On Tue, 12 Nov 2002 15:27:06 -0000, <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >Jim Elwell wrote: >>Now that Bill has explained FFU, IFP and WOMBAT, allow me to put >>in my two cents. I don't like any of these, > >Nor me. For similar reasons. > > >>So, I guess we can say there is no widely-accepted term for >>"traditional units of measure used in America." > >Definitive US government publications use the term 'inch-pound'. I am >comfortable with that. > >The term 'inch/pound' is less satisfactory because 'metric/inch-pound' >is clearer in meaning than 'metric/inch/pound'.
The term 'fps' (foot-pound-second') was what I was taught alongside 'cgs' and 'MKS'. That is the consistent term. 'ifp' is almost meaningless, containing two units for one quantity. Chris -- UK Metric Association: http://www.metric.org.uk/
