I don't know. Stan and I have both written complaint letters. Since we did not receive the courtesy of a reply, I have no clue what they are thinking. It was not the deciding factor, but it was a factor. I dropped my membership a few years ago. Their magazine (AEI, considers itself "above" the metric policy which prevails in their conferences. I don't know why.
--- On Sat, 2/5/11, Kilopascal <[email protected]> wrote: From: Kilopascal <[email protected]> Subject: Re: [USMA:49658] auto manufacturing in SI To: "U.S. Metric Association" <[email protected]> Date: Saturday, February 5, 2011, 3:06 PM John Steele, Any idea as to why Automotive Engineering, SAE and any other auto publication uses dual? As I mentioned, if the industry is fully metric and everyone is thinking only in metric, or should be, then why is there a need for dual? What purpose does it serve? From: Kilopascal Sent: Wednesday, 2011-02-02 23:02 To: U.S. Metric Association Subject: Re: [USMA:49658] auto manufacturing in SI I'm surprised that they would even use dual. Why not SI only? If the industry is metric, then what purpose does dual serve? You know that if only SI is there, then a greater understanding and intuitiveness will develop. But, dual has the opposite effect. It allows those who should know SI, but don't to rely on the USC and ignore the SI. Then that person is required to think in SI when using the CAD system as USC is locked out and to deal with vendors in units they don't know well. Their designs have to be flawed to some degree. No wonder American cars have a bad reputation. What other magazines or publications did you encounter and what was their status? Papers presented at conferences should be SI 100 %, not just primarily and there should never be a need for dual. Dual is a failure of the industry to completely metricate. From: John M. Steele Sent: Wednesday, 2011-02-02 22:30 To: Kilopascal Subject: Re: [USMA:49658] auto manufacturing in SI Automotive Eng. has been a mix of dual and SI for a long time. Papers (presented at conferences) are primarily SI, and if they have dual, SI is first. --- On Wed, 2/2/11, Kilopascal <[email protected]> wrote: From: Kilopascal <[email protected]> Subject: Re: [USMA:49658] auto manufacturing in SI To: "U.S. Metric Association" <[email protected]> Date: Wednesday, February 2, 2011, 9:56 PM Was SAE always dual (since metrication) or did the addition of USC come later? I think the use of dual comes from pressure from those who are not comfortable with SI, which I would say is all of the domestic new blood who has replaced people like you when you and others retired. You and your colleagues would understandably feel more positive towards metrication since you went through the process from the beginning. The new engineers never did this and have no intuition for SI even if they have some exposure in school. That is my opinion. I'm still curious about the trade magazines you received when working. Were they SI only, dual or other? The Jan/Feb 2011 issue is volume 123 No. 1, which tells me it has been around for 123 years, if that is possible. From: John M. Steele Sent: Wednesday, 2011-02-02 20:54 To: Kilopascal Subject: Re: [USMA:49658] auto manufacturing in SI Good question. I've never seen this magazine, and I'm not sure who is intended for. If you get a chance, look at a copy of SAE Automotive Engineering. Everything will be SI-only or dual. To be honest, there is a LOT of dual, but none (or little) USC only. Given SAE's metric policy, I am surprised there is as much dual as there is, and uncertain who it is for. --- On Wed, 2/2/11, Kilopascal <[email protected]> wrote: From: Kilopascal <[email protected]> Subject: [USMA:49658] auto manufacturing in SI To: "U.S. Metric Association" <[email protected]> Date: Wednesday, February 2, 2011, 8:29 PM One way to know for sure if the automobile industry is truly metric on the inside would be to get a hold of literature in the form of magazines or trade journals written by automotive engineers for automotive engineers. I happened to come across one and was shocked to see the almost lack of SI. The magazine I'm referring to is AUTOMOTIVE DESIGN and PRODUCTION. Anyone can view their publication (published out every two months) online at: http://www.autofieldguide.com/ I actually have a hard copy of the January/February 2011 issue. When I scanned through it I found most articles were USC with some USC (SI) peppered in now and then, but no SI only, which is what I would expect from a industry that supposedly operates in SI only. If you look at the webpage and select "Latest Issue" under "The Magazine", you will see the same articles that are in the hard copy. I found the article: "Audi Addresses Electromobility" of particular interest. The article was basically USC, except for these two lines: The peak output of the R8 e-tron is 313 hp (a.k.a., 230 kW); it produces 3,319 lb-ft of torque (a.k.a., 4,500 Nm). And its 0 to 62.14 mph (a.k.a., 100 km/h) time is 4.8 seconds. I found it very strange that the specs for a German engineered car that were obviously SI were not only in the secondary position, but that the were labeled as a.k.a.. It is almost as if the author was using this to mock the metric system. At least he didn't try to put the USC data in round numbers and the metric appear as nonsense. I wonder if John Steele has an explanation for this. From experience John, is this how the trade publication were when you were there, or is this a new trend? If the American auto engineers are suppose to be able to function in SI, then why are these publications using USC instead of SI? I can see where this can bring harm simply by not giving the engineer the opportunity to think only in SI, but to muddy the waters with USC and increase the chance of errors. I know John that when you worked in the industry they had rigid rules to assure that USC was kept out. But I'm sure that much of that has been relaxed since you (and your colleagues) have left and even if the drawings and the parts are in SI, the engineers not accustom to SI outside the company will do their thinking in USC and want to read, write and converse in USC, not SI. They will use SI where they are forced to, but where they can be free not to, they will forget metric. [USMA:49658] auto manufacturing in SI Robert H. Bushnell Fri, 28 Jan 2011 14:35:23 -0800 2011 Jan 28 It has been said on this web site that automobile manufacturing changed away from inch-pound units many years ago. On Saturday Jan 22 the Denver Electric Vehicle Council visited Boulder Electric Vehicle Inc. to see their electric Delivery Van. Their specification is all inch-pound. They have no SI spec. They work in inches and thousandths of inches. www.boulderev.com They make one a day. They are setting up to make 20 a day. They make the truck after the order is placed. They offer many models including a 15 passenger bus. The US Army is trying to get in line. They are mostly an assembly operation. They buy motors (80 kW), lights, steering parts, wheels, seats, everything. How can they do this if the auto industry is all SI? It looks to me like they have a good market in that users can work in a local market so they will not need a combustion engine. The range is 120 miles on one charge. This is plenty for plumbers, delivery and service people. Robert H. Bushnell No virus found in this message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com Version: 10.0.1204 / Virus Database: 1435/3419 - Release Date: 02/02/11 No virus found in this message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com Version: 10.0.1204 / Virus Database: 1435/3419 - Release Date: 02/02/11
