Just ordered a new math tool

Gene Howe · Post by **Gene Howe** » Sat Sep 29, 2012 1:44 pm

Plans????
Don't use no steeenkin' plans.

Actually, those sorts of conversions I can do in my head.

JPG · Post by **JPG** » Sat Sep 29, 2012 2:08 pm

[quote="Gene Howe"]Plans????
Don't use no steeenkin' plans.]

Ahhhh Soooo!;)

dusty · Post by **dusty** » Sat Sep 29, 2012 2:40 pm

[quote="JPG40504"]Ahhhh Soooo!]

I don't think that's French.

JPG · Post by **JPG** » Sat Sep 29, 2012 2:43 pm

dusty wrote:I don't think that's French.

Neither is 'steeenkin'!:D Must be a desert rat word.

Gene Howe · Post by **Gene Howe** » Sat Sep 29, 2012 4:20 pm

HIGH (as in elevation;)) desert rat word!

charlese · Post by **charlese** » Sat Sep 29, 2012 7:37 pm

dlbristol wrote:Doug, and Gene, Wow, music to my ears! I was part of that conversion mess! You are exactly right about why " metrification" failed. I think it goes even deeper than the conversions however, People do not really understand the English system, but they do know the relative size of units and they have an understanding of how far a mile is , how long a foot is and how much a quart is. When comparison is the only use, and precision is not an issue, almost any " system" works. A story stick, offers accuracy, and shows the " system" to be irrelevant. Kids, if taught the relative size of metric units, the prefix, suffix naming system and the fact that fractions pretty much went away, ( great motivator ) soon refused to do any calculations in the english system. Adults however were a different story. They often think the units and system are the basis for the reality!
I had a lady in a class I taught who one evening told me she as no longer going to support the metric system and would not be back to class. I asked why and she said because " she would have to move her house" if we went metric. She had measured 1 Kilometer from the intersection of a main road to her house and apparently assumed that metrics would require the grid system based on miles to be changed to KM! I used to teach kids how the metric system worked by " inventing" a metric ( base 10) clock. As soon as they realized how it worked, they wanted that change as well. You can read the time directly, with out any multiplication by 5. Adults fought it, thinking they would have to get up earlier, or the earth would have to spin slower. I might try the ruler!

Not only the lady in your class, but most if not all forestry organizations, land surveyors, land owners, etc.
The entire Western U.S. was surveyed by a system that layed out Principle meridians in each state and Township and Range locations from the 0 crossing of the principle meridians. Each Township (North or South) from the Baseline was layed out to be 6 mile from the baseline. Each range (East or West) was layed out 6 miles East or West. (Example; T21N, R35E is 21 miles north of the baseline and 35 miles east of the principle meridian)
Townships were divided into 36 Sections, each being 1 mile square. The only variation is because of the curvature of the earth. Each "Section" is divided into half Sections (320 acre), quarter Sections (160 acre) and 40s. There are 4ea. 40 acre parcels in each quarter section. The 40s are broken down into lots as needed for particular ownerships.

Sections are 1 mile square, usually measured in "chains" . A mile is 80 chains. A cool thing is that square chains divided by 10 gives the number of acres.

No one could imagine trying to convert this system to feet and 10ths of feet, let alone convert to metric. How many hectares are there in a quarter section.

The only way to convert would be to re-survey the entire nation, converting each line to metric then computing the number of hectares. The metes and bounds surveys in the Eastern part of the nation would be a particularly interesting challenge.

reible · Post by **reible** » Sat Sep 29, 2012 9:13 pm

I guess I got lucky, my brain has no problem working with fractions. Perhaps I've just done it so much that it became second nature?

I've also worked with metric measurements, in fact during my working years we were required to do all new designs in metric, old designs were left in imperial but with secondary metric dimensions. These looked really odd due to the conversions needed.

The company did this so things could be manufactured off-shore and to be compliant with overseas requirements.

I too have different scales with different divisions, and of course there are scales with scales for those that need that sort of thing.

For those of you who use sketch-up, what do you have as your default dimension settings? For woodworking I stay in fractional.

Ed

dusty · Post by **dusty** » Sun Sep 30, 2012 7:22 am

reible wrote:I guess I got lucky, my brain has no problem working with fractions. Perhaps I've just done it so much that it became second nature?

I've also worked with metric measurements, in fact during my working years we were required to do all new designs in metric, old designs were left in imperial but with secondary metric dimensions. These looked really odd due to the conversions needed.

The company did this so things could be manufactured off-shore and to be compliant with overseas requirements.

I too have different scales with different divisions, and of course there are scales with scales for those that need that sort of thing.

For those of you who use sketch-up, what do you have as your default dimension settings? For woodworking I stay in fractional.

Ed

I have spent a lot of time going back and forth from imperial to metric. I was raised on imperial and forced to go metric while working for a defense contractor who used metric almost exclusively. Maybe because I was forced to metric I prefer imperial.

Now with my digital gauges I have a choice of decimal, metric or fractions]Side Bar: I had a folding rule that often got me into trouble when I used it. I have since put it away. After having it for quite some time, I was informed that it was scaled for masonry work.[/SIZE]