SAE maintains separate standards in inch units and metric (Ibelieve ASME does the same). The standards for inch bolts, threads, wrenches are maintained and periodically reaffirmed. Mostly they are SOLD for $50; I doubt they'll be disavowed. But SAE has separate metric standards for bolts, threads, etc. The Technical Standards Board governs standards development in 7 councils further divided into committees, working groups etc. Because of the status of aerospace industry, the Aerocpace Council is almost entirely inch-based and converting very slowly. The other six councils are pretty metric, but they do review (and update if necessary) old english-unit standards. They are withdrawn when demand disappears. Standards are reviewed every five years; they are reaffirmed, updated, or withdrawn. (Original issue date is maintained if reaffirmed, but reaffirmation date noted in records.) I just don't see anyone being fanatical about being metric, and withdrawing inch-based standards that earn revenue. Especially if they wish to be a factor in aerospace.
--- On Sun, 4/12/09, Jeremiah MacGregor <[email protected]> wrote: From: Jeremiah MacGregor <[email protected]> Subject: Re: [USMA:44615] Re: SAE, was Water, teraliters To: [email protected], "U.S. Metric Association" <[email protected]> Date: Sunday, April 12, 2009, 3:09 PM Your reply made me think that someone opposed to metric usage by SAE could simply refer to a pre-metric version of their standard to justify using SAE as a supporter for a non-metric reference. In the example I gave previously, it was tools that sold sold with the claim that SAE tools are inch based and metric tools (and usage) are not supported by SAE. But since the SAE presently supports metric as its primary system, don't you think SAE should prevent a tool company from inferring that inch tools are SAE and metric ones are not? Have you ever encountered inch based tools as being referred to SAE? Jerry From: John M. Steele <[email protected]> To: U.S. Metric Association <[email protected]> Sent: Sunday, April 12, 2009 10:24:51 AM Subject: [USMA:44615] Re: SAE, was Water, teraliters The SAE has a current metric practice guide, SAE TSB003. It was reassigned to the Technical Standards Board in 1992. It was previously known as J916, and was first issued 1965-06. The current metric policy is a few lines of this 39 page document and is quoted below: 4. SAE Metric Policy 4.1 Statement— The following statement of Metric Policy was approved by the SAE Board of Directors on March 4, 1993: 4.1.1 SAE METRIC POLICY— Operating Boards shall not use any weights and measures system other than metric (SI), except when conversion is not practical, or where a conflicting world industry practice exists..." I do not have older versions and can't track the changes over the years since 1965. It is true that some older standards in inch-pound units are still maintained and sold for $50/copy if demand persists. However, most standards are metric as are the industries served: passenger vehicle, heavy truck and coach, offroad (which includes ag equipment). There are smaller sections for locomotive and aircraft; I don't think SAE is the primary engineering society representing those two. Technical papers are required to be SI-primary, but generally allow and frequently use supplemental Customary in parentheses, at the author's option. --- On Sun, 4/12/09, Jeremiah MacGregor <[email protected]> wrote: From: Jeremiah MacGregor <[email protected]> Subject: [USMA:44613] Re: Water, teraliters, was FPLA 2010 To: "U.S. Metric Association" <[email protected]> Date: Sunday, April 12, 2009, 9:45 AM John, Would you say that SAE is metric now where once it was pre-metric? Now, what do you think of when you see wrench sets described as "Metric or SAE", implying that SAE sponsored tools are not metric? Jerry From: John M. Steele <[email protected]> To: U.S. Metric Association <[email protected]> Sent: Sunday, April 12, 2009 7:06:55 AM Subject: [USMA:44608] Re: Water, teraliters, was FPLA 2010 Dear Pat, Let me guess. Before metrication, they used acre-feet (at least we do in the US).. 1 acre-foot = 43560 ft³ x (0.3048 m/ft)³ = 1233.5 m³ or 1.2335 ML or 1.2335 dam³. So it is an "almost familiar" size unit. The agricultural section of SAE recommends the cubic dekameter wherever acre-foot is now used (although I have never heard anyone in the US actually use it). --- On Sun, 4/12/09, Pat Naughtin <[email protected]> wrote: From: Pat Naughtin <[email protected]> Subject: [USMA:44604] Re: Fw: Re: Water, teraliters, was FPLA 2010 To: "U..S. Metric Association" <[email protected]> Date: Sunday, April 12, 2009, 3:03 AM Dear John, Thanks for the correction. I simply cut and pasted the article without reading it carefully. I will watch the 'Geelong Advertiser' more closely in future. By the way, the few water engineers that I know have developed a mindset where the unit megalitre is used for capacities and they have a sense of how big the dams in our system are, see http://www.barwonwater.vic.gov.au/index.cfm?h2o=services.water_levels , and they don't see a need to convert between megalitres and cubic measures of any kind; they just develop their megalitre mindset and then base their reference values using that unit. Another aspect to the use of megalitres is that there is no fear of large numbers. Water engineers, like many others, have simply chosen a unit where almost all, if not all, of the values they use daily are in whole numbers, which is one of the great strengths of the metric system. It is possible to choose prefixes for units so that there is never any need for fractions at all. See http://www.metricationmatters.com/docs/WholeNumberRule.pdf for some further thoughts on this issue. Cheers, Pat Naughtin Geelong, Australia On 2009/04/12, at 12:22 AM, John M. Steele wrote: Indeed, there is a prefix error. This "facts & figures" page http://www.barwonwater.vic.gov.au/cms/serveDoc.cfm?docId=24911 indicates Barwon water supplies 32000 ML of water annually, processes 21000 ML of sewage, and serves 270000 customers (that is apparently population, as household connections is less than half that, 131000). Thus average household use is therefore around 244 m³ per year. A thousand-fold error should cause a "whoa, wait a minute" response. I believe the fact that it didn't is adequate evidence that megaliters, gigaliters, and teraliters (even with "re" spelling) are not very intuitive units and throw a great cloud of confusion over any attempt to visualize or sanity check the amount. Any form of proper cubic measure, from 32 x 10^6 m³, 32 million cubic meters, 32000 dam³, 32 hm³, would be a more suitable way to convey this information, and be less likely to obscure a thousand-fold error. Teraliters are frightening. --- On Sat, 4/11/09, John M. Steele <[email protected]> wrote: From: John M. Steele <[email protected]> Subject: Re: [USMA:44564] Re: FPLA 2010 To: "U.S. Metric Association" <[email protected]>, [email protected] Date: Saturday, April 11, 2009, 8:59 AM You have proven megaliters, gigaliters, and teraliters are used. That is a staggering amount of water given Geelong's population. Where does it all go? Irrigation? If I compare with Detroit, private consumption and industry can't account for much. A volume of 32 TL/annum meant absolutely nothing to me, a completely incomprehensible number. Some manipulation led me to it being 32 km³ per year, giving me some sense of what you do to the river. It also works out to a withdrawal of 1015 m³/s. It still seemed large, so I compared it to the Detroit River (part of the connection between Lake Huron and Lake Erie, and the Detroit Water Dept, which serves a metro region of about 5 million people. The Detroit River flow varies typically from 4500 m³/s in low lake level years to 6500 m³/s in high lake level years. The Detroit Water department handles an average of 673 million gallons per day, by their figures. Converting, this is 0.93 TL (or km³) per year (29.5 m³/s) for 5 million people. That figure is reasonably consistent with my household use of 273 m³/year) As we use less than 1/32 the water for about 25X the population (is Geelong under 200,000?), I wonder if there isn't a prefix error in that news article. (If it isn't an error, you guys need more conservation effort!) --- On Sat, 4/11/09, Pat Naughtin <[email protected]> wrote: From: Pat Naughtin <[email protected]> Subject: [USMA:44564] Re: FPLA 2010 To: "U.S. Metric Association" <[email protected]> Date: Saturday, April 11, 2009, 12:00 AM On 2009/04/11, at 1:35 PM, Jeremiah MacGregor wrote: I can see where the terms megalitre, gigalitre and teralitre would be less cumbersome for the public then their equivalents of cubic dekametres, cubic hectometres and cubic kilometres. Dear Jerry and Stan, Here is an example of the use of gigalitres from our local paper, The Geelong Advertiser, from October last year. Barwon Water is our local water supply organisation as we get most of our water from the Barwon river. http://www.geelongadvertiser.com.au/article/2008/10/24/26151_news.html Cheers, Pat Naughtin PO Box 305 Belmont 3216, Geelong, Australia Phone: 61 3 5241 2008 Metric system consultant, writer, and speaker, Pat Naughtin, has helped thousands of people and hundreds of companies upgrade to the modern metric system smoothly, quickly, and so economically that they now save thousands each year when buying, processing, or selling for their businesses. Pat provides services and resources for many different trades, crafts, and professions for commercial, industrial and government metrication leaders in Asia, Europe, and in the USA. Pat's clients include the Australian Government, Google, NASA, NIST, and the metric associations of Canada, the UK, and the USA. See http://www.metricationmatters.com/ to subscribe. Pat Naughtin PO Box 305 Belmont 3216, Geelong, Australia Phone: 61 3 5241 2008 Metric system consultant, writer, and speaker, Pat Naughtin, has helped thousands of people and hundreds of companies upgrade to the modern metric system smoothly, quickly, and so economically that they now save thousands each year when buying, processing, or selling for their businesses. Pat provides services and resources for many different trades, crafts, and professions for commercial, industrial and government metrication leaders in Asia, Europe, and in the USA. Pat's clients include the Australian Government, Google, NASA, NIST, and the metric associations of Canada, the UK, and the USA. See http://www.metricationmatters.com/ to subscribe.
