Dear Brian, Whan I saw your note my first thought was:
Give 'em a millimetre and they'll take a kilometre. Seriously though, you reminded me of the conflict in the textile trade between the topmakers and the spinners. One lot chose newtons per decitex as a basic unit and the other lot chose kilonewtons per tex. Although, as you know, its only a matter of sliding decimal points back and forth. it effectively led to the demise of clear and open communication between the groups. If you want to see something of the mess in the textile trades � and the overwhelming need they have for the metric system see: http://www.swicofil.com/companyinfo/manualyarnnumbering.html The point that I want to make is that without an overall policy on the choice of units, then small sub-groups will choose their own units (or will create units) that are peculiar to themselves for local and social reasons. Using your examples, some will choose bar, some kg/cm2, some hectopascals, and yet others will choose the preferred unit, kilopascals (kPa). We both know that this will not become a big issue as long as the work remains within the work group, the company, the industry, or the nation. You only have problems when you meet with others at the borders of your defined space. Even then, you might say that it is only a matter of moving a decimal point or applying a conversion factor � which is true. But isn't this one of the main reasons that we are trying to get rid of old measuring methods in the first place. My experience is that metrication programs that contain a goal statement about which metric system they will use have a much better chance of being rapid and successful. Conversion programs that do not specify the units intended by the program will be doomed to painfully slow progress with constant internal and external conflict along the way. As an examle, you might consider these general purpose metrication goals: The science and engineering departments of this institution will use SI units exclusively from 2003-12-31. SI is defined as the units that are modelled on those contained in the Bureau International de Poids et Mesures (BIPM) document 'The International System of Units' in Tables 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, and 8; however, the prefixes hecto, deca, deci, and centi will not be used. Copies of 'The International System of Units' are freely available from www.bipm.fr. or Our manufacturing group will use metric units exclusively from 2003-12-31. Metric is defined as the units that are modelled on the units contained in Tables 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, and 6 in the Bureau International de Poids et Mesures (BIPM) document 'The International System of Units'; however, the prefixes hecto, deca, deci, and centi will not be used. Copies of 'The International System of Units' are freely available from www.bipm.fr. or 'The metric units for linear measurement in building and construction will be the metre (m) and the millimetre (mm), with the kilometre (km) being used where required. This will apply to all sectors of the industry, and the centimetre (cm) shall not be used.' and 'The centimetre should not be used in any calculation and it should never be written down'. This is the goal set by the Australian building industry that resulted in their famously rapid and smooth metrication program. Remember to set goals that are SMART (Specific, Measurable, Achievable, Realistic, and Timed). SMART goals are much more likely to achieve metrication smoothly and rapidly. Cheers, Pat Naughtin LCAMS Geelong, Australia Pat Naughtin is the editor of the free online newsletter, 'Metrication matters'. You can subscribe by sending an email containing the words subscribe Metrication matters to [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- on 2003-06-16 06.33, Brian J White at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > Bill points out with liters, why I prefer bar for pressures, especially in > the automotive context. Turbo boost, oil pressure, etc....bar is very nice. > kg/cm2 is ok.....but kPa is just nonsense for those kinds of > measurements. Fine though for tire pressures, although bar worked just > fine as well. > > At 12:49 2003-06-15 -0700, Bill Potts wrote: > >> Terry Simpson wrote: >>> There are no SI units mentioned on that list. I hope that you won't mind me >>> pointing out that the litre is not an SI unit. >> >> Although, in the strict sense, you're right, it's a distinction without >> much of a difference. >> >> As far as BIPM and the periodic CGPMs are concerned it's "a non-SI unit >> accepted for use with SI." >> >> As far as IEEE/ASTM SI 10 is concerned, it's a "Unit in use with SI." >> >> It's a synonym of an SI unit (cubic decimeter). (To avoid acrimonious >> acronymious arguments, note that I'm knowingly stretching the meaning of >> synonym, as it's more correct to say that a liter is defined as one cubic >> decimeter.) >> >> Even the most hard-line SI advocate is unlikely to start talking about >> milk, soft drinks, liquor, etc. in cubic decimeters, rather than liters. >> >> Even the most hard-line SI-advocating cook is not going to revert from >> milliliters to cubic centimeters for liquid measure. >> >> And so on. >> >> With respect to persuading others of the simplicity of the modern metric >> system (SI), I'm prepared to lie a little about "liter," rather than >> confusing the issue. >> >> Bill Potts, CMS >> Roseville, CA >> <http://metric1.org>http://metric1.org [SI Navigator] >
