---------- Forwarded message ----------
Date: Fri, 23 Mar 2001 16:16:41 -0600 (CST)
From: Gene Mechtly <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: Dennis H. Ross <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Policy on SI
Dear Mr. Ross:
The three policy alternatives on SI, now under consideration
by the Engineering & Technology Committee of the American Public Works
Association, have been brought to my attention.
My first professional contribution in support of SI was authorship
of "The International System of Units, Physical Constants and Conversion
Factors, published in 1964 by the National Aeronautics and Space
Administration as Special Publication 7012. SP-7012 was published to
improve technical communications within NASA and with NASA contractors
by reducing the incoherent babble of mixed units of measurement.
Unfortunately, to this day, not all of NASA's aerospace
contractors have complied with NASA specifications of SI units.
One costly result was the recent loss of the Mars Climate Orbiter.
Recommendations by the NASA Inspector General (posted at www.hq.nasa.gov)
advocate SI to correct such miscommunications of technical data.
More down to earth, and as noted in the APWA Discussion
Paper of August 21, many large contracts for *highway* construction
now require specifications in SI. An important addition to the APWA list
of transitions to SI is the fact that almost all contracts for federal
*building* construction now also require SI.
Clearly, Policy Alternative #1, *Advocate Metrication* is the best
course of action for the APWA.
Incidentally, the most recent documentation on SI is published
in the Federal Register of 1998 (July 28), "Metric System of Measurement:
Interpretation of the International System of Units for the United States;
Notice", pp. 40333-40340. Both gpo.gov and nist.gov post this Notice.
Sincerely,
Eugene A. Mechtly, College of Engineering
University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign
