Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

When the Inch turned.

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #31
    Hi
    Guys you forgot some thing: “ it is not ‘ X miles per gal.’ it is X Liter per 100 km.’
    h12721

    Comment


    • #32
      Originally posted by h12721 View Post
      Hi
      Guys you forgot some thing: “ it is not ‘ X miles per gal.’ it is X Liter per 100 km.’
      h12721
      Just another elitist way to change things around!

      It would work as well to say km per liter, and probably make more sense, but because folks in the US would do that, it HAS to be expressed the other way, because folks in the US are, well, just WRONG, and of course nothing can be done the way THEY would do it. That's what happens when you get snobbish geeks in charge. The kind of folks who argue for hours about the technique of pouring wine, grinding beans and brewing coffee, or the technically "proper" way to do anything, really.
      CNC machines only go through the motions

      Comment


      • #33
        Originally posted by J Tiers View Post
        Just another elitist way to change things around!

        It would work as well to say km per liter, and probably make more sense, but because folks in the US would do that, it HAS to be expressed the other way, because folks in the US are, well, just WRONG, and of course nothing can be done the way THEY would do it. That's what happens when you get snobbish geeks in charge. The kind of folks who argue for hours about the technique of pouring wine, grinding beans and brewing coffee, or the technically "proper" way to do anything, really.
        ???? The way fuel consumption is stated is tied to how some mysterious panel of snobs out to get you and something to do with how they grind their coffee?
        Last edited by Mcgyver; 05-10-2017, 08:07 AM.
        in Toronto Ontario - where are you?

        Comment


        • #34
          Originally posted by wombat2go View Post
          ...
          The targets had crystal clocks controlling the exposure clutches, deliberately not adjustable.
          The clutches were wrap spring clutches which were not adjustable, neither were the induction motors that drove the clutches.
          Every morning a procession of about 8 "officials" would arrive with their manually operated approved clockwork stop watches,
          and I would have to run each target through its sequence, to get the timing approved for the day.
          They stood in front of the targets and thumbed their stop watches.

          The first day there was a big argument.
          Not only were all the official measurements different, but they ganged up on me and said the targets were no good....

          "A man who has one clock always knows what time it is,
          A man who has two clocks never knows what time it is"
          - Ancient Vulcan Proverb

          Comment


          • #36
            lol
            in Toronto Ontario - where are you?

            Comment


            • #37
              Hi this is from the European Union
              Can I poke in a couple of Paragraphs from Niel Wyatt published in Model Engineers Workshop a couple of years back

              http://www.model-engineer.co.uk/foru...?th=105618&p=1

              Non-subscribers to MEW may have missed the note on the latest directive, 104/2015, from Brussels, one that could have a direct impact on our hobby. In a bid to finally lay to rest the problems converting between imperial and metric units, from 2019 we will instead be using the metric inch or ‘metrinch’. This is exactly 25.6mm long, a figure chosen so that fractions of an inch are nice round metric sizes – five sixteenths of an inch will now be exactly 8mm instead of 7.9375mm, for example. I imagine there will be a grace period, and probably some confusion, while traditional inch measuring kit and materials are phased out in favour of the new metrinch standard, which will be about 2% larger.


              OK, I know some of you aren't taking this seriously, and I can see why, but I have found some more details and it starts to make sense.

              It;'s all about rationalising the supply of non-precision sized materials in fractional sizes. So 1" PGMS or Silver steel will still be 1.000" and 25.4mm (within whatever tolerance you want to pay for)

              The tolerance bands will be shifted for fractional sizes of things like BDMS, aluminium extrusions and so on (ref. the recent discussion on how big the tolerance bands are fro drawn alloy tubes). In these cases the 'metrinch' will be used (i.e. 25.6mm rather than 25.4mm) and the 'official size' of fractional stock will be 1.0078% larger.

              This means all fractional stock down to 1/256 of an inch (in practice little is produced below 1/32" steps) will translate to exact sizes to 0.1 of a mm. These sizes are already within existing tolerance bands for nearly all products affected. For example a 3/8" bar will 'officially' be exactly 9.60mm rather than 9.525.

              This will greatly simplify the design process for any projects using mixed imperial and metric stock (i.e. you can specify standard metric size tooling (available in 0.1mm steps) for any task using non-precision imperial stock.

              The rumour is that this is actually Brussels running up the white flag and accepting that the imperial system is here to stay and that, in some parts of industry (those dealing with the USA, at least) some aspects of metrication may be rolled back.

              In practice, it will have little more impact than the fact that number drills are now actually made to metric, not imperial, dimensions.


              I have no connection to MEW other than an avid reader

              Eric

              Comment


              • #38
                Originally posted by velocette View Post
                Hi this is from the European Union
                Can I poke in a couple of Paragraphs from Niel Wyatt published in Model Engineers Workshop a couple of years back

                http://www.model-engineer.co.uk/foru...?th=105618&p=1

                Non-subscribers to MEW may have missed the note on the latest directive, 104/2015, from Brussels, one that could have a direct impact on our hobby. In a
                Please note that 1-04-2015 is April fools day.
                At the end of the project, there is a profound difference between spare parts and left over parts.

                Location: SF East Bay.

                Comment


                • #39
                  Some might be Interested in knowing that from 2018 on, the kilogram will no longer be defined from a platnium cylinder. There are 41 of these cylinders across the world, one master and 40 siblings, all which weigh slightly different amounts.

                  Off topic, but while we're on the subject...

                  Sent from my XT1053 using Tapatalk

                  Comment


                  • #40
                    Originally posted by Andre3127 View Post
                    Some might be Interested in knowing that from 2018 on, the kilogram will no longer be defined from a platnium cylinder. There are 41 of these cylinders across the world, one master and 40 siblings, all which weigh slightly different amounts.

                    Off topic, but while we're on the subject...

                    Sent from my XT1053 using Tapatalk
                    Not only kilogram but many others also:
                    https://www.ptb.de/cms/fileadmin/int..._of_the_SI.pdf
                    Location: Helsinki, Finland, Europe

                    Comment


                    • #41
                      Originally posted by J Tiers View Post
                      Just another elitist way to change things around!

                      It would work as well to say km per liter, and probably make more sense, but because folks in the US would do that, it HAS to be expressed the other way, because folks in the US are, well, just WRONG, and of course nothing can be done the way THEY would do it. That's what happens when you get snobbish geeks in charge. The kind of folks who argue for hours about the technique of pouring wine, grinding beans and brewing coffee, or the technically "proper" way to do anything, really.

                      Well yeabut...litres per 100kms is a measure of fuel consumption (i.e. the measure of fuel consumed per distance) whereas kilometres per litre would be a measure of distance travelled (i.e. measure of distance travelled per fuel consumed).

                      Comment


                      • #42
                        Originally posted by fjk View Post
                        "A man who has one clock always knows what time it is,
                        A man who has two clocks never knows what time it is"
                        - Ancient Vulcan Proverb
                        In my working life, "never knows what time it is to better than 7 nanoseconds"...

                        Dave H. (the other one)
                        Rules are for the obedience of fools, and the guidance of wise men.

                        Holbrook Model C Number 13 lathe, Testa 2U universal mill, bikes and tools

                        Comment


                        • #43
                          Originally posted by Paul Alciatore View Post
                          ...the length of the meter was originally defined as 1/10,000,000 of the distance from the North Pole to the equator. Talk about an awkward standard. It has also been adjusted over the years...
                          An awkward standard indeed. This put me in mind of a fact related to me some time ago by my son-in-law, an environmental engineer. Seems that the planet is still exhibiting the effects of the last glacial period 12,000 years ago, specifically the portions of the crust weighed down the massive glacial ice sheets were crushed down and the areas at the perimeter of the ice fields was extruded up. That was then, but with the subsidence of the ice, the land masses have been returning to "normal" even to the present day.

                          See here:https://www.unavco.org/highlights/20...l_rebound.html

                          This has ongoing ramifications when attempting to rely on geological features when establishing measurement standards.

                          At the risk of derailing this thread, I wonder if the glacial rebound factor has been considered in the climate change debate when projecting sea level changes and assigning causes and blame, particularly on the northeast coast of the United States, where actual measurements document "sea level rise". Or is it subsidence of the land mass?
                          Weston Bye - Author, The Mechatronist column, Digital Machinist magazine
                          ~Practitioner of the Electromechanical Arts~

                          Comment


                          • #44
                            Originally posted by Weston Bye View Post
                            An awkward standard indeed. This put me in mind of a fact related to me some time ago by my son-in-law, an environmental engineer. Seems that the planet is still exhibiting the effects of the last glacial period 12,000 years ago, specifically the portions of the crust weighed down the massive glacial ice sheets were crushed down and the areas at the perimeter of the ice fields was extruded up. That was then, but with the subsidence of the ice, the land masses have been returning to "normal" even to the present day.

                            See here:https://www.unavco.org/highlights/20...l_rebound.html

                            This has ongoing ramifications when attempting to rely on geological features when establishing measurement standards.
                            Yes, originally defined as such and nowadays has no relation to the geological features. It isnow defined as the distance light will travel in a vacuum in 1/299792458 second.

                            And the mass is also being redefined to a different base standard,don't know when it is ready or in use.
                            Amount of experience is in direct proportion to the value of broken equipment.

                            Comment


                            • #45
                              This whole thread is very similar to Bishops arguing over how many angels can dance on the head of a pin. As far as I can ascertain, none of the changes that have ever supposedly occured in any measurement system has ever made any difference at the practical level, no one has thrown away measuring equipment because it was no longer standard The 1kg platinum cylinders lose atomic mass at a very gradual rate, and so may have to be replaced because they no longer weigh 1Kg, not because the weight of the kg is changing. The Inch was standardised hundreds of years ago, and the original "standards are still stored in London. When the British first went to America, copies of the standards went with them, thus standardising measurement in the new world. Unfortunately the US became independant before the reform act of 1820, and so kept all the old British standard weights and measurements Whilst the uk moved on to a rigidly standardised system. Like most of what comes from Brussels, we have had several instances of EU weights and measures nonsense, which has been enforced all over Europe in a failed attempt to "standardise". In the electrical field, we have now had two complete changes of cable identification colours, in order to "Harmonise" colours . Why this happened is anyones guess, as anyone from the UK who has travelled anywhere in Europe will tell you what a far superior system the UK has since the introduction of the BS1363 13amp plug and socket . The biggest "harmonisation" turkey was harmonisation of voltage throughout Europe. The nominal voltage in the UK is 240V, the nominal voltage in Europe is 230V, hence appliances are labelled "230/240V" It was proposed that, although there was to be no actual change to the UK voltage (for obvious reasons! see Ohms law) From a certain harmonisation date we would all in the Electrical industry, refer to UK mains voltage as "230V" They say that the air movement caused by massed middle digits raised towards Brussels caused a twister in Oklahoma...........Thank god for Brexit!!
                              Man who say it cannot be done should not disturb man doing it! https://www.youtube.com/user/philhermetic/videos?

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X