I Hate The Imperial System!!!!!!!!

[vizwhiz]

autocad can NOT even switch between civil units and architectural units

 

1.0 in civil = 1 foot

1.0 in arch = 1 inch

 

Try To compile a civil and arch dwg file and They are off by a scale of 12

either The civil has To be scaled UP or The architectural has To be scaled down

 

or did i get This reversed?

 

Bug 1.0 in autocad

 

i like The idea of being able To switch between measurement systems with out losing The 'full-size' of The project geometry

 

otterdisk would rather program 37 different ways To connect with The internet Than To actually fix something That would otherwise be useful and heaven forbid if it was actually functional and something That people really use on a daily basis

 

(not even beginning To rant on This, not yet)

 

Thanks

 

The Imperial System Strikes Back (coming in Theatres soon)

[znotlin]

i didnt know why the imperial system used the 12 base. now i know.

from now on, when designing, i'll make all measures possible multipliers of 12, 12cm, 24 cm, 120cm, etc.

:D

 

Eduardo

 

Yes, I am familair with this patch, my sympathies for your countrymen having ported over to the first MS Vista - The Metric System.

[Ernest Burden III]

....Why the heck can't AutoCad run both systems at once? Why can't I freely switch between metric and imperial while working on CDs? FormZ can do it. Vector Works can do it. Yet the flagship largest producer of drawing software cannot.

 

That is one of the many reasons I have always used Datacad. I can switch units on the fly and it would even auto-switch measurement text on associative dimension strings. Not that I do any real drafting (yea! being a renderer=no drafting, yea!), but the fact is that you are representing real-world objects--like a door--which is the same size regardless of which tape-rule you reach for. CAD should recognize this. It's not hard, you just have to give a crap about your users. Datacad even has settings for Australian metric notation since its a little different from what other places do.

[gfa2]

but the fact is that you are representing real-world objects--like a door--which is the same size regardless of which tape-rule you reach for.

 

In my experience it's actually not the same. One case is that there are metric doors and Imperial doors. For example, metric door = 900mm (35.43296") and Imperial doors = 36" (914.4mm). I know it sounds crazy, but there are buildings in the US that are actual real metric buildings...every thing in it is metric.

[TheCleaner]

Base 10 FTW!!! Come one, we have 10 digits on our hands, haha.

 

Britain is screwed up, we have speedlimits and guages in MPH.. but buy fuel in litres, mean miles to the gallon (dont get me started, a gallon being diffenet for US/UK) doesnt translate directly to anything.. also, litres per mile works here, but should be l/km

 

not to mention the majority of people measure themselves in stone/pounds, feet/inches.. but still, like me, cannot grasp imperial for bigger stuff, and use mm, kg etc.

 

Just you wait people, metric-time is on its way!

[Ernest Burden III]

In my experience it's actually not the same. One case is that there are metric doors and Imperial doors.

 

You took me a little too literally. If I were drawing a person in elevation I might make the figure 6 feet. If I switch to metric it would be OK to now read 6 meters? An object is as big as it is regardless of which unit system you measure it with. CAD programs (and this includes most of the major 3D apps unfortunately) that cannot switch on the fly suck.

[blowback]

 

otterdisk would rather program 37 different ways To connect with The internet Than To actually fix something That would otherwise be useful and heaven forbid if it was actually functional and something That people really use on a daily basis

 

 

 

Otterdisk......I really have to agree. Don't get me started on those jokers. metric-time eh? can't wait.

[vizwhiz]

so how much does a keg of beer weigh?

 

(assume it is NOT yet empty)

 

random Thought, is 'keg' Imperial or metric?

or what other kind of measurement system is This?

[salf]

wow...didnt think I will get such response when ranting about the imperial system.....lol

 

For those that say that the imperial system is "better" or "easier", I think you guys are on drugs....hehehe

 

Yes, its an upbringing thing, its obvious you can have a sense of measuring and spacing, on the system you happen to be brought up to, but I think thats easier for an imperial user to switch to metric, than the other way around.

 

Actually, Im not sure if this type of study has been done, but Ill bet that if you take 2 kids, and teach them at the same time and pace, each system, the metric one will be able to catch and learn the system faster than the kid learning imperial.

 

BTW, im just starting to play with sketchup, and you can enter any type of system data you want, you can draw a line in cm, and the next one in feet, in the same project, without editing anything, nor affecting the project scale. I wish this could be done in AutoCAD.

 

On a side note, the Fahrenheit Vs Celsius discussion, again Im a C user, but since I moved here Im tackling the F scale, again is an upbringing thing, but then again doesnt makes more sense the celsius units?

 

Lets study the water, as its the most common of liquids.

 

You have 0 which is the start of everything, form 0 and up water heats, and form 0 and down water freezes, so 0 is the middle point, you could see it as teh freezing point of water, or teh melting point of ice.

 

Anything down from 0 is just cold, freezing, the more negative the number, I guess the more volume of water you could freeze at the same time (a lake at -10 will probably just freeze the outter layer, but maybe at -40 will freeze entirely) and the same way, form 0 and up everything is hot, when you reach 100 thats the boiling point of water, from there up starts evaporating.

 

So its like this:

 

-100.........................................0..........................................100

frigging cold!......................freeze/melt.....................................boil

 

Now, In Fahrenheit, 32 is the melting/freezing point and 212 is the boling point, so its 180 degress between each, as opposed to the 100 degrees apart in the C scale. This isnt really a problem, just a different way of measure temp.

 

However, what happens when you got into the negatives?

 

In C scale, everything from te melting/freezing point will be neagtive, since its 0, but in Fs, you first have a portion of positive numbers, then you reach 0 and start the neagtive ones, however all of them are already bellow freezing point, isnt that confusing?... thinking objectively.

 

If you ask me 0 is an universal mark for measuring, it sure makes things easier.

[salf]

Not sure about any of this stuff, but I do have a question for our friends in and out of the coalition. Whenever we work on a project in Metric it is drawn in Millimeters, or Meters. Both of which are easy enough to understand, but one feels too coarse and one seems too fine for architecture as a subject matter. That may be cultural but, is this really how folks draw architecture, and do they really sweat the millimeters? It just doesn't seem to me that architecture is that finely grained (unless it is a nuclear reactor) once you factor in expansion joints, caulk, etc... And it seems to me you would spend an inordinate amount of time sweating what comes before and what comes after the decimal point, including the number of zeroes.

 

At this point when we're faced with a Metric project we do everything in decimeters as it seems the most adept at an architectural scale and the least number of zeroes you need to type .1 for a centimeter, 10 for a meter, etc...But I've never seen architectural drawings done similarly, any insights?

 

thats strange...what type of work do you do that you have to work in mm?

 

I guess if youre an industrial designer, your drawings would be in mm.

 

As an architect, our drawings are based in meters, we only use millimiters when drawing a "detail", for obvious reasons, but in a plan its meters, so a space between 2 columns axis is 4.00m (4 meters) lets say that between those 2 columns theres a wall, then a door, then the rest of the wall, the dimensions will read: 2.00m ........ 0.90m ........... 1.90m

that means the first wall is 2 meters long, then theres a 90 cm door and then the rest of the wall is 1.90 meters, which all and to the 4 meters between columns.

 

The same thing noted in "cm" would read:

200cm .......... 90cm...........190cm

 

The same thing noted in "millimiters" would read:

2000mm ..........900mm...........1900mm

[neko]

thats strange...what type of work do you do that you have to work in mm?

 

I guess if youre an industrial designer, your drawings would be in mm.

 

As an architect, our drawings are based in meters, we only use millimiters when drawing a "detail", for obvious reasons, but in a plan its meters, so a space between 2 columns axis is 4.00m (4 meters) lets say that between those 2 columns theres a wall, then a door, then the rest of the wall, the dimensions will read: 2.00m ........ 0.90m ........... 1.90m

that means the first wall is 2 meters long, then theres a 90 cm door and then the rest of the wall is 1.90 meters, which all and to the 4 meters between columns.

 

The same thing noted in "cm" would read:

200cm .......... 90cm...........190cm

 

The same thing noted in "millimiters" would read:

2000mm ..........900mm...........1900mm

 

metric architectural projects in canada are usually in millimeters (in my experience).

 

it seems a bit excessive, but i think it's because millimeters would be considered the smallest measurable metric unit. working in centimeters or meters might start to confuse people here.

[jkletzien]

salf, I think you'll see that most folks in North America that see metric architectural drawings see them in mm, which as your post points out is not world wide standard. This may explain some of the reluctance of us to switch to metric, as we're dealing with millimeters which will quickly cause one to lose ones mind in terms of the numbers of zeroes, and stretching MAX to distances that are beyond its limits.

 

I still am perplexed why decimeters aren't seized upon more, no decimal points to worry about at all unless a dimension is more refined than 10cm (approx 4 inches), 25 is 2.5 meters and then .25 equals about an inch. But I guess to each their own. Meters seems too big to me, and you have to use decimal points for just about everything.

 

It'd be like doing architecture in yards (3ft), and percentages of those for us imperial first folks, and that would be uncomfortable.

[salf]

I do not see the point of using mm for architectural drawings.

 

Yes, not only is "excessive", but actually useless.

 

mm should be kept for architectural details, where you will actually need a more specific "tiny" measurement.

 

But dimensioning a wall in mm is nonsense.....when youre building the wall, you stop the measurement or lay out at cms, not at mm, so all that info is not used, why put it then?

[neko]

I do not see the point of using mm for architectural drawings.

 

Yes, not only is "excessive", but actually useless.

 

mm should be kept for architectural details, where you will actually need a more specific "tiny" measurement.

 

But dimensioning a wall in mm is nonsense.....when youre building the wall, you stop the measurement or lay out at cms, not at mm, so all that info is not used, why put it then?

 

the point is that you use the same units for ALL drawings in a project - you don't use different units for details and plans/sections/elevations.

 

can you imagine what confusion that would cause on a building site ?

[Koper]

this pic explains it all

[Chris Potts]

Ha ha

[Guest STU_P]

this pic explains it all

 

Is that a very small toilet or a very large sink?

[Koper]

depends if your standing or siting?

[neko]

i was going to let this thread finally rest, but i was just reading a story that some might like to see (it is from the globe and mail / toronto)

 

 

The tale of the Gimli Glider has circled the globe, boosted by a 1989 book titled Freefall: A True Story, which details the flight that departed from Montreal, made a scheduled stopover in Ottawa and landed in Gimli, instead of its intended destination of Edmonton. After being published in English, the book was translated into six other languages: French, German, Swedish, Dutch, Italian and Japanese versions spawned worldwide interest in the jet. Mr. Pearson has a copy of all seven versions on the book.

 

Air Canada Flight 143 only had half the fuel that the pilots thought it carried, due to a metric conversion error on the ground that went undetected in both Montreal and Ottawa.

 

"Wrong information was given by the refuelling company to the mechanics," said Mr. Pearson, who was originally threatened with a six-month demotion for allegedly not taking enough care. But he doesn't hold any grudges, relieved at the safe landing and escaping disciplinary action.

[TheCleaner]

the funny thing is, you guys fighting 'for' the imperial system, still use base 10 numbers.. so, numbers go into double figures at 10, triple at 100, etc..

 

so it just seem damn stupid to me that anyone would buckle this nice and easy way of measuring, with '12 inches to a foot' etc.. its just irrational.. number you count with are base 10.. we have 10 digits on our hands.. base 10 FTW!!!!

 

oh and as for units of measure, architecture here is generally all in mm, even full scale things, it means the degree of accuracy is constantly high

[salf]

the point is that you use the same units for ALL drawings in a project - you don't use different units for details and plans/sections/elevations.

 

can you imagine what confusion that would cause on a building site ?

 

 

We mainly use (Venezuela atleast) meters for sections, elevations, plans, etc....and only switch to mm for the details, if the detail is small enough.

 

I understand you, but seems weird to have a wall thats 3500,00 "units" long instead of 3,50 "units" long (first one in mm and the last one in m) its easier to read at first glance atleast.

 

Im doing a 3d for the office, this is the kind of unput I have to enter in autocad for a distance:

 

9´11-13/16"

 

WOW!!!:...i mean thats crazy....lol.....theres 3 keystrokes I could save working in metric, besides the issue locating the keys, and shift/alt combo if apply....hehehe

[Crazy Homeless Guy]

 

9´11-13/16"

 

 

unless you are doing drawings that are going to become construction documents, you don't need to be that accurate. the difference between that and 10' will probably be less than a pixels worth of information in a rendering, and therefore will not show anyway.

[neko]

 

I understand you, but seems weird to have a wall thats 3500,00 "units" long instead of 3,50 "units" long (first one in mm and the last one in m) its easier to read at first glance atleast.

 

if we do the dimensions in millimeters it would be 3500, which is only one digit less than your meter-based example

 

unless you are doing drawings that are going to become construction documents, you don't need to be that accurate. the difference between that and 10' will probably be less than a pixels worth of information in a rendering, and therefore will not show anyway.

 

travis - i know what you're saying, but it isn't just a debate about arch viz...........although this is undoubtably an arch viz forum.

[TheCleaner]

In practice here in the uk, from my experience, EVERYTHING is in mm, its keeps a high degree of accuracy across the board.

 

Also, something else against imperial, the very numbers that are used are base 10.. double didgits come in at 10, triple at 100, etc. Imperial measurement therefore just seem a bit 'random'.. like pick a number, any number... ok, 12... base 10 makes it so much simpler, everything is then just powers of 'metres'.. so nano, micro, milli, centi, kilo.. its great!

[znotlin]

In practice here in the uk, from my experience, EVERYTHING is in mm, its keeps a high degree of accuracy across the board.

 

Also, something else against imperial, the very numbers that are used are base 10.. double didgits come in at 10, triple at 100, etc. Imperial measurement therefore just seem a bit 'random'.. like pick a number, any number... ok, 12... base 10 makes it so much simpler, everything is then just powers of 'metres'.. so nano, micro, milli, centi, kilo.. its great!

 

A degree of precision that is smaller than the width of a sawblade, or how much a wood door will expand on a hot humid day is a little overkill for architecture, would you not concede?

 

The imperial system is organic, but it is far from random. And there is little question that we have much better names...miles, leagues, fathoms, yards, feet, hands, inches.