Super selfish reason but as an architect in the US, I deal with nice round imperial numbers all day. Door frames, typically 2”. Standard commercial door, 3’x7’. All the codes are based around imperial too. ADA door width, 3’. Masonry Dimension, every 8 inches. At this point, it would be hard to remember that ADA turning radius is 1525 mm (not the easy 5’…. And yes, I know that’s changing to 67” soon). There are literally hundreds of dimensions I would have to relearn. I suppose it’s probably for the best to switch over and rip that bandaid off, but damn, it would be a headache and take me much longer to review drawings in metric (in the short term).
I assume you would also introduce a new standard with rounded numbers, metric doors are also 200x80 cm for example, and sizes of everything gets rounded in the rest of the world, too. Timber sizes differ a little between north america and the rest of the world, it is a different framework, you’d get used to it.
All I think about is how much current tooling in manufacturing is made to use those round imperial measurements, and how much it would cost to convert/change them over. That’s possibly the #1 reason why the US will never go metric.
A change like that shouldn’t be done over night, you’d need to go double standard for a while, say 10-20 years depending on the sector. That way you can construct ‘ansi’ buildings while new development is slowly moving to ‘iso’, and machines get the new specs when replaced. Give a heading and industries will slowly adapt.
True, would just have to get accepted by the ICC and all the state legislatures who approve state wide code. I have a feeling it will be difficult to convince some of the less forward thinking states to accept metric codes that take into account the rounding…. Who knows though. I don’t know a ton about that side of things
Super selfish reason but as an architect in the US, I deal with nice round imperial numbers all day. Door frames, typically 2”. Standard commercial door, 3’x7’. All the codes are based around imperial too. ADA door width, 3’. Masonry Dimension, every 8 inches. At this point, it would be hard to remember that ADA turning radius is 1525 mm (not the easy 5’…. And yes, I know that’s changing to 67” soon). There are literally hundreds of dimensions I would have to relearn. I suppose it’s probably for the best to switch over and rip that bandaid off, but damn, it would be a headache and take me much longer to review drawings in metric (in the short term).
I assume you would also introduce a new standard with rounded numbers, metric doors are also 200x80 cm for example, and sizes of everything gets rounded in the rest of the world, too. Timber sizes differ a little between north america and the rest of the world, it is a different framework, you’d get used to it.
All I think about is how much current tooling in manufacturing is made to use those round imperial measurements, and how much it would cost to convert/change them over. That’s possibly the #1 reason why the US will never go metric.
A change like that shouldn’t be done over night, you’d need to go double standard for a while, say 10-20 years depending on the sector. That way you can construct ‘ansi’ buildings while new development is slowly moving to ‘iso’, and machines get the new specs when replaced. Give a heading and industries will slowly adapt.
True, would just have to get accepted by the ICC and all the state legislatures who approve state wide code. I have a feeling it will be difficult to convince some of the less forward thinking states to accept metric codes that take into account the rounding…. Who knows though. I don’t know a ton about that side of things
What does the first letter in “ICC” stand for, again? One would think it ought to already have metric.
Just make your drawing in an imperial template and change the unit display when your done.