• Godamned 0603

    From Sylvia Else@21:1/5 to All on Fri Feb 18 19:31:48 2022
    I've got a board made that includes pads for some 0603 smds.

    How was I expected to know that 0603 is used for both imperial and
    metric sizes? No wonder there's no way I can put my imperial 0603
    components onto the metric 0603 landing pads.

    0603 appears to be the only size where this trap arises, and I fell
    right into it.

    If I'd printed out the PCB layout at 1:1 scale, I might have realised
    that the pads were absurdly small, but of course, I didn't.

    Sylvia.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Lasse Langwadt Christensen@21:1/5 to All on Fri Feb 18 02:11:21 2022
    fredag den 18. februar 2022 kl. 09.32.02 UTC+1 skrev Sylvia Else:
    I've got a board made that includes pads for some 0603 smds.

    How was I expected to know that 0603 is used for both imperial and
    metric sizes? No wonder there's no way I can put my imperial 0603
    components onto the metric 0603 landing pads.

    0603 appears to be the only size where this trap arises, and I fell
    right into it.

    also 0402 metric which is 01005 imperial

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Jeroen Belleman@21:1/5 to Lasse Langwadt Christensen on Fri Feb 18 12:01:14 2022
    On 2022-02-18 11:11, Lasse Langwadt Christensen wrote:
    fredag den 18. februar 2022 kl. 09.32.02 UTC+1 skrev Sylvia Else:
    I've got a board made that includes pads for some 0603 smds.

    How was I expected to know that 0603 is used for both imperial and
    metric sizes? No wonder there's no way I can put my imperial 0603
    components onto the metric 0603 landing pads.

    0603 appears to be the only size where this trap arises, and I fell
    right into it.

    also 0402 metric which is 01005 imperial


    Designed to confuse. Why do people do that?

    Jeroen Belleman

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From olaf@21:1/5 to Jeroen Belleman on Fri Feb 18 12:26:39 2022
    Jeroen Belleman <jeroen@nospam.please> wrote:

    Designed to confuse. Why do people do that?

    Marketing! There is a special caliber to check that
    and you should by it:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wtjwHiStjPQ

    (at 24:00)

    Olaf

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Lasse Langwadt Christensen@21:1/5 to All on Fri Feb 18 06:50:49 2022
    fredag den 18. februar 2022 kl. 15.45.50 UTC+1 skrev gnuarm.del...@gmail.com:
    On Friday, February 18, 2022 at 6:01:25 AM UTC-5, Jeroen Belleman wrote:
    On 2022-02-18 11:11, Lasse Langwadt Christensen wrote:
    fredag den 18. februar 2022 kl. 09.32.02 UTC+1 skrev Sylvia Else:
    I've got a board made that includes pads for some 0603 smds.

    How was I expected to know that 0603 is used for both imperial and
    metric sizes? No wonder there's no way I can put my imperial 0603
    components onto the metric 0603 landing pads.

    0603 appears to be the only size where this trap arises, and I fell
    right into it.

    also 0402 metric which is 01005 imperial

    Designed to confuse. Why do people do that?
    You mean why do people use the measuring system that everyone else in their country use? I guess this is a more pointed question at the US community. I remember working with a mechanical engineer at a military contractor and was surprised they still
    did everything using inches. 90% of electronic components are in mm as the primary unit. I guess I expect the mechanical community would have converted by now, but, no.

    I seem to recall an imperial 0603 is a metric 1608. The places where I would be selecting a part they make it clear which size they are using. On layout I would notice the difference in size, 2.5 to 1. I'm a bit surprised this error was made. If the
    layout was done by someone else, maybe not so much. I like doing layouts. It's like puzzle solving.


    https://erp.eso-electronic.com/files/Oi90JOl.png

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Clive Arthur@21:1/5 to Rick C on Fri Feb 18 15:02:21 2022
    On 18/02/2022 14:45, Rick C wrote:

    <snipped>

    I don't get why mil are still used in PCB layout so much.

    For a thousandth of an inch, we say 'thou' (with the th as in
    thousandth). A mil is often verbal shorthand for a millimetre or
    millilitre, depending on context.

    That has caused much confusion too.

    --
    Cheers
    Clive

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Rick C@21:1/5 to Jeroen Belleman on Fri Feb 18 06:45:39 2022
    On Friday, February 18, 2022 at 6:01:25 AM UTC-5, Jeroen Belleman wrote:
    On 2022-02-18 11:11, Lasse Langwadt Christensen wrote:
    fredag den 18. februar 2022 kl. 09.32.02 UTC+1 skrev Sylvia Else:
    I've got a board made that includes pads for some 0603 smds.

    How was I expected to know that 0603 is used for both imperial and
    metric sizes? No wonder there's no way I can put my imperial 0603
    components onto the metric 0603 landing pads.

    0603 appears to be the only size where this trap arises, and I fell
    right into it.

    also 0402 metric which is 01005 imperial

    Designed to confuse. Why do people do that?

    You mean why do people use the measuring system that everyone else in their country use? I guess this is a more pointed question at the US community. I remember working with a mechanical engineer at a military contractor and was surprised they still
    did everything using inches. 90% of electronic components are in mm as the primary unit. I guess I expect the mechanical community would have converted by now, but, no.

    I seem to recall an imperial 0603 is a metric 1608. The places where I would be selecting a part they make it clear which size they are using. On layout I would notice the difference in size, 2.5 to 1. I'm a bit surprised this error was made. If the
    layout was done by someone else, maybe not so much. I like doing layouts. It's like puzzle solving.

    I don't get why mil are still used in PCB layout so much. Layer thickness is still done in mil. Trace/space is still commonly in mil. I typically do my layout in mm. 6 mil is 0.1524 mm, so that gets rounded to 0.15 mm. Unfortunately that can trigger
    the alarms at PCB house pricing software and put you in a higher price category. I remember seeing feature checking software that would sound the alarm at what I can only assume was round off error missing the target by 0.00001 inches or something. I
    don't think I ever used that PWB supplier. I can't imagine what it would take to get that through their system. There were dozens if not hundreds of such error reports.

    --

    Rick C.

    - Get 1,000 miles of free Supercharging
    - Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Rick C@21:1/5 to lang...@fonz.dk on Fri Feb 18 07:17:19 2022
    On Friday, February 18, 2022 at 9:51:00 AM UTC-5, lang...@fonz.dk wrote:
    fredag den 18. februar 2022 kl. 15.45.50 UTC+1 skrev gnuarm.del...@gmail.com:
    On Friday, February 18, 2022 at 6:01:25 AM UTC-5, Jeroen Belleman wrote:
    On 2022-02-18 11:11, Lasse Langwadt Christensen wrote:
    fredag den 18. februar 2022 kl. 09.32.02 UTC+1 skrev Sylvia Else:
    I've got a board made that includes pads for some 0603 smds.

    How was I expected to know that 0603 is used for both imperial and
    metric sizes? No wonder there's no way I can put my imperial 0603
    components onto the metric 0603 landing pads.

    0603 appears to be the only size where this trap arises, and I fell >> right into it.

    also 0402 metric which is 01005 imperial

    Designed to confuse. Why do people do that?
    You mean why do people use the measuring system that everyone else in their country use? I guess this is a more pointed question at the US community. I remember working with a mechanical engineer at a military contractor and was surprised they still
    did everything using inches. 90% of electronic components are in mm as the primary unit. I guess I expect the mechanical community would have converted by now, but, no.

    I seem to recall an imperial 0603 is a metric 1608. The places where I would be selecting a part they make it clear which size they are using. On layout I would notice the difference in size, 2.5 to 1. I'm a bit surprised this error was made. If the
    layout was done by someone else, maybe not so much. I like doing layouts. It's like puzzle solving.

    https://erp.eso-electronic.com/files/Oi90JOl.png

    The power numbers in that chart are not definitive. Different companies rate them differently. I recall one part I was using because it had much higher dissipation in a small package. Then it was discontinued! But others had similar parts by then.

    --

    Rick C.

    + Get 1,000 miles of free Supercharging
    + Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Johann Klammer@21:1/5 to Rick C on Fri Feb 18 16:25:55 2022
    On 02/18/2022 03:45 PM, Rick C wrote:
    On Friday, February 18, 2022 at 6:01:25 AM UTC-5, Jeroen Belleman wrote:
    On 2022-02-18 11:11, Lasse Langwadt Christensen wrote:
    fredag den 18. februar 2022 kl. 09.32.02 UTC+1 skrev Sylvia Else:
    I've got a board made that includes pads for some 0603 smds.

    How was I expected to know that 0603 is used for both imperial and
    metric sizes? No wonder there's no way I can put my imperial 0603
    components onto the metric 0603 landing pads.

    0603 appears to be the only size where this trap arises, and I fell
    right into it.

    also 0402 metric which is 01005 imperial

    Designed to confuse. Why do people do that?

    You mean why do people use the measuring system that everyone else in their country use? I guess this is a more pointed question at the US community. I remember working with a mechanical engineer at a military contractor and was surprised they still
    did everything using inches. 90% of electronic components are in mm as the primary unit. I guess I expect the mechanical community would have converted by now, but, no.

    I seem to recall an imperial 0603 is a metric 1608. The places where I would be selecting a part they make it clear which size they are using. On layout I would notice the difference in size, 2.5 to 1. I'm a bit surprised this error was made. If
    the layout was done by someone else, maybe not so much. I like doing layouts. It's like puzzle solving.

    I don't get why mil are still used in PCB layout so much. Layer thickness is still done in mil. Trace/space is still commonly in mil. I typically do my layout in mm. 6 mil is 0.1524 mm, so that gets rounded to 0.15 mm. Unfortunately that can
    trigger the alarms at PCB house pricing software and put you in a higher price category. I remember seeing feature checking software that would sound the alarm at what I can only assume was round off error missing the target by 0.00001 inches or
    something. I don't think I ever used that PWB supplier. I can't imagine what it would take to get that through their system. There were dozens if not hundreds of such error reports.

    Because it's 1 to two digit small integers for all the practical
    sizes on a board.
    The millimeter/micrometer sizes are all off by at least a factor of ten
    to be convenient.

    metric pin headers/screw clamps are also sh!t
    it works to have 2 pins 5.00mm in 5.08(2x100mil) holes.
    but when it's 8 pins long or so it won't fit anymore.
    (perfboards!)

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Rick C@21:1/5 to Johann Klammer on Fri Feb 18 07:39:23 2022
    On Friday, February 18, 2022 at 10:26:18 AM UTC-5, Johann Klammer wrote:
    On 02/18/2022 03:45 PM, Rick C wrote:
    On Friday, February 18, 2022 at 6:01:25 AM UTC-5, Jeroen Belleman wrote:
    On 2022-02-18 11:11, Lasse Langwadt Christensen wrote:
    fredag den 18. februar 2022 kl. 09.32.02 UTC+1 skrev Sylvia Else:
    I've got a board made that includes pads for some 0603 smds.

    How was I expected to know that 0603 is used for both imperial and
    metric sizes? No wonder there's no way I can put my imperial 0603
    components onto the metric 0603 landing pads.

    0603 appears to be the only size where this trap arises, and I fell >>>> right into it.

    also 0402 metric which is 01005 imperial

    Designed to confuse. Why do people do that?

    You mean why do people use the measuring system that everyone else in their country use? I guess this is a more pointed question at the US community. I remember working with a mechanical engineer at a military contractor and was surprised they still
    did everything using inches. 90% of electronic components are in mm as the primary unit. I guess I expect the mechanical community would have converted by now, but, no.

    I seem to recall an imperial 0603 is a metric 1608. The places where I would be selecting a part they make it clear which size they are using. On layout I would notice the difference in size, 2.5 to 1. I'm a bit surprised this error was made. If the
    layout was done by someone else, maybe not so much. I like doing layouts. It's like puzzle solving.

    I don't get why mil are still used in PCB layout so much. Layer thickness is still done in mil. Trace/space is still commonly in mil. I typically do my layout in mm. 6 mil is 0.1524 mm, so that gets rounded to 0.15 mm. Unfortunately that can trigger
    the alarms at PCB house pricing software and put you in a higher price category. I remember seeing feature checking software that would sound the alarm at what I can only assume was round off error missing the target by 0.00001 inches or something. I don'
    t think I ever used that PWB supplier. I can't imagine what it would take to get that through their system. There were dozens if not hundreds of such error reports.

    Because it's 1 to two digit small integers for all the practical
    sizes on a board.
    The millimeter/micrometer sizes are all off by at least a factor of ten
    to be convenient.

    Sorry, what is convenient about 250 mil? Or 850 mil, or 4500 mil? I'm good with 6.35 mm or better just 6 mm for a mounting pad. My board is 21.6 x 114 mm in metric. I don't find that cumbersome although I probably would have made it 21.6 mm (required
    by the application) by 110 mm (selected by me).


    metric pin headers/screw clamps are also sh!t
    it works to have 2 pins 5.00mm in 5.08(2x100mil) holes.
    but when it's 8 pins long or so it won't fit anymore.
    (perfboards!)

    I haven't used a perf board in 20 years. I also don't typically use through hole, although it does show up for cable connectors for ribbon cables. In that case, 2.5 mm spaced connectors are not an option. I didn't know they made them. I've seen 2 mm
    and 1 mm, but 2.5 mm??? What are these 5.0 mm connectors, more than 8 pins long? I'm guessing something that might be used in a washing machine sort of appliance?

    --

    Rick C.

    -- Get 1,000 miles of free Supercharging
    -- Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From jlarkin@highlandsniptechnology.com@21:1/5 to All on Fri Feb 18 08:02:48 2022
    On Fri, 18 Feb 2022 19:31:48 +1100, Sylvia Else <sylvia@email.invalid>
    wrote:

    I've got a board made that includes pads for some 0603 smds.

    How was I expected to know that 0603 is used for both imperial and
    metric sizes? No wonder there's no way I can put my imperial 0603
    components onto the metric 0603 landing pads.

    Your PCB layout program library (or person) must be ambiguous.


    0603 appears to be the only size where this trap arises, and I fell
    right into it.

    If I'd printed out the PCB layout at 1:1 scale, I might have realised
    that the pads were absurdly small, but of course, I didn't.

    Sylvia.

    Since SMT originated in the USA, at IBM, everyone could have kept the
    original size nomenclature. Or at least done something original if
    they insisted on going metric, like 06M03 or something. An M8 screw is
    clearly distinct from a number 8.

    I like to use 0805s. 0603s are getting too small to handle and probe.
    I recently used some 0402s for some really fast stuff, and I hate
    them. Metric 0602 is 0201 in plain English, spec-of-dust size.

    Most passive are made on 20 mil thick alumina, so the small ones tend
    towards cubes.

    Did you use reference designators? That would have made the size
    difference more obvious.



    --

    I yam what I yam - Popeye

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From jlarkin@highlandsniptechnology.com@21:1/5 to jeroen@nospam.please on Fri Feb 18 08:06:41 2022
    On Fri, 18 Feb 2022 12:01:14 +0100, Jeroen Belleman
    <jeroen@nospam.please> wrote:

    On 2022-02-18 11:11, Lasse Langwadt Christensen wrote:
    fredag den 18. februar 2022 kl. 09.32.02 UTC+1 skrev Sylvia Else:
    I've got a board made that includes pads for some 0603 smds.

    How was I expected to know that 0603 is used for both imperial and
    metric sizes? No wonder there's no way I can put my imperial 0603
    components onto the metric 0603 landing pads.

    0603 appears to be the only size where this trap arises, and I fell
    right into it.

    also 0402 metric which is 01005 imperial


    Designed to confuse. Why do people do that?

    Jeroen Belleman

    The early IC designers defined as inch as equal to 25 mm.



    --

    I yam what I yam - Popeye

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Rick C@21:1/5 to jla...@highlandsniptechnology.com on Fri Feb 18 08:26:05 2022
    On Friday, February 18, 2022 at 11:03:06 AM UTC-5, jla...@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:
    On Fri, 18 Feb 2022 19:31:48 +1100, Sylvia Else <syl...@email.invalid>
    wrote:
    I've got a board made that includes pads for some 0603 smds.

    How was I expected to know that 0603 is used for both imperial and
    metric sizes? No wonder there's no way I can put my imperial 0603 >components onto the metric 0603 landing pads.
    Your PCB layout program library (or person) must be ambiguous.

    0603 appears to be the only size where this trap arises, and I fell
    right into it.

    If I'd printed out the PCB layout at 1:1 scale, I might have realised
    that the pads were absurdly small, but of course, I didn't.

    Sylvia.
    Since SMT originated in the USA, at IBM, everyone could have kept the original size nomenclature. Or at least done something original if
    they insisted on going metric, like 06M03 or something. An M8 screw is clearly distinct from a number 8.

    I don't see 0603 used as a label for metric sizes. Digikey clearly lists (0603 Metric) as a size. Data sheets seem to use 0603 as a label for 1.6 x 0.8 mm parts. I'm not finding the confusion issue.

    --

    Rick C.

    -+ Get 1,000 miles of free Supercharging
    -+ Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Jeroen Belleman@21:1/5 to jlarkin@highlandsniptechnology.com on Fri Feb 18 17:48:59 2022
    On 2022-02-18 17:06, jlarkin@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:
    On Fri, 18 Feb 2022 12:01:14 +0100, Jeroen Belleman
    <jeroen@nospam.please> wrote:

    On 2022-02-18 11:11, Lasse Langwadt Christensen wrote:
    fredag den 18. februar 2022 kl. 09.32.02 UTC+1 skrev Sylvia Else:
    I've got a board made that includes pads for some 0603 smds.

    How was I expected to know that 0603 is used for both imperial and
    metric sizes? No wonder there's no way I can put my imperial 0603
    components onto the metric 0603 landing pads.

    0603 appears to be the only size where this trap arises, and I fell
    right into it.

    also 0402 metric which is 01005 imperial


    Designed to confuse. Why do people do that?

    Jeroen Belleman

    The early IC designers defined as inch as equal to 25 mm.

    The point is not whether we should use metric or inches. The
    point is that the /syntax/ of the size designators should be
    distinguishable. Without further indications, I would assume
    that 0603 is imperial.

    Jeroen Belleman

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Gerhard Hoffmann@21:1/5 to All on Fri Feb 18 18:43:49 2022
    Am 18.02.22 um 17:02 schrieb jlarkin@highlandsniptechnology.com:

    I like to use 0805s. 0603s are getting too small to handle and probe.
    I recently used some 0402s for some really fast stuff, and I hate
    them. Metric 0602 is 0201 in plain English, spec-of-dust size.

    At a customer's, the solder ladies bragged they could solder
    everything. I showed them my Murata 01005 starter kit.
    Oh what a shock!

    Ger "the bags are all empty" hard

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Lasse Langwadt Christensen@21:1/5 to All on Fri Feb 18 09:25:21 2022
    fredag den 18. februar 2022 kl. 17.06.53 UTC+1 skrev jla...@highlandsniptechnology.com:
    On Fri, 18 Feb 2022 12:01:14 +0100, Jeroen Belleman
    <jer...@nospam.please> wrote:

    On 2022-02-18 11:11, Lasse Langwadt Christensen wrote:
    fredag den 18. februar 2022 kl. 09.32.02 UTC+1 skrev Sylvia Else:
    I've got a board made that includes pads for some 0603 smds.

    How was I expected to know that 0603 is used for both imperial and
    metric sizes? No wonder there's no way I can put my imperial 0603
    components onto the metric 0603 landing pads.

    0603 appears to be the only size where this trap arises, and I fell
    right into it.

    also 0402 metric which is 01005 imperial


    Designed to confuse. Why do people do that?

    Jeroen Belleman
    The early IC designers defined as inch as equal to 25 mm.

    since it is now standardized as 25.4mm, pretty close

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Lasse Langwadt Christensen@21:1/5 to All on Fri Feb 18 09:23:20 2022
    fredag den 18. februar 2022 kl. 16.39.34 UTC+1 skrev gnuarm.del...@gmail.com:
    On Friday, February 18, 2022 at 10:26:18 AM UTC-5, Johann Klammer wrote:
    On 02/18/2022 03:45 PM, Rick C wrote:
    On Friday, February 18, 2022 at 6:01:25 AM UTC-5, Jeroen Belleman wrote:
    On 2022-02-18 11:11, Lasse Langwadt Christensen wrote:
    fredag den 18. februar 2022 kl. 09.32.02 UTC+1 skrev Sylvia Else:
    I've got a board made that includes pads for some 0603 smds.

    How was I expected to know that 0603 is used for both imperial and >>>> metric sizes? No wonder there's no way I can put my imperial 0603 >>>> components onto the metric 0603 landing pads.

    0603 appears to be the only size where this trap arises, and I fell >>>> right into it.

    also 0402 metric which is 01005 imperial

    Designed to confuse. Why do people do that?

    You mean why do people use the measuring system that everyone else in their country use? I guess this is a more pointed question at the US community. I remember working with a mechanical engineer at a military contractor and was surprised they
    still did everything using inches. 90% of electronic components are in mm as the primary unit. I guess I expect the mechanical community would have converted by now, but, no.

    I seem to recall an imperial 0603 is a metric 1608. The places where I would be selecting a part they make it clear which size they are using. On layout I would notice the difference in size, 2.5 to 1. I'm a bit surprised this error was made. If
    the layout was done by someone else, maybe not so much. I like doing layouts. It's like puzzle solving.

    I don't get why mil are still used in PCB layout so much. Layer thickness is still done in mil. Trace/space is still commonly in mil. I typically do my layout in mm. 6 mil is 0.1524 mm, so that gets rounded to 0.15 mm. Unfortunately that can
    trigger the alarms at PCB house pricing software and put you in a higher price category. I remember seeing feature checking software that would sound the alarm at what I can only assume was round off error missing the target by 0.00001 inches or
    something. I don't think I ever used that PWB supplier. I can't imagine what it would take to get that through their system. There were dozens if not hundreds of such error reports.

    Because it's 1 to two digit small integers for all the practical
    sizes on a board.
    The millimeter/micrometer sizes are all off by at least a factor of ten
    to be convenient.
    Sorry, what is convenient about 250 mil? Or 850 mil, or 4500 mil? I'm good with 6.35 mm or better just 6 mm for a mounting pad. My board is 21.6 x 114 mm in metric. I don't find that cumbersome although I probably would have made it 21.6 mm (required
    by the application) by 110 mm (selected by me).
    metric pin headers/screw clamps are also sh!t
    it works to have 2 pins 5.00mm in 5.08(2x100mil) holes.
    but when it's 8 pins long or so it won't fit anymore.
    (perfboards!)
    I haven't used a perf board in 20 years. I also don't typically use through hole, although it does show up for cable connectors for ribbon cables. In that case, 2.5 mm spaced connectors are not an option. I didn't know they made them. I've seen 2 mm
    and 1 mm, but 2.5 mm??? What are these 5.0 mm connectors, more than 8 pins long? I'm guessing something that might be used in a washing machine sort of appliance?


    the very common JST-XH is 2.50mm, supposedly you can get up 20 pin but I don't think I've seen more than 6

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Rick C@21:1/5 to Jeroen Belleman on Fri Feb 18 10:00:37 2022
    On Friday, February 18, 2022 at 11:49:09 AM UTC-5, Jeroen Belleman wrote:
    On 2022-02-18 17:06, jla...@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:
    On Fri, 18 Feb 2022 12:01:14 +0100, Jeroen Belleman
    <jer...@nospam.please> wrote:

    On 2022-02-18 11:11, Lasse Langwadt Christensen wrote:
    fredag den 18. februar 2022 kl. 09.32.02 UTC+1 skrev Sylvia Else:
    I've got a board made that includes pads for some 0603 smds.

    How was I expected to know that 0603 is used for both imperial and
    metric sizes? No wonder there's no way I can put my imperial 0603
    components onto the metric 0603 landing pads.

    0603 appears to be the only size where this trap arises, and I fell
    right into it.

    also 0402 metric which is 01005 imperial


    Designed to confuse. Why do people do that?

    Jeroen Belleman

    The early IC designers defined as inch as equal to 25 mm.
    The point is not whether we should use metric or inches. The
    point is that the /syntax/ of the size designators should be
    distinguishable. Without further indications, I would assume
    that 0603 is imperial.

    I find that passive data sheets all have dimensional data. Even with the same designation without the confusion of metric/imperial, parts vary in size. I select a pad size that is appropriate.


    --

    Rick C.

    +- Get 1,000 miles of free Supercharging
    +- Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From whit3rd@21:1/5 to gnuarm.del...@gmail.com on Fri Feb 18 10:50:53 2022
    On Friday, February 18, 2022 at 6:45:50 AM UTC-8, gnuarm.del...@gmail.com wrote:
    On Friday, February 18, 2022 at 6:01:25 AM UTC-5, Jeroen Belleman wrote:
    On 2022-02-18 11:11, Lasse Langwadt Christensen wrote:
    fredag den 18. februar 2022 kl. 09.32.02 UTC+1 skrev Sylvia Else:
    I've got a board made that includes pads for some 0603 smds.

    How was I expected to know that 0603 is used for both imperial and
    metric sizes? No wonder there's no way I can put my imperial 0603
    components onto the metric 0603 landing pads.

    Designed to confuse. Why do people do that?

    You mean why do people use the measuring system that everyone else in their country use? I guess this is a more pointed question at the US community. I remember working with a mechanical engineer at a military contractor and was surprised they still
    did everything using inches. 90% of electronic components are in mm as the primary unit. I guess I expect the mechanical community would have converted by now, but, no.

    Pre-NATO, all US military machinery would have been inches; even now,
    NATO has standard 7.62 mm ammo, which is just a soft-conversion
    from .30 caliber...

    Conversion is a slow process. In the print industries, inches have been the norm; in
    science, it has been SI (metric) units for decades. So early semiconductor designs
    had diffusion depths in microns, and emitter areas in... square micro-inches. Because the emitters were printed.

    Eventually it gets sorted out... but I've got a century-old machine tool
    that has inch-standard parts everywhere except one lefthand metric screw...
    so don't expect the conversion-in-progress phase to be complete in your lifetime. Digitization, if anything, will impede the progress; your calipers are made with a 'convert to' button, so the multiple standards don't
    bother one so much.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Joe Gwinn@21:1/5 to clive@nowaytoday.co.uk on Fri Feb 18 13:15:40 2022
    On Fri, 18 Feb 2022 15:02:21 +0000, Clive Arthur
    <clive@nowaytoday.co.uk> wrote:

    On 18/02/2022 14:45, Rick C wrote:

    <snipped>

    I don't get why mil are still used in PCB layout so much.

    For a thousandth of an inch, we say 'thou' (with the th as in
    thousandth). A mil is often verbal shorthand for a millimetre or
    millilitre, depending on context.

    That has caused much confusion too.

    Not so fast there. Too Euro-centric?

    In the US, traditionally a "mil" is 0.001", and a "tenth" is 0.0001",
    and a millimeter is a millimeter ("mm") and never a mil.

    Joe Gwinn

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Lasse Langwadt Christensen@21:1/5 to All on Fri Feb 18 11:00:47 2022
    fredag den 18. februar 2022 kl. 19.51.04 UTC+1 skrev whit3rd:
    On Friday, February 18, 2022 at 6:45:50 AM UTC-8, gnuarm.del...@gmail.com wrote:
    On Friday, February 18, 2022 at 6:01:25 AM UTC-5, Jeroen Belleman wrote:
    On 2022-02-18 11:11, Lasse Langwadt Christensen wrote:
    fredag den 18. februar 2022 kl. 09.32.02 UTC+1 skrev Sylvia Else:
    I've got a board made that includes pads for some 0603 smds.

    How was I expected to know that 0603 is used for both imperial and
    metric sizes? No wonder there's no way I can put my imperial 0603
    components onto the metric 0603 landing pads.
    Designed to confuse. Why do people do that?

    You mean why do people use the measuring system that everyone else in their country use? I guess this is a more pointed question at the US community. I remember working with a mechanical engineer at a military contractor and was surprised they still
    did everything using inches. 90% of electronic components are in mm as the primary unit. I guess I expect the mechanical community would have converted by now, but, no.
    Pre-NATO, all US military machinery would have been inches; even now,
    NATO has standard 7.62 mm ammo, which is just a soft-conversion
    from .30 caliber...

    Conversion is a slow process. In the print industries, inches have been the norm; in
    science, it has been SI (metric) units for decades. So early semiconductor designs
    had diffusion depths in microns, and emitter areas in... square micro-inches.
    Because the emitters were printed.

    Eventually it gets sorted out... but I've got a century-old machine tool that has inch-standard parts everywhere except one lefthand metric screw... so don't expect the conversion-in-progress phase to be complete in your lifetime. Digitization, if anything, will impede the progress; your calipers are made with a 'convert to' button, so the multiple standards don't
    bother one so much.

    or it might help, if all your tools/machines/instruments can only do one standard
    switching means throwing it all away. If they can do both like every CNC or digital caliper
    switching is just a push of a button

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Cydrome Leader@21:1/5 to jlarkin@highlandsniptechnology.com on Fri Feb 18 21:01:21 2022
    jlarkin@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:
    On Fri, 18 Feb 2022 12:01:14 +0100, Jeroen Belleman
    <jeroen@nospam.please> wrote:

    On 2022-02-18 11:11, Lasse Langwadt Christensen wrote:
    fredag den 18. februar 2022 kl. 09.32.02 UTC+1 skrev Sylvia Else:
    I've got a board made that includes pads for some 0603 smds.

    How was I expected to know that 0603 is used for both imperial and
    metric sizes? No wonder there's no way I can put my imperial 0603
    components onto the metric 0603 landing pads.

    0603 appears to be the only size where this trap arises, and I fell
    right into it.

    also 0402 metric which is 01005 imperial


    Designed to confuse. Why do people do that?

    Jeroen Belleman

    The early IC designers defined as inch as equal to 25 mm.

    Wasn't that the commies that did that? COMECON semiconductors have that
    silly 2.5mm lead spacing in DIP packages -aka "metric inch" or something
    like that.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From DecadentLinuxUserNumeroUno@decadenc@21:1/5 to Lasse Langwadt Christensen on Fri Feb 18 22:26:05 2022
    Lasse Langwadt Christensen <langwadt@fonz.dk> wrote in news:4ecce2c8- 24f2-491a-9b47-d1a29e02df0dn@googlegroups.com:

    fredag den 18. februar 2022 kl. 09.32.02 UTC+1 skrev Sylvia Else:
    I've got a board made that includes pads for some 0603 smds.

    How was I expected to know that 0603 is used for both imperial and
    metric sizes? No wonder there's no way I can put my imperial 0603
    components onto the metric 0603 landing pads.

    0603 appears to be the only size where this trap arises, and I fell
    right into it.

    also 0402 metric which is 01005 imperial



    <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:SMT_sizes, _based_on_original_by_Zureks.svg>

    I always used the metric designations and perform my purchases and my
    layouts in metric as well. Much easier. I have been 'metrisized'
    since the '70s.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Rick C@21:1/5 to Joe Gwinn on Fri Feb 18 14:22:24 2022
    On Friday, February 18, 2022 at 1:15:55 PM UTC-5, Joe Gwinn wrote:
    On Fri, 18 Feb 2022 15:02:21 +0000, Clive Arthur
    <cl...@nowaytoday.co.uk> wrote:

    On 18/02/2022 14:45, Rick C wrote:

    <snipped>

    I don't get why mil are still used in PCB layout so much.

    For a thousandth of an inch, we say 'thou' (with the th as in
    thousandth). A mil is often verbal shorthand for a millimetre or >millilitre, depending on context.

    That has caused much confusion too.
    Not so fast there. Too Euro-centric?

    In the US, traditionally a "mil" is 0.001", and a "tenth" is 0.0001",
    and a millimeter is a millimeter ("mm") and never a mil.

    Your label of "Euro-centric" would seem to be rather US-centric. It's pretty much us against the world on this one. I do see some data sheets that seem to treat inches as the obligatory technical concession to the US. Otherwise it is metric all the
    way.

    It's a damn good thing they had already developed metric measurements for electricity by the time things got rolling. Otherwise we would be the only country left measuring resistance in barley corns and electrical potential in hands, requiring a
    conversion factor of 3.92118E-4 to get current flow in ounces of silver per fortnight.

    --

    Rick C.

    ++ Get 1,000 miles of free Supercharging
    ++ Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From DecadentLinuxUserNumeroUno@decadenc@21:1/5 to Jeroen Belleman on Fri Feb 18 22:26:43 2022
    Jeroen Belleman <jeroen@nospam.please> wrote in news:sunu9q$1l2u$1 @gioia.aioe.org:

    On 2022-02-18 11:11, Lasse Langwadt Christensen wrote:
    fredag den 18. februar 2022 kl. 09.32.02 UTC+1 skrev Sylvia Else:
    I've got a board made that includes pads for some 0603 smds.

    How was I expected to know that 0603 is used for both imperial and
    metric sizes? No wonder there's no way I can put my imperial 0603
    components onto the metric 0603 landing pads.

    0603 appears to be the only size where this trap arises, and I fell
    right into it.

    also 0402 metric which is 01005 imperial


    Designed to confuse. Why do people do that?

    Jeroen Belleman


    Anti-metric much? You anti-mask as well?

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Rick C@21:1/5 to All on Fri Feb 18 14:36:16 2022
    On Friday, February 18, 2022 at 1:51:04 PM UTC-5, whit3rd wrote:
    On Friday, February 18, 2022 at 6:45:50 AM UTC-8, gnuarm.del...@gmail.com wrote:
    On Friday, February 18, 2022 at 6:01:25 AM UTC-5, Jeroen Belleman wrote:
    On 2022-02-18 11:11, Lasse Langwadt Christensen wrote:
    fredag den 18. februar 2022 kl. 09.32.02 UTC+1 skrev Sylvia Else:
    I've got a board made that includes pads for some 0603 smds.

    How was I expected to know that 0603 is used for both imperial and
    metric sizes? No wonder there's no way I can put my imperial 0603
    components onto the metric 0603 landing pads.
    Designed to confuse. Why do people do that?

    You mean why do people use the measuring system that everyone else in their country use? I guess this is a more pointed question at the US community. I remember working with a mechanical engineer at a military contractor and was surprised they still
    did everything using inches. 90% of electronic components are in mm as the primary unit. I guess I expect the mechanical community would have converted by now, but, no.
    Pre-NATO, all US military machinery would have been inches; even now,
    NATO has standard 7.62 mm ammo, which is just a soft-conversion
    from .30 caliber...

    I would hope you'd understand the difference in changing nomenclature and changing measurement systems. Caliber is not an actual measurement of anything, rather a nominal use. Same as 12 inch wafers or a 19 inch rack cabinet. I guess something on a
    19 inch rack cabinet is actually 19 inches, but in reality, it's just a name we use.


    Conversion is a slow process. In the print industries, inches have been the norm; in
    science, it has been SI (metric) units for decades. So early semiconductor designs
    had diffusion depths in microns, and emitter areas in... square micro-inches.
    Because the emitters were printed.

    Yeah, whoever does a thing first gets to name it and set the measurements, but they can get changed. You still see references to angstroms in measuring wavelengths. Doesn't mean it isn't stupid.


    Eventually it gets sorted out... but I've got a century-old machine tool that has inch-standard parts everywhere except one lefthand metric screw... so don't expect the conversion-in-progress phase to be complete in your lifetime. Digitization, if anything, will impede the progress; your calipers are made with a 'convert to' button, so the multiple standards don't
    bother one so much.

    In the US there is no conversion process. We decided to convert and then decided not to. That's on us. I believe we lost a Mars lander because of that. I'm sure there have been many, many other issues as well. I know that's why the Navy won't
    convert from yards to meters for targeting. The two measurements are close, but they are too concerned about what happens during the switchover which would take some decades. Opps, I didn't mean to hit *that* ship!

    With feature sizes on PCBs using fractions of thousandths of an inch, there isn't much reason to stick with it. Get rid of the confusion and convert. Rip the band aid off and be done with it. But PCB manufacturing is one of the least progressive areas
    of electronics in terms of standards and modernization. They have tried on more than one occasion to incorporate Gerber files into a standard that would provide much more information. I think those attempts have only met with limited acceptance. Is it
    because there are too many competing standards from different companies?


    --

    Rick C.

    --- Get 1,000 miles of free Supercharging
    --- Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From DecadentLinuxUserNumeroUno@decadenc@21:1/5 to Lasse Langwadt Christensen on Fri Feb 18 22:41:35 2022
    Lasse Langwadt Christensen <langwadt@fonz.dk> wrote in news:845ddacd-f984-4693-b99a-47c9d1fb0064n@googlegroups.com:

    fredag den 18. februar 2022 kl. 19.51.04 UTC+1 skrev whit3rd:
    On Friday, February 18, 2022 at 6:45:50 AM UTC-8,
    gnuarm.del...@gmail.com
    wrote:
    On Friday, February 18, 2022 at 6:01:25 AM UTC-5, Jeroen
    Belleman wrote
    :
    On 2022-02-18 11:11, Lasse Langwadt Christensen wrote:
    fredag den 18. februar 2022 kl. 09.32.02 UTC+1 skrev Sylvia
    Else:

    I've got a board made that includes pads for some 0603
    smds.

    How was I expected to know that 0603 is used for both
    imperial and

    metric sizes? No wonder there's no way I can put my
    imperial 0603

    components onto the metric 0603 landing pads.
    Designed to confuse. Why do people do that?

    You mean why do people use the measuring system that everyone
    else in t
    heir country use? I guess this is a more pointed question at the
    US community. I remember working with a mechanical engineer at a
    military contractor and was surprised they still did everything
    using inches. 90% of electronic components are in mm as the
    primary unit. I guess I expect the mechanical community would have
    converted by now, but, no.
    Pre-NATO, all US military machinery would have been inches; even
    now, NATO has standard 7.62 mm ammo, which is just a
    soft-conversion from .30 caliber...

    Conversion is a slow process. In the print industries, inches
    have been t
    he norm; in
    science, it has been SI (metric) units for decades. So early
    semiconducto
    r designs
    had diffusion depths in microns, and emitter areas in... square
    micro-inc
    hes.
    Because the emitters were printed.

    Eventually it gets sorted out... but I've got a century-old
    machine tool

    that has inch-standard parts everywhere except one lefthand
    metric screw.
    ..
    so don't expect the conversion-in-progress phase to be complete
    in your

    lifetime. Digitization, if anything, will impede the progress;
    your calip
    ers
    are made with a 'convert to' button, so the multiple standards
    don't bother one so much.

    or it might help, if all your tools/machines/instruments can only
    do one standard switching means throwing it all away. If they can
    do both like every CNC or digital caliper switching is just a push
    of a button

    And a conscious mental effort on the part of the person claiming to
    be performing engineering tasks.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From DecadentLinuxUserNumeroUno@decadenc@21:1/5 to Joe Gwinn on Fri Feb 18 22:40:04 2022
    Joe Gwinn <joegwinn@comcast.net> wrote in news:kaov0ht8v1704ljg89q5bo5392a16jhlbq@4ax.com:

    On Fri, 18 Feb 2022 15:02:21 +0000, Clive Arthur
    <clive@nowaytoday.co.uk> wrote:

    On 18/02/2022 14:45, Rick C wrote:

    <snipped>

    I don't get why mil are still used in PCB layout so much.

    For a thousandth of an inch, we say 'thou' (with the th as in
    thousandth). A mil is often verbal shorthand for a millimetre or >>millilitre, depending on context.

    That has caused much confusion too.

    Not so fast there. Too Euro-centric?

    In the US, traditionally a "mil" is 0.001", and a "tenth" is
    0.0001",
    and a millimeter is a millimeter ("mm") and never a mil.

    Joe Gwinn


    Yep.... for many many decades.

    If I say a number in 'mils' to an engineer in the US, he or she
    automatically knows I refer to thousandths of an inch.

    Well.. maybe Larkin is an exception to that. He still thinks you
    are supposed to dip in a vapor phase cleaning tank.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From John Larkin@21:1/5 to clive@nowaytoday.co.uk on Fri Feb 18 14:45:10 2022
    On Fri, 18 Feb 2022 15:02:21 +0000, Clive Arthur
    <clive@nowaytoday.co.uk> wrote:

    On 18/02/2022 14:45, Rick C wrote:

    <snipped>

    I don't get why mil are still used in PCB layout so much.

    For a thousandth of an inch, we say 'thou' (with the th as in
    thousandth). A mil is often verbal shorthand for a millimetre or
    millilitre, depending on context.

    That has caused much confusion too.

    In the US, machinists usually say thou and engineers most often say
    mils, both meaning 0.001 inches.

    Surprisingly, some big aerospace companies still use pounds and slugs
    and BTUs and things. Creeps me out.

    The Gimli Glider was about confusing gallons with liters.

    --

    If a man will begin with certainties, he shall end with doubts,
    but if he will be content to begin with doubts he shall end in certainties. Francis Bacon

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Clive Arthur@21:1/5 to jlarkin@highlandsniptechnology.com on Fri Feb 18 23:13:26 2022
    On 18/02/2022 16:06, jlarkin@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:

    <snip>

    The early IC designers defined as inch as equal to 25 mm.

    Many decades ago I bought some stripboard for a prototype. It was 2.5mm
    pitch, which I assumed was really meant to be 0.1".

    It was in fact 2.5mm as claimed, and the pins on my 40 pin DIL processor
    were well bent, like a man trying to fit into too small shoes.

    I do have a lot of sympathy for some 'imperial' units. For example, I
    have a set of scales in the kitchen with both metric and imperial
    weights. The imperial weights have no duplicates. The metric weights
    have two of 200g and two of 20g. Yes, I realise that's because there
    are 2^4 ounces in a pound. Likewise, inches in halves, quarters,
    eights, sixteenths etc - very convenient and easy to eyeball.

    We need to make 16 the default number base. You know it makes sense.

    --
    Cheers
    Clive

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Lasse Langwadt Christensen@21:1/5 to All on Fri Feb 18 15:24:37 2022
    fredag den 18. februar 2022 kl. 23.45.26 UTC+1 skrev John Larkin:
    On Fri, 18 Feb 2022 15:02:21 +0000, Clive Arthur
    <cl...@nowaytoday.co.uk> wrote:
    On 18/02/2022 14:45, Rick C wrote:

    <snipped>

    I don't get why mil are still used in PCB layout so much.

    For a thousandth of an inch, we say 'thou' (with the th as in
    thousandth). A mil is often verbal shorthand for a millimetre or >millilitre, depending on context.

    That has caused much confusion too.
    In the US, machinists usually say thou and engineers most often say
    mils, both meaning 0.001 inches.

    Surprisingly, some big aerospace companies still use pounds and slugs
    and BTUs and things. Creeps me out.

    The Gimli Glider was about confusing gallons with liters.

    no, it was pounds per liter vs. kg per liter

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Joe Gwinn@21:1/5 to clive@nowaytoday.co.uk on Fri Feb 18 18:38:32 2022
    On Fri, 18 Feb 2022 23:13:26 +0000, Clive Arthur
    <clive@nowaytoday.co.uk> wrote:

    On 18/02/2022 16:06, jlarkin@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:

    <snip>

    The early IC designers defined as inch as equal to 25 mm.

    Many decades ago I bought some stripboard for a prototype. It was 2.5mm >pitch, which I assumed was really meant to be 0.1".

    It was in fact 2.5mm as claimed, and the pins on my 40 pin DIL processor
    were well bent, like a man trying to fit into too small shoes.

    I do have a lot of sympathy for some 'imperial' units. For example, I
    have a set of scales in the kitchen with both metric and imperial
    weights. The imperial weights have no duplicates. The metric weights
    have two of 200g and two of 20g. Yes, I realise that's because there
    are 2^4 ounces in a pound. Likewise, inches in halves, quarters,
    eights, sixteenths etc - very convenient and easy to eyeball.

    We need to make 16 the default number base. You know it makes sense.

    Hard to count on the fingers?

    I knew a woman who had six fingers on each hand, all fingers looking
    and working normally. But she didn't even attempt to get to eight
    fingers per hand.

    Joe Gwinn

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Lasse Langwadt Christensen@21:1/5 to All on Fri Feb 18 15:43:35 2022
    fredag den 18. februar 2022 kl. 23.36.28 UTC+1 skrev gnuarm.del...@gmail.com:
    On Friday, February 18, 2022 at 1:51:04 PM UTC-5, whit3rd wrote:
    On Friday, February 18, 2022 at 6:45:50 AM UTC-8, gnuarm.del...@gmail.com wrote:
    On Friday, February 18, 2022 at 6:01:25 AM UTC-5, Jeroen Belleman wrote:
    On 2022-02-18 11:11, Lasse Langwadt Christensen wrote:
    fredag den 18. februar 2022 kl. 09.32.02 UTC+1 skrev Sylvia Else:
    I've got a board made that includes pads for some 0603 smds.

    How was I expected to know that 0603 is used for both imperial and >> metric sizes? No wonder there's no way I can put my imperial 0603 >> components onto the metric 0603 landing pads.
    Designed to confuse. Why do people do that?

    You mean why do people use the measuring system that everyone else in their country use? I guess this is a more pointed question at the US community. I remember working with a mechanical engineer at a military contractor and was surprised they
    still did everything using inches. 90% of electronic components are in mm as the primary unit. I guess I expect the mechanical community would have converted by now, but, no.
    Pre-NATO, all US military machinery would have been inches; even now,
    NATO has standard 7.62 mm ammo, which is just a soft-conversion
    from .30 caliber...

    I would hope you'd understand the difference in changing nomenclature and changing measurement systems. Caliber is not an actual measurement of anything, rather a nominal use. Same as 12 inch wafers or a 19 inch rack cabinet. I guess something on a 19
    inch rack cabinet is actually 19 inches, but in reality, it's just a name we use.

    a 19" rack enclosure is 19" wide including the "ears"

    in the case of 7.62mm it is land to land diameter of the barrel, the bullet is bigger

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Piotr Wyderski@21:1/5 to Jeroen Belleman on Sat Feb 19 01:02:07 2022
    Jeroen Belleman wrote:

    Designed to confuse. Why do people do that?

    Mars Climate Orbiter likes it! ;)

    Best regards, Piotr

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Piotr Wyderski@21:1/5 to Rick C on Sat Feb 19 01:13:46 2022
    Rick C wrote:

    It's a damn good thing they had already developed metric measurements for electricity by the time things got rolling.

    Not entirely, decibels still haunt the landscape. Why would I write 60dB
    if I mean 1e3 relative something?

    Best regards, Piotr

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Piotr Wyderski@21:1/5 to John Larkin on Sat Feb 19 01:20:26 2022
    John Larkin wrote:

    Surprisingly, some big aerospace companies still use pounds and slugs
    and BTUs and things. Creeps me out.

    Slug's a good one, thanks! This is so pervert.

    Best regards, Piotr

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From John Larkin@21:1/5 to All on Fri Feb 18 16:34:37 2022
    On Fri, 18 Feb 2022 18:38:32 -0500, Joe Gwinn <joegwinn@comcast.net>
    wrote:

    On Fri, 18 Feb 2022 23:13:26 +0000, Clive Arthur
    <clive@nowaytoday.co.uk> wrote:

    On 18/02/2022 16:06, jlarkin@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:

    <snip>

    The early IC designers defined as inch as equal to 25 mm.

    Many decades ago I bought some stripboard for a prototype. It was 2.5mm >>pitch, which I assumed was really meant to be 0.1".

    It was in fact 2.5mm as claimed, and the pins on my 40 pin DIL processor >>were well bent, like a man trying to fit into too small shoes.

    I do have a lot of sympathy for some 'imperial' units. For example, I
    have a set of scales in the kitchen with both metric and imperial
    weights. The imperial weights have no duplicates. The metric weights
    have two of 200g and two of 20g. Yes, I realise that's because there
    are 2^4 ounces in a pound. Likewise, inches in halves, quarters,
    eights, sixteenths etc - very convenient and easy to eyeball.

    We need to make 16 the default number base. You know it makes sense.

    Hard to count on the fingers?

    Hard for kids to learn the addition and multiplication tables.

    Most DEC computers were octal, even the 16-bit PDP-11. I can still
    assemble some octal instructions from memory.

    012737 Move word immediate to absolute location
    nnnnn
    aaaaa


    I knew a woman who had six fingers on each hand, all fingers looking
    and working normally. But she didn't even attempt to get to eight
    fingers per hand.

    Joe Gwinn

    Base 12 has been proposed to replace 10.

    There must be some FOR loop in our DNA that wraps around a subroutine
    called FINGER. Maybe one base pair is the index.

    What's amazing is that the 6th finger actually works, has veins and
    nerves and muscles and tendons and stuff.

    --

    If a man will begin with certainties, he shall end with doubts,
    but if he will be content to begin with doubts he shall end in certainties. Francis Bacon

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Joe Gwinn@21:1/5 to jlarkin@highland_atwork_technology. on Fri Feb 18 21:13:14 2022
    On Fri, 18 Feb 2022 16:34:37 -0800, John Larkin <jlarkin@highland_atwork_technology.com> wrote:

    On Fri, 18 Feb 2022 18:38:32 -0500, Joe Gwinn <joegwinn@comcast.net>
    wrote:

    On Fri, 18 Feb 2022 23:13:26 +0000, Clive Arthur
    <clive@nowaytoday.co.uk> wrote:

    On 18/02/2022 16:06, jlarkin@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:

    <snip>

    The early IC designers defined as inch as equal to 25 mm.

    Many decades ago I bought some stripboard for a prototype. It was 2.5mm >>>pitch, which I assumed was really meant to be 0.1".

    It was in fact 2.5mm as claimed, and the pins on my 40 pin DIL processor >>>were well bent, like a man trying to fit into too small shoes.

    I do have a lot of sympathy for some 'imperial' units. For example, I >>>have a set of scales in the kitchen with both metric and imperial >>>weights. The imperial weights have no duplicates. The metric weights >>>have two of 200g and two of 20g. Yes, I realise that's because there
    are 2^4 ounces in a pound. Likewise, inches in halves, quarters,
    eights, sixteenths etc - very convenient and easy to eyeball.

    We need to make 16 the default number base. You know it makes sense.

    Hard to count on the fingers?

    Hard for kids to learn the addition and multiplication tables.

    Most DEC computers were octal, even the 16-bit PDP-11. I can still
    assemble some octal instructions from memory.

    012737 Move word immediate to absolute location
    nnnnn
    aaaaa

    Actually, there was a time when I was disassembling PDP-11 machine
    code manually, and one soon learned the common opcodes.


    I knew a woman who had six fingers on each hand, all fingers looking
    and working normally. But she didn't even attempt to get to eight
    fingers per hand.

    Joe Gwinn

    Base 12 has been proposed to replace 10.

    There must be some FOR loop in our DNA that wraps around a subroutine
    called FINGER. Maybe one base pair is the index.

    Well, it's mechanistic, but way more interesting than DO loops:
    Sonic Hedgehog and Homeobox genes, specifically HOX genes. The
    literature is immense. Here are some summary articles.

    .<https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5328949/>

    .<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homeobox#Human_homeobox_genes>


    What's amazing is that the 6th finger actually works, has veins and
    nerves and muscles and tendons and stuff.

    Yes, extra fingers are often vestigial, and people usually have them
    removed surgically. But not in her case. The only problem, aside
    from an occasional quizzical look, was that regular gloves didn't fit.

    Joe Gwinn

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From David Eather@21:1/5 to Sylvia Else on Sat Feb 19 12:05:06 2022
    On 18/02/2022 6:31 pm, Sylvia Else wrote:
    I've got a board made that includes pads for some 0603 smds.

    How was I expected to know that 0603 is used for both imperial and
    metric sizes? No wonder there's no way I can put my imperial 0603
    components onto the metric 0603 landing pads.

    0603 appears to be the only size where this trap arises, and I fell
    right into it.

    If I'd printed out the PCB layout at 1:1 scale, I might have realised
    that the pads were absurdly small, but of course, I didn't.

    Sylvia.

    I didn't know that. Thanks for the heads up. I have a design I need to
    check (again) before it goes to JLC.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Sylvia Else@21:1/5 to Rick C on Sat Feb 19 14:27:37 2022
    On 19-Feb-22 1:45 am, Rick C wrote:
    On Friday, February 18, 2022 at 6:01:25 AM UTC-5, Jeroen Belleman wrote:
    On 2022-02-18 11:11, Lasse Langwadt Christensen wrote:
    fredag den 18. februar 2022 kl. 09.32.02 UTC+1 skrev Sylvia Else:
    I've got a board made that includes pads for some 0603 smds.

    How was I expected to know that 0603 is used for both imperial and
    metric sizes? No wonder there's no way I can put my imperial 0603
    components onto the metric 0603 landing pads.

    0603 appears to be the only size where this trap arises, and I fell
    right into it.

    also 0402 metric which is 01005 imperial

    Designed to confuse. Why do people do that?

    You mean why do people use the measuring system that everyone else in their country use?

    No, I think the question was why was a size code needlessly duplicated?
    The numbers are only an approximation to the size anyway. Whichever came
    second could have been named 0604, without any other impact whatsoever.

    Sylvia.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Sylvia Else@21:1/5 to Sylvia Else on Sat Feb 19 14:18:08 2022
    On 18-Feb-22 7:31 pm, Sylvia Else wrote:
    I've got a board made that includes pads for some 0603 smds.

    How was I expected to know that 0603 is used for both imperial and
    metric sizes? No wonder there's no way I can put my imperial 0603
    components onto the metric 0603 landing pads.

    0603 appears to be the only size where this trap arises, and I fell
    right into it.

    If I'd printed out the PCB layout at 1:1 scale, I might have realised
    that the pads were absurdly small, but of course, I didn't.

    Sylvia.

    Somehow, I managed to connect an imperial 0603 resistor to a metric 0603
    pad. The component is skewed, and its top surface is at a 45 degree
    angle to the board (!), but it is connected.

    I don't expect that it's something I can repeat though.

    Sylvia.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From jlarkin@highlandsniptechnology.com@21:1/5 to All on Fri Feb 18 19:54:58 2022
    On Sat, 19 Feb 2022 14:27:37 +1100, Sylvia Else <sylvia@email.invalid>
    wrote:

    On 19-Feb-22 1:45 am, Rick C wrote:
    On Friday, February 18, 2022 at 6:01:25 AM UTC-5, Jeroen Belleman wrote:
    On 2022-02-18 11:11, Lasse Langwadt Christensen wrote:
    fredag den 18. februar 2022 kl. 09.32.02 UTC+1 skrev Sylvia Else:
    I've got a board made that includes pads for some 0603 smds.

    How was I expected to know that 0603 is used for both imperial and
    metric sizes? No wonder there's no way I can put my imperial 0603
    components onto the metric 0603 landing pads.

    0603 appears to be the only size where this trap arises, and I fell
    right into it.

    also 0402 metric which is 01005 imperial

    Designed to confuse. Why do people do that?

    You mean why do people use the measuring system that everyone else in their country use?

    No, I think the question was why was a size code needlessly duplicated?
    The numbers are only an approximation to the size anyway. Whichever came >second could have been named 0604, without any other impact whatsoever.

    Sylvia.

    Then there are the sideways caps, like 0306.



    --

    I yam what I yam - Popeye

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Rick C@21:1/5 to Sylvia Else on Fri Feb 18 20:42:28 2022
    On Friday, February 18, 2022 at 10:27:51 PM UTC-5, Sylvia Else wrote:
    On 19-Feb-22 1:45 am, Rick C wrote:
    On Friday, February 18, 2022 at 6:01:25 AM UTC-5, Jeroen Belleman wrote:
    On 2022-02-18 11:11, Lasse Langwadt Christensen wrote:
    fredag den 18. februar 2022 kl. 09.32.02 UTC+1 skrev Sylvia Else:
    I've got a board made that includes pads for some 0603 smds.

    How was I expected to know that 0603 is used for both imperial and
    metric sizes? No wonder there's no way I can put my imperial 0603
    components onto the metric 0603 landing pads.

    0603 appears to be the only size where this trap arises, and I fell >>>> right into it.

    also 0402 metric which is 01005 imperial

    Designed to confuse. Why do people do that?

    You mean why do people use the measuring system that everyone else in their country use?
    No, I think the question was why was a size code needlessly duplicated?
    The numbers are only an approximation to the size anyway. Whichever came second could have been named 0604, without any other impact whatsoever.

    It's not about first or second. The convention is to name the part by its size. If you are using metric the size will be named by the approximate metric values.

    People need to learn this is a metric world. Do you really think the rest of the world is bound by the mistakes made in the US fifty years ago?

    While anyone can make a mistake, in reality, this is your mistake. I sympathize with your problem, but it is not the responsibility of the people who make the parts. Have you figured out exactly how it happened? Did an engineer specify the wrong part?
    Or was it an error in the layout where someone didn't understand the names of the footprints in their system?

    If you can't get the SMT parts to solder properly, you might try using small wires to connect the parts.

    --

    Rick C.

    --+ Get 1,000 miles of free Supercharging
    --+ Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From olaf@21:1/5 to John Larkin on Sat Feb 19 06:22:16 2022
    John Larkin <jlarkin@highland_atwork_technology.com> wrote:

    Surprisingly, some big aerospace companies still use pounds and slugs
    and BTUs and things. Creeps me out.

    Yes, it must be a strange live there. We have in our measurement devices
    a huge list to calculate the units for US customers. When you read this
    it is very strange that they claim to reach the moon. :-D

    Oh..and it is one of the reason why american cars are not so popular
    in Germany. People wonder how to repair them with strange threads
    and unusual tools.

    Whenever I read about AWG, 0.5oz copper or number drill sizes I have
    to shake my head.

    Olaf

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Piotr Wyderski@21:1/5 to jlarkin@highlandsniptechnology.com on Sat Feb 19 08:14:14 2022
    jlarkin@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:

    Then there are the sideways caps, like 0306.

    And resistors. I like the 0612 for current sensing.

    Best regards, Piotr

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From David Brown@21:1/5 to Rick C on Sat Feb 19 12:17:14 2022
    On 18/02/2022 23:36, Rick C wrote:
    On Friday, February 18, 2022 at 1:51:04 PM UTC-5, whit3rd wrote:
    On Friday, February 18, 2022 at 6:45:50 AM UTC-8,

    You mean why do people use the measuring system that everyone
    else in their country use? I guess this is a more pointed
    question at the US community. I remember working with a
    mechanical engineer at a military contractor and was surprised
    they still did everything using inches. 90% of electronic
    components are in mm as the primary unit. I guess I expect the
    mechanical community would have converted by now, but, no.
    Pre-NATO, all US military machinery would have been inches; even
    now, NATO has standard 7.62 mm ammo, which is just a
    soft-conversion from .30 caliber...

    I would hope you'd understand the difference in changing nomenclature
    and changing measurement systems. Caliber is not an actual
    measurement of anything, rather a nominal use. Same as 12 inch
    wafers or a 19 inch rack cabinet. I guess something on a 19 inch
    rack cabinet is actually 19 inches, but in reality, it's just a name
    we use.


    I think a key point on units is whether you need to convert them or not,
    and how they are compared to different measurements. If you need to
    convert things into real lengths, weights, or whatever, then metric is
    the only sane choice. But often you don't need conversions.

    It doesn't matter if a .44 calibre bullet is 0.44 inches wide or long,
    0.44 kg in weight, or whatever - it's just a name, and as long as you
    match up the name used on the gun and the ammo, you're fine.

    It doesn't matter what width a 19" rack is - it just matters that
    everyone follows the same standard size. You don't measure the height
    of the rack in centimetres - you measure it in "units" because
    everything that goes in the rack is an integer number of "units" in
    height. If you want to know if your new 4 unit server will fit in your
    rack, you count the number of units of space you have left - conversion
    to millimetres or measuring with an inchtape would be silly.

    On the other side, the size of your pcb tracks and footprints, or screw threads, or mechanical drawings, all need to be as accurate as
    practically possible, and all need to be specified in a precise scale -
    metric.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From David Brown@21:1/5 to John Larkin on Sat Feb 19 12:27:22 2022
    On 19/02/2022 01:34, John Larkin wrote:
    On Fri, 18 Feb 2022 18:38:32 -0500, Joe Gwinn <joegwinn@comcast.net>
    wrote:

    On Fri, 18 Feb 2022 23:13:26 +0000, Clive Arthur
    <clive@nowaytoday.co.uk> wrote:


    We need to make 16 the default number base. You know it makes sense.

    Hard to count on the fingers?


    Some cultures use additional parts of their hand (or even the rest of
    their body) in counting.

    Base 12 has been proposed to replace 10.

    Base 12 has been used for many things - that's why we have "a dozen" and
    "a gross". Base 20 has also been popular (hence "a score"). And mixes
    of bases have been used historically - the Sumerians and Babylonians
    alternated between 12 and 5, giving 60 per digit pair, from whence 60
    seconds in a minute, 60 degrees in a triangle.

    But for larger numbers, a consistent base is a lot easier. Either 12 or
    16 might have been a better choice than 10, but it's hard to change now!


    I'd prefer base 16 - it makes calculating the digits of π easier :-)

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Rick C@21:1/5 to David Brown on Sat Feb 19 06:15:23 2022
    On Saturday, February 19, 2022 at 6:17:25 AM UTC-5, David Brown wrote:
    On 18/02/2022 23:36, Rick C wrote:
    On Friday, February 18, 2022 at 1:51:04 PM UTC-5, whit3rd wrote:
    On Friday, February 18, 2022 at 6:45:50 AM UTC-8,
    You mean why do people use the measuring system that everyone
    else in their country use? I guess this is a more pointed
    question at the US community. I remember working with a
    mechanical engineer at a military contractor and was surprised
    they still did everything using inches. 90% of electronic
    components are in mm as the primary unit. I guess I expect the
    mechanical community would have converted by now, but, no.
    Pre-NATO, all US military machinery would have been inches; even
    now, NATO has standard 7.62 mm ammo, which is just a
    soft-conversion from .30 caliber...

    I would hope you'd understand the difference in changing nomenclature
    and changing measurement systems. Caliber is not an actual
    measurement of anything, rather a nominal use. Same as 12 inch
    wafers or a 19 inch rack cabinet. I guess something on a 19 inch
    rack cabinet is actually 19 inches, but in reality, it's just a name
    we use.

    I think a key point on units is whether you need to convert them or not,
    and how they are compared to different measurements. If you need to
    convert things into real lengths, weights, or whatever, then metric is
    the only sane choice. But often you don't need conversions.

    It doesn't matter if a .44 calibre bullet is 0.44 inches wide or long,
    0.44 kg in weight, or whatever - it's just a name, and as long as you
    match up the name used on the gun and the ammo, you're fine.

    It doesn't matter what width a 19" rack is - it just matters that
    everyone follows the same standard size. You don't measure the height
    of the rack in centimetres - you measure it in "units" because
    everything that goes in the rack is an integer number of "units" in
    height. If you want to know if your new 4 unit server will fit in your
    rack, you count the number of units of space you have left - conversion
    to millimetres or measuring with an inchtape would be silly.

    On the other side, the size of your pcb tracks and footprints, or screw threads, or mechanical drawings, all need to be as accurate as
    practically possible, and all need to be specified in a precise scale - metric.

    That is an error. There is nothing more precise about metric than imperial units. It's just a matter of convenience. For some metric is more convenient because it's what they are used to, but also the advantages of a decimal based system with few
    conversion factors. For others imperial is what they are used to and need to learn the conversion factors... many conversion factors... many, many conversion factors. But both are equally precise.

    --

    Rick C.

    -+- Get 1,000 miles of free Supercharging
    -+- Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From David Brown@21:1/5 to Rick C on Sat Feb 19 15:27:10 2022
    On 19/02/2022 15:15, Rick C wrote:
    On Saturday, February 19, 2022 at 6:17:25 AM UTC-5, David Brown
    wrote:
    On 18/02/2022 23:36, Rick C wrote:
    On Friday, February 18, 2022 at 1:51:04 PM UTC-5, whit3rd wrote:

    On Friday, February 18, 2022 at 6:45:50 AM UTC-8,
    You mean why do people use the measuring system that everyone
    else in their country use? I guess this is a more pointed
    question at the US community. I remember working with a
    mechanical engineer at a military contractor and was
    surprised they still did everything using inches. 90% of
    electronic components are in mm as the primary unit. I guess
    I expect the mechanical community would have converted by
    now, but, no.
    Pre-NATO, all US military machinery would have been inches;
    even now, NATO has standard 7.62 mm ammo, which is just a
    soft-conversion from .30 caliber...

    I would hope you'd understand the difference in changing
    nomenclature and changing measurement systems. Caliber is not an
    actual measurement of anything, rather a nominal use. Same as 12
    inch wafers or a 19 inch rack cabinet. I guess something on a 19
    inch rack cabinet is actually 19 inches, but in reality, it's
    just a name we use.

    I think a key point on units is whether you need to convert them or
    not, and how they are compared to different measurements. If you
    need to convert things into real lengths, weights, or whatever,
    then metric is the only sane choice. But often you don't need
    conversions.

    It doesn't matter if a .44 calibre bullet is 0.44 inches wide or
    long, 0.44 kg in weight, or whatever - it's just a name, and as
    long as you match up the name used on the gun and the ammo, you're
    fine.

    It doesn't matter what width a 19" rack is - it just matters that
    everyone follows the same standard size. You don't measure the
    height of the rack in centimetres - you measure it in "units"
    because everything that goes in the rack is an integer number of
    "units" in height. If you want to know if your new 4 unit server
    will fit in your rack, you count the number of units of space you
    have left - conversion to millimetres or measuring with an inchtape
    would be silly.

    On the other side, the size of your pcb tracks and footprints, or
    screw threads, or mechanical drawings, all need to be as accurate
    as practically possible, and all need to be specified in a precise
    scale - metric.

    That is an error. There is nothing more precise about metric than
    imperial units.

    I know that, and it is not actually what I said.

    If everyone used imperial units consistently (which could work for
    lengths, though some imperial units are different in different
    countries), they could be precise.

    But they don't - and conversions back and forth will mean inaccuracies
    creep in and rounding errors can add up.

    When accuracy is important, the world uses metric - except for a
    decreasing proportion of hold-outs in the USA. If your drawings,
    designs or measurements pass through the hands of imperial unit users in
    the USA, accuracy is likely to drop.

    It is not just important that you use a precise scale - some imperial
    scales are as precise as metric. (An inch is formally defined as 25.4
    mm.) But you need to use a /single/ scale - the same scale everyone
    else uses. Metric.


    It's just a matter of convenience. For some metric
    is more convenient because it's what they are used to, but also the advantages of a decimal based system with few conversion factors.
    For others imperial is what they are used to and need to learn the
    conversion factors... many conversion factors... many, many
    conversion factors. But both are equally precise.


    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Rick C@21:1/5 to David Brown on Sat Feb 19 06:53:01 2022
    On Saturday, February 19, 2022 at 9:27:22 AM UTC-5, David Brown wrote:
    On 19/02/2022 15:15, Rick C wrote:
    On Saturday, February 19, 2022 at 6:17:25 AM UTC-5, David Brown
    wrote:
    On 18/02/2022 23:36, Rick C wrote:
    On Friday, February 18, 2022 at 1:51:04 PM UTC-5, whit3rd wrote:

    On Friday, February 18, 2022 at 6:45:50 AM UTC-8,
    You mean why do people use the measuring system that everyone
    else in their country use? I guess this is a more pointed
    question at the US community. I remember working with a
    mechanical engineer at a military contractor and was
    surprised they still did everything using inches. 90% of
    electronic components are in mm as the primary unit. I guess
    I expect the mechanical community would have converted by
    now, but, no.
    Pre-NATO, all US military machinery would have been inches;
    even now, NATO has standard 7.62 mm ammo, which is just a
    soft-conversion from .30 caliber...

    I would hope you'd understand the difference in changing
    nomenclature and changing measurement systems. Caliber is not an
    actual measurement of anything, rather a nominal use. Same as 12
    inch wafers or a 19 inch rack cabinet. I guess something on a 19
    inch rack cabinet is actually 19 inches, but in reality, it's
    just a name we use.

    I think a key point on units is whether you need to convert them or
    not, and how they are compared to different measurements. If you
    need to convert things into real lengths, weights, or whatever,
    then metric is the only sane choice. But often you don't need
    conversions.

    It doesn't matter if a .44 calibre bullet is 0.44 inches wide or
    long, 0.44 kg in weight, or whatever - it's just a name, and as
    long as you match up the name used on the gun and the ammo, you're
    fine.

    It doesn't matter what width a 19" rack is - it just matters that
    everyone follows the same standard size. You don't measure the
    height of the rack in centimetres - you measure it in "units"
    because everything that goes in the rack is an integer number of
    "units" in height. If you want to know if your new 4 unit server
    will fit in your rack, you count the number of units of space you
    have left - conversion to millimetres or measuring with an inchtape
    would be silly.

    On the other side, the size of your pcb tracks and footprints, or
    screw threads, or mechanical drawings, all need to be as accurate
    as practically possible, and all need to be specified in a precise
    scale - metric.

    That is an error. There is nothing more precise about metric than
    imperial units.
    I know that, and it is not actually what I said.

    Uh, really???

    "all need to be specified in a precise scale - metric"

    Perhaps I'm starting to forget my English.


    If everyone used imperial units consistently (which could work for
    lengths, though some imperial units are different in different
    countries), they could be precise.

    The precision of a unit has nothing to do with who is using it.


    But they don't - and conversions back and forth will mean inaccuracies
    creep in and rounding errors can add up.

    Ok, now you are on a different topic, unit conversions. But the fact remains that there is nothing about metric that is more precise than imperial units.


    When accuracy is important, the world uses metric - except for a
    decreasing proportion of hold-outs in the USA. If your drawings,
    designs or measurements pass through the hands of imperial unit users in
    the USA, accuracy is likely to drop.

    BS! The conversion is simple, 2.54 cm to the inch, exactly, or should I say, "precisely"?


    It is not just important that you use a precise scale - some imperial
    scales are as precise as metric. (An inch is formally defined as 25.4
    mm.) But you need to use a /single/ scale - the same scale everyone
    else uses. Metric.

    Now you are doubling down on your bad bet! You claimed you weren't saying metric is more precise than imperial and now you are saying it is!

    BTW, you need to understand precision. It's actually a term that is being misused by you. What exactly do you mean when you say "precision"? Precision has to do with repeatability of a measurement relating to effects of equipment in the real world.
    This has *nothing* to do with what scale you are using.

    Please stop being silly about this. There's nothing inherently more "precise" about metric than imperial. I hope you also realize that every specification has a tolerance. This is clearly shown in drawings when they are dimensioned in both imperial
    and metric units.

    --

    Rick C.

    -++ Get 1,000 miles of free Supercharging
    -++ Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From jlarkin@highlandsniptechnology.com@21:1/5 to bombald@protonmail.com on Sat Feb 19 07:12:15 2022
    On Sat, 19 Feb 2022 08:14:14 +0100, Piotr Wyderski
    <bombald@protonmail.com> wrote:

    jlarkin@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:

    Then there are the sideways caps, like 0306.

    And resistors. I like the 0612 for current sensing.

    Best regards, Piotr

    Resistor power dissipation doesn't vary much between part sizes like
    0603, 0805, 1206, provided you can heat sink the end caps. Sinking is
    limited by the pcb pads. If you do big copper pours, thermal crowding
    limits heat spreading. So the sideways parts are better, specifically
    for current shunts on big copper pours.

    One can also parallel a few resistors and place a couple of strategic
    pickoff vias.

    https://www.dropbox.com/s/83f2bewe6igvor5/P902B6.jpg?raw=1



    --

    I yam what I yam - Popeye

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Jeroen Belleman@21:1/5 to David Brown on Sat Feb 19 17:26:24 2022
    On 2022-02-19 12:27, David Brown wrote:
    On 19/02/2022 01:34, John Larkin wrote:
    On Fri, 18 Feb 2022 18:38:32 -0500, Joe Gwinn <joegwinn@comcast.net>
    wrote:

    On Fri, 18 Feb 2022 23:13:26 +0000, Clive Arthur
    <clive@nowaytoday.co.uk> wrote:


    We need to make 16 the default number base. You know it makes sense.

    Hard to count on the fingers?


    Some cultures use additional parts of their hand (or even the rest of
    their body) in counting.

    Base 12 has been proposed to replace 10.

    Base 12 has been used for many things - that's why we have "a dozen" and
    "a gross". Base 20 has also been popular (hence "a score"). And mixes
    of bases have been used historically - the Sumerians and Babylonians alternated between 12 and 5, giving 60 per digit pair, from whence 60
    seconds in a minute, 60 degrees in a triangle.

    But for larger numbers, a consistent base is a lot easier. Either 12 or
    16 might have been a better choice than 10, but it's hard to change now!


    I'd prefer base 16 - it makes calculating the digits of π easier :-)


    Base 12 is good because it has lots of dividers. To make learning multiplication tables easier, I would choose the digit values to
    go from -5 to +6 rather than from 0 to 11. That has lots of other
    advantages too. (Maybe from -6 to +6 is even better for symmetry,
    although then there would be numbers that could be written in
    multiple ways.)

    Jeroen Belleman

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From jlarkin@highlandsniptechnology.com@21:1/5 to olaf on Sat Feb 19 08:29:56 2022
    On Sat, 19 Feb 2022 06:22:16 +0100, olaf <olaf@criseis.ruhr.de> wrote:

    John Larkin <jlarkin@highland_atwork_technology.com> wrote:

    Surprisingly, some big aerospace companies still use pounds and slugs
    and BTUs and things. Creeps me out.

    Yes, it must be a strange live there. We have in our measurement devices
    a huge list to calculate the units for US customers. When you read this
    it is very strange that they claim to reach the moon. :-D

    Oh..and it is one of the reason why american cars are not so popular
    in Germany. People wonder how to repair them with strange threads
    and unusual tools.

    Whenever I read about AWG, 0.5oz copper or number drill sizes I have
    to shake my head.

    Olaf


    Those everyday units, inches and tablespoons and cups and miles per
    hour, are familiar and no trouble at all. We do engineering math in SI
    units. I do sometimes compute things like degC/W per inch. Here are
    some measurements of the thermal conductivity of some coaxial cables:

    https://www.dropbox.com/s/g9hjwi15zjq4k4y/Coax_Theta.jpg?raw=1

    Stainless hardline is much better but it's expensive and hard to get.
    SS barely conducts heat.

    We never use Fahrenheit, except for room temp and cooking. My wife
    works in degrees F.

    #10 wire is 0.1" diameter and 1 milliohm per foot. #20 is 10
    mohms/foot. #30, 100 mohms. Easy to remember.



    --

    I yam what I yam - Popeye

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From jlarkin@highlandsniptechnology.com@21:1/5 to david.brown@hesbynett.no on Sat Feb 19 08:39:31 2022
    On Sat, 19 Feb 2022 12:17:14 +0100, David Brown
    <david.brown@hesbynett.no> wrote:

    On 18/02/2022 23:36, Rick C wrote:
    On Friday, February 18, 2022 at 1:51:04 PM UTC-5, whit3rd wrote:
    On Friday, February 18, 2022 at 6:45:50 AM UTC-8,

    You mean why do people use the measuring system that everyone
    else in their country use? I guess this is a more pointed
    question at the US community. I remember working with a
    mechanical engineer at a military contractor and was surprised
    they still did everything using inches. 90% of electronic
    components are in mm as the primary unit. I guess I expect the
    mechanical community would have converted by now, but, no.
    Pre-NATO, all US military machinery would have been inches; even
    now, NATO has standard 7.62 mm ammo, which is just a
    soft-conversion from .30 caliber...

    I would hope you'd understand the difference in changing nomenclature
    and changing measurement systems. Caliber is not an actual
    measurement of anything, rather a nominal use. Same as 12 inch
    wafers or a 19 inch rack cabinet. I guess something on a 19 inch
    rack cabinet is actually 19 inches, but in reality, it's just a name
    we use.


    I think a key point on units is whether you need to convert them or not,
    and how they are compared to different measurements. If you need to
    convert things into real lengths, weights, or whatever, then metric is
    the only sane choice. But often you don't need conversions.

    It doesn't matter if a .44 calibre bullet is 0.44 inches wide or long,
    0.44 kg in weight, or whatever - it's just a name, and as long as you
    match up the name used on the gun and the ammo, you're fine.

    It doesn't matter what width a 19" rack is - it just matters that
    everyone follows the same standard size.

    The instrument front panels are 19" wide. Any significant differences
    would look goofy.


    You don't measure the height
    of the rack in centimetres - you measure it in "units" because
    everything that goes in the rack is an integer number of "units" in
    height. If you want to know if your new 4 unit server will fit in your
    rack, you count the number of units of space you have left - conversion
    to millimetres or measuring with an inchtape would be silly.

    1U is 1.75 inches.


    On the other side, the size of your pcb tracks and footprints, or screw >threads, or mechanical drawings, all need to be as accurate as
    practically possible, and all need to be specified in a precise scale - >metric.

    We do PCB layouts mostly in inches. There is no precision lost. Trace
    widths measured in integer mils are convenient. "Make that one five."





    --

    I yam what I yam - Popeye

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Jeroen Belleman@21:1/5 to jlarkin@highlandsniptechnology.com on Sat Feb 19 18:07:48 2022
    On 2022-02-19 17:45, jlarkin@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:
    [...]

    measure inches as accurately as you can measure centimeters.

    Does anybody use centimeters? Seems like an orphan unit.

    [...]

    We don't think of centimeters as a unit. The unit is the
    meter. Centi is just a prefix meaning 1/100th. Engineers
    tend to use mostly prefixes that are powers of 1000.

    There are some weird exceptions. You'll see hPa because it
    happens to be close to 1mbar. You'll see daN because it
    happens to be near the downward force of a 1kg mass.

    Jeroen Belleman

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From jlarkin@highlandsniptechnology.com@21:1/5 to david.brown@hesbynett.no on Sat Feb 19 08:45:44 2022
    On Sat, 19 Feb 2022 15:27:10 +0100, David Brown
    <david.brown@hesbynett.no> wrote:

    On 19/02/2022 15:15, Rick C wrote:
    On Saturday, February 19, 2022 at 6:17:25 AM UTC-5, David Brown
    wrote:
    On 18/02/2022 23:36, Rick C wrote:
    On Friday, February 18, 2022 at 1:51:04 PM UTC-5, whit3rd wrote:

    On Friday, February 18, 2022 at 6:45:50 AM UTC-8,
    You mean why do people use the measuring system that everyone
    else in their country use? I guess this is a more pointed
    question at the US community. I remember working with a
    mechanical engineer at a military contractor and was
    surprised they still did everything using inches. 90% of
    electronic components are in mm as the primary unit. I guess
    I expect the mechanical community would have converted by
    now, but, no.
    Pre-NATO, all US military machinery would have been inches;
    even now, NATO has standard 7.62 mm ammo, which is just a
    soft-conversion from .30 caliber...

    I would hope you'd understand the difference in changing
    nomenclature and changing measurement systems. Caliber is not an
    actual measurement of anything, rather a nominal use. Same as 12
    inch wafers or a 19 inch rack cabinet. I guess something on a 19
    inch rack cabinet is actually 19 inches, but in reality, it's
    just a name we use.

    I think a key point on units is whether you need to convert them or
    not, and how they are compared to different measurements. If you
    need to convert things into real lengths, weights, or whatever,
    then metric is the only sane choice. But often you don't need
    conversions.

    It doesn't matter if a .44 calibre bullet is 0.44 inches wide or
    long, 0.44 kg in weight, or whatever - it's just a name, and as
    long as you match up the name used on the gun and the ammo, you're
    fine.

    It doesn't matter what width a 19" rack is - it just matters that
    everyone follows the same standard size. You don't measure the
    height of the rack in centimetres - you measure it in "units"
    because everything that goes in the rack is an integer number of
    "units" in height. If you want to know if your new 4 unit server
    will fit in your rack, you count the number of units of space you
    have left - conversion to millimetres or measuring with an inchtape
    would be silly.

    On the other side, the size of your pcb tracks and footprints, or
    screw threads, or mechanical drawings, all need to be as accurate
    as practically possible, and all need to be specified in a precise
    scale - metric.

    That is an error. There is nothing more precise about metric than
    imperial units.

    I know that, and it is not actually what I said.

    If everyone used imperial units consistently (which could work for
    lengths, though some imperial units are different in different
    countries), they could be precise.

    But they don't - and conversions back and forth will mean inaccuracies
    creep in and rounding errors can add up.

    When accuracy is important, the world uses metric - except for a
    decreasing proportion of hold-outs in the USA. If your drawings,
    designs or measurements pass through the hands of imperial unit users in
    the USA, accuracy is likely to drop.

    US decimal points are just as good as metric decimal points. We can
    measure inches as accurately as you can measure centimeters.

    Does anybody use centimeters? Seems like an orphan unit.

    The real advantage of SI units is avoiding strange conversions, like
    between watts and horsepower and BTUs. Thermal calcs are a nightmare
    in imperial units.

    Pressure in atm is pretty arbitrary.



    --

    I yam what I yam - Popeye

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Rick C@21:1/5 to jla...@highlandsniptechnology.com on Sat Feb 19 10:14:31 2022
    On Saturday, February 19, 2022 at 11:45:55 AM UTC-5, jla...@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:

    Does anybody use centimeters? Seems like an orphan unit.

    My skis are 180 cm. People tend to use cm for their heights. Better than hands.

    --

    Rick C.

    +-+ Get 1,000 miles of free Supercharging
    +-+ Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Rick C@21:1/5 to olaf on Sat Feb 19 10:11:09 2022
    On Saturday, February 19, 2022 at 12:45:12 PM UTC-5, olaf wrote:
    jla...@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:

    #10 wire is 0.1" diameter and 1 milliohm per foot. #20 is 10
    mohms/foot. #30, 100 mohms. Easy to remember.
    Only if you have a feeling what a "foot" is. :-)

    That's easy. It's about how far light travels in a nanosecond. I think that was how it came about, but they didn't measure the speed of light very well early on. Kinda like a meter being 1 million between the equator and the poles of the Earth. Close,
    but not all that close.

    --

    Rick C.

    +-- Get 1,000 miles of free Supercharging
    +-- Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From olaf@21:1/5 to jlarkin@highlandsniptechnology.com on Sat Feb 19 18:39:24 2022
    jlarkin@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:

    #10 wire is 0.1" diameter and 1 milliohm per foot. #20 is 10
    mohms/foot. #30, 100 mohms. Easy to remember.

    Only if you have a feeling what a "foot" is. :-)

    Olaf

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From whit3rd@21:1/5 to David Brown on Sat Feb 19 10:48:16 2022
    On Saturday, February 19, 2022 at 6:27:22 AM UTC-8, David Brown wrote:
    On 19/02/2022 15:15, Rick C wrote:


    There is nothing more precise about metric than
    imperial units.
    I know that, and it is not actually what I said.

    If everyone used imperial units consistently (which could work for
    lengths, though some imperial units are different in different
    countries), they could be precise.

    But they don't - and conversions back and forth will mean inaccuracies
    creep in and rounding errors can add up.

    Oh, that's a solved problem, though; sometime in the past (1935?) the US
    made a three-digit conversion from 'inch' to 'meter' that is definitive (it defines the inch in SI units, so Systeme Internationale applies). We here
    in US have to deal with 'statute mile' versus 'mile' as a result, but...that's not an international problem).

    Conversions can be exact, but of course there's no getting around numeric-representation errors; diagonal of a square isn't rational, so
    we NEVER have "all" of the digits written down. That's not a standards problem, it's just... a problem.

    The 'inch' was never international-standard; Denmark had a different inch. That's why it makes little sense to make a local inch the definition of
    a meter. France did the world a favor when (after a king redefined the 'bushel' measure to increase land rents) declared a new measure for
    world distribution.

    When accuracy is important, the world uses metric - except for a
    decreasing proportion of hold-outs in the USA. If your drawings,
    designs or measurements pass through the hands of imperial unit users in
    the USA, accuracy is likely to drop.

    Not just the USA; all NATO countries accept #6-32 screws as 'a' standard size, and
    BSP (British Standard Pipe) pipe threads are all over the world. Accuracy is available equally to all, and calculators can handle more digits than I've ever needed.
    Cube roots to ten digits was painful before personal computing, but I could do it
    with the right glowing-digits office machine. Slide rule, though, wasn't gonna work.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From John S@21:1/5 to All on Sat Feb 19 13:14:05 2022
    On 2/19/2022 12:48 PM, whit3rd wrote:
    On Saturday, February 19, 2022 at 6:27:22 AM UTC-8, David Brown wrote:
    On 19/02/2022 15:15, Rick C wrote:


    There is nothing more precise about metric than
    imperial units.
    I know that, and it is not actually what I said.

    If everyone used imperial units consistently (which could work for
    lengths, though some imperial units are different in different
    countries), they could be precise.

    But they don't - and conversions back and forth will mean inaccuracies
    creep in and rounding errors can add up.

    Oh, that's a solved problem, though; sometime in the past (1935?) the US
    made a three-digit conversion from 'inch' to 'meter' that is definitive (it defines the inch in SI units, so Systeme Internationale applies). We here in US have to deal with 'statute mile' versus 'mile' as a result, but...that's
    not an international problem).

    Which 'mile' do you mean? 'Nautical mile' perhaps?


    Conversions can be exact, but of course there's no getting around numeric-representation errors; diagonal of a square isn't rational, so
    we NEVER have "all" of the digits written down. That's not a standards problem, it's just... a problem.

    The 'inch' was never international-standard; Denmark had a different inch. That's why it makes little sense to make a local inch the definition of
    a meter. France did the world a favor when (after a king redefined the 'bushel' measure to increase land rents) declared a new measure for
    world distribution.

    When accuracy is important, the world uses metric - except for a
    decreasing proportion of hold-outs in the USA. If your drawings,
    designs or measurements pass through the hands of imperial unit users in
    the USA, accuracy is likely to drop.

    Not just the USA; all NATO countries accept #6-32 screws as 'a' standard size, and
    BSP (British Standard Pipe) pipe threads are all over the world. Accuracy is
    available equally to all, and calculators can handle more digits than I've ever needed.
    Cube roots to ten digits was painful before personal computing, but I could do it
    with the right glowing-digits office machine. Slide rule, though, wasn't gonna work.


    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Rick C@21:1/5 to All on Sat Feb 19 11:05:56 2022
    On Saturday, February 19, 2022 at 1:48:27 PM UTC-5, whit3rd wrote:Accuracy is
    available equally to all, and calculators can handle more digits than I've ever needed.

    A friend was working for IBM on a military sonar problem. She had to calculate table values for a Sin lookup or something. So she used a calculator with I'm not sure how many digits. I thought it was an HP, but that has 15 digits which would seem to
    be enough. The point is they had problems with the functions using this table and discovered the values were not accurate enough! I'm surprised that even 10 digits weren't enough, but I guess there are issues of differences between large numbers that
    require very high internal accuracy in the calculations.

    --

    Rick C.

    ++- Get 1,000 miles of free Supercharging
    ++- Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From whit3rd@21:1/5 to John S on Sat Feb 19 11:42:34 2022
    On Saturday, February 19, 2022 at 11:14:27 AM UTC-8, John S wrote:
    On 2/19/2022 12:48 PM, whit3rd wrote:

    ...sometime in the past (1935?) the US
    made a three-digit conversion from 'inch' to 'meter' that is definitive (it defines the inch in SI units, so Systeme Internationale applies). We here in US have to deal with 'statute mile' versus 'mile' as a result, but...that's
    not an international problem).

    Which 'mile' do you mean? 'Nautical mile' perhaps?

    Land-measure miles were originally done with (I think) the convention
    that 39.37 inches is exactly one meter. When the change became
    official that 25.4 mm is one inch, a meter became equal to 39.370079
    inches, and that would have changed all land-measure boundaries.
    So, they made the land-markers correct, in a system with 'statute mile'
    instead of common 'mile'. The 'statute foot' is now the base for
    old chains, rods, acres, etc.

    units foot surveyfoot
    * 0.999998
    / 1.000002

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From jlarkin@highlandsniptechnology.com@21:1/5 to olaf on Sat Feb 19 11:54:41 2022
    On Sat, 19 Feb 2022 18:39:24 +0100, olaf <olaf@criseis.ruhr.de> wrote:

    jlarkin@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:

    #10 wire is 0.1" diameter and 1 milliohm per foot. #20 is 10
    mohms/foot. #30, 100 mohms. Easy to remember.

    Only if you have a feeling what a "foot" is. :-)

    Olaf



    I have two!



    --

    I yam what I yam - Popeye

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From jlarkin@highlandsniptechnology.com@21:1/5 to jeroen@nospam.please on Sat Feb 19 12:11:40 2022
    On Sat, 19 Feb 2022 18:07:48 +0100, Jeroen Belleman
    <jeroen@nospam.please> wrote:

    On 2022-02-19 17:45, jlarkin@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:
    [...]

    measure inches as accurately as you can measure centimeters.

    Does anybody use centimeters? Seems like an orphan unit.

    [...]

    We don't think of centimeters as a unit. The unit is the
    meter. Centi is just a prefix meaning 1/100th. Engineers
    tend to use mostly prefixes that are powers of 1000.

    There are some weird exceptions. You'll see hPa because it
    happens to be close to 1mbar. You'll see daN because it
    happens to be near the downward force of a 1kg mass.

    Jeroen Belleman

    The metric scales on most rulers here are in cm. I always convert to
    mm.

    What do you use for tire pressure? We use PSI, ballpark 30.

    The old english units are physically handy. Most common things work
    out to be 1 or 2-digit integers, probably because worker-guys have
    used them for centuries.

    I ordered some cognac in Paris and the bartender asked me how many
    milliliters I wanted. I had no clue so I said "medium" and he grunted
    and poured.

    In the US, whiskey is measured in "jiggers." A sensible bartender
    holds the jigger over the glass, pours until it's full, lets it
    overflow for a while, then dumps it in. Good for tips.





    --

    I yam what I yam - Popeye

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Robert Latest@21:1/5 to David Brown on Sat Feb 19 20:01:58 2022
    David Brown wrote:
    It is not just important that you use a precise scale - some imperial
    scales are as precise as metric. (An inch is formally defined as 25.4
    mm.)

    Which is sad. They should've made it 2.56mm, then all those power-of-two fractions would divide beautifully into mm.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Lasse Langwadt Christensen@21:1/5 to All on Sat Feb 19 14:25:20 2022
    lørdag den 19. februar 2022 kl. 21.11.52 UTC+1 skrev jla...@highlandsniptechnology.com:
    On Sat, 19 Feb 2022 18:07:48 +0100, Jeroen Belleman
    <jer...@nospam.please> wrote:

    On 2022-02-19 17:45, jla...@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:
    [...]

    measure inches as accurately as you can measure centimeters.

    Does anybody use centimeters? Seems like an orphan unit.

    [...]

    We don't think of centimeters as a unit. The unit is the
    meter. Centi is just a prefix meaning 1/100th. Engineers
    tend to use mostly prefixes that are powers of 1000.

    There are some weird exceptions. You'll see hPa because it
    happens to be close to 1mbar. You'll see daN because it
    happens to be near the downward force of a 1kg mass.

    Jeroen Belleman
    The metric scales on most rulers here are in cm. I always convert to
    mm.

    What do you use for tire pressure? We use PSI, ballpark 30.

    The old english units are physically handy. Most common things work
    out to be 1 or 2-digit integers, probably because worker-guys have
    used them for centuries.

    I ordered some cognac in Paris and the bartender asked me how many milliliters I wanted. I had no clue so I said "medium" and he grunted
    and poured.

    30ml or more common 3cl, for something like cognac about the same
    amount of alcohol as a beer or a glass of wine

    In the US, whiskey is measured in "jiggers." A sensible bartender
    holds the jigger over the glass, pours until it's full, lets it
    overflow for a while, then dumps it in. Good for tips.

    jiggers are everywhere for making drinks, it's what's in recipes

    the more "commercial" bars/clubs/pubs around here use electronics ones.
    They are mounted on the bottles with a tamper seal, to pour you stick on
    a gadget connect to the register that triggers it, out comes an exact amount

    https://scan-drink.dk/41-medium_default/kodeprop-nr-1.jpg https://scan-drink.dk/86-medium_default/dc-707-spiritusanlaeg.jpg

    so at the end of the night the owner knows exactly how much what have been poured, and how much money should be in the register, so no cheating

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Tom Del Rosso@21:1/5 to olaf on Sat Feb 19 20:39:09 2022
    olaf wrote:
    John Larkin <jlarkin@highland_atwork_technology.com> wrote:

    Surprisingly, some big aerospace companies still use pounds and slugs
    and BTUs and things. Creeps me out.

    Yes, it must be a strange live there. We have in our measurement
    devices a huge list to calculate the units for US customers. When you
    read this it is very strange that they claim to reach the moon. :-D

    Newton proved his gravity equation by calculating the motion of the moon
    in inches, so we can too.

    But I and practically everyone with any technical inclination uses
    metric in all cases except when an object is involved which was cut in
    English units by someone else.


    --
    Defund the Thought Police

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Rick C@21:1/5 to Tom Del Rosso on Sat Feb 19 18:27:24 2022
    On Saturday, February 19, 2022 at 8:39:22 PM UTC-5, Tom Del Rosso wrote:
    olaf wrote:
    John Larkin <jlarkin@highland_atwork_technology.com> wrote:

    Surprisingly, some big aerospace companies still use pounds and slugs
    and BTUs and things. Creeps me out.

    Yes, it must be a strange live there. We have in our measurement
    devices a huge list to calculate the units for US customers. When you
    read this it is very strange that they claim to reach the moon. :-D
    Newton proved his gravity equation by calculating the motion of the moon
    in inches, so we can too.

    But I and practically everyone with any technical inclination uses
    metric in all cases except when an object is involved which was cut in English units by someone else.

    Yeah, we don't want no one telling us what units to measure in or to wear masks to keep from dying of a pandemic. Both have worked well for everyone in this country... except for 959,000.

    --

    Rick C.

    ++ Get 1,000 miles of free Supercharging
    ++ Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From DecadentLinuxUserNumeroUno@decadenc@21:1/5 to John Larkin on Sun Feb 20 10:50:17 2022
    John Larkin <jlarkin@highland_atwork_technology.com> wrote in news:lv701hhvq2t75d9dkh16budkb2b8ljiedd@4ax.com:

    In the US, machinists usually say thou and engineers most often say
    mils, both meaning 0.001 inches.


    Nope, machinists say "10 mils" or "10 thousandths" interchangeably,
    and when they are doing metric, they say the full mm number and
    divisor, as in 4 tenths of a millimeter, or 4 hundredths of a
    millimeter, because length representations in metric are usually based
    against the full meter or centimeters and we do not use deci or Deci
    very often here. In weights they (we) say tenths or hundredths of a
    gram, and then 'milligrams' for thousandths of a gram.

    We rarely use prefixes like deca or Deca, or deci and Deci, but do
    use centi. For liquid it would be against the liter for the base.

    Some of us, however know many of the prefixes and stating a measure
    using it is correct, but sometimes gets questioned to convey clarity.
    All it takes is experience, just like muscle memory for physical things
    like tossing a swish in in basketball.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From DecadentLinuxUserNumeroUno@decadenc@21:1/5 to John Larkin on Sun Feb 20 10:58:24 2022
    John Larkin <jlarkin@highland_atwork_technology.com> wrote in news:b7e01hpa2jnjni5qtt8dvqu8urqliqm2af@4ax.com:


    Most DEC computers were octal, even the 16-bit PDP-11. I can still
    assemble some octal instructions from memory.


    We had a DEC Writer at one company I was at, and they had a Burroughs
    mainframe too. We could not find a guy who could rewrite the mainframe applications in a language and app we could then use on a PC. This was
    back in the days of the XT and first 286 boxes. That was for the
    accounting and inventory system.

    In the lab we used AutoCAD rev like 2.1 or such to do 4X PCB layouts,
    and plot them with a big HP pen plotter along with 4X tapes and rings,
    etc. Those were the days... circa '85 -'86.
    I was even pumping numbers into a very early Lotus 123 app on a
    monochrome XT and printing out dot matrix printed graphs.

    That job triggered my desire to get into personal computers. And it
    has been all downhill since. :-)

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From DecadentLinuxUserNumeroUno@decadenc@21:1/5 to John Larkin on Sun Feb 20 11:01:35 2022
    John Larkin <jlarkin@highland_atwork_technology.com> wrote in news:b7e01hpa2jnjni5qtt8dvqu8urqliqm2af@4ax.com:

    What's amazing is that the 6th finger actually works, has veins and
    nerves and muscles and tendons and stuff.


    Some pianists joke that playing some of the works of Rachmaninoff
    requires 6 fingered hands.

    It was a testament to how difficult to play some of his stuff was.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From DecadentLinuxUserNumeroUno@decadenc@21:1/5 to olaf on Sun Feb 20 11:22:41 2022
    olaf <olaf@criseis.ruhr.de> wrote in
    news:8db6ei-auc.ln1@criseis.ruhr.de:

    John Larkin <jlarkin@highland_atwork_technology.com> wrote:

    Surprisingly, some big aerospace companies still use pounds and
    slugs and BTUs and things. Creeps me out.

    Yes, it must be a strange live there. We have in our measurement
    devices a huge list to calculate the units for US customers. When
    you read this it is very strange that they claim to reach the
    moon. :-D

    Oh boy... another fucking retarded flat earther who thinks that we
    did not go to the Moon.

    BTUs come from BRITAIN, you dopey putz. And "a slug" was also a
    BRITISH unit. Could have been the poundal.

    You been at the Pub drinking PINTS or something?

    Oh..and it is one of the reason why american cars are not so
    popular in Germany.

    US cars are metric, dipshit. Especially their Euro offerings.

    People wonder how to repair them with strange
    threads and unusual tools.

    Idiots, perhaps. I'll bet that REAL repair shops over there know
    exactly what to use and where.


    Whenever I read about AWG, 0.5oz copper or number drill sizes I
    have to shake my head.

    Olaf

    You ain't real bright then. Derivations are easy. Any sixth
    grader can learn and use conversions for any units of measure.

    I have drill indexes with all the 'races' represented. And if you
    have trouble with a PCB cladding moniker you shoud probably not
    attempt PCB layouts.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Tom Del Rosso@21:1/5 to Rick C on Sun Feb 20 06:15:38 2022
    Rick C wrote:
    On Saturday, February 19, 2022 at 8:39:22 PM UTC-5, Tom Del Rosso
    wrote:
    olaf wrote:
    John Larkin <jlarkin@highland_atwork_technology.com> wrote:

    Surprisingly, some big aerospace companies still use pounds and
    slugs and BTUs and things. Creeps me out.

    Yes, it must be a strange live there. We have in our measurement
    devices a huge list to calculate the units for US customers. When
    you read this it is very strange that they claim to reach the moon.
    :-D
    Newton proved his gravity equation by calculating the motion of the
    moon in inches, so we can too.

    But I and practically everyone with any technical inclination uses
    metric in all cases except when an object is involved which was cut
    in English units by someone else.

    Yeah, we don't want no one telling us what units to measure in or to
    wear masks to keep from dying of a pandemic. Both have worked well
    for everyone in this country... except for 959,000.

    I recall saying 2 years ago that everyone could keep going to work if
    they wore masks, and I recall you saying it would not be adequate.


    --
    Defund the Thought Police

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From DecadentLinuxUserNumeroUno@decadenc@21:1/5 to Rick C on Sun Feb 20 11:42:19 2022
    Rick C <gnuarm.deletethisbit@gmail.com> wrote in news:aa59638f-4edb-4430-830d-da377476f9c9n@googlegroups.com:

    On Saturday, February 19, 2022 at 6:17:25 AM UTC-5, David Brown
    wrote:
    On 18/02/2022 23:36, Rick C wrote:
    On Friday, February 18, 2022 at 1:51:04 PM UTC-5, whit3rd
    wrote:
    On Friday, February 18, 2022 at 6:45:50 AM UTC-8,
    You mean why do people use the measuring system that everyone
    else in their country use? I guess this is a more pointed
    question at the US community. I remember working with a
    mechanical engineer at a military contractor and was
    surprised they still did everything using inches. 90% of
    electronic components are in mm as the primary unit. I guess
    I expect the mechanical community would have converted by
    now, but, no.
    Pre-NATO, all US military machinery would have been inches;
    even now, NATO has standard 7.62 mm ammo, which is just a
    soft-conversion from .30 caliber...

    I would hope you'd understand the difference in changing
    nomenclature

    and changing measurement systems. Caliber is not an actual
    measurement of anything, rather a nominal use. Same as 12 inch
    wafers or a 19 inch rack cabinet. I guess something on a 19
    inch rack cabinet is actually 19 inches, but in reality, it's
    just a name we use.

    I think a key point on units is whether you need to convert them
    or not,

    and how they are compared to different measurements. If you need
    to convert things into real lengths, weights, or whatever, then
    metric is the only sane choice. But often you don't need
    conversions.

    It doesn't matter if a .44 calibre bullet is 0.44 inches wide or
    long, 0.44 kg in weight, or whatever - it's just a name, and as
    long as you match up the name used on the gun and the ammo,
    you're fine.

    It doesn't matter what width a 19" rack is - it just matters that
    everyone follows the same standard size. You don't measure the
    height of the rack in centimetres - you measure it in "units"
    because everything that goes in the rack is an integer number of
    "units" in height. If you want to know if your new 4 unit server
    will fit in your rack, you count the number of units of space you
    have left - conversion

    to millimetres or measuring with an inchtape would be silly.

    On the other side, the size of your pcb tracks and footprints, or
    screw

    threads, or mechanical drawings, all need to be as accurate as
    practically possible, and all need to be specified in a precise
    scale -

    metric.

    That is an error. There is nothing more precise about metric than
    imperial units. It's just a matter of convenience. For some
    metric is more convenient because it's what they are used to, but
    also the advantages of a decimal based system with few conversion
    factors. For others imperial is what they are used to and need to
    learn the conversion factors... many conversion factors... many,
    many conversion factors. But both are equally precise.


    Yep... 60 degree threads are 60 degree threads. Same in both
    instances.

    Maybe he has a 60 degree fever.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From David Brown@21:1/5 to Rick C on Sun Feb 20 13:25:48 2022
    On 19/02/2022 15:53, Rick C wrote:

    BTW, you need to understand precision.

    I do understand the term - and I do appreciate that it is obviously
    independent of the scale. But I have been making a bit of a dog's
    breakfast in what I wrote, so I'll stop there.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From David Brown@21:1/5 to Robert Latest on Sun Feb 20 14:26:27 2022
    On 19/02/2022 21:01, Robert Latest wrote:
    David Brown wrote:
    It is not just important that you use a precise scale - some imperial
    scales are as precise as metric. (An inch is formally defined as 25.4
    mm.)

    Which is sad. They should've made it 2.56mm, then all those power-of-two fractions would divide beautifully into mm.


    Yes. But it had to match up with the length of three barley corns.
    (The barleycorn is of course still used in shoe sizes.)

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Rick C@21:1/5 to David Brown on Sun Feb 20 10:13:22 2022
    On Sunday, February 20, 2022 at 8:26:38 AM UTC-5, David Brown wrote:
    On 19/02/2022 21:01, Robert Latest wrote:
    David Brown wrote:
    It is not just important that you use a precise scale - some imperial
    scales are as precise as metric. (An inch is formally defined as 25.4
    mm.)

    Which is sad. They should've made it 2.56mm, then all those power-of-two fractions would divide beautifully into mm.

    Yes. But it had to match up with the length of three barley corns.
    (The barleycorn is of course still used in shoe sizes.)

    Barleycorns aside, it was more about matching the inch. The definition of the inch has a long and tortuous history, but in 1866 the US defined it as 39.37 to a meter, just off from 2.54 cm by about two ppm. Not many uses were impacted by two ppm, so 2.
    54 cm to the inch was later adopted largely because it had become commercial practice.

    --

    Rick C.

    --+ Get 1,000 miles of free Supercharging
    --+ Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Rick C@21:1/5 to Tom Del Rosso on Sun Feb 20 09:41:59 2022
    On Sunday, February 20, 2022 at 6:18:26 AM UTC-5, Tom Del Rosso wrote:
    Rick C wrote:
    On Saturday, February 19, 2022 at 8:39:22 PM UTC-5, Tom Del Rosso
    wrote:
    olaf wrote:
    John Larkin <jlarkin@highland_atwork_technology.com> wrote:

    Surprisingly, some big aerospace companies still use pounds and
    slugs and BTUs and things. Creeps me out.

    Yes, it must be a strange live there. We have in our measurement
    devices a huge list to calculate the units for US customers. When
    you read this it is very strange that they claim to reach the moon.
    :-D
    Newton proved his gravity equation by calculating the motion of the
    moon in inches, so we can too.

    But I and practically everyone with any technical inclination uses
    metric in all cases except when an object is involved which was cut
    in English units by someone else.

    Yeah, we don't want no one telling us what units to measure in or to
    wear masks to keep from dying of a pandemic. Both have worked well
    for everyone in this country... except for 959,000.
    I recall saying 2 years ago that everyone could keep going to work if
    they wore masks, and I recall you saying it would not be adequate.

    And it has not been adequate. What is your point? You did see the sarcasm in my statement, no?

    The mistake I made was thinking there was ever a prayer of hope that people would actually do what was needed or that we could "get 'er done" around the world. As it turns out not only are masks not sufficient, vaccines are not sufficient. With new
    strains showing up every few months, we can expect this pandemic to be with us for a long time. It may turn out that there is selective pressure to be less virulent, in which case it may end up being no worse than the flu. At the moment the US is
    approaching 1 million dead which is far, far worse than any flu since I was born.

    --

    Rick C.

    --- Get 1,000 miles of free Supercharging
    --- Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Clive Arthur@21:1/5 to Jeroen Belleman on Sun Feb 20 22:12:01 2022
    On 19/02/2022 17:07, Jeroen Belleman wrote:

    <snip>

    There are some weird exceptions. You'll see hPa because it
    happens to be close to 1mbar.

    It's exactly that, by definition.

    We use hectares too. Also, hectogrammes ('hetti') are used as
    convenient measures for some foodstuffs in Italy at least.

    [IMO the 'Are' should have been one square metre (and the 'Vol' one
    cubic meter), but hey ho.]

    Still base 60 is handy, and there are 60 ohm-farads in a minute.

    --
    Cheers
    Clive

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Jasen Betts@21:1/5 to jlarkin@highlandsniptechnology.com on Mon Feb 21 04:06:46 2022
    On 2022-02-19, jlarkin@highlandsniptechnology.com <jlarkin@highlandsniptechnology.com> wrote:
    On Sat, 19 Feb 2022 15:27:10 +0100, David Brown
    <david.brown@hesbynett.no> wrote:

    US decimal points are just as good as metric decimal points. We can
    measure inches as accurately as you can measure centimeters.

    Does anybody use centimeters? Seems like an orphan unit.

    It's mainly used for measuring people, so clothing dimensions, describing
    how tall someone is. That sort of thing.

    --
    Jasen.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Tom Del Rosso@21:1/5 to Rick C on Mon Feb 21 01:05:43 2022
    Rick C wrote:
    On Sunday, February 20, 2022 at 6:18:26 AM UTC-5, Tom Del Rosso wrote:
    Rick C wrote:
    On Saturday, February 19, 2022 at 8:39:22 PM UTC-5, Tom Del Rosso
    wrote:
    olaf wrote:
    John Larkin <jlarkin@highland_atwork_technology.com> wrote:

    Surprisingly, some big aerospace companies still use pounds and
    slugs and BTUs and things. Creeps me out.

    Yes, it must be a strange live there. We have in our measurement
    devices a huge list to calculate the units for US customers. When
    you read this it is very strange that they claim to reach the
    moon. :-D
    Newton proved his gravity equation by calculating the motion of the
    moon in inches, so we can too.

    But I and practically everyone with any technical inclination uses
    metric in all cases except when an object is involved which was cut
    in English units by someone else.

    Yeah, we don't want no one telling us what units to measure in or to
    wear masks to keep from dying of a pandemic. Both have worked well
    for everyone in this country... except for 959,000.
    I recall saying 2 years ago that everyone could keep going to work if
    they wore masks, and I recall you saying it would not be adequate.

    And it has not been adequate. What is your point? You did see the
    sarcasm in my statement, no?

    So we should have been out of work for 2 years.


    The mistake I made was thinking there was ever a prayer of hope that
    people would actually do what was needed or that we could "get 'er
    done" around the world. As it turns out not only are masks not
    sufficient, vaccines are not sufficient. With new strains showing up
    every few months, we can expect this pandemic to be with us for a
    long time. It may turn out that there is selective pressure to be
    less virulent, in which case it may end up being no worse than the
    flu. At the moment the US is approaching 1 million dead which is
    far, far worse than any flu since I was born.

    The flu kills people who don't have 6 comorbidities. Or cancer like
    Powell.


    --
    Defund the Thought Police

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Rick C@21:1/5 to Tom Del Rosso on Mon Feb 21 00:00:59 2022
    On Monday, February 21, 2022 at 1:11:24 AM UTC-5, Tom Del Rosso wrote:
    Rick C wrote:
    On Sunday, February 20, 2022 at 6:18:26 AM UTC-5, Tom Del Rosso wrote:
    Rick C wrote:
    On Saturday, February 19, 2022 at 8:39:22 PM UTC-5, Tom Del Rosso
    wrote:
    olaf wrote:
    John Larkin <jlarkin@highland_atwork_technology.com> wrote:

    Surprisingly, some big aerospace companies still use pounds and
    slugs and BTUs and things. Creeps me out.

    Yes, it must be a strange live there. We have in our measurement
    devices a huge list to calculate the units for US customers. When
    you read this it is very strange that they claim to reach the
    moon. :-D
    Newton proved his gravity equation by calculating the motion of the
    moon in inches, so we can too.

    But I and practically everyone with any technical inclination uses
    metric in all cases except when an object is involved which was cut
    in English units by someone else.

    Yeah, we don't want no one telling us what units to measure in or to
    wear masks to keep from dying of a pandemic. Both have worked well
    for everyone in this country... except for 959,000.
    I recall saying 2 years ago that everyone could keep going to work if
    they wore masks, and I recall you saying it would not be adequate.

    And it has not been adequate. What is your point? You did see the
    sarcasm in my statement, no?
    So we should have been out of work for 2 years.
    The mistake I made was thinking there was ever a prayer of hope that
    people would actually do what was needed or that we could "get 'er
    done" around the world. As it turns out not only are masks not
    sufficient, vaccines are not sufficient. With new strains showing up
    every few months, we can expect this pandemic to be with us for a
    long time. It may turn out that there is selective pressure to be
    less virulent, in which case it may end up being no worse than the
    flu. At the moment the US is approaching 1 million dead which is
    far, far worse than any flu since I was born.
    The flu kills people who don't have 6 comorbidities. Or cancer like
    Powell.

    Is there a meaning to what you posted? Or is it just some random thought you had and felt the need to share with us like some derelict on a street corner?

    --

    Rick C.

    -+- Get 1,000 miles of free Supercharging
    -+- Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From David Brown@21:1/5 to Rick C on Mon Feb 21 09:57:15 2022
    On 20/02/2022 19:13, Rick C wrote:
    On Sunday, February 20, 2022 at 8:26:38 AM UTC-5, David Brown wrote:
    On 19/02/2022 21:01, Robert Latest wrote:
    David Brown wrote:
    It is not just important that you use a precise scale - some
    imperial scales are as precise as metric. (An inch is formally
    defined as 25.4 mm.)

    Which is sad. They should've made it 2.56mm, then all those
    power-of-two fractions would divide beautifully into mm.

    Yes. But it had to match up with the length of three barley corns.
    (The barleycorn is of course still used in shoe sizes.)

    Barleycorns aside, it was more about matching the inch. The
    definition of the inch has a long and tortuous history, but in 1866
    the US defined it as 39.37 to a meter, just off from 2.54 cm by about
    two ppm. Not many uses were impacted by two ppm, so 2.54 cm to the
    inch was later adopted largely because it had become commercial
    practice.


    Yes, that's the point. (Three barleycorns was one of the first
    standardised definitions of the length of an inch.)

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From David Brown@21:1/5 to Jasen Betts on Mon Feb 21 09:54:54 2022
    On 21/02/2022 05:06, Jasen Betts wrote:
    On 2022-02-19, jlarkin@highlandsniptechnology.com <jlarkin@highlandsniptechnology.com> wrote:
    On Sat, 19 Feb 2022 15:27:10 +0100, David Brown
    <david.brown@hesbynett.no> wrote:

    US decimal points are just as good as metric decimal points. We can
    measure inches as accurately as you can measure centimeters.

    Does anybody use centimeters? Seems like an orphan unit.

    It's mainly used for measuring people, so clothing dimensions, describing
    how tall someone is. That sort of thing.


    When doing high precision work, you might include tolerances or error
    margins - 10.20 mm ± 0.02 mm. But for more casual measurements, you
    rarely do so. People infer the accuracies from the context, the
    wording, the value range, and the units. Thus choice of units gives a different implication, even if the value is the same. Giving a length
    as "168 cm" is therefore slightly different from saying "1680 mm" (and
    from "five and a half feet").

    In general, people find it easier to imagine sizes if the numbers
    involved are not too big. "1.2 m" is easier than "120 cm" which is
    easier than "1200 mm".

    Centimetres are used all time, for all kinds of things - they are often
    a more convenient unit than mm or metres for hand-held or desktop size
    things. To me, a pcb board might by 10 cm by 16 cm - even though it
    would be given in standard mm in the actual design.


    Sometimes unit choices are psychological. Sweets sold in lose weights
    are priced per hectogram (100 g), a unit that is seldom seen. But if
    the price were per gram, the price per gram would be meaninglessly small
    in Euro, pounds, or whatever. If it were given in price per kg,
    however, people would feel they are buying far too much when their
    sweets are measured in kg.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From aioe usenet@21:1/5 to Rick C on Mon Feb 21 18:16:42 2022
    On 18/02/2022 21:45, Rick C wrote:
    On Friday, February 18, 2022 at 6:01:25 AM UTC-5, Jeroen Belleman wrote:
    On 2022-02-18 11:11, Lasse Langwadt Christensen wrote:
    fredag den 18. februar 2022 kl. 09.32.02 UTC+1 skrev Sylvia Else:
    I've got a board made that includes pads for some 0603 smds.

    How was I expected to know that 0603 is used for both imperial and
    metric sizes? No wonder there's no way I can put my imperial 0603
    components onto the metric 0603 landing pads.

    0603 appears to be the only size where this trap arises, and I fell
    right into it.

    also 0402 metric which is 01005 imperial

    Designed to confuse. Why do people do that?

    You mean why do people use the measuring system that everyone else in their country use? I guess this is a more pointed question at the US community. I remember working with a mechanical engineer at a military contractor and was surprised they still
    did everything using inches. 90% of electronic components are in mm as the primary unit. I guess I expect the mechanical community would have converted by now, but, no.

    I seem to recall an imperial 0603 is a metric 1608. The places where I would be selecting a part they make it clear which size they are using. On layout I would notice the difference in size, 2.5 to 1. I'm a bit surprised this error was made. If
    the layout was done by someone else, maybe not so much. I like doing layouts. It's like puzzle solving.

    I don't get why mil are still used in PCB layout so much. Layer thickness is still done in mil. Trace/space is still commonly in mil. I typically do my layout in mm. 6 mil is 0.1524 mm, so that gets rounded to 0.15 mm. Unfortunately that can
    trigger the alarms at PCB house pricing software and put you in a higher price category. I remember seeing feature checking software that would sound the alarm at what I can only assume was round off error missing the target by 0.00001 inches or
    something. I don't think I ever used that PWB supplier. I can't imagine what it would take to get that through their system. There were dozens if not hundreds of such error reports.


    The USA is at war with the decimal system. An fraction of an inch is not
    0.x but x/[2 or 4 or 8 or a multiple thereof] and a foot is not 10 inches.

    In the 1980s they promised to go metric, like the British did. Yeah, right.

    They don't want to fit in the world. They want the world to fit around them.

    Werner Dahn

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From jlarkin@highlandsniptechnology.com@21:1/5 to All on Mon Feb 21 05:36:34 2022
    On Mon, 21 Feb 2022 18:16:42 +0700, aioe usenet <hirni47@yahoo.com>
    wrote:

    On 18/02/2022 21:45, Rick C wrote:
    On Friday, February 18, 2022 at 6:01:25 AM UTC-5, Jeroen Belleman wrote:
    On 2022-02-18 11:11, Lasse Langwadt Christensen wrote:
    fredag den 18. februar 2022 kl. 09.32.02 UTC+1 skrev Sylvia Else:
    I've got a board made that includes pads for some 0603 smds.

    How was I expected to know that 0603 is used for both imperial and
    metric sizes? No wonder there's no way I can put my imperial 0603
    components onto the metric 0603 landing pads.

    0603 appears to be the only size where this trap arises, and I fell
    right into it.

    also 0402 metric which is 01005 imperial

    Designed to confuse. Why do people do that?

    You mean why do people use the measuring system that everyone else in their country use? I guess this is a more pointed question at the US community. I remember working with a mechanical engineer at a military contractor and was surprised they still
    did everything using inches. 90% of electronic components are in mm as the primary unit. I guess I expect the mechanical community would have converted by now, but, no.

    I seem to recall an imperial 0603 is a metric 1608. The places where I would be selecting a part they make it clear which size they are using. On layout I would notice the difference in size, 2.5 to 1. I'm a bit surprised this error was made. If
    the layout was done by someone else, maybe not so much. I like doing layouts. It's like puzzle solving.

    I don't get why mil are still used in PCB layout so much. Layer thickness is still done in mil. Trace/space is still commonly in mil. I typically do my layout in mm. 6 mil is 0.1524 mm, so that gets rounded to 0.15 mm. Unfortunately that can
    trigger the alarms at PCB house pricing software and put you in a higher price category. I remember seeing feature checking software that would sound the alarm at what I can only assume was round off error missing the target by 0.00001 inches or
    something. I don't think I ever used that PWB supplier. I can't imagine what it would take to get that through their system. There were dozens if not hundreds of such error reports.


    The USA is at war with the decimal system. An fraction of an inch is not
    0.x but x/[2 or 4 or 8 or a multiple thereof] and a foot is not 10 inches.

    In the 1980s they promised to go metric, like the British did. Yeah, right.

    They don't want to fit in the world. They want the world to fit around them.

    Werner Dahn

    We do science and engineering in SI units.

    Pounds, ounces, inches, feet, miles, pints, gallons, degrees F are
    familiar and convenient everyday units. Nothing wrong with that.

    Converting to metric was unpopular, so it wasn't forced.



    --

    I yam what I yam - Popeye

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From DecadentLinuxUserNumeroUno@decadenc@21:1/5 to aioe usenet on Mon Feb 21 14:06:30 2022
    aioe usenet <hirni47@yahoo.com> wrote in
    news:suvsdd$1t4i$1@gioia.aioe.org:


    The USA is at war with the decimal system. An fraction of an inch
    is not 0.x but x/[2 or 4 or 8 or a multiple thereof] and a foot is
    not 10 inches.

    In the 1980s they promised to go metric, like the British did.
    Yeah, right.

    They don't want to fit in the world. They want the world to fit
    around them.

    Werner Dahn



    The USA has been metric for decades. We just happen to embrace both.
    Big deal. Or at least only to those wanting to piss and moan about it.
    Kids are taught metric in US schools. Young adults get taught
    fractional inch in the contruction trade and a few others.
    Both are taught and US auto makers have been metric for half a century.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From David Brown@21:1/5 to jlarkin@highlandsniptechnology.com on Mon Feb 21 15:07:55 2022
    On 21/02/2022 14:36, jlarkin@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:
    On Mon, 21 Feb 2022 18:16:42 +0700, aioe usenet <hirni47@yahoo.com>
    wrote:


    The USA is at war with the decimal system. An fraction of an inch is not
    0.x but x/[2 or 4 or 8 or a multiple thereof] and a foot is not 10 inches. >>
    In the 1980s they promised to go metric, like the British did. Yeah, right. >>
    They don't want to fit in the world. They want the world to fit around them. >>
    Werner Dahn

    We do science and engineering in SI units.

    Pounds, ounces, inches, feet, miles, pints, gallons, degrees F are
    familiar and convenient everyday units. Nothing wrong with that.

    Converting to metric was unpopular, so it wasn't forced.


    A change like that is always hard, and therefore unpopular. But it
    typically gets harder the longer you wait.

    Part of the job of a government is to do things that are unpopular, but
    are nonetheless the right move in the long run. It seems to me that governments are getting worse at that, with the USA in the lead but not
    alone - politicians are unwilling to risk their current popularity by
    making long-term investments where the benefits will be reaped by later politicians. The American system of presidents from alternating parties
    whose main focus seems to be undoing everything from the previous
    presidency, makes it even harder to make major long-term changes.

    An exception to this trend is Brexit - there the UK government /was/
    willing to go through very significant cost and hardship for long-term
    change. Unfortunately the short-term cost and hardship is a sacrifice
    leading to longer-term cost and hardship - change is perhaps inevitable,
    but progress is not.

    The British went through the change to metric (keeping pints for beer
    and milk, which is fine). They went through a change in currency in
    about 1971, from silly pounds / shillings / pence to a decimal system.
    It can be done, and it is worth doing.

    Maybe a deal can be made - the USA changes its outdated measurement
    system, its daft paper sizes, and its non-standard mains electricity.
    In return, the British will accept "color", "analog" and "neighbor" as acceptable spelling :-)

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From jlarkin@highlandsniptechnology.com@21:1/5 to david.brown@hesbynett.no on Mon Feb 21 07:19:26 2022
    On Mon, 21 Feb 2022 15:07:55 +0100, David Brown
    <david.brown@hesbynett.no> wrote:

    On 21/02/2022 14:36, jlarkin@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:
    On Mon, 21 Feb 2022 18:16:42 +0700, aioe usenet <hirni47@yahoo.com>
    wrote:


    The USA is at war with the decimal system. An fraction of an inch is not >>> 0.x but x/[2 or 4 or 8 or a multiple thereof] and a foot is not 10 inches. >>>
    In the 1980s they promised to go metric, like the British did. Yeah, right. >>>
    They don't want to fit in the world. They want the world to fit around them.

    Werner Dahn

    We do science and engineering in SI units.

    Pounds, ounces, inches, feet, miles, pints, gallons, degrees F are
    familiar and convenient everyday units. Nothing wrong with that.

    Converting to metric was unpopular, so it wasn't forced.


    A change like that is always hard, and therefore unpopular. But it
    typically gets harder the longer you wait.

    Part of the job of a government is to do things that are unpopular, but
    are nonetheless the right move in the long run.

    Assuming that a ruling elite can ignore the preferences of the dumb
    flyover populace who, for some bizarre reason, are allowed to vote.



    It seems to me that
    governments are getting worse at that, with the USA in the lead but not
    alone - politicians are unwilling to risk their current popularity by
    making long-term investments where the benefits will be reaped by later >politicians. The American system of presidents from alternating parties >whose main focus seems to be undoing everything from the previous
    presidency, makes it even harder to make major long-term changes.

    Democracy sucks. What you need are a few good kings.


    An exception to this trend is Brexit - there the UK government /was/
    willing to go through very significant cost and hardship for long-term >change. Unfortunately the short-term cost and hardship is a sacrifice >leading to longer-term cost and hardship - change is perhaps inevitable,
    but progress is not.

    The British went through the change to metric (keeping pints for beer
    and milk, which is fine). They went through a change in currency in
    about 1971, from silly pounds / shillings / pence to a decimal system.
    It can be done, and it is worth doing.

    Maybe a deal can be made - the USA changes its outdated measurement
    system, its daft paper sizes, and its non-standard mains electricity.
    In return, the British will accept "color", "analog" and "neighbor" as >acceptable spelling :-)

    No, leave things alone, we find your quirks amusing when we take tours
    to see the ancient Brits in their native costumes.

    Pity about the food, although I have had some great Italian in
    England.



    --

    I yam what I yam - Popeye

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Rick C@21:1/5 to David Brown on Mon Feb 21 08:35:46 2022
    On Monday, February 21, 2022 at 9:08:07 AM UTC-5, David Brown wrote:

    The British went through the change to metric (keeping pints for beer
    and milk, which is fine). They went through a change in currency in
    about 1971, from silly pounds / shillings / pence to a decimal system.
    It can be done, and it is worth doing.

    I've always though the British monetary units were cute. How about a Bob, Guv? I still can't remember how much a crown is, but it sounds interesting. The guinea is the one that really gets me though, £1/1/-. Who invented that!? Apparently it arose
    from the fact it was gold and intended to be 20 shillings, but the shilling was in silver and the relative value varied. At some point the guinea was standardized to be worth 21 shillings (the relative value at the time) and the oddness was born!


    Maybe a deal can be made - the USA changes its outdated measurement
    system, its daft paper sizes, and its non-standard mains electricity.
    In return, the British will accept "color", "analog" and "neighbor" as acceptable spelling :-)

    English is the common language that divides us.

    --

    Rick C.

    +-- Get 1,000 miles of free Supercharging
    +-- Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Joe Gwinn@21:1/5 to gnuarm.deletethisbit@gmail.com on Mon Feb 21 11:58:22 2022
    On Mon, 21 Feb 2022 08:22:42 -0800 (PST), Rick C <gnuarm.deletethisbit@gmail.com> wrote:

    On Monday, February 21, 2022 at 6:18:17 AM UTC-5, aioe usenet wrote:
    On 18/02/2022 21:45, Rick C wrote:
    On Friday, February 18, 2022 at 6:01:25 AM UTC-5, Jeroen Belleman wrote: >> >> On 2022-02-18 11:11, Lasse Langwadt Christensen wrote:
    fredag den 18. februar 2022 kl. 09.32.02 UTC+1 skrev Sylvia Else:
    I've got a board made that includes pads for some 0603 smds.

    How was I expected to know that 0603 is used for both imperial and
    metric sizes? No wonder there's no way I can put my imperial 0603
    components onto the metric 0603 landing pads.

    0603 appears to be the only size where this trap arises, and I fell
    right into it.

    also 0402 metric which is 01005 imperial

    Designed to confuse. Why do people do that?

    You mean why do people use the measuring system that everyone else in their country use? I guess this is a more pointed question at the US community. I remember working with a mechanical engineer at a military contractor and was surprised they still
    did everything using inches. 90% of electronic components are in mm as the primary unit. I guess I expect the mechanical community would have converted by now, but, no.

    I seem to recall an imperial 0603 is a metric 1608. The places where I would be selecting a part they make it clear which size they are using. On layout I would notice the difference in size, 2.5 to 1. I'm a bit surprised this error was made. If the
    layout was done by someone else, maybe not so much. I like doing layouts. It's like puzzle solving.

    I don't get why mil are still used in PCB layout so much. Layer thickness is still done in mil. Trace/space is still commonly in mil. I typically do my layout in mm. 6 mil is 0.1524 mm, so that gets rounded to 0.15 mm. Unfortunately that can trigger
    the alarms at PCB house pricing software and put you in a higher price category. I remember seeing feature checking software that would sound the alarm at what I can only assume was round off error missing the target by 0.00001 inches or something. I don'
    t think I ever used that PWB supplier. I can't imagine what it would take to get that through their system. There were dozens if not hundreds of such error reports.


    The USA is at war with the decimal system. An fraction of an inch is not
    0.x but x/[2 or 4 or 8 or a multiple thereof] and a foot is not 10 inches.

    Don't confuse decimal with imperial or metric. The binary fractions are a common use of inches, but it is far from universal. Virtually any use of inches other than personal usage is decimal inches.


    In the 1980s they promised to go metric, like the British did. Yeah, right.

    I don't think the US ever made any promises. The efforts to metrify were always voluntary. We have become a dual measurement country. But habits are hard to change. We have supermarket products labeled in both Imperial and metric, but most people
    here are more comfortable with Imperial. We happily buy our liquor in metric. That industry simply converted and is done with "fifths" and half pints, etc. Beer is commonly sold by ounces though. I'm currently drinking a soft drink in a tall skinny
    can that is 330 ml/11.15 fl oz.


    They don't want to fit in the world. They want the world to fit around them.

    I think few people from outside the US can appreciate the level of isolation in the US. Yeah, we can pretty much live fat, dumb and happy with the Imperial system in everyday use. However, anything international has to include metric. Data sheets in
    the US for international products, just like from other countries, have dual labels for metric and Imperial. So we are doing what we must to fit in. If or when the international convention for data sheets becomes metric only, our data sheets will still
    include metric values, so we will be compatible.

    It is my hope that someday we will convert, but there is literally no pain in staying with our current system. None that the typical voter sees anyway. So politicians are not going to push the issue.

    How does this affect anyone outside the US? If the US converted to metric measurements today, 100%, what would change for you?

    The original reason that Industry in the US resisted conversion to
    Metric was that with the technology of that day, Industry would have
    had to replace all their machine tools and tooling, and redo all their
    drawings and documentation. All for no practical advantage.

    Now days, with everything becoming computer-controlled, switching is
    far easier, and conversion is happening gradually, in the natural
    course of progress.

    Some industries are already totally metric, or nearly so. One that
    comes to mind is optics. Pharma also.

    Joe Gwinn

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Rick C@21:1/5 to aioe usenet on Mon Feb 21 08:22:42 2022
    On Monday, February 21, 2022 at 6:18:17 AM UTC-5, aioe usenet wrote:
    On 18/02/2022 21:45, Rick C wrote:
    On Friday, February 18, 2022 at 6:01:25 AM UTC-5, Jeroen Belleman wrote:
    On 2022-02-18 11:11, Lasse Langwadt Christensen wrote:
    fredag den 18. februar 2022 kl. 09.32.02 UTC+1 skrev Sylvia Else:
    I've got a board made that includes pads for some 0603 smds.

    How was I expected to know that 0603 is used for both imperial and
    metric sizes? No wonder there's no way I can put my imperial 0603
    components onto the metric 0603 landing pads.

    0603 appears to be the only size where this trap arises, and I fell >>>> right into it.

    also 0402 metric which is 01005 imperial

    Designed to confuse. Why do people do that?

    You mean why do people use the measuring system that everyone else in their country use? I guess this is a more pointed question at the US community. I remember working with a mechanical engineer at a military contractor and was surprised they still
    did everything using inches. 90% of electronic components are in mm as the primary unit. I guess I expect the mechanical community would have converted by now, but, no.

    I seem to recall an imperial 0603 is a metric 1608. The places where I would be selecting a part they make it clear which size they are using. On layout I would notice the difference in size, 2.5 to 1. I'm a bit surprised this error was made. If the
    layout was done by someone else, maybe not so much. I like doing layouts. It's like puzzle solving.

    I don't get why mil are still used in PCB layout so much. Layer thickness is still done in mil. Trace/space is still commonly in mil. I typically do my layout in mm. 6 mil is 0.1524 mm, so that gets rounded to 0.15 mm. Unfortunately that can trigger
    the alarms at PCB house pricing software and put you in a higher price category. I remember seeing feature checking software that would sound the alarm at what I can only assume was round off error missing the target by 0.00001 inches or something. I don'
    t think I ever used that PWB supplier. I can't imagine what it would take to get that through their system. There were dozens if not hundreds of such error reports.


    The USA is at war with the decimal system. An fraction of an inch is not
    0.x but x/[2 or 4 or 8 or a multiple thereof] and a foot is not 10 inches.

    Don't confuse decimal with imperial or metric. The binary fractions are a common use of inches, but it is far from universal. Virtually any use of inches other than personal usage is decimal inches.


    In the 1980s they promised to go metric, like the British did. Yeah, right.

    I don't think the US ever made any promises. The efforts to metrify were always voluntary. We have become a dual measurement country. But habits are hard to change. We have supermarket products labeled in both Imperial and metric, but most people
    here are more comfortable with Imperial. We happily buy our liquor in metric. That industry simply converted and is done with "fifths" and half pints, etc. Beer is commonly sold by ounces though. I'm currently drinking a soft drink in a tall skinny
    can that is 330 ml/11.15 fl oz.


    They don't want to fit in the world. They want the world to fit around them.

    I think few people from outside the US can appreciate the level of isolation in the US. Yeah, we can pretty much live fat, dumb and happy with the Imperial system in everyday use. However, anything international has to include metric. Data sheets in
    the US for international products, just like from other countries, have dual labels for metric and Imperial. So we are doing what we must to fit in. If or when the international convention for data sheets becomes metric only, our data sheets will still
    include metric values, so we will be compatible.

    It is my hope that someday we will convert, but there is literally no pain in staying with our current system. None that the typical voter sees anyway. So politicians are not going to push the issue.

    How does this affect anyone outside the US? If the US converted to metric measurements today, 100%, what would change for you?

    --

    Rick C.

    -++ Get 1,000 miles of free Supercharging
    -++ Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From DecadentLinuxUserNumeroUno@decadenc@21:1/5 to jlarkin@highlandsniptechnology.com on Mon Feb 21 16:42:17 2022
    jlarkin@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote in news:9ra71hput0akpqeiqk83056ce91ql7eanj@4ax.com:

    Assuming that a ruling elite can ignore the preferences of the dumb
    flyover populace who, for some bizarre reason, are allowed to vote.


    Where the fuck were you back when the Vietnam thing was happening?

    18 years of age and US citizen. THOSE ARE THE ONLY TWO FACTORS.

    I think socially inept dumbfucks like you should not be permitted to
    vote.

    "ruling elite"??? "dumb flyover populace"??? What the fuck is that
    even, you stupid twerp?

    You are the clueless thinks he's above the rest utter idiot on this
    bus.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From David Brown@21:1/5 to Rick C on Mon Feb 21 18:00:51 2022
    On 21/02/2022 17:35, Rick C wrote:
    On Monday, February 21, 2022 at 9:08:07 AM UTC-5, David Brown wrote:

    The British went through the change to metric (keeping pints for
    beer and milk, which is fine). They went through a change in
    currency in about 1971, from silly pounds / shillings / pence to a
    decimal system. It can be done, and it is worth doing.

    I've always though the British monetary units were cute. How about a
    Bob, Guv? I still can't remember how much a crown is, but it sounds interesting.

    A "bob" is a shilling - one twentieth of a pound, and thus 5 "new pence"
    (or 12 d in old money). A florin was two shillings. A crown was 5
    shillings, and of course a half-crown was therefore 2½ shillings. A
    shilling was two sixpences, each of which was two thrupences or three tuppences. (My spelling might not be 100% accurate here - my newsreader dictionary is not old enough!). A penny was two ha'pennies, or four
    farthings.

    Common names for coins can still be used - "bob" was common long after shillings were obsolete, and lasted until 5 pence was basically
    worthless. I guess you have the same thing with dimes and nickels.

    The guinea is the one that really gets me though,
    £1/1/-. Who invented that!? Apparently it arose from the fact it
    was gold and intended to be 20 shillings, but the shilling was in
    silver and the relative value varied. At some point the guinea was standardized to be worth 21 shillings (the relative value at the
    time) and the oddness was born!


    Guineas were heavily used for auctions. (I can't say for sure if
    auctions were the origin, or if it was due to the prices of gold and
    silver as you say.) Basically, they buyer paid the price in guineas,
    the seller got the price in pounds, and the auctioneer kept the 5% cut.
    Horse auctions are still done in guineas, last I heard.


    Maybe a deal can be made - the USA changes its outdated measurement
    system, its daft paper sizes, and its non-standard mains
    electricity. In return, the British will accept "color", "analog"
    and "neighbor" as acceptable spelling :-)

    English is the common language that divides us.


    There are plenty of differences in spelling in which the American
    version just makes more sense - "color", for example. You didn't go
    through the "make it look more like French by adding random vowels"
    period that we had.

    On the other hand, you have some cases where the word is the same, but
    you've got the meaning completely wrong. And you can't pronounce
    "route" correctly - for some reason, that one always bugs me.

    But you are still closer to the Queen's English than in many parts of
    the UK :-)

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Clive Arthur@21:1/5 to David Brown on Mon Feb 21 17:28:34 2022
    On 21/02/2022 17:00, David Brown wrote:

    <snip>

    A
    shilling was two sixpences, each of which was two thrupences or three tuppences.

    Very valuable nowadays, those tuppences.

    --
    Cheers
    Clive

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Dan Purgert@21:1/5 to David Brown on Mon Feb 21 17:16:09 2022
    -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
    Hash: SHA512

    David Brown wrote:
    ...
    On the other hand, you have some cases where the word is the same, but
    you've got the meaning completely wrong. And you can't pronounce
    "route" correctly - for some reason, that one always bugs me.

    Look, just because we don't go kicking our rooters every time the
    internet goes out ... :)


    -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----

    iQIzBAEBCgAdFiEE3asj+xn6fYUcweBnbWVw5UznKGAFAmITyQUACgkQbWVw5Uzn KGBNiRAAo+DFyC1gqVMWi7ENL1iJBij2Zie2iA2xwULvVINfBCChKTOkzTr7C5V+ fAZAzoaRSg1Q92cibwYG3+VveG0ruZ9DLwNWDrhds+F9bdmFg22hJ8PorLSqhoeL +BWydwZWPOBCCoCW2Kd3JMgmX6QubfsfGSzw4wRLE/u6fnvB9ueM0mh0Nn15i7Nz eIGVpRWqhfsoR+EJNl/OU3/6EnTwk3snfCcAZ77I6/69vNJsKC7iCXAHAtorjC5N cX8pVY9qFqP/+QoQYhDmoeSgrWC7GOiOFFJDrlHzpcjOA5NhMMiMaNdEYuYX4FY0 DZzHx91ymix65EnHZgFFloPbz8/TrXdLVPM5a6YjIvYlcD9YL7atn1PIkI1JpRBX nnMhobJv4tZxVa4i3k+mkOmmXRNrzDIrcgHi3YkqijS0kh4YNi2S091PdXWWWjQB TE7o6Wxt7WupxU8HR0YsvBkMFHbYk3HeO60VDaf++p+6ZJcMd+BQpzQtahpGyD28 Hv/gto65Gcr2fkg1YIsAr+fqmG3dTV1NSz/JUgrOtrQHql8pguhZG2j+upizF2Le M04ZONZ9Q7SlSt8noXjHgpo6zbfQDHj3cjQ8SZfFUiJr8NWevoAnRg6Sep+qJQsO D53szvbJrL22kccP9T/3An64mptzE5lUBFaoUWnz7HqvAVhjqa8=
    =8v08
    -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

    --
    |_|O|_|
    |_|_|O| Github: https://github.com/dpurgert
    |O|O|O| PGP: DDAB 23FB 19FA 7D85 1CC1 E067 6D65 70E5 4CE7 2860

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From DecadentLinuxUserNumeroUno@decadenc@21:1/5 to Rick C on Mon Feb 21 17:28:16 2022
    Rick C <gnuarm.deletethisbit@gmail.com> wrote in news:7efd2d30-ebcd-4ea2-87bf-c90a325a01bbn@googlegroups.com:

    On Monday, February 21, 2022 at 6:18:17 AM UTC-5, aioe usenet
    wrote:
    On 18/02/2022 21:45, Rick C wrote:
    On Friday, February 18, 2022 at 6:01:25 AM UTC-5, Jeroen
    Belleman wrote
    :
    On 2022-02-18 11:11, Lasse Langwadt Christensen wrote:
    fredag den 18. februar 2022 kl. 09.32.02 UTC+1 skrev Sylvia
    Else:
    I've got a board made that includes pads for some 0603 smds.

    How was I expected to know that 0603 is used for both
    imperial and

    metric sizes? No wonder there's no way I can put my imperial
    0603 components onto the metric 0603 landing pads.

    0603 appears to be the only size where this trap arises, and
    I fell

    right into it.

    also 0402 metric which is 01005 imperial

    Designed to confuse. Why do people do that?

    You mean why do people use the measuring system that everyone
    else in t
    heir country use? I guess this is a more pointed question at the
    US community. I remember working with a mechanical engineer at a
    military contractor and was surprised they still did everything
    using inches. 90% of electronic components are in mm as the
    primary unit. I guess I expect the mechanical community would have
    converted by now, but, no.

    I seem to recall an imperial 0603 is a metric 1608. The places
    where I
    would be selecting a part they make it clear which size they are
    using. On layout I would notice the difference in size, 2.5 to 1.
    I'm a bit surprised this error was made. If the layout was done by
    someone else, maybe not so much. I like doing layouts. It's like
    puzzle solving.

    I don't get why mil are still used in PCB layout so much. Layer
    thickne
    ss is still done in mil. Trace/space is still commonly in mil. I
    typically do my layout in mm. 6 mil is 0.1524 mm, so that gets
    rounded to 0.15 mm. Unfortunately that can trigger the alarms at
    PCB house pricing software and put you in a higher price category.
    I remember seeing feature checking software that would sound the
    alarm at what I can only assume was round off error missing the
    target by 0.00001 inches or something. I don't think I ever used
    that PWB supplier. I can't imagine what it would take to get that
    through their system. There were dozens if not hundreds of such
    error reports.


    The USA is at war with the decimal system. An fraction of an inch
    is not

    0.x but x/[2 or 4 or 8 or a multiple thereof] and a foot is not
    10 inches
    .

    Don't confuse decimal with imperial or metric. The binary
    fractions are a common use of inches, but it is far from
    universal. Virtually any use of inches other than personal usage
    is decimal inches.


    In the 1980s they promised to go metric, like the British did.
    Yeah, righ
    t.

    I don't think the US ever made any promises. The efforts to
    metrify were always voluntary. We have become a dual measurement
    country. But habits are hard to change. We have supermarket
    products labeled in both Imperial and metric, but most people here
    are more comfortable with Imperial. We happily buy our liquor in
    metric. That industry simply converted and is done with "fifths"
    and half pints, etc. Beer is commonly sold by ounces though. I'm
    currently drinking a soft drink in a tall skinny can that is 330
    ml/11.15 fl oz.


    They don't want to fit in the world. They want the world to fit
    around th
    em.

    I think few people from outside the US can appreciate the level of
    isolation in the US. Yeah, we can pretty much live fat, dumb and
    happy with the Imperial system in everyday use. However, anything international has to include metric. Data sheets in the US for
    international products, just like from other countries, have dual
    labels for metric and Imperial. So we are doing what we must to
    fit in. If or when the international convention for data sheets
    becomes metric only, our data sheets will still include metric
    values, so we will be compatible.

    It is my hope that someday we will convert, but there is literally
    no pain in staying with our current system. None that the typical
    voter sees anyway. So politicians are not going to push the
    issue.

    How does this affect anyone outside the US? If the US converted
    to metric measurements today, 100%, what would change for you?


    It is about usage. Just like baseball and basketball, pool, etc.
    To get good at any of them, one must experience the operations over
    and over again to become familiar with them. Commonly referred to as
    practice.

    To do metric in a dual realm demographic, the INDIVIDUAL must
    decide to make a conscious effort in that direction. Then personally
    do so each time one is confronted with weights and measures in their
    daily life. So at first one nit-picks every little thing and does
    the conversions. Once the conversions take root in the person's
    mindset, less nit-picking and more automatic self metrification take
    place in the brain. IOW It become easier... hard wired even...
    enjoyable.

    I used to have a good idea what a one inch span was between my
    fingers. Really good. Now, I concentrate on my brain learning one
    millimeter, then 5 and 10, and then ten of those and then the meter
    itself.
    Practice is all it takes. A conscious effort.

    And when one becomes really good at one of those games, we call it
    expert or pro. I call it The Harlem Globe Trotter Effect.
    Meadowlark Lemon could stand at half court with his back to the rim,
    talking to Howard Cosell and flip a shot over his shoulder and in for
    a swish.

    Easy for me... when I do carpentry or framing I use inch. Because
    were I to get in a conversation with a friend, or neighbor, or
    realtor, I would want to be able to tell them about the size of those
    elements I built the way they are still 'traditionally' referred to
    as. As I myself do that conversion in my head, and could tell
    someone in metric what the span was at a certain location.

    When I do small part design, and machining or PCB layout, I use
    metric and speak metric about it. Base ten is easy. Describing
    something in millimeters and knowing what ten of those make (a
    centimeter), one can describe small machined parts or circuit board
    elements. With the early SMD realm here, however, we used the
    standard form factors listed usually 2106, 0805, 0602, 0402.
    I can solder down to 0402.

    It all comes down to personal experience in the US. If one is
    exposed to the metric system, one learns it and then has two in his
    or her brain. It could be argued that in the metric only places in
    the world, they are missing out. Many here can't be bothered.
    And the rest of the globe looks at my nation and thinks that we are
    all as dumb as the can't be bothered crowd.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From DecadentLinuxUserNumeroUno@decadenc@21:1/5 to Clive Arthur on Mon Feb 21 17:39:43 2022
    Clive Arthur <clive@nowaytoday.co.uk> wrote in
    news:sv0i44$efj$1@dont-email.me:

    On 21/02/2022 17:00, David Brown wrote:

    <snip>

    A
    shilling was two sixpences, each of which was two thrupences or
    three tuppences.

    Very valuable nowadays, those tuppences.


    And those pressurized firkins too.

    Just ask Ringo... err Yougman Grand. ;-)

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Tom Del Rosso@21:1/5 to Rick C on Mon Feb 21 22:37:23 2022
    Rick C wrote:

    Is there a meaning to what you posted? Or is it just some random
    thought you had and felt the need to share with us like some derelict
    on a street corner?

    The meaning could be that you just continually ignore factors like the
    sharp increase in teen suicide and other consequenses of your lockdowns,
    or your incapacity to understand the very concept of freedom, as well as
    the stats on "covid" deaths that include almost no one with less than 2 comorbidities.

    A derelict on a street corner would be more likely to abruptly change
    the subject of conversation, like you did in this thread.


    --
    Defund the Thought Police

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From David Brown@21:1/5 to Dan Purgert on Tue Feb 22 08:29:08 2022
    On 21/02/2022 18:16, Dan Purgert wrote:
    David Brown wrote:
    ...
    On the other hand, you have some cases where the word is the same, but
    you've got the meaning completely wrong. And you can't pronounce
    "route" correctly - for some reason, that one always bugs me.

    Look, just because we don't go kicking our rooters every time the
    internet goes out ... :)


    You'd rather rout your packets off the battlefield!

    :-)

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)