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

PLenty more examples at: blah, blah, blah

Of course the two links you provided in your postings came from the British Warts and Measles Society (BWMA). They are as usful as the "dozental society" and the "flat earth" society.

Why not go to:
http://www.usma.demon.co.uk/misc.htm

Common misconceptions and deliberate disinformation about the metric system

Floppy disks aren't metric

Yes, they are; 90.0 mm wide, to be exact. Allied to this myth is their description as '88.9 mm', or '89 mm'. ISO/IEC 9529-1 describes the dimensions of the diskette: 90.0 x 94.0 mm (neither of which is 3.50 inches).

Penalties for not using metric units have been imposed only in the UK and the Irish Republic (not in any other country in the EU)

It is up to individual nations how transgressions of national laws are penalized. EU Directives were established to harmonize units of measurements across the member states in order to facilitate trade. The actual legislation to enact these requirements is the responsibilty of each member state, as are the penalties for breaches. The penalties within the UK have not changed substantially since the 1963 Weights & Measures Act, and the most severe are reserved for offenders who persistently give misleading information. All that has changed is the list of permitted units. So someone persistently advertising by the bushel or peck could have been fined after 1968, even before the 1995 metrication legislation was enacted.
The new regulations mean A4 paper is banned

Logical thinking really went out the window with whoever came up with this gem! Absolute nonsense.

There is no justification here for denying freedom of choice

Yes there is (unless you're an anarchist, of course!). All legislation denies 'freedom of choice' to some extent, and weights and measures legislation is there to protect the public, by ensuring that the standards used for measuring equipment are maintained, and that traders are providing honest and open information to the public. There always has been W & M legislation to define what units are legal for trade. Trading Standards Officers are there to protect the public against unscrupulous traders. To permit traders and public to pick and chose which units they want to use would lead to anarchy, and the sort of confusion that anti-metric supporters claim to be against. There was no outcry by such people when a UK publican was fined by Trading Standards for selling his beer in metric measures! Nor were there any complaints when it became illegal to sell by the stone several years ago.

Metrication costs money

This is a statement often used, but grossly exaggerated in many cases, and untrue in others. Whilst it is true that replacing or recalibrating equipment costs money, it has to be remembered that businesses write off equipment against tax over a given period. Also, equipment wears out, and competitive pressures mean that some equipment has to be replaced before it wears out, if the company is to remain competitive. The excruciatingly slow pace of metrication in the UK (35 years an counting) exposes the desperate nature of such claims. In addition, claims of not being given enough warning must be regarded with suspicion (especially when voiced just a few months before new legislation), as the main EU directive behind the latest legislation appeared 10 years ago. Admittedly, the DTI has ducked its responsibility over giving widespread and timely publicity, and much of the press has given misleading information.

Experience by companies who have metricated has shown that metrication can actually save money. British engineering companies, US car manufacturers, and even the US Government (who mandate that new federal buildings be designed in metric) have shown that fewer different stock items and ease of use can reduce costs. Prolonging the process adds to costs.

The USA has not gone metric - why should we?

Not true; although the USA has made erratic progress towards metrication (like the UK), it has nonetheless advanced. Its wine and spirits industry made the change back in the 70s, the car industry went metric in the mid-80s (with considerable savings), and many goods are appearing in shops in rational metric sizes. Dual-labelling of goods is now mandatory for most products. The US is ahead of the UK in one significant area: that of road signs. They repealed the legislation which forbade metric units on signs over a decade ago, something which the UK has still to do. For more detail on practical examples of the changes happening in the USA see Jim Frysinger's Metric Methods site.

Even metric nations use non-metric units

I won't try and pretend that this is not true, but it warrants closer examination. In many cases, it is the historical dominance of the USA in particular fields that has forced the rest of the world to fall into line. Examples are:

Computer screens (though European companies often include the centimetre size as well)
Guns & ammunition - obviously these have to be mutually compatible, and become self-perpetuating
Car wheels - the past dominance of the US car industry
Plumbing fixtures - I understand that some European use inch-based parts. (I'd be grateful if someone could give me the history behind this.)
Aircaft heights and speeds; engine thrusts in pounds force - US industry dominance again

In other cases, names of non-SI units have been retained in a colloquial way. Many bear little or no relation to the 'imperial' units we have used in the UK, e.g. there have been many variants on how long a mile is. (Even within the British Isles the mile often varied by region). In other cases the terms are used as slang for actual metric units, e.g. the livre (pound) in France means 500 g. It has been argued that these units are not permitted by the EC Directives. However, it is important to note that these terms do not have any legal standing. To say that we should not use legally-enforced metric units because of these uses is a non sequitur. This is like saying we should not use terms like 'quid', 'bob', 'fiver', or 'buck', 'penny' in the USA, because these have never been legal terms of currency.
Centimetres are not valid within SI

Complete nonsense! This misunderstanding has its roots in the development of SI as a rational and coherent system of units, and in general good engineering and scientific practice. For such purposes it is recommended that one restricts the use of multiples and sub-multiples of units to factors of 10³, e.g. µm, mm and m. So engineering drawings and building plans are labelled in millimetres only. Regardless of the system of units used, it is not a good idea to mix units (e.g. inches and feet). Unfortunately, our own British Standards Institute promulgated the idea that the centimetre was not an approved unit, and as a result, the millimetre has been used (often expressed in terms that indicate a totally unwarranted precision) for many consumer products where the centimetre would have yielded a much more 'user friendly' figure. Of course, anti-metric folks do not point out the error of such practice, instead seizing on it as proof of the unsuitability of SI more everyday use.

Road signs could only be converted in an 'overnight' manner

The argument against a gradual replacement of road signs by the government is that it would be unsafe. Ireland has successfully converted the majority of its distance signs over a period of years by replacing worn signs and installing new ones with km-only markings. (The deadline for metricating speed signs has been deferred to 2001-06-30.) I do not believe there are any safety issues as far as distance signs are concerned. It should also be noted that vehicles in the transport industry (both people and freight) have metric speedometers and odometers. If safety issues don't arise in an industry where public safety is regulated carefully, why should they for car drivers?

An alternative strategy would be the Canadian one, where decals showing km and km/h were placed over signs on their Labour Day weekend.

Lads,
I'm pretty sure you won't agree. It was never my intent to start a metric vs. imperial war.

Perhaps we should keep the metric vs. imperial for some other forum?

Sorry guys, not my intent either, but as you can tell, feelings sometimes run a little high over this issue in Britain.

John,
I think we'll have to agree to disagree on this one.

[quoteJohn,
I think we'll have to agree to disagree on this one.[/unquote]

Oh darn, and I was having so much fun.

I'd just like to point out those harsh penalties don't apply in the Republic of Ireland. There is a requirment to display € per KG or € per liter BUT there is absolutely no problem displaying an equivilant in € per LB or € per Pint etc. The units are still legally recognised. However, trading standards require that the price be given in metric units, you can have it in anything else you like after that.

{quote]I'd just like to point out those harsh penalties don't apply in the Republic of Ireland. There is a requirment to display € per KG or € per liter BUT there is absolutely no problem displaying an equivilant in € per LB or € per Pint etc. The units are still legally recognised. However, trading standards require that the price be given in metric units, you can have it in anything else you like after that.[/quote]

If, i'm not mistake, and Paul can correct me if I am wrong, but that is the same way it is in the UK. However, some folks are making a noise for themselves by not wanting to follow this simple procedure and as a result those resisting are being charged.

If no one in Eire has been charged with an infraction of the law, it is because all have peacefully complied and see no reason why not to.

Keep in mind though, that the use of price per imperial unit as a secondary declaration in advertisements is only legal until 2009-12-31. After which the secondary declarations must be removed. Their legality is only short term.

For further info see the provisions of EU directive 80/181.

Yes, that is correct. The current rules allow dual marking, but only on the condition that the metric quantities be given equal (or greater) prominence to English units.

As you point out, however, the dual-marking has been "granted" to us as a temporary derogation to allow us to continue using English units for a few more years. (How generous! )

According to the powers-that-be, under EC Directive 99/103 (I think that's the number) it will be illegal to include non-metric units in any way from 2010. Metric only from then; English not even allowed as a supplementary indication. Who is being arrogant by forcing their system upon whom now?

But before we all get on our soapboxes too much again, please let's try to get back to the practical applications as they relate to electrical work.

How about the change of fixture threads on British device boxes as an example of harmonization for no good reason?

When the IEE decided to convert fully to metric, the fixing screws changed from 4BA (British Association) to 3.5mm.

Did that serve any useful purpose? I submit that it did not. You cannot argue that it helped with economy by harmonizing with Europe, because nowhere else in Continental Europe uses British-style boxes and devices.

All that happened was that the screws supplied with new devices would not fit the existing boxes. I still find homes where somebody has tried to install a replacement device using new screws and has jammed the threads up because the old boxes were 4BA threads.


[This message has been edited by pauluk (edited 09-11-2003).]