I started work in the Commercial and Residential
Building Industry in 1982 and only used millimetres and never came across
opposition to metric. Every architectural plan I have worked from has been
in millimetres. Centimetres was promoted to the general public and
millimetres to the trades and professionals. I have never used a
decimetre.
During the introduction, from 1974 to 1977 any sole
reference to imperial units on products was banned. One could
not purchase a tape measure with inches on it, only sole metric tape
measures were allowed for the first three years. After that, dual measures
were permitted. Sole imperial tape measures have not been available since.
I was in Primary (Grade) School at the time, so my education was limited to only
metric. The rulers on our school desks were presented in both centimetres
and millimetres.
My mother received her initial introduction to
metric when she worked as a sales assistant in a home decorating centre at
Bristol Paint & Wallpaper (TM) from 1974. All wallpaper was presented in centimetres. Whilst the
trades worked in millimetres, much wallpapering was done by the home handyman
and I presume this is why wallpaper was not in mm.
I believe that there was no argument over the use of
centimetres or millimetres, just that the public had to change. I
think the initial banning of sole imperial at the introduction was
sensible of the government in order to get the new system introduced.
What frustrates me today, is that rule is either very relaxed or no
longer law, as I come across some products in the 'cheap imports'
stores that have only inch measurements. The assistant told me
when that they were designed for the US market.
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On
Behalf Of kilopascal
Sent: Sunday, 29 December 2002 08:14
To: U.S. Metric Association
Subject: [USMA:24265] Re: Millimetres, centimetres, and decimetres
2002-12-28
>
> As far as I can remember, there was no controversy in Canada about
> the centimetre versus the millimetre. The arguments were metric
> versus inch-pound. The engineers and architects went metric, but the
> house builders would have none of it .
I think Australia went through the same phase. Pat, mike and Brenton can
clarify this. The reason the FFU-ists lost the battle was that "products"
were not available in FFU after a certain date. Thus a house builder who
wanted to continue with FFU could not do it so easily.
If your panel wood is only available in incremental sizes of 1200 x 2400, it
makes it hard to continue with inches if the inch equivalents don't match up
to fit these sizes. If products are still made in the 4 x 8 foot size
range, one can continue with inches forever. But, see how far you can go if
you have to put your stud spacing at 400 mm or 600 mm using inches. It
doesn't work that well and the builder eventually gives up.
Get rid of FFU products and you can get rid of FFU too. It is the FFU
products most of all that keep FFU alive.
John
