ECN Forum Forums General Topics of the Trade Non-US Electrical Systems & Trades AWG to MWG?

John, I don't disagree with you on the need for the US to harmonize with the rest of the world. However, what is the point of adopting metric equivalent sizes for AWG here in the US?

Obviously, I agree with Paul.

If you're not planning on actually changing the physical size of the conductors, why introduce another system at all? I don't quite see what you're getting at.

If the problem is just that non-U.S. countries might not understand AWG, why not just print the metric equivalent alongside, e.g. 14 AWG (2.08 sq. mm) ???

The whole concept of adopting a common name for wire sizes is for ease of comparisons. With globalisation a reality and machines and products from one country being sold in another, one can not always assume the wiring will match what is used in the home market.

With a common naming standard applied to all wire, no matter where it is used or sold makes it easier and safer to replace or work with wire from different sources.

If a machine has 2.5 mm² installed and at some point needs to be replaced, with what would an American electrician replace it with? Without a chart to guide him or if he misreads the chart, the electrician can make a serious mistake which could cause sever injury or death. If American products are sold outside the US, and American wire sizes are used, a foreign electrician would have the same problem as the American with foreign wire.

As I stated earlier, it is all a matter of safety and economy.

John, I agree with you to a point. An American-made machine for export should be wired with metric sized wire.

However, I can't see the point in calling #12 AWG "3.3 mm2" just for the sake of harmonization.

.

The problem with keeping the AWG number is that the metric number won't be learned at all. Putting the 2 side by side, if done, must be done for a a very short time.

Changing the naming method is the first step towards harmonisation. Then organisations, like the IEC can play an active role in harmonising the sizes, and/or enforcing one standard.




[This message has been edited by JohnS (edited 08-02-2003).]

I still don't see the problem. Assuming you're keeping the wire sizes the same, an American electrician working in the U.S.A. will continue to call it #14 and that's all he needs to know.

If he has to compare sizes with some imported equipment, then he can look at the cable reel and see that it's 2.08 sq. mm.

I don't think dropping the AWG designations would be very popular. We've experienced a similar situation in Britain where items were first dual-marked -- e.g. 1 lb (454g) --and then the English units were dropped altogether leaving just metric. Then the metric pack sizes were adjusted to make the figures more round, e.g. 450g, or 425g.

Most people here were happy to accept dual-marking, but have been most unhappy at the forced withdrawal of English units.

At the present time, no American wire is dual marked, not even the reel. The first step in conversion would be to require that all wire products carry a square millimetre designation, either as the primay or secondary unit as an aid in getting use to the new numbers.

During this time, the standards bodies can test true metric wire to see if it can safely replace the US standard and if it can, the US sizes can be eliminated. When the International sizes are accepted, then the need to include AWG numbers can be dropped. If an electrician wants to call it by its old name, fine, but by the same token he would be required to know exactly what he was using if the wire contained no old names. We can't hold back because some luddites don't want to move forward.


No change is ever popular. So, worrying about what people think during a transition period is useless. Your sister countries learned that the shorter the transition period, the quicker people will adapt to the new ways. Of course you have to put up with a few weeks of grumbling. So what. Let the people grumble. They eventually get used to it and move on to something else to grumble about.

Britain's problem with metrication is really a problem of arrogance. We were a mighty kingdom. The sun never set on our empire. We pushed our ways on every culture world-wide. Blah. Blah. Blah. And now someone else is telling us what to do. We can't accept this. Metrication is just another nail in the dead empire's coffin.

The truth is the British will learn to buy in grams and kilograms and I'm sure many already have. In the same notion, the US electrician will adapt to international wire sizes. It is just a matter of making sure the transition period is as short as possible.

It may be true that people get used to grams and kilograms on packets, but that's only because they've been left with no choice on those items where English units have been completed removed. But most people I know don't think in metric units. They see 450g on a packet and say, "Ah, that's almost a pound," or they see a 1kg bag of sugar and think "A little over 2 lb."

Your profile says you're in Ohio, but I assume from the way you're talking about "our empire" that you're from Britain originally.

The problem most people have with metrication these days is not arrogance but the dictatorial way that it is being forced upon us against the wishes of the majority of the people.

When market traders are turned into criminals for selling a pound of beans, is it any wonder that public opinion is turning more and more against this whole harmonization process?

But to get back to cables.....

I don't doubt that the U.S. could adapt to metric cable sizes. My point is that there is no need to mess up a perfectly good staandard which has been in use for decades just to satisfy the rest of the world.

That is the only way to get use to it. The cold turkey approach. If the whole world can adapt to metrication, the British should be able to too. Most people don't like change, but change is in many instances is necessary for progress and economy.


Fine if they want to go through the hardship of memorising conversion factors and equivalents instead of trying to learn that 450 g means 450 g and a 1 kg means 1 kg. If anyone says metric is hard, what they really mean is they find it hard and a nuisance to have to back convert. End the need to back convert and the hardship vanishes.


No, not at all. My ancestors are German and Slavic. I guess my feelings on the subject are that Germany and the Slavic nations metricated without a big fuss, and I can't seem to grasp why the British can't just accept it as they did. Let's face it, the British have the whole world speaking English, the least they can do is use the metric system.

English is the international language of business. Metric is the international language of measurement.

Keep this motto in mind.


I disagree totally. It is arrogance. When a nation was once an empire and got use to the idea of pushing its culture and language on the whole world, it develops a lot of pride in it self. Such a people find it hard to compromise and accept other people's practices as valid.

Under British law, weights and measures are governed by the Weights and Measures Act(WMA). Do you agree? The law makers have the right to set measurement laws and prescribe what units are legal and what units are not via this act. Throughout history, the WMA has been amended to remove units that no longer served the country and added new ones when needed. This of course has always irked those who did not want to see units they considered useful as illegal and of course protested. But, time won out and the changes became accepted.

The latest changes to the WMA put more emphasis on the use of SI units and less on imperial. Thus, the sense that metric is being forced down people throats.

Market traders are not being turned into criminals for not using metric. That is the propaganda of the imperialists and their like. Those who have been charged have been charged for using non-legal scales. It is not legal under the WMA as of 2000-01-01 for a trading standards inspector to renew the validation certificate for a scale not calibrated in kilograms (or grams). A trader who uses a non certified scale for a sale is breaking the law. Even in the US, if a shop keeper used a non certified scale to sell goods, they would be fined and the scale confiscated.

It is not fair to those that comply with the laws for those that do not to get away without being charged. Apparantly, every court your "metric martyrs" appealed to agreed that the law was valid and the traders had an obligation to obey it.

No one is forced to use metric. A customer can still ask for a pound and until 2010, the trader weighs it out as 450 g. After 2010, the pound becomes a non-legal unit, meanings it no longer has legal status. Then traders can interpret of define the pound anyway they wish. Even to make it equal to 500 g if they chose. So, a customer asking for a pound after 2010 may be served a 500 g portion. This will harmonise the pound with the livre, libra and pfund. As these names are still used infrequently on the continent, they always refer to 500 g and thus are not a pound in the British sense.

If you feel metrication is unfair, then campaign to abolish the WMA and go back to the old ways when every trader decided for himself what a unit's value was. Of course, that would lead to wide scale mayhem and cheating. But, that is the way it was before the WMA came into existant. And outside of Britain, there were no standard units until metrication. And of course, as far as imperial units are concerned, that is what is going to happen again in 2010 when imperial units become non-legal in the UK.


Who says it is perfectly good? It's not just to satisy the rest of the world, but to make the US a team player, not the neighbourhood bully, who will only play with the rest of the kids if they agree to play by his rules. The US is finding out the hard way that the majority when pushed to far will rise up and say NO.

In our increasingly global economy, harmonisation is necessary for quicker understanding, ease of use and most important, for economy. Question is, would the US and UK be groaning so much if harmonisation was based on imperial units and not SI?

I'm told they already do this in some areas of Britain.


Should read frequently


No, although many people from the English-speaking world and young people anywhere would think so. In reality, measures and scales have been tightly controlled ever since antiquity. In Athens, a seller who was caught cheating by the inspector not only lost the goods but had his scales destroyed too. Each each country (or even city) had it's own measures. If the European countries hadn't converted to the metric system, there would still be the Swedish pound (skålpund = 425g), the Norwegian pound (pund = 498g), French pound (livré = 489.5g), Russian pound (funt = 409.5g) and so on.