If the north american manufacturers don't adjust their mix to what people want, they won't be around much longer anyhow. Gerry :-)} London, Canada
If the north american manufacturers don't adjust their mix to what people want, they won't be around much longer anyhow. Gerry :-)} London, Canada
If you build the whole thing offshore you'll probably want to use metric components unless your market requires Imperial fasteners or compatibility with legacy parts is required. On custom parts, it doesn't matter whether the threads are metric or Imperial, but the standard part will likely be cheaper if you go with a standard M3 or whatever rather than a 6-32.
I see designing in metric* as one of the keys to keeping the front end of the manufacturing process "here". The back end is already gone, and it ain't coming back.
Best regards, Spehro Pefhany
Its the responsibity of the flight crew to verify that they have the fuel on board that they need for the flight. I guess they were not doing their job.
John
Sounds interesting, and valuable, although I don't see the connection with terrorists.
100gm of meat and/or cheese is about right for a sandwich.A thou is big for precision work, a tenth a bit small, wheras 0.1mm or
0.05mm is about right. 100kg is a big guy, 50kg is a small galWhen I design in Solidworks I key in mm or inches interchangably or even mixed (0.125" + 0.5mm, for a clearance dimension for example).
It's like you speaking Spanish, I'd imagine, a bit of effort but no big deal, and you see benefits in the long run for a some work in the short term. There are lots of people who say scr*w Spanish, let them speak English if they want to do business, right? ;-)
Best regards, Spehro Pefhany
Any "Bus Drivers" out there? I still want to know...
Did Boeing ever write that section of the flight manual covering 'All Engine Out" flight, the glide rate, optimum speeds, install mechanical altimeters with rate of descent gauge, etc.? Did they ever quantify the safety of side-slipping or other techniques you may need to use in a dead-stick approach?
And one of the things Captain Bob Pearson mentions is that "Luckily we were in a Boeing - you can't side-slip an Airbus, the computers won't let you." Did Airbus ever correct that?
Murphy's Law Number (mumblety-seven...): When you ask about a rare emergency and they say "Oh, you don't have to worry about optimum glide speeds in a Jumbo Jet, since that can NEVER happen!" you can rest assured that it in fact /can/ happen. And you're liable to be the guinea pig that gets a front row seat to see how it turns out...
In EMT Class they told me I'd *never* witness a Grand Mal seizure from the onset, so learning how to use (or improvise) a bite stick wasn't really necessary... Two inside of a year.
-->--
Can be needed until the glycogen/glucose kicks in with a major hypoglycaemic incident. DAMHIKT
Mark Rand RTFM
Seems as though the Improvised Explosive Devices are the main killing machines used by the terrorists... ok, militants. Our aim is to quickly deploy a device capable of doing point work as a convoy goes into dangerous territory.
I'm having a ball trying to relate specs from metric originated suppliers of motors and controllers which really seem to be contrived and not really honest metrication... but massaged from prior art in HP, inch, pound... the so called Newton is a joke in the real world. Try as I might, I can't visualize applying a force to a one kilogram bowling ball to accelerate it to a speed of one meter per second par second. But I can see a horse lift
550 lbs one ft. in one second. No problem there. I know I can do a 1/20 HP for a second or two. Easy to see. Impossible to visualize that rolling kilogram bowling ball... on what surface? In zero gravity? out in space? with a spring loaded plunger?Oh well, live and learn something every day. This has been an exciting thread!
Man oh man! With your knowledge, it would be better for you to work as a lumber jack! Newton is force (lbf), not torque, torque is Nm (lbf x ft). Speed is not "one meter per second par second" it's m/s (ft/s), ms^-2 is acceleration(ft/s^2). HP is called kW in SI (and needs a factor to convert to; about 0.745*) for HP). HP is not lbs x ft / s, but lbf x ft / s. Note the difference? And if you are so lame that you can make only 1/20 HP for a second or two, you'd better not leave the bed.
*) But that would be too easy to multiply voltage by amperage to get the input wattage of the motor. And maybe multiply it by its efficency. You prefer converting it to HP first. *Much* easier. LOL!And someone like you -who doesn't understand his own system- thinks he is in the intellectual position to say that SI is shit?
Nick
Never said it was shit. I just ask the question why a world leader in technology would even think of spending the fortunes in converting all their experience into a system that is just another system. Good or bad.
Tell me how many times you can lift a 55 lb anvil one foot in one second and then tell me to stay in bed. That's only a tenth of a HP...
And I agree that my brain is becoming mush and that is why I seek enlightenment through your wisdom and others in the newsgroup. I'm humble enough to recognize the need. Thanks for sharing your insight, I do appreciate reading your notes, albeit a bit arrogant.
Wayne
Yes. The SI folks prefer the much more rational and intuitive "cubic decimeter," or "10^-3*m^3".
d8-)
-- Ed Huntress
I do not understand the grammar of that response. The FPLA forbids Proctor and Gamble from selling metric-only products.
Your analysis is one of the best I have seen but it omits the legal barriers to metrication. Voluntary conversion is forbidden by law. Companies like Proctor and Gamble want to offer metric-only products right now. But the FPLA and other laws make metric-only products illegal in the US.
I assume that there is no problem at all with selling 1kg of sugar that is also labeled as 2lb 3 1/4oz etc. That gets the punter used to the size of metric quantities and makes the change to metric only labeling less traumatic.Doesn't have to be instantaneous. 40 years is probably not unreasonable to let people grow up with the ideas, and it's already happening.
Mark Rand RTFM
Well, you said "in a free market." I think that US consumers would be wary of metric-only volumes and weights in many categories of products. So it would be necessary to have both metric and Imperial measures printed on bottles and containers to avoid losing those customers who wanted to know how many ounces or pints, etc., they were buying.
In most categories that wouldn't be a high percentage. But it would be a measurable loss of market share, and that always hurts.
Even though 2 liters is slightly more volume than 2 quarts, people I've talked to believe that the liter-based volumes are a ploy to sell less for more. So printing the Imperial volumes under the liter volumes probably helps Coke and Pepsi avoid the skepticism. I don't think, in other words, that Coke and Pepsi would print only the liters on the bottles if they were allowed to do so.
-- Ed Huntress
Yes to the first part, and yes to the second part, to a modest degree. I think that most consumers only care if they're shopping for value in terms of cost-per-weight or cost-per-volume. There are some of those, and it varies by category.
However, we're used to seeing metric measures now, as long as the Imperial measures are somewhere on the container.
-- Ed Huntress
I don't have an opinion on english versus metric in products, but I will tell one small war story from the software realm:
Some years ago, on a project to build a very large UHF early-warning radar (these are ten-story buildings with antenna patches at least 50 feet in diameter, with ranges measured in the thousands of miles into space), the issue of units came up early in the development. I suggested use of the SI system in the software, and this was accepted. The rationale was that having a consistent-physics-based system of units would save money by reducing errors in the software (~600,000 lines of C++). The exception was that many kinds of data needed by the software comes in legacy units of measure, so in these cases we convert to SI internally as soon as possible, so the bulk of the software uses only SI units.
Joe Gwinn
That sounds perfectly sensible, and I would be alarmed if you told us the decision was to use anything else. In fact, I find it remarkable that any science or the loftier realms of engineering use anything else, after most sciences switched in the 1960s or even earlier, in some cases.
Apparently there are some stragglers.
-- Ed Huntress
I just noticed how painlessly we adopted the liter as a unit of measure for cola and how easily intuitive that unit is, in the U.S. now.
--Winston
Yeah. It's a little more than a quart. d8-)
Members of this NG are hardly representative, but I think that most of us probably are comfortable with either system of measure. When I'm doing calculations these days I have to look everything up to remind myself, anyway.
-- Ed Huntress
PolyTech Forum website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.