----- Original Message ----- From: "John S. Ward" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "U.S. Metric Association" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Friday, 2004-01-02 22:52 Subject: [USMA:28124] Pipes, lumber, etc: hard or soft conversion?
> Howard, > > I think it's worth pointing out that few people are bothered that a 2x4 is not > even close to 2x4 inches, nor is a 1" board 1" thick. In fact, a 1" board is > a lot closer to 20 mm, and a 2x4 is much closer to 4x9 cm than 2x4 inches. > So there's an argument to be made to simply rename many old sizes to the > closest rational metric value. > > This a tough problem. Manufacturing lumber, plumbing, etc. in new hard-metric > sizes might sound great, the very large majority of the population who need > to maintain their current non-hard-metric abodes will need current standard > sized materials for a very long time. Further, houses aren't exported, so > the usual economic arguments don't apply. > > I propose the following bastardized solution: change the lengths of boards > and pipes to hard-metric sizes. But leave the other dimensions unchanged, > just rename them to the closest round metric value. This has already been achieved as far as pipe is concerned. Pipe sizes were never rational inch to start with thus switching them to rational millimetres would serve no purpose. However a metric naming schemeis already in existance. It is the "Diameter Nominal" scheme. A half-inch pipe is called DN15 under this scheme. I guess because the inner diameter is about 15 mm in diameter. Houses aren't exported but the materials that are used to build them can be. A 4 x 8 (1219 mm x 2438 mm) foot piece of wood would be useless in a market where houses are built on 400 and 600 mm centres and 1200 mm x 2400 mm is designed to fit. US size brick won't work right in a metric designed house. If the US housing indistry is in a slump, the US companies that make the materials can't rely on exports of their products to keep the slump from aff ecting them. Being different comes at a cost. Euric > > So I ask, hard conversion, or soft? > > John > > On Friday 02 January 2004 05:30, Howard Ressel wrote: > > Culture, custom and economy. Even if we go metric 100% I don't see the > > paper size industry changing too fast, if ever. Like pipes and lumber, > > paper will probably just go to a rational nominal size. Pipe sizes have not > > changed in many metric countries nor lumber and other products, just their > > names have become rational metric. I don't see the use of A4 paper as a > > metric issue rather an international standards issue. Certainly there are > > bigger international standards we need to be concerned about other than > > paper sizes (IE. formats for electronic equipment). > >
