Metric v. Standard measurement usage survey / ?

[Ronald Blue]

.23 mm is about .009 thousandths. .0005 or 1/2 thousandth is a pretty tight tolerance for all but ultra precision applications. Certainly nothing you would ever need when working with wood. I can adapt to either system although I grew up with the good old inch system. Most all autos are pretty well metric especially on engines but more and more frame hardware is as well. Industrial engines are mostly all metric these days as well. Cummins, Deere, Cat. I don't mind that but there was a time when they had some of both in use and that drives you nuts when they had both in use because you are using a metric socket on one thing and then you have a "standard" on something else. While I still encounter a little of this on accessory mounts etc. most things are metric. As many have said it's what you are used to. Both have served their purposes effectively. One thing I have always liked about metric is you don't need a tap drill chart for selecting the right drill bit. Just subtract the thread pitch from the diameter and you have it. I don't know if the inch system will disappear in my lifetime. I was here when the talk in the 70's of a mass conversion was going on but that just dissolved and here we are still using both.

[Steve Griffin]

Decimal inches works well for me.

It's hard to imagine a more worthless measurement increment than the millimeter for cabinets/construction. It's too small to pencil mark or read when taking a measurement. It's way too big for fine machine adjustments.

The 1/16 of an inch increment is about perfect for human marking and measuring.

Using decimal inches to the thousandth is the perfect increment for adjusting my wide belt sander. Doing math is easy with the decimal system, and when working with US clients using inches is the ONLY way to communicate with them.

I do all my plans/cutlists in decimal inches, and it takes about one project for a new employee to memorize the basics. Attached is a cheater sheet, which I have attached before.

The very best thing about the imperial system is it is different than metric, and I like being in a country which is different.

[Rod Sheridan]

So I am wondering if any Creekers have switched to metric from a standard measuring system while in the process of learning woodworking. To me the metric system seems more user friendly when it comes to woodworking just given the fact that it is lineal as opposed to fractional.

Of course this would be a moot question if you can convert fractions to decimals on the fly.

Jamie, your thread title makes me smile every time I read it, because metric is standard, Imperial is the odd ball in this world.

Regardless, I did post an answer however I failed to indicate that if I receive a drawing in a particular measurement system, I build it using that system. Conversion is a mess, so I would suggest you start by trying a project in metric, probably from plans you have drawn yourself.

Regards, Rod.

[Halgeir Wold]

It's hard to imagine a more worthless measurement increment than the millimeter for cabinets/construction. It's too small to pencil mark or read when taking a measurement. It's way too big for fine machine adjustments..

Strange thing to say - unless you really intend to be the oddball....
I do most of my work in millimeters - machine drawings at work, or personal woodwork or what-have-you. I've never had a problem to pencil mark to the millimeter. As for fine machine work - that's when we use tenths or hundreds of millimeters- and even thousands for high precision work. Oh sorry - that's in base 10, so it's metric. And BTW - 1/1000" is still just 0.0254 mm, so even high precision works better in metric....

The very best thing about the imperial system is it is different than metric, and I like being in a country which is different.

Making claims of difference for the sake of difference itself is OK with me, but is hardly a signal of an open mind.....

As the previous poster just said - it is really imperial that is the oddball of the world these days, but I guess we'll have to live with two systems for still many years. I have personally no problems working with both. I also work for a company that has a lot of international contracts, so the necessity of learning conversion is just the way it is.
We have a major building renovation and extension project going on at work, roughly 1000 sqm- or 10.000 sq.ft, and some of my responsiblity is electric power and communication systems. All the drawings that pass my desk for inspection is in millimeters, and workers of all trades work to the same drawings - in millimeters - carpenters, plumbers,electricians, HVAC, etc.etc. No-one seems to have any problems reading the drawings. It's all in our minds... and an open mind usually functions better......

[Pat Barry]

Metric system works great for people in Europe and it should stay that way. The kids grow up accustomed to it over there and good for them. I use both for my job and rarely have any problems because certain types of work are customarily done that way and thats the way I was trained. But lets face it, American kids grow up learn the English system from their parents and thats the way it should be. Both systems work, but I never think of any daily tasks in metric. That would drive me crazy. Everything I do is in English system because thats what I learned early on and it works. The metric system is not easier or more convenient either. Furthermore, there is no reason to do things differently. I hope US never goes metric because it is pointless and has zero cost benefit to anyone.

Lastly, what is a meter anyway ? Wikipedia "Originally intended to be one ten-millionth of the distance from the Earth's equator to the North Pole (at sea level), its definition has been periodically refined to reflect growing knowledge of metrology. Since 1983, it is defined as the length of the path travelled by light in vacuum in 1 ⁄ 299,792,458 of a second". Can I ask everyone why that makes any more sense than, lets say a foot or an inch?

Then there is the famous kilogram, which according to Wikipedia is "The kilogram (SI symbol: kg), also known as the kilo, is the base unit of mass in the and is defined as being almost exactly equal to the mass of one liter of water." What - not exactly? Just almost the same? What kind of nonsense is that? Of course it must make perfect sense that the kilogram is based on a liter right, because the liter is 1/1000 of a cubic meter and we all know how important it is to reference our daily life to the path travelled by light in vacuum in 1 ⁄ 299,792,458 of a second. Why not the path of light in vaccum in some metric-like base 10 period of time? Like, 1/1,000,000,000 second?

No, I'll stay with what I know, thank you, and continue to teach my kids and grandkids the same way I learned.

[Peter J Lee]

How are you going to explain what a mile or a pound is? Will you tell them about a thousand paces or 1,728 carob seeds?

[William Adams]

Curt Harms wrote:

>My pencil lead is not that fine . 23 mm would be perfectly adequate
>in most non-precision (think 0.0005" tolerance) applications I think.

Except 23 mm x 6 == 138 mm so the assemblage will be too large by 1 mm or more.

[Halgeir Wold]

Some hundreds of years ago, the foot, the inch, the pound, and what-ever-have-you, were different from country to country, and as international trade expanded, this was the direct cause of severe aggravation between people and countries. It was also a serious source of fraud in trade. The metric system emanated within the french science academy around 1800 or so, to end this confusion of size and value differences. The SI system of scientific measuring units is of a lot more modern origin. The base of 10s was introduced to ease transitions and coversions, as opposed to the odd-ball systems of 12s, 20s and so on, that was common to other measurements and values. Strangely enough, most of what you call "Imperial" measures, is and have been metric for a very long time, except for measuremenths of length. - just look around. Even if I grew up as something of a math geek, and is used ot metric, I fail to see how odd-ball and uneven divisons are easier than multiplying or dividing by 10s, - in practice mostly simply moving the decimal point, or comma here in Europe. We still have a lot of different units for different values, and this is probably how it is going to stay for many years to come, but once you start shifting measurement values across borders, it is surely immensly easier to use comon standards. It is my bet,that unless the political narcissists of this modern world manages to finish us all of in one blow, in 100 years or so, even the US will be "metricated"... it is slowly sneaking up upon you without most of you not noticing, and have been for quite a while...

BTW - Pat - your definition of the meter is all wrong.... 1 meter= 1 650 763.73 wavelengths of light from a Krypton atom, elevated to the energy transistion level of 2p10 and 5d5 ( in practice by heating the stuff, so that it radiates light ).....

I do hope at least some of you realises that to some extent I have been pulling your legs, although not without serious intent, as I do find discussions like this quite amusing, but I have already stated my sincere opinion on this matter - it is really all in our minds. Most of us find it not being a problem at all.......... and we are all free to do as we choose.

[Pat Barry]

See, you just can't trust what you read on Wikipedia. LOL

[Pat Barry]

Lets go to WIkipedia for the answer "The exact length of the land mile varied slightly among English-speaking countries until an international agreement in 1959 established the yard as exactly 0.9144 metres, giving a mile of exactly 1,609.344 metres." OMG - miles ARE metric.

[James Carmichael]

metric from a standard measuring system.

Metric is the standard.

I just wish the U.S. could go all the way, I'm sick of having to have two sets of wrenches & sockets to work on things, even the same machine.

[Jamie Schmitz]

I gave in. http://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=137+mm+%C3%B7+6

[Mike Delyster]

Metric is the standard.

I just wish the U.S. could go all the way, I'm sick of having to have two sets of wrenches & sockets to work on things, even the same machine.

In Canada they switched the road signs to metric in the seventies. In 2012 we still work with pipe, fittings and flanges that are made all over the world and they are all made to imperial measurement sizes. We only have one set of wrenches at work " standard measurement".
At home I've got both sets of tools as you need both. Canada isn't even close to being all the way.

[William Adams]

Jamie Schmitz wrote:

>I gave in. http://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=137+mm+%C3%B7+6

Weird that the precision is so low there. As I noted previously dividing a 137 mm wide object into sixths gives a typically irrational decimal value of 22.8335 (according to Macromedia FreeHand --- and multiplying that by 6 or enlarging 600% restores the original 137 mm, which it shouldn't since the correct value is the irrational 22.833333333333333333333333333333 (w/ a line over the final 3)).

FWIW, the 1 mm error of rounding up to 23 mm is 0.03937" --- quite a bit more than the 0.0005" tolerance Curt Harms noted.

[Pat Keefe]

Australia went metric in 1966, but I was born in 1971. So I am conversant with both metric and "imperial" ( & SAE/Whitworth). I prefer metric, but to annoy some of the older members of the wood club I translate imperial measurements to metric 1/4" 6.35 mm, 3/8mm 9.8mm and so on. I can buy my timber by the "board foot" or "lineal meter", sheet goods "8 x4" or 2400 x 1200 (real size 2420 x 1220). Funnily enough, all my surfboards are measured in Imperial, I see a metric measurement for a board and ask the shop assistant what?