I've just been clicking through and viewing some of the expert Users' drawings.  I'm thinking Darrrel Carl Durose and John Venediger (Up), right now.  I am so envious of the Metric system.

----
Being born and raised in California, USA, of course all I have ever known or used is the Imperial measuring system.  Having been a carpenter as well as a draftsman for the past many years, I have come to feel and think the feet-and-inches and yards system to be so cumbersome, inefficient, and archaic.  I've had many novice carpenters work for me that have to say "you mean the little line below ¼"?" when I am asking for a length of 3/16".

Looking at Darrel's and John's drawings- I'm thinking John's Garden Bench shop drawings right now- I am so envious of the efficiency of the metric system; in the field, I would gladly make the switch.  I mean...  multiply, divide, add, subtract...  reading the plans and the tape...  it would be so much easier.

Only have maybe 30, 40 years left, so I guess it unlikely that I will ever see the time when the plans I draw, the plans I am building from, or my Stanley tape-measure will simply be in milimeters and centimeters.  That would be so cool!  (maybe I oughta' just move to South Africa)

This Editortial brought to you by:
Alvin- an American Carpenter

Alvin

Thanks for the mention.... I started out using imperial with my dad making mostly made to measure bedroom furniture, I never found it a problem as I didn't know anything different...no computers back then....

The downside of imperial is when it comes to CAD and accuracy.... the displaying of imperial measurements can look a mess...

1mm = 3⁄64in as an example showing that more text space is required generally for imperial dimensions....

Well....also if the more accurate decimal method it would be 1mm = 0.0393700790in...wow 

Alvin

Thanks for the mention.... I started out using imperial with my dad making mostly made to measure bedroom furniture, I never found it a problem as I didn't know anything different...no computers back then....

The downside of imperial is when it comes to CAD and accuracy.... the displaying of imperial measurements can look a mess...

1mm = 3⁄64in as example showing that more text space is required generally for imperial dimensions....

Yes, Darrel... "a mess".  A cumbersome, hard-to-read, somewhat illegible, mess; and that's just one of the many problems with the Imperial system.

I mean, just look at John Venediger's Garden Bench workshop drawings; they're so easy to read thanks to the Metric system:  http://forums.turbocad.com/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=4217.0;attach=9145  (and of course, in large Thanks to John's time and effort and attention to detail)

----
At 49 now, I know I'll never live to say the day.... when Metric is the standard in the U.S.  That sucks.  Maybe my kids' kids, if I had any.  -Alvin

Alvin:

No need to move so far. You could move to join your Northern Neighbors.

Only issue is that you will be drawing snow-forts and snowmobiles and primary transport is by dogsled.

However we will introduce you to seal flipper pie as great delicacy -- much preferred to frozen whale blubber.

Perhaps we will re-introduce AVRoe Arrow Interceptor program -- may be additional aeronautical work shortly. (... or Avro Arrow -- use google)

All my work is in metric these days... love it. 

Alvin,

I believe that folks who advocate the use of the metric system are ones who manipulate units of measure daily in their professional or personal lives. Those who oppose or are indifferent to the use of the metric system rarely find the need to.

Let's see:
1 foot 6 inches + 2 foot 8 inches + 5 foot 4 inches = ??
(110 pounds 3 ounces + 230 pounds 12 ounces) - 54 pounds 2 ounces = ??
4 cups + 2 quarts + 3 pints = (My fave)

"Metric --- 10 Times Better!" :-]

Kate---

Alvin,

I believe that folks who advocate the use of the metric system are ones who manipulate units of measure daily in their professional or personal lives. Those who oppose or are indifferent to the use of the metric system rarely find the need to.

Let's see:
1 foot 6 inches + 2 foot 8 inches + 5 foot 4 inches = ??
(110 pounds 3 ounces + 230 pounds 12 ounces) - 54 pounds 2 ounces = ??
4 cups + 2 quarts + 3 pints = (My fave)

"Metric --- 10 Times Better!" :-]

Kate---

"10" is so appropriate Kate.  Everything is a mulitple of "10" in metric.  as in:

"Metric --- 10 Times Better!" x 10 x10= "Metric --- 1,000 Times Better!"

This, coming from a guy who's seen a lot of errors in the field due to feet'-and-inches"

Alvin:

No need to move so far. You could move to join your Northern Neighbors.

Only issue is that you will be drawing snow-forts and snowmobiles and primary transport is by dogsled.

However we will introduce you to seal flipper pie as great delicacy -- much preferred to frozen whale blubber.

Perhaps we will re-introduce AVRoe Arrow Interceptor program -- may be additional aeronautical work shortly. (... or Avro Arrow -- use google)

Brrrrrrr....  Although, it's going to be 100° for the second day in a row here-  in September!!--  in the lower central-valley of California.  So maybe a little snow and seal flipper pie (a la mode?) wouldn't be such a bad thing.

All my work is in metric these days... love it. 

I can't even wrap my head around it- in regards to the building industry.  It would be like a whole new language for me; but one I would definitely be on board with learning.

So, what is a 2x4 (or the closest thing to a 2x4) called in the Metric world?

Canada began to change to the metric system in 1970-71 when I was 10-11 years old but it didn't get fully integrated for years, probably around 1978 (my grade 12) so I am of the generation that got totally confused. It was a real mess in some areas while the change was occurring. I really like the metric system but only really appreciate when I am working with smaller sizes. When you are talking about larger things like cabinets and houses I still think in inches. But, I did learn to use the metric system when I was a commercial cabinet maker and grew to appreciate the system 32 we used. While working in it I began to feel good because I could get a feel for how long a 3000mm stretch of counter top really was, and so forth. I didn't have to pull out the tape measure to see how long that might be. Now that I am a CAD guy I have to work in both metric and imperial because I have clients that use different system. I am part of a US design team that manufactures glass doors and we work strictly in imperial and I have to keep a fraction conversion table by my side just to stay sane. The people I work with on trade show booths are also imperial users, but that is larger items, so I don't have to give it much thought. If you look at my tutorials you will see that small things are almost always presented in metric and the large things are presented in imperial. In a way this has been beneficial as both US and Canadian or European customers get a chance to experience both if they purchase different tutorials.

I hope the US will change one day, but I get the feeling that they like the 'individuality' this gives them. I don't mean this in a negative way. Perhaps the US government feels it would be too costly to change. You US residents would likely know better about this than this Canadian.

... it's going to be 100° for the second day in a row here- ........

100°?  There's some irony in using Fahrenheit in a thread enthusing about metric measurement.  We Celsiusers would be boiling....but Alvin, we still refer to 4 x 2s (dunno why the diff, but they've always been 4 be 2s here, not 2 x 4s) and 3 x 2s except on paperwork.

I'm a couple of years older than you, Don, but Australia and NZ changed around the same time.   They prepared us pretty well in school, I grew up pretty fluent in both, but metric was a completely natural preference.  I was a builder when first out of school, and in those days, we got packets of timber that we cut and built with completely on-site.   In those days, we were taught to estimate 25-30% wastage, and that figure would give estimators heart failure now, 5% being generous.  Nobody builds that way anymore, but I reckon that imperial measures were at least partly responsible.

Quote from: GregT on September 14, 2012, 06:17:03 AM

All my work is in metric these days... love it. 

I can't even wrap my head around it- in regards to the building industry.  It would be like a whole new language for me; but one I would definitely be on board with learning.

So, what is a 2x4 (or the closest thing to a 2x4) called in the Metric world?

This is a great question and you won't believe the answer when it comes to Canada.

Just to check I just phoned my local building company. The fellow stated that dimensional lumber is still called by its traditional imperial moniker (2x4, 2x10, etc) but I forgot to ask if the actual dimensions changed (I doubt it). Even in my day sheet lumber changed; 3/4" went to 19mm but we still called them 4x8 sheets. The guy I called said that some things changed to metric in residential building such as 16in O/C became 4...something mm O/C but that may just be a direct conversion. I thought he said 480mm, but he sounded like he was guessing since it converts to 406.4. He did say that commercial building is all metric, so maybe they use a different moniker for steel studs, etc. Moral of the story is we haven't really fully converted.

"So, what is a 2x4 (or the closest thing to a 2x4) called in the Metric world?"

48 x 98

and a 19 mm was before 7/8" not 3/4", that's 16 mm today in my part of the world

Torfinn

I forgot to mention that this is after it's  being adjusted for housebuilding

Torfinn

"So, what is a 2x4 (or the closest thing to a 2x4) called in the Metric world?"

48 x 98

and a 19 mm was before 7/8" not 3/4", that's 16 mm today in my part of the world

Torfinn

What part of the world are you from?

I forgot to mention that this is after it's  being adjusted for housebuilding

Torfinn

Torfinn- What does that mean (your quote above)?   This is interesting to me.  Can you expound on and clairfy your intended meaning in the statement quoted above.

Thanks, Alvin

Quote from: torfinn on September 14, 2012, 09:41:15 AM

"So, what is a 2x4 (or the closest thing to a 2x4) called in the Metric world?"

48 x 98

and a 19 mm was before 7/8" not 3/4", that's 16 mm today in my part of the world

Torfinn

What part of the world are you from?

I'm from the northern Europe, i figured out that i was talking about what we normaly use for building houses and correct it in a new post, but to late I assume 

Torfinn

In elementary school in California (early 70s) I were told we would switching to the metric system...

I remember people fighting it and....

Alvin, over the hill in Pasadena today 104, at least it a dry heat.

Alan H.

Quote from: Don Cheke on September 14, 2012, 10:00:31 AM

Quote from: torfinn on September 14, 2012, 09:41:15 AM

"So, what is a 2x4 (or the closest thing to a 2x4) called in the Metric world?"

48 x 98

and a 19 mm was before 7/8" not 3/4", that's 16 mm today in my part of the world

Torfinn

What part of the world are you from?

I'm from the northern Europe, i figured out that i was talking about what we normaly use for building houses and correct it in a new post, but to late I assume 

Torfinn

Oh, I get it.  Because of the sanding of the plywood or dimensional lumber and the resultant finish-product.  Such as here in my part of the world, what used to be ½" plywood- nominal- has through the years become 7/16".  Now what we call 7/16" has been taken down even further and is actually 13/32".  ½"- nominal- is actually 15/32".

I'm just realizing that this must all sound really forgein to you, Torfinn.  Just as it would if you were trying to explain the same thing to me using metric measurements.  It's hard to conceptualize.
All One People:  That's going to be very hard to achieve when we speak different languages and use different measuring systems; until there is a world-standard, our individual conceptualizations are always going to be just so different.

Interesting stuff.

----
So, Torfinn, assuming that you do at least some 2D architectural drawing, what do you use for the Thickness setting of your Walls in TurboCAD?

   -Alvin

In elementary school in California (early 70s) I were told we would switching to the metric system...

I remember people fighting it and....

Alvin, over the hill in Pasadena today 104, at least it a dry heat.

Alan H.

104° Celsius??- you must be "boiling".  It is ironic that I used a Farenheiht temperature in this Topic.

Yes, they say that was one of President Jimmy Carter's biggest causes and agenda- changing the U.S.A. to the Metric system.  Jimmy was never a very well respected president.  If Ronald Reagan- so respected by many-  would have taken up the cause... -or even President Bill, for that matter-  we would likely be doing our drafting and building in Metric today.

-Alvin

Quote from: torfinn on September 14, 2012, 09:57:41 AM

I forgot to mention that this is after it's  being adjusted for housebuilding

Torfinn

Torfinn- What does that mean (your quote above)?   This is interesting to me.  Can you expound on and clairfy your intended meaning in the statement quoted above.

Thanks, Alvin

When it comes from the mill, it must be adjusted for accuracy so the quality should be good enough to make houses
Normaly - 2-3 mm
So for example, 7/8 x 6 "would be 19 x 148 mm
Although 7/8 is 21 mm

Torfinn ( i hate the new verification system

(i hate the new verification system)    Torfinn

Torfinn, Regarding the new Forums verification system:

Be patient, it seems to only be applying to those still in the "Newbie" status.  (which has nothing to do with your TurboCAD expertise level, but simply the number of times you have posted.  It doesn't take much to go the next "level".)

-Alvin

Quote from: torfinn on September 14, 2012, 10:11:40 AM

Quote from: Don Cheke on September 14, 2012, 10:00:31 AM

Quote from: torfinn on September 14, 2012, 09:41:15 AM

"So, what is a 2x4 (or the closest thing to a 2x4) called in the Metric world?"

48 x 98

and a 19 mm was before 7/8" not 3/4", that's 16 mm today in my part of the world

Torfinn

What part of the world are you from?

I'm from the northern Europe, i figured out that i was talking about what we normaly use for building houses and correct it in a new post, but to late I assume 

Torfinn

Oh, I get it.  Because of the sanding of the plywood or dimensional lumber and the resultant finish-product.  Such as here in my part of the world, what used to be ½" plywood- nominal- has through the years become 7/16".  Now what we call 7/16" has been taken down even further and is actually 13/32".  ½"- nominal- is actually 15/32".

I'm just realizing that this must all sound really forgein to you, Torfinn.  Just as it would if you were trying to explain the same thing to me using metric measurements.  It's hard to conceptualize.
All One People:  That's going to be very hard to achieve when we speak different languages and use different measuring systems; until there is a world-standard, our individual conceptualizations are always going to be just so different.

Interesting stuff.

----
So, Torfinn, assuming that you do at least some 2D architectural drawing, what do you use for the Thickness setting of your Walls in TurboCAD?

   -Alvin

In Norway there must now be a minimum 200 mm insulation in exterior walls, so in TC i build my walls up around the framework, it means that a normal wall will be a total of 265 mm or 308 mm, depending on whether it is horizontal or vertical panels on the outside.
The exterior walls pretty much look like this, inside out ;
plaster
plastic
construction / insulation
fibreboard
barge
panel

And i still find it funny to walk in to a shop and ask for 5/4 x 2 ( 30 x 48 mm ), looking the eyes on young staff inside the shop, they don't have a clue what i'm talking about

Torfinn

I worked as a builder and the last years as a timber yardman in a building supply outfit.The funny thing is here ,  the builders (young and old) give you the imperial size and the metric lenght from the timber.
so as a 4x2 and 2.4 mtr long. They never get rid of there imperial measurements.

I worked as a builder and the last years as a timber yardman in a building supply outfit.The funny thing is here ,  the builders (young and old) give you the imperial size and the metric lenght from the timber.
so as a 4x2 and 2.4 mtr long. They never get rid of there imperial measurements.

Humm.... that's interesting.    Where is "here" Cadmium?

And... you are the first to Post on this Topic to use the unit "meter" Cadmium; the others used "milimeter".  Why is no one referring to centimeters?  I mean, they seem like a good "in-between" for house-building, especially when the decimal-place can be used so efficiently.

-Alvin

Alvin

Interesting.... We very rarely use the term Centimeters "in the trade"...... Millimetres and Metres or Millimeters or Meters haha.....can't we even agree on the spelling lol 

We normaly use all three,
About 2,4 meters or
240 cm when you need more correct
2400 mm when it should bee 100 % correct, like when you amount a kitchen or make a construction drawing, don't use decimal on mm, nobody is able to cut anything at 2400,36 mm anyway on the construction site.
If they make it on the mm, that will be the best possible out on the site
Inside the mechanical industri they use decimal on mm, but then it's a machine ho do the cutting

Torfinn

Hi Alvin.

"here" is  Top of the South - New Zealand.
It works here like this ,  builders give you the imperial size ,4x2, and then always the m lenght and not the mm,they don't say I want it 2400 mm long , so 2.4 m is 2400 mm.
example , if we talking about a sheet size ,  we say, I want this  1.8 x1.350  meams 1800 mm x 1350 mm and the thickness is in mm.
We never talk about cm
It can be very confusing. But you get use it ,after a few mistakes. I'm self from a metric country  and they talk there about cm and m.
Then you have these realy old fasion people who can't work out the metric system and keep measuring in imperial,the only trick I had was divid it through 3 or 2.54 is for feet and inches.

Cheers.

This is so cool.  Reading Torfinn's and Cadmium's latest Posts, and seeing the decimal put to use, and just how easy and precise and efficient the Metric system is.

Almost makes a U.S. American carpenter/draftsman want to move.

Thanks for all the "enlightment" everyone.   -Alvin

   [Numbers: First of all the metric/decimal system seems to make sense because we have a decimal number system. This probably originated because humans have ten fingers on which to count. If we had 8 fingers we'd probably have an octal system. If we had flippers we'd have a binary system, etc. Some time around junior high school we have learned all the arithmetic there is to learn. (Arithmetic deals with numbers mathematics deals with concepts.) First we learn to count, then to add, after that we learn multiplication tables of one and sometimes two digit integers. With this knowledge we can multiply larger numbers and we can do fractions. Addition, subtraction, multiplication and division of fractions involves nothing more complicated than multiplication and division of integers. It is only when we get to long division that we are forced to do decimals.
   Stuff: Systems of measurement are not abstract concepts, but ways of dealing with stuff. Stuff is so many inches long; we have so many liters or pounds of stuff. So systems of measurement are really about what we need to do with that stuff in the real world. This determines the accuracy we need. The lower limit of accuracy is how precise we need to be. For the carpenter this is about a mm or 1/16 sometimes 1/32 inch. For the machinist this is decimal mm or .001 inch. For the surveyor this is .1 foot. (Aha, decimals are not limited to the metric system!) But there is also an upper limit on what we need to measure. Tape measures longer than 30 feet are specialty tools. If we are making a journey of several kilometers (or kilometres;  with two spellings and two pronunciation so much for metric consistency) we probably don't need meters. So why measure stuff? I measure stuff so I can cut or modify it, combine it or add to it, or divide it. Somewhere in this process I need to commit figures to working memory.  With US units I can do almost any manipulation in my head without use of a calculator.
   Example 1. What is (4' 4 7/16”)/3 ? The process is this: 4'/3 is 1' plus 12”/3 = 1' 4”. Then 4”/3 is 1” plus 1/3”. So I have 1' 5 1/3”. Now my accuracy is 1/16” so 1/3” is 5/15” which I round of to 5/16”. 7/16”/3 is approx. 2/16” So 5/16” plus 2/16” = 2/16” = 7/16”. Answer 1' 5 7/16”. I've just done  that in my head to a 1/16” accuracy!
   Within the US system we seldom use more than 2 units at a time. We wouldn't often talk about yards, feet, and inches or quarts, pints, cups and ounces. The smaller units are always fractions of the larger units.
   Example 2. What is one fifth of 2 quarts 4 ½ ounces. The process is this: 2 qt. = 64 oz.
Divided by 5 that's 12 4/5 oz.  4 ½ oz. is 9/2 oz. Divided by 5 that's 9/10 oz. 12 4/5 oz. Is 12 8/10 oz. Add 9/10 oz. = 12 17/10 oz = 13 7/10 oz. So 7/10 oz = 21/30 oz = approx. 20/32 oz. = 5/8 oz. So the answer is 13 5/8 oz. Doing this in my head I'm off by only .075 oz!
   I can't do decimal long division in my head.
   Three and powers of two: Usually I manipulate stuff in powers of two, repeatedly doubling it or dividing it. I do this most easily with integer units or fractions which are expressed in integers. I divide or multiply by three much more often than by five or ten. Which brings this discussion to the number 12 (= 2x2x3 = 2x6  = 3x4) often a more useful number than 10.
   Units that seem arbitrary may not be. 1 mile = 1760 yards = 5280 feet. This makes more sense when you think that 1/2 mile is 880 yards; ¼ mile is 440 yards  (Remember that from track.); 1/8 mile is 110 yards; 1/16 mile is 55 yards.  1/3 mile is 1760 feet. 1/12 mile is 440 feet etc.
   1 foot is 12 inches which can be divided by 3 and repeatedly by 2 when we allow fractions of an inch.
   2 tablespoons = 1 ounce. 8 ounces = a cup. 2 cups = 1 pint. 2 pints = 1 quart. 4 quarts = 1 gallon. When you throw in a teaspoon you have thirds as well.
   Ounces and pounds are powers of 2.
Often in the US system only one unit is used at a time; smaller quantities are expressed as fractions of that unit.
   Human Scale: The metric system represents a dehumanization of measurement. An inch is based on the human finger, a foot on the foot, a yard on an arm or a pace. I can pace off yards but not meters. A meter was one ten-millionth of the distance from the pole to the equator, but is now the distance traveled by light in a vacuum in 1/299,792,458 second. I sure can't relate to that. Metric volumes relate to the meter. Metric weights relate to volumes of water. Metric temperatures relate to boiling and freezing water. Fahrenheit temperatures relate to the normal limits of human experience. Temperatures below zero or above 100 are extremes. Human sensitivity to temperature is so acute that it needs fractions of a metric degree.
   We can use both: I cook a lot. I use both metric and US units. The difference between a quart and a liter is negligible. I like metric weights. My scale can use either. Metric translation of US recipes almost always use grams and milliliters; recipes from metric countries use more humanized units. Spanish cookbooks for instance use 3 kinds of spoons, soup spoons, dessert spoons, and coffee spoons. Metric liquor bottles come in two different regional sizes 750ml or 75cl. (My American English spell-checker likes750ml but not 75cl???)
I never met a dope dealer who couldn't instantly convert between metric and US weights.

   Enough of my nonsense.

 
   

   [Numbers: .......
   ........Enough of my nonsense.

That was "fun" and enlightening Sheldon*.  I grasped it, but wouldn't want to replicate it, for fear of brain over-clocking.  Cool perspectives though.  Reminds me of just how little I know, and how little I use this muscle in my skull.

Thanks Mike.  -Alvin

*(It didn't take long into reading that I pictured that I was being "taught/lectured" by Sheldon Cooper from The Big Bang Theory.  It had that WOW?!?! feel.)

The metric system deals with abstraction and metameasurement better than imperial, for example working acceleration and displacement with formulas.  Mike's probably right about 'dehumanisation', but there's no intuitive, obvious or consistently accurate way of using things like length of stride/sec/sec or how much the water level in an arbitrary vessel will rise when you immerse an average person in it, or working out a fulcrum ratio with feet/inches/fractions and pounds/ounces....
Even US gallons aren't the same as the gallons the rest of the imperial world used, pre-metric.  What we relate to is very dependent on what we've been indoctrinated with.   That aside, being able to describe a unit in terms of constants that can be established independently is what makes metric measurement a better system, and a universal one.  People are, on average, taller and heavier than they were a couple of hundred years ago, so finger length, foot size and stride are all different.
On a not-altogether-unrelated topic, I've got a book to recommend: "the Information", by James Gleick.  About how humans understand and convey knowledge, and the people who've informed us about what we've been doing.  A great read.

My dad- who passed away in 2008, at the age of 82- had a 3rd-grade Azores, Portugal education.  What Mike described- how the Imperial system is rooted in "human-ness"- reminds me of how Luiz measured:

     If my dad wanted to know just how big that steer was, or how long the old board he needed to cut was, he would "step off" the measurement, using his thumb and middle-finger:  Starting with the middle-finger adjacent to his thumb, he'd "walk" his middle-finger wide out and speak "um"; then bring the thumb in to the middle-finger; and repeat, "dois"; repeat.  A steer might be dezassete long.  Pretty funny (and a little frustrating to me)

I think that is why I was driven to CAD.  After witnessing that type of measurement system for so many years, I have a penchant for precision.

At least we can all agree that both the Metric and the Imperial systems are better than dear-ol'-dad's.

-Alvin

In Norway there must now be a minimum 200 mm insulation in exterior walls

Torfinn

Hi Torfinn,

I wondered what your new insulation standard was related to.  Is it just a requirement to have a wall gap of 200 mm - filled with something?  Or, is it an amount of insulation equivalent to 200 mm of a standard material?  Do most buildings just use glass fibre mat, for instance?

Regards Tim

It's related to the U-value i dont know if you using this way of mesuring, U-value or thermal transmittance is a measure used by the construction industry to enter a building partly insulating ability.( google translate is sometime a good thing
The lower U-value, the better, min 0,18 but possible with 0.22 in a exterior wall, if you use a better window or put more in the roof, so that the total for the house is inside minimum level sett by gouverment.
That will give 200 mm insulation in a 0,22 wall and 250 mm in a 0,18 wall, becouse the plot and house is very expencive, we normaly use 200 mm and add some ekstra in the window, floor or roof, so that we don't loose to many space inside the house.
We also have regulations about howe many % of the plot it's possible to use for house and garage, normaly messured on the outside of the exterior wall's

There is a maximum for how many kw of power the house should use pr year pr m2 for heating. ( saving energi )

The insulation is basicly 2 different types, glass and stone fibre mat.

Torfinn

Why a lower u value?

If it comes down to 0.0 it mens that there will be no transmitting true the wall, it will never happens, but if you make a house like this, you will never need anything to heating the hose, becouse the heat from your body, when make food etc etc wil make the house hot inside, actually to hot, if nothing going in/ out true the wall, window,roof and so on.

We also need to catch the heat from the ventilation system, so that min. 70 % of the heat in "old" air, is used for heating up the new fresh air the system bring in to the house again.

Torfinn

It's related to the U-value i dont know if you using this way of mesuring, U-value or thermal transmittance is a measure used by the construction industry to enter a building partly insulating ability.( google translate is sometime a good thing
The lower U-value, the better, min 0,18 but possible with 0.22 in a exterior wall, if you use a better window or put more in the roof, so that the total for the house is inside minimum level sett by gouverment.
That will give 200 mm insulation in a 0,22 wall and 250 mm in a 0,18 wall, becouse the plot and house is very expencive, we normaly use 200 mm and add some ekstra in the window, floor or roof, so that we don't loose to many space inside the house.
We also have regulations about howe many % of the plot it's possible to use for house and garage, normaly messured on the outside of the exterior wall's

There is a maximum for how many kw of power the house should use pr year pr m2 for heating. ( saving energi )

The insulation is basicly 2 different types, glass and stone fibre mat.

Torfinn

Thanks Torfinn, very interesting.  Much the same materials here (UK), but sometimes not as cold!

Regards Tim

But not from Scotland i hope
5-6 yaers ago the biggest glass fibre factory have a fire and was down for a periode, we then have to import from Scotland, well i work with it for about 3 min before i leave it to my traine, the leftover we put to garbitch container Terrible stuff.
The problem was that is was to loose and a lot of dust coming from it when we should put in the celing, insulation is not good to put up if it's hot on the site, (that's meaning more then about 10 degree)

The temp is normaly no problem where i living on the south-west coast, but go to the area near Sweden ( inland ) or to the north, then we talking -30 to -40 degree in the winthertime make me wonder " why people want to live there " and on the summer, 10 000 billion mosqitos try to eat you in the north

Torfinn

I am of the age where I started in Imperial and then went on to Metric. I must say I have always found the metric system much easier and more logical. I certainly wouldn't want to go back to Imperial. Mind you, I still have to deal with builders on site who want to refer to a bit of 4 x 2 but I guess it's a lot easier than saying a bit of 100 x 50 

As an English person I think it's funny you Americans dont actually build with 4 x 2s do you, but 3 1/2 x 1 1/2's (or 89mm x 38mm) when when you do your cad drawings you have to use fractions all the time. This caught me out when I started looking a designs of American buildings on the internet.
I am actually building a large timber frame house as we speak and I am am using what we call CLS (Canadian Lumber standard) timber which comes in 38mm thick by 63,89 and 114mm widths (and actually comes from Estonia!) so American sizes!. But if you walk into a timber yard and ask for a 4x2 you will get a piece of timber of 47mm (but not 50!) thick by 100mm wide.. An the lengths come in increments of 300mm not 304.8mm (1 foot), but a 2.4m length is still called 8ft
Things also get confusing for sheet materials where plywood and OSB come in imperial sized sheets (8x 4 feet or 1.22 x 2.44m) but metric thickness 9,11,18mm etc. BUT plasterboard (drywall) come in metric sizes (1.2 x 2.4m) but a mixture of  imperial thickness 12.5mm (1.2 inch) and  metric 10mm Argh!
Yes England changed to metric in the 70's but building is avery conservative trade and has not really fully converted even after 40 years.
So even if America changed to metric today I think you might end up with the same mess as we have.

When I think about measurements anything less than 3-4m I do in metric but when talking about room sizes I talk in feet and driving in miles.

For doing any sort of engineering calculation I couldn't imagine trying to do it in imperial units. Metric units are much simpler and are all related by exact muliples of ten (mostly ... 1kilogram exerts 9.81Newtons of load {pesky gravity is not metric}).
Pressure is measured N/m² or a Pascals. Bending strength of a timber to be stated as 16N/mm² and an air pressure in HVAC duct as 400 Pascals. But this does mean you have to keep track of all the decimal places! (1N/mm² is 1 million Pascals) (imperial pressure units in of water,in Hg,psi,psf all different by various factors (1 psf=0.00694 psi=0.359 in-Hg or 4.882 in-H2O !![gives me hives but if you are used to them])

I think I have expounded enough now. But it shows that changing systems is not quick, and metric is not nessearily easy but it's easier than imperial.

Stud lengths. In California a 2x4 Stud for 8' ceilings is 92 1/4". (92 1/4" + 1 1/2" bottom plate, + 2 * 1 1/2" top plate = 96 3/4". 1/2" or 5/8" drywall ceiling + 96" drywall wall + aprox. 1/4" clearance.) So far so good. In Washington State studs are 92 5/8". Okay a little more clearance. My question is this. Is there some where in between where you can get studs of two different length depending on your supplier? I've never worked in Oregon so I don't know. Go figure.