When it comes to insulation temperature rating, why do we use celsius?

Seven-Delta-FortyOne said:
Because the NFPA likes to be obtuse, and come across as elitist.
Click to expand...
You dont think it has anything to do with the manufacturers and the materials they use? Maybe it comes from IEEE or ANSI.
Celsius has been used for electrical equipment, like insulation and breakers, since it was called Centigrade.
 
jim dungar said:
You dont think it has anything to do with the manufacturers and the materials they use? Maybe it comes from IEEE or ANSI.
Celsius has been used for electrical equipment, like insulation and breakers, since it was called Centigrade.
Click to expand...


Your explanation is likely more accurate, but I’ll still take the opportunity to tee off on the NFPA if it presents itself. 😂
 
I don't remember a single one of my chemistry, physics, or EE/ME/CE classes being conducted in anything other than metric. Drafting was done in both just so we'd learn how to communicate fractions to the CAD package we were being "Intro to Drafting' with.
 
ModbusMan said:
I don't remember a single one of my chemistry, physics, or EE/ME/CE classes being conducted in anything other than metric. Drafting was done in both just so we'd learn how to communicate fractions to the CAD package we were being "Intro to Drafting' with.
Click to expand...
Same here. It's frustrating to have to use Imperial units in AutoCAD when I have to divide up a rooftop measurement into five equal segments and the length is something like 147' 9-7/16" and express the result in Imperial units. I can do it but I am grinding my teeth the whole time. Engineers and architects are at loggerheads. :D
 
Why not call it 148' and be close enough? Or call it 150, divide by 5, and fudge the segments a little shorter? (Measure with a micrometer, mark with chalk, etc)

IMHO an huge problem people have with conversions is insisting on exact numbers where that precision doesn't matter -- 5 meter cable is really just shy of 16' 5", but calling it 16' is close enough unless you're trying to measure something with it (which you shouldn't, don't you have a tape measure?).
 
ggunn said:
Engineers and architects are at loggerheads. :D
Click to expand...
I wouldn't be too surprised if the archs wouldn't mind switching themselves were it not for the fact that all our structural members are done in imperial (not that a 2x4 is actually two inches by four inches post-milling anyway), and asking for a 3m x 4m bedroom just doesn't feel as big as 10ft x 12ft.
 
The reality is that it really doesn't matter what system what is done in, as long as it is consistent. The argument that metric is more accurate is bull because you can have a fraction of an inch just as easily as you can a millimeter. And then people say things like, "Yeah, but with metric I can easily tell you how many millimeters are in a kilometer without a calculator!" Sure, but why would you need to? Anyone needing to know how many cubic barleycorns are in a gallon on a regular basis will likely know the conversion factor, just like you remember the conversion factor between millimeters and kilometers.

People just want to argue about something because they have no real problems in life.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top