In snipping your remarks to the minimum, I have damaged your color coding.  
Sorry.
 
The Otis approach is interesting.  Given the usual "feelings" associated with 
color, I am surprised they didn't reverse red and blue.  The point of a 
succesful metric conversion is that inch-pound design has no future.  New 
inch-pound work should be red to raise a flag. (NASA should consider this.)
 
On historical values of conversion factors, I would suggest that these changes 
are mostly very minor, and mostly of interest to metrology students.  No need 
to teach to everybody.  Historical precision was worse than modern precision 
and these differences (for the most part) would never matter in everyday life 
or modern interpretation of it.
 
Even the much discussed International vs. Survey foot is only a difference of 
two parts per million, and can't matter in results having five or fewer 
significant digits (which is 99+% percent of all practical work). (If you go 
back to a Roman foot, the difference is a little bigger).  Even in surveying, 
the Survey foot doesn't really matter in local surveying, only geodetic 
surveying, or in the State Plane coordinate system where millions of feet of 
false origin offset are added to basic data, introducing an error of 2 feet per 
million feet of false origin.
 
The area where it does matter, and it is more cultural than historical is 
volume.  The US has retained an obsolete gallon, and an obsolete bushel based 
on a second gallon rather than adopt the Imperial gallon.  Except for that, 
there is no redefinition that is significant enough to teach anything but the 
modern value in the US or Australia, because no (essential) change has occurred 
within our history.  For the UK, there is more history and more obsolete units 
(but how many REALLY care about those old conversions).

--- On Sun, 11/29/09, Pat Naughtin <[email protected]> wrote:


From: Pat Naughtin <[email protected]>
Subject: [USMA:46213] Re: content inch pound meter gram
To: "U.S. Metric Association" <[email protected]>
Date: Sunday, November 29, 2009, 8:24 PM




 . I am a fan of the Otis Elevators approach where they identify all jobs as 
old or as new; they then identify each job as whether it is a new design and 
construction or a repair job to an existing elevator. Obviously the words, 
old-new, new-new, and new-old were immediately confusing so they used color 
codes: red and blue for existing foot-pound equipment and green and gold for 
new metric equipment. They then had four possibilities so that all work could 
have a color code:


Red = repair of existing equipment in feet and pounds
Blue = new work to be done in feet and pounds


Green = new work to be done in metric
Gold = repair of existing metric equipment in metric


Obviously the company were planning for a transition period that might last 100 
or more years (elevators are long-lasting) but most importantly nobody has to 
do any measurement conversions – in any direction. 
. . . .

Agreed, keeping in mind that the current definition of an inch, a foot, and a 
pound are just that – current – they have changed over the years so any 
historical documents need to know the historical timing and the historical 
place where the old pre-metric measuring words came from.

 

Reply via email to