Metric versus Imperial System for Diving?

Please register or login

Welcome to ScubaBoard, the world's largest scuba diving community. Registration is not required to read the forums, but we encourage you to join. Joining has its benefits and enables you to participate in the discussions.

Benefits of registering include

  • Ability to post and comment on topics and discussions.
  • A Free photo gallery to share your dive photos with the world.
  • You can make this box go away

Joining is quick and easy. Log in or Register now!

Status
Not open for further replies.
10 miles to the nearest store? That's over 16 kliks. Too far to walk, too near to drive. I'd move. I know kliks real well because that's all there was for a year of my life, a crucial year of map reading and high tension hiking.

Converting kliks to miles is easy. Figure almost but not quite 2/3 the number of miles when reading kliks. Close enough. Most people are stupid. When I traveled frequently in Europe my friends were always asking me to convert currency.Some dimwits actually used little 'currency converters". All that's really needed is to establish a numeric relationship: 5 to 3 or 27 to one or 2.5 to 4. Once you've got the ratio clear, conversion takes a couple of seconds, with some rounding, all done in your head, if you have one.
 
First thing that is going to have to happen for the US to convert to the metric system is a need to do so. Second thing is going to be to find someone who really cares one way or the other. It seems to me that the vast majority of people who really care, don't live here. It's a tough sell. It was a tough sell years ago when I was in grade school and nobody really bought into it. When in Rome...........
 
One of the more hilarious aspects (well, to me, anyway) of the non-metric society that the US is, is how a lot of the gas stations present their gas prices.

$3.24 9/10

What the hell is that, a fraction of a fraction? :rofl3:

No, genius, it's a percentage of a whole number, 9/10 of one cent. The price, written differently, is 'three hundred twenty four and 9/10 cents.' The combination of a decimal and a fraction seems to have caused a problem, despite the fact that the currency being used is structured in a pure decimal system, essentially metric. How can this be? Gallons or liters is not an issue in the pricing method.
 
This from my original post.. Don't misquote me. It's a dishonest tactic.

"Moreover Celcius was chosen very logical. 0 - when water freezes, 100 - when the water boils under 1 atmosphere. "

WAS CHOSEN. and UNDER 1 ATMOSPHERE.. I mentioned it. Print it and reread this 10 times.

And you continue to miss the point that it was an arbitrary and (now) proven inadequate reference, again the understanding of atmospheric pressure on the phase change of water (you do understand phase change) was incompletely understood when Celsius was defined.

The gram was originally defined as a measurement unit filled with water. So the measurement unit has changed, water is no longer used to define weight (and not to confuse weight and mass) and the kilogram is defined by a historical artifact.

So where we sit today, we have a system that conveniently works in multiples of 10 (conveniently aligning with the Western numbering system), but there is intrinsically nothing different that Fahrenheit picking some arbitrary extremes and going from there.

A meter is not a measure of the earth, Celsius is not based on points easily reproducible by "normal" people, and the kilo is just a hunk of metal.

And you are an ass. And if you remember where this started, you started off (and continued) with attacks on me because of my imperfect understanding of the metric system.

Would you like to share your credentials?

Oh, and I almost forgot. Celsius is insufficiently granular.
Can you show me a weather forecast where a decimal place is shown ??
 
And you continue to miss the point that it was an arbitrary and (now) proven inadequate reference, again the understanding of atmospheric pressure on the phase change of water (you do understand phase change) was incompletely understood when Celsius was defined.

The gram was originally defined as a measurement unit filled with water. So the measurement unit has changed, water is no longer used to define weight (and not to confuse weight and mass) and the kilogram is defined by a historical artifact.

So where we sit today, we have a system that conveniently works in multiples of 10 (conveniently aligning with the Western numbering system), but there is intrinsically nothing different that Fahrenheit picking some arbitrary extremes and going from there.

A meter is not a measure of the earth, Celsius is not based on points easily reproducible by "normal" people, and the kilo is just a hunk of metal.

And you are an ass. And if you remember where this started, you started off (and continued) with attacks on me because of my imperfect understanding of the metric system.

Would you like to share your credentials?

Oh, and I almost forgot. Celsius is insufficiently granular.
Can you show me a weather forecast where a decimal place is shown ??

Dude, just stop it. The water temperature was chosen as freezing and boiling temperatures - read a book. Obviously centuries later the definition was refined. Seriously. You are arguing about things, that every child in Europe or Asia simply knows. They don't have to claim to have "degrees" in science to understand where all these measurements came from. All you have to do is just to read a book.

I didn't attack you, you posted some comment about "granularity" and I commented that people who use metric system don't even think about granularity, because it's not even an issue. Every European or Asian child just knows that, uses that. For you Celcius is insufficiently granular? Cool, use Fahrenheit, claim that you are reincarnation of Einstein, claim all the degrees from all the universities and say you are revolutionizing the science and all the scientists of all 163 countries are just morons. Cool, whatever rocks your boat - you are not alone.

You considered my comment an "attack"? I'm sorry I hurt your feelings. Drink some water, it will heal in time. It's dangerous out there in Internet, you know, people "attack" other people..
 
Dude, just stop it. The water temperature was chosen as freezing and boiling temperatures - read a book. Obviously centuries later the definition was refined. Seriously. You are arguing about things, that every child in Europe or Asia simply knows. They don't have to claim to have "degrees" in science to understand where all these measurements came from. All you have to do is just to read a book.

I didn't attack you, you posted some comment about "granularity" and I commented that people who use metric system don't even think about granularity, because it's not even an issue. Every European or Asian child just knows that, uses that. For you Celcius is insufficiently granular? Cool, use Fahrenheit, claim that you are reincarnation of Einstein, claim all the degrees from all the universities and say you are revolutionizing the science and all the scientists of all 163 countries are just morons. Cool, whatever rocks your boat - you are not alone.

You considered my comment an "attack"? I'm sorry I hurt your feelings. Drink some water, it will heal in time. It's dangerous out there in Internet, you know, people "attack" other people..

So with no lack of hubris, we'll add certain measure of demonstrated amnesia
Duh. It has nothing to do with chemistry. Did you get your degree in wikipedia?


And:
Moreover when dealing with absolute zeroes scientists use Kelvin - it's just same Celcius minus 273.


Really ?? (hint it's not)

And if you recall, I facetiously mentioned that my favorite unit of measurement was Furlongs per fortnite.

So you have some demonstrated inferiority complex about your lack of formal education. Poor baby, you can make up for that with an excess of tact (oh wait that ship has sailed)
 
Duh, 0 Kelvin is -273.15 Celsius.. 0 Celsius is 273.15 Kelvin.... but perhaps I should stop replying.. and then we are talking about "metric system in the US".. nah.. won't happen..
 
Yeah, you'd have to come up with something else. Exercises like these are nothing but a complete waste of time in SI. Indeed, if being able to read a tape measure correctly is what determines the skill level of a carpenter, then I do pity your carpenters.

No need to pity our carpenters, I said apprentice carpenter, not carpenter.

Apprentice
noun
1.someone who works for a skilled or qualified person in order to learn a trade or profession, esp for a recognized period, any beginner or novice


---------- Post added October 23rd, 2014 at 09:24 PM ----------

First thing that is going to have to happen for the US to convert to the metric system is a need to do so. Second thing is going to be to find someone who really cares one way or the other. It seems to me that the vast majority of people who really care, don't live here. It's a tough sell. It was a tough sell years ago when I was in grade school and nobody really bought into it. When in Rome...........

Agreed. Hardly anyone in America gives a crap about adopting the metric system, it's used freely when required, not like the metric system is rocket science or something.
 
Gas Blending in Metric is a lot more intuitive as well. . .


Starting from an empty tank or set of tanks (5 .5L, same as AL40 deco cylinder; and 11L, same as AL80 in doubles/twinset backgas Cylinders):


To get Nitrox 50 add 37% O2:
That is, for every 100 bar of Eanx50 deco mix, you need 37 bar of pure O2 and top off the remainder with [hyper-filtered clean] Air;


Nitrox 32 (add 14% O2):
For every 100 bar of Eanx32 mix, you need 14 bar of pure O2 and top off the remainder with Air;


20/20 Trimix (add 4% O2 & 20% Helium):
For every 100 bar of 20/20 Trimix, you need 4 bar of pure O2, 20 bar of He and top off remainder with Air;


25/25 Triox (add 12% O2 & 25% Helium):
For every 100 bar of 25/25 Triox, you need 12 bar of pure O2, 25 bar of He and top off remainder with Air;


30/30 Triox (add 19% O2 & 30% Helium):
For every 100 bar of 30/30 Triox, you need 19 bar of pure O2, 30 bar of He and top off remainder with Air;


21/35 Trimix (add 9% O2 & 35% Helium):
For every 100 bar of 21/35 Trimix, you need 9 bar of pure O2, 35 bar of He and top off remainder with Air;


18/45 Trimix (add 8% O2 & 45% Helium):
For every 100 bar of 18/45 Trimix, you need 8 bar of pure O2, 45 bar of He and top off remainder with Air;


15/55 Trimix (add 7% O2 & 55% Helium):
For every 100 bar of 15/55 Trimix, you need 7 bar of pure O2, 55 bar of He and top off remainder with Air;


12/60 Trimix (add 5% O2 & 60% Helium):
For every 100 bar of 12/60 Trimix, you need 5 bar of pure O2, 60 bar of He and top off remainder with Air;


10/70 Trimix (add 4.5% O2 & 70% Helium):
For every 100 bar of 10/70 Trimix, you need 4.5 bar of pure O2, 70 bar of He and top off remainder with Air.


Using a 11L (AL80) cylinder, or set of twin 11L doubles (double AL80's) for a total of 22L, a full tank or set of tanks is 200 bar:
-->Therefore, all you need is 2 times the amount in bar for O2 (& He for Trimix) from above recipes for a particular mixture.


Example)
21/35 Trimix requires blending 9% Oxygen and and 35% Helium; Therefore a full 11L (Al80) cylinder(s) at 200 bar total pressure needs 18 bar of O2 (2 times 9 bar equals 18 bar), and 70 bar of Helium (2 times 35 bar equals 70 bar); and top off remainder to 200 bar with [hyper-filtered clean] Air.


Gas Blending in Metric (cont.):
Now how did we get the "cookbook recipes" for blending the particular mixtures above? And why for instance with Nitrox 50, can't we use 50 bar of Oxygen and 50 bar of Nitrogen for every 100 bar of Eanx50 to blend a seemingly real intuitive "half & half" mixture?


The answer is YES! You can blend 50 bar of O2 and 50 bar of N2 -->If you are mixing pure O2 AND PURE N2 TOGETHER!!!
But for practical means, why do you need pure N2 when you can just use Air with its natural constituent contribution of 21% Oxygen & 79% Nitrogen?


Using Air this time, let's blend 100 bar of deco mix Nitrox 50:
We know empirically that for every 100 bar of Eanx50, 50 bar must be O2 and 50 bar must be N2;
Quantitatively then, how much Air do we need to add in order to give us a N2 amount of 50 bar?


Algebraically and by Dalton's Law, you divide 50 bar N2 by 79% (the %age of Nitrogen in Air), and this yields approximately 63 bar of Air needed. And of this 63 bar of Air, 21% of it (the %age of Oxygen in Air) contributes to the amount needed for O2: approx 13 bar of Oxygen.


Therefore, instead of initially mixing in a full 50 bar of O2, and since we're using Air instead pure N2, you only need 50 bar minus the 13 bar Oxygen contribution from Air, which equals 37 bar. So hence the cookbook recipe of for every 100 bar of Nitrox 50, add 37 bar of pure O2, and fill the remainder with Air to 100 bar (100 bar total minus 37 bar of O2 equals 63 bar --the amount of Air needed for N2 which we calculated above).


Now to fill an empty 5.5L/bar deco tank (same as an AL40) with Nitrox 50, we need 200 bar of the above recipe (i.e. "For every 100 bar of Eanx50, add 37 bar of pure O2, and then fill the remainder with Air"). Therefore just multiply 37 bar by 2 which equals 74 bar of O2 needed, and then fill the remainder with Air to the total fill pressure of 200 bar.


Similarly, it all applies also to the Trimix recipes --the only difference is accounting for the exact percentage and amount in bar of the Helium constituent in the total mixture . . .
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom