

It just seems that the converting is not as big a priority as it once was.Probably not, seeing that nearly all of the world had already converted.

[CutterJohn]

A thought I had a few days ago.. Most of the world gives americans shit for being monolingual. I realized we can give you shit for being mono-measuring-systemal.

Get some culture! Expand your horizons! Weigh yourself in pounds every once in a while!

:D

[Johnny Angel]

Get some culture! Expand your horizons! Weigh yourself in pounds every once in a while!
Then they can dare the Americans to work in the Apothecary system.

[Shirley Ujest]

Forget the metric system, I'm converting all measures of weight into stone, just to mess with people.

[Rala]

You will find that almost every piece of office equipment can handle A4 paper, but it will be very hard to find. You may need to special-order it.
You don't have (much) A4 in America? What paper do you guys normally use?

[Giles]

You don't have (much) A4 in America? What paper do you guys normally use?

Letter (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Letter_%28paper_size%29), which is 8.5 x 10.5 inches, or 215.9 mm × 279.4 mm, is the most common size.

[StarvingButStrong]

Letter (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Letter_%28paper_size%29), which is 8.5 x 10.5 inches, or 215.9 mm × 279.4 mm, is the most common size.

8.5" X 11", actually.

[Johnny Angel]

A4 paper is more expensive in the US, and never available on sale as a loss leader at Staples.

[Mangetout]

Letter (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Letter_%28paper_size%29), which is 8.5 x 10.5 inches, or 215.9 mm × 279.4 mm, is the most common size.

This is why misconfigured printer drivers in the UK often cause the printer to say 'Load Letter' (the document was sent as letter size, but the printer only has A4, and wants you to load some Letter-sized paper)

[Napier]

I think that in the US, the most important thing about dimensionless numbers is that they don't keep changing depending on which custom is in use in the conversation.

Though, things could be worse. In spectroscopy, people customarily use inverse centimeters, and graph them increasing right to left. I still find references that say this is the smart thing to do because the values are more reasonable this way.

[pretend my name is witty]

I know that this thread is a little old now, but I thought I'd chip in (again) with an example here.

I'm at work at the moment and I'm aiming to produce a script that automates a lot of the hand calculations that had been performed previously. I'm doing all the work in SI units and enabling conversion to other at the end (pilots still think in knots, and older engineers are comfortable visualising feet).

The author of a big document I'm working from has some funny numbers, and working through it it's clear that they've gone straight from using slugs to pounds without converting. According to google 1 slugs = 32.1740486 pounds, so I'm not surprised they didn't have that one memorised. Obviously, it's made a big difference and I've got a feeling that it's meant something that I'm working on is heavily over-engineered because they're expecting the air to be 32x denser.

Stupid imperial (stormtroopers?).

[pretend my name is witty]

In fact, delving further into the work that's been done; it's clear that they've confused pounds (mass) and pounds (force). Which has led them to give the units of pressure as lbs/ft^2 (mass per unit area?) and converted them to Kg (sic)/m^2, which doesn't make too much sense.

eta: the 'sic' bit. I try not to use sloppy prefixes in my own work

[Johnny Angel]

I just did some quick-and-dirty ballparking for a typical white sauce (http://www.cooks.com/rec/view/0,1655,129182-251198,00.html) recipe usually given in US units in terms of tablespoons of butter and flour per cup of liquid. What would the rule be if you're cooking in metric?

Some preliminary Googlation seems to suggest that flour is about half as dense as butter. Sauce recipes suggest a 1:1 flour-to-butter ratio by volume, though the amount of flour is really the key determinant of the final sauce -- you need enough butter to cook the sauce in. Still, if the density is 1:2, then I find the following rough equivalents to the typical recipes:

Thin: x g Flour, 2x g butter, 30x ml liquid
Medium: x g Flour, 2x g butter, 15x ml liquid
Thick: x g Flour, 2x g butter, 10x ml liquid

I haven't tried out these ratios yet, but this is in the same ballpark as the standard ratios given, only now in ratios convenient in the metric system. If you don't have a digital scale, you can use this equivalent for the 15 ml measuring spoons you get in a metric set and the 'tablespoon' notches on your butter stick wrapper (1 TB = 14.79 ml, close enough). And depending on what subunits your measuring cup is marked to, you may wish to round up or down on the liquid portion:

Thin: 15 ml Flour, 1 notch butter, 225-250 ml liquid
Medium: 20 ml Flour, 2 notches butter, 225-250 ml liquid
Thick: 30 ml Flour, 3 notches butter, 225-250 ml liquid