Units of measurement

Status
Not open for further replies.
RichB

RichB

Senior Member
Location
Tacoma, Wa
Occupation
Electrician/Electrical Inspector
junkhound said:
Most US engineers are bi-dimensional, I even think in metric in other than mechanical construction.

Perhaps we should all go back to Megalithic yards.

Wonder what electrical units would look like in Megalithic terms ? Other than any precursors of Bagdad battery, no archeological artifacts though
Click to expand...

Is that like being "bi-sackual" at the store?? Paper or plastic ?:roll::?:angel:
 
kwired

kwired

Electron manager
Location
NE Nebraska
drcampbell said:
I'm pretty sure the French horsepower is the metric horsepower, 75 kilogram-meters per second.
(which is actually a measure of impulse, not power, because the kilogram isn't a measure of force)

I'm also pretty sure the French don't use it any more.
Click to expand...

My question is why 75 and not 100?

Newton is a unit of force that could be used instead of a unit of mass.
 
W

winnie

Senior Member
Location
Springfield, MA, USA
Occupation
Electric motor research
kwired said:
My question is why 75 and not 100?

Newton is a unit of force that could be used instead of a unit of mass.
Click to expand...

75 because it was a round number which gave a result that was close to the 'imperial' unit.

In a 1 g field, lifting 75 kg 1 m per s is about 736W.

Sort of like 500g being used as a 'pound' in areas where metric is used but there is a tradition of using pounds.

-Jon
 
A

Adamjamma

Senior Member
Location
Jamaica and london
winnie said:
75 because it was a round number which gave a result that was close to the 'imperial' unit.

In a 1 g field, lifting 75 kg 1 m per s is about 736W.

Sort of like 500g being used as a 'pound' in areas where metric is used but there is a tradition of using pounds.

-Jon
Click to expand...
I thought a pound of beef at Asda was 400 grams..they are shorting me? Hmmmm
 
P

Phil Corso

Senior Member
Location
Boca Raton, Fl, USA
For those of you who don't know...

We, the USA, signed the world treaty to accept and use the International System of Units (SI) in 1866! Now, why do you think it's use here, is spotty at best!

Phil Corso
 
A

Adamjamma

Senior Member
Location
Jamaica and london
Phil Corso said:
For those of you who don't know...

We, the USA, signed the world treaty to accept and use the International System of Units (SI) in 1866! Now, why do you think it's use here, is spotty at best!

Phil Corso
Click to expand...
But we do use many items from international treaties without realizing it. So many of the symbols we use in electronics are international symbols. Most of our road signs are using international symbols, so much so that I keep wondering will I return to the USA and see the round speed limit signs on the posts...lol... even the stop lines I got used to in many states are used in the UK and Europe.
 
S

Strathead

Senior Member
Location
Ocala, Florida, USA
Occupation
Electrician/Estimator/Project Manager/Superintendent
tom baker said:
One advantage of legal marijuana is having to know the metric system...
I agree metric units are much easier to work with, where I work all our lab work is metric, as most places are.
But with metric its all or nothing, which is why our previous attempts in the US have failed.
Click to expand...

That is funny I don't care who you are! I must admit that for dry weight that is why I have a full grasp of grams.
 
S

Strathead

Senior Member
Location
Ocala, Florida, USA
Occupation
Electrician/Estimator/Project Manager/Superintendent
Besoeker said:
English Oxford Dictionary.
Click to expand...


Technically though, aren't all the units from that system interrelated? One gram of water is equal to 1 cubic centimeter of water? Really it doesn't matter what we call it, I am with you. I would gladly convert to SI across the board. It would be difficult at first, but the payoff is huge.
 
drcampbell

drcampbell

Senior Member
Location
The Motor City, Michigan USA
Occupation
Registered Professional Engineer
They're all interrelated, but not the way you seem to think.

The old metric system (c.1700s) was based on the boiling & freezing points and density of water, the distance from the equator to the North Pole, and so forth. But that's long obsolete.

In the centuries since then, we've discovered that the water's characteristics aren't constant - density varies with temperature and boiling & freezing points vary with pressure. So it became necessary to redefine the fundamental units in order to be able to make precise measurements that are the same everywhere. The meter was redefined in terms of wavelengths of cesium light, the kilogram was defined in terms of a pure silicon sphere and so forth. Those harmonizations & redefinitions mark the transition from the old metric system to the current SI system.
 
C

Carultch

Senior Member
Location
Massachusetts
drcampbell said:
They're all interrelated, but not the way you seem to think.

The old metric system (c.1700s) was based on the boiling & freezing points and density of water, the distance from the equator to the North Pole, and so forth. But that's long obsolete.

In the centuries since then, we've discovered that the water's characteristics aren't constant - density varies with temperature and boiling & freezing points vary with pressure. So it became necessary to redefine the fundamental units in order to be able to make precise measurements that are the same everywhere. The meter was redefined in terms of wavelengths of cesium light, the kilogram was defined in terms of a pure silicon sphere and so forth. Those harmonizations & redefinitions mark the transition from the old metric system to the current SI system.
Click to expand...

The kilogram is still defined by the international prototype platinum-iridium cylinder known as "Le Grande K". The silicon sphere from the Avogadro project is one of the two proposed alternatives that could redefine it. The other alternative is fixing Planck's constant as it relates to an experiment known as the Kibble balance, and this is the solution that is most likely going to define the new kilogram. It has to do with whether the uncertainty of the new method is an improvement over the existing uncertainty in Le Grande K, as we know from comparing it to the sister kilograms stored in similar conditions.

The fundamental advantage of the new methods, is that its definition would be independent of any individual object in particular. Just as the international prototype meter stick was replaced with the speed of light in free space and the definition of the second in the Cesium atomic clock.
 
Besoeker

Besoeker

Senior Member
Location
UK
Strathead said:
Technically though, aren't all the units from that system interrelated? One gram of water is equal to 1 cubic centimeter of water?
Click to expand...
Yes, in the CGS system.

Strathead said:
Really it doesn't matter what we call it, I am with you. I would gladly convert to SI across the board. It would be difficult at first, but the payoff is huge.
Click to expand...
Some units you already use are SI. There is, for example, there is no Imperial equivalent of the Amp or Volt.
For others like the pound and the inch, there are readily available conversion tools if you don't remember the factors. It isn't really very difficult.

One of the obstacles to changing the systems used in the US is cost I suppose. You have say, a motor with a 2" drive shaft. To accommodate that, you need bearings that fit which won't be in SI units. That's true for old equipment here (UK) and I've often come across motors that were built in the 1950s and still in service.
 
W

winnie

Senior Member
Location
Springfield, MA, USA
Occupation
Electric motor research
The US currently uses SI as the actual basis of its system of measure, so that any changes in the definition of the meter are reflected as a change in the definition of the inch.

The inch is _defined_ as 2.54cm, _exactly_.

-Jon
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top