Tape measure in Tenths of an inch

In article <aRJ_g.526$uF.267@dukeread12>, DanG <[email protected]> wrote:
>Pat,
>
>I, too, use 1/8's for calling out cuts with helpers. It has
>nothing to do with anyone's abilities, it has more to do with
>sound levels on a construction site. We tend to use the "3 and 7"
>or the "22 and 6" pattern. It can even be done with hand signals
>in extreme situations.
>
>I had not considered going to tenths, but I do use them outdoors
>on long tapes and shooting grade. It is hard for some of my guys
>to shift gears. Maybe we should all move to tenths, but it means
>lots of new tape measures. It might be more simple to force them
>to work metric. It is a change that it is long overdue.
>
>______________________________
>Keep the whole world singing . . . .
>DanG (remove the sevens)
>[email protected]
>
>

My observation has been that for the usual quality of construction
work, 1/8" and 1/10" would be interchangeable. :)



--
No dumb questions, just dumb answers.

Larry Wasserman - Baltimore, Maryland - [email protected]

eganders wrote:
> I have been looking for a tape (say 16 or 25 ft) in tenths of an inch.
> I can't find that. ...

Then you haven't looked much...first look (Lufkin) found for a partial
listing...

LFK2312D 12' x 3/4'' Feet, Inches, 10ths Each $15.49
LFKHV1425D 25' x 1'' Feet, Inches, 10ths Each $16.49
LFK2325D 25' x 3/4'' Feet, 10ths Each $20.95
LFK2133D 33' x 1'' Feet, Inches, 10ths Each $24.49
LFKHV1325D 25' x 1'' Feet, 10ths Each $15.49
LFKHV1034DM 4M/13' Metric, 10ths Each $10.95
LFKHV1048DM 8M/26' Metric, 10ths Each $16.49
LFKHV1433DM 10M/33' Metric, 10ths Each $18.49


Dual-scale, centering, adhesive or other are undoubtedly somewhat less
common but can't imagine there's hardly anything you can think of that
isn't available...

dpb wrote:
> Then you haven't looked much...first look (Lufkin) found for a partial
> listing...
>
> LFK2312D 12' x 3/4'' Feet, Inches, 10ths Each $15.49
> LFKHV1425D 25' x 1'' Feet, Inches, 10ths Each $16.49
> LFK2325D 25' x 3/4'' Feet, 10ths Each $20.95
> LFK2133D 33' x 1'' Feet, Inches, 10ths Each $24.49
> LFKHV1325D 25' x 1'' Feet, 10ths Each $15.49
> LFKHV1034DM 4M/13' Metric, 10ths Each $10.95
> LFKHV1048DM 8M/26' Metric, 10ths Each $16.49
> LFKHV1433DM 10M/33' Metric, 10ths Each $18.49
>
>
> Dual-scale, centering, adhesive or other are undoubtedly somewhat less
> common but can't imagine there's hardly anything you can think of that
> isn't available...

Hey,
What can I say. I have no excuse, but this is why I love newsgroups.

Leon wrote:
> "eganders" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
> >I have been looking for a tape (say 16 or 25 ft) in tenths of an inch.
> > I can't find that. The reason I am interested is that that would allow
> > me to use english units and not have to screw around with fractions.
...
> >
>
> You realize that a tape measure in 10ths of an inch is just another
> fraction?

Evidently he prefers decimal fractions to binary.

--

FF

DanG wrote:
> Pat,
>
> I, too, use 1/8's for calling out cuts with helpers. It has
> nothing to do with anyone's abilities, it has more to do with
> sound levels on a construction site. ...
>

This was a common practice among molding, dado and plough plane
makers. A #4 dado would be 1/2" wide, for example.

I'm not clear on why it became customary in school to always
reduce fractions (is 'reduce' the right term?)

--

FF

Realize that folding rules and tape measures have been made for years
marked in tenths -- they are primarily used for engineering and
surveying applications

Puckdropper wrote:
> [email protected] wrote in news:1161539089.540990.280170
> @h48g2000cwc.googlegroups.com:
>
> >
> >
>
> *snip*
>
> >
> > I'm not clear on why it became customary in school to always
> > reduce fractions (is 'reduce' the right term?)
> >
>
> It's very clear when you're looking for the simplest form that there's
> more than one way to represent a quantity. That may be why it's common
> to do that.
>
> What they don't teach (and should) is that sometimes in the real world
> it's easier to leave the fraction unreduced and work with it.

Yes, that was my point. For comparison, it is much easier to
work with a common denominator. Driving it home to _always_
reduce fractions whether useful or not is the part I question.

This is also an advantage to using binary fractions instead of
decimal. It is easier to chose a base unit appropriate to the
work being done.

For fine cabinetry 1 mm is too course and its too fine for framing.
1/32" may be about right for cabinetry and 1/64" surely is. For
masonry and framing 1/8" may be about right.

You can measure or round to the nearest 2 mm or 3 mm, but
the tape or rule isn't likely to have extra long ticks every 3 mm.
No doubt the guys who have been using SI for construction all
their lives handle it fine, but I'm far from convinced that it is
better than binary fractions.

--

FF

Puckdropper wrote:
> ...
> You can teach that in theory and suggest they try it on homework (Ooh,
> story problems!) You can even require they use that method on the
> homework and take off points if they don't. (Give them points for a
> correct answer if they use another method, but not all the points.)
>
> John measures a board's thickness and it's 6/8". He wants to add a 1/8"
> thick border around the outside. How thick will the final piece be?
>

3/4"

Adding a border around the edge of a board does not change
it's thickness.

If three frogs are sitting on a log and one of them takes a
notion to jump off, how many frogs are left on the log?

--

FF

CW wrote:
> <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
> >
> > Puckdropper wrote:
> > > ...
> > > You can teach that in theory and suggest they try it on homework (Ooh,
> > > story problems!) You can even require they use that method on the
> > > homework and take off points if they don't. (Give them points for a
> > > correct answer if they use another method, but not all the points.)
> > >
> > > John measures a board's thickness and it's 6/8". He wants to add a 1/8"
> > > thick border around the outside. How thick will the final piece be?
> > >
> >
> > 3/4"
> >
> > Adding a border around the edge of a board does not change
> > it's thickness.
> >
> > If three frogs are sitting on a log and one of them takes a
> > notion to jump off, how many frogs are left on the log?
>
> 3
>

Correct.

One frog took a a notion to jump off, he didn't actually do it.

I'm taking a notion to get back to work now...

--

FF

<[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
>
> Puckdropper wrote:
> > ...
> > You can teach that in theory and suggest they try it on homework (Ooh,
> > story problems!) You can even require they use that method on the
> > homework and take off points if they don't. (Give them points for a
> > correct answer if they use another method, but not all the points.)
> >
> > John measures a board's thickness and it's 6/8". He wants to add a 1/8"
> > thick border around the outside. How thick will the final piece be?
> >
>
> 3/4"
>
> Adding a border around the edge of a board does not change
> it's thickness.
>
> If three frogs are sitting on a log and one of them takes a
> notion to jump off, how many frogs are left on the log?
>

One. The other one is right on the log.

--

-Mike-
[email protected]

"Leon" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
>
> "Edwin Pawlowski" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
>>
>> "Leon" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>>>
>>> You realize that a tape measure in 10ths of an inch is just another
>>> fraction?
>>
>> I know of a few companies that translate all of their customer
>> specifications to 16ths to avoid confusion. You won't find a box made 12
>> 1/2", but it will be 12 8/16" Seems just as awkward at times.
>>
> I guess some people have a hard time with simple math.
>

I work to the nearest 1/8. A helper does the cutting so I call out 12 4 and
they cut it. Many helpers don't understand fractions or tape measures. I
would love to have a tape marked in 8ths. Maybe I could switch to tenths.
I think I'll buy a couple and see.

"Edwin Pawlowski" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
>
> "Leon" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>>
>> You realize that a tape measure in 10ths of an inch is just another
>> fraction?
>
> I know of a few companies that translate all of their customer
> specifications to 16ths to avoid confusion. You won't find a box made 12
> 1/2", but it will be 12 8/16" Seems just as awkward at times.
>
I guess some people have a hard time with simple math.

[email protected] wrote in news:1161539089.540990.280170
@h48g2000cwc.googlegroups.com:

>
>

*snip*

>
> I'm not clear on why it became customary in school to always
> reduce fractions (is 'reduce' the right term?)
>

It's very clear when you're looking for the simplest form that there's
more than one way to represent a quantity. That may be why it's common
to do that.

What they don't teach (and should) is that sometimes in the real world
it's easier to leave the fraction unreduced and work with it.

Puckdropper
--
Wise is the man who attempts to answer his question before asking it.

To email me directly, send a message to puckdropper (at) fastmail.fm

"George" <[email protected]> wrote in
news:XGl%[email protected]:

>
> "Puckdropper" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
>> [email protected] wrote in news:1161539089.540990.280170
>
>> What they don't teach (and should) is that sometimes in the real
>> world it's easier to leave the fraction unreduced and work with it.
>
> Sorry, can't teach that. Teaching something supplies the knowledge,
> but learning when or how to apply that knowledge requires
> participation.
>

You can teach that in theory and suggest they try it on homework (Ooh,
story problems!) You can even require they use that method on the
homework and take off points if they don't. (Give them points for a
correct answer if they use another method, but not all the points.)

John measures a board's thickness and it's 6/8". He wants to add a 1/8"
thick border around the outside. How thick will the final piece be?

Puckdropper
--
Wise is the man who attempts to answer his question before asking it.

To email me directly, send a message to puckdropper (at) fastmail.fm

[email protected] () wrote in
news:[email protected]:

>
> The quesetion can't really be answered with the information provided.
> WE know that three frogs were sitting on the log to start, but the
> question asks, how many are left on the log? Since we aren't told how
> many frogs are on the log that are NOT sitting, the question cannot be
> answered.

Actually, I took it to mean:
3 frogs
-------
(a)log

and it's still missing a crucial piece of information!

Also, these are obviously not Shrodinger's frogs, as you've already
observed them and determined their value.

:-)

Puckdropper
--
Wise is the man who attempts to answer his question before asking it.

To email me directly, send a message to puckdropper (at) fastmail.fm

"B A R R Y" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> On Sat, 21 Oct 2006 10:05:39 -0700, "Pat"
> <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> Many helpers don't understand fractions or tape measures.
>
> You have helpers that can't understand 3/8 vs. 3/4? <G>
And if they can't, then they are not helpers. They are hinderers.
Jim

On Sun, 22 Oct 2006 07:53:59 -0500, "DanG" <[email protected]> wrote:

>Pat,
>
>I, too, use 1/8's for calling out cuts with helpers. It has
>nothing to do with anyone's abilities, it has more to do with
>sound levels on a construction site. We tend to use the "3 and 7"
>or the "22 and 6" pattern. It can even be done with hand signals
>in extreme situations.
>
>I had not considered going to tenths, but I do use them outdoors
>on long tapes and shooting grade. It is hard for some of my guys
>to shift gears. Maybe we should all move to tenths, but it means
>lots of new tape measures. It might be more simple to force them
>to work metric. It is a change that it is long overdue.

I'm still trying to figure out what the big deal is with reading rules
and tape measures. Wouldn't 5 minutes with a guy who can't do it fix
the problem? If it doesn't, why not set him to stacking lumber or
carrying shingles until he learns, or just can him? Way I see it, if
a guy can't read a tape measure, he has no business putting up a
building. That's Framing 101, IMO.

As far as your initial comment goes, that's fine enough. I've worked
with crews that use the same method. But personally, I've always felt
that things hould be as accurate as possible for the long-term
duribility of the building. Never liked 1/16" gaps all over- seems
like years of shaking in heavy winds and storms would weaken things
considerably, as well as allowing crap to collect in the joints and
speed up the fasteners' corrosion.

In article <[email protected]>,
<[email protected]> wrote:
>
>DanG wrote:
>> Pat,
>>
>> I, too, use 1/8's for calling out cuts with helpers. It has
>> nothing to do with anyone's abilities, it has more to do with
>> sound levels on a construction site. ...
>>
>
>This was a common practice among molding, dado and plough plane
>makers. A #4 dado would be 1/2" wide, for example.
>
>I'm not clear on why it became customary in school to always
>reduce fractions (is 'reduce' the right term?)
>
>--
>
>FF
>

Using 1/16ths is still common for auger bits. I think they teach
"least common denominators" just to make the concept more intuitive
for kids. 375/1000 doesn't just jump right out at you as a
recognizable fraction.
--
No dumb questions, just dumb answers.

Larry Wasserman - Baltimore, Maryland - [email protected]

That would be good. That way, you could add the conversion screw ups to the
unfamiliarity of metric. Should result in some rather original building
shapes.

"DanG" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:aRJ_g.526$uF.267@dukeread12...
> Pat,
>
> It might be more simple to force them
> to work metric. It is a change that it is long overdue.
>
______________________________

<[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
>
> Puckdropper wrote:
> > ...
> > You can teach that in theory and suggest they try it on homework (Ooh,
> > story problems!) You can even require they use that method on the
> > homework and take off points if they don't. (Give them points for a
> > correct answer if they use another method, but not all the points.)
> >
> > John measures a board's thickness and it's 6/8". He wants to add a 1/8"
> > thick border around the outside. How thick will the final piece be?
> >
>
> 3/4"
>
> Adding a border around the edge of a board does not change
> it's thickness.
>
> If three frogs are sitting on a log and one of them takes a
> notion to jump off, how many frogs are left on the log?

3

>
> --
>
> FF
>

"Edwin Pawlowski" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
>
> "Leon" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>>
>> You realize that a tape measure in 10ths of an inch is just another
>> fraction?
>
> I know of a few companies that translate all of their customer
> specifications to 16ths to avoid confusion. You won't find a box made 12
> 1/2", but it will be 12 8/16" Seems just as awkward at times.
>
104 tm (tiny marks)

Like those convenient metrics where dimensions up to a meter are reported in
mm, I guess. There are a couple measurements in between, but seldom used.

In article <[email protected]>,
<[email protected]> wrote:
>
>CW wrote:
>> <[email protected]> wrote in message
>> news:[email protected]...
>> >
>> > Puckdropper wrote:
>> > > ...
>> > > You can teach that in theory and suggest they try it on homework (Ooh,
>> > > story problems!) You can even require they use that method on the
>> > > homework and take off points if they don't. (Give them points for a
>> > > correct answer if they use another method, but not all the points.)
>> > >
>> > > John measures a board's thickness and it's 6/8". He wants to add a 1/8"
>> > > thick border around the outside. How thick will the final piece be?
>> > >
>> >
>> > 3/4"
>> >
>> > Adding a border around the edge of a board does not change
>> > it's thickness.
>> >
>> > If three frogs are sitting on a log and one of them takes a
>> > notion to jump off, how many frogs are left on the log?
>>
>> 3
>>
>
>Correct.
>
>One frog took a a notion to jump off, he didn't actually do it.
>
>I'm taking a notion to get back to work now...

The quesetion can't really be answered with the information provided.
WE know that three frogs were sitting on the log to start, but the
question asks, how many are left on the log? Since we aren't told how
many frogs are on the log that are NOT sitting, the question cannot be
answered.
--
No dumb questions, just dumb answers.

Larry Wasserman - Baltimore, Maryland - [email protected]

"Puckdropper" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> "George" <[email protected]> wrote in
> news:XGl%[email protected]:
>
>>
>> "Puckdropper" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>> news:[email protected]...
>>> [email protected] wrote in news:1161539089.540990.280170
>>
>>> What they don't teach (and should) is that sometimes in the real
>>> world it's easier to leave the fraction unreduced and work with it.
>>
>> Sorry, can't teach that. Teaching something supplies the knowledge,
>> but learning when or how to apply that knowledge requires
>> participation.
>>
>
> You can teach that in theory and suggest they try it on homework (Ooh,
> story problems!) You can even require they use that method on the
> homework and take off points if they don't. (Give them points for a
> correct answer if they use another method, but not all the points.)
>

But you can't "fail" them if they don't do the work.

In truth, though, I had more than a few who picked up their basic concept of
fractions a few years late in IA class. Little Physics and Chemistry, too.
Didn't have to listen to those whining "what are we ever gonna use this
for?"

"Puckdropper" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> [email protected] wrote in news:1161539089.540990.280170

> What they don't teach (and should) is that sometimes in the real world
> it's easier to leave the fraction unreduced and work with it.

Sorry, can't teach that. Teaching something supplies the knowledge, but
learning when or how to apply that knowledge requires participation.

"DanG" <[email protected]> wrote in news:aRJ_g.526$uF.267@dukeread12:

> It might be more simple to force them
> to work metric. It is a change that it is long overdue.
>

Yes, indeed (grew up in Holland, but here in the US since '69). I always
have to mentally translate 1/8" into ~3 mm. That visualizes much easier.

--
Best regards
Han
email address is invalid

[email protected] () wrote in news:F--
[email protected]:

> Using 1/16ths is still common for auger bits. I think they teach
> "least common denominators" just to make the concept more intuitive
> for kids. 375/1000 doesn't just jump right out at you as a
> recognizable fraction.
> --
> No dumb questions, just dumb answers.

It just depends where you grew up. 0.375 is much more recognizable to me
than 3/8.

Just a my view. Originally Dutch, I moved to the US in 1969, when I was
almost 23.

Now very happy in Radburn
<radburn.org>

--
Best regards
Han
email address is invalid

[email protected] () wrote in
news:[email protected]:

> In article <[email protected]>,
> Han <[email protected]> wrote:
>>[email protected] () wrote in news:F--
>>[email protected]:
>>
>>> Using 1/16ths is still common for auger bits. I think they teach
>>> "least common denominators" just to make the concept more intuitive
>>> for kids. 375/1000 doesn't just jump right out at you as a
>>> recognizable fraction.
>>> --
>>> No dumb questions, just dumb answers.
>>
>>It just depends where you grew up. 0.375 is much more recognizable to
>>me than 3/8.
>>
>>Just a my view. Originally Dutch, I moved to the US in 1969, when I
>>was almost 23.
>>
>
> You're right about .375. How about something like 51/136 ?
>
I did have to think hard. Divide numerator and deniminator by a certain
prime number, and voila, what do you get?

--
Best regards
Han
email address is invalid

In article <[email protected]>,
Han <[email protected]> wrote:
>[email protected] () wrote in news:F--
>[email protected]:
>
>> Using 1/16ths is still common for auger bits. I think they teach
>> "least common denominators" just to make the concept more intuitive
>> for kids. 375/1000 doesn't just jump right out at you as a
>> recognizable fraction.
>> --
>> No dumb questions, just dumb answers.
>
>It just depends where you grew up. 0.375 is much more recognizable to me
>than 3/8.
>
>Just a my view. Originally Dutch, I moved to the US in 1969, when I was
>almost 23.
>

You're right about .375. How about something like 51/136 ?


--
No dumb questions, just dumb answers.

Larry Wasserman - Baltimore, Maryland - [email protected]

"eganders" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
>I have been looking for a tape (say 16 or 25 ft) in tenths of an inch.
> I can't find that. The reason I am interested is that that would allow
> me to use english units and not have to screw around with fractions.
> THAT is my major concern. I don't care if the standard is metric or
> english, I just don't want to have to deal with fractions. For someone
> that is not working with the larger measurements such as meters and
> kilometers, that would solve most of the problems. I can get
> micrometers, dial indicators and scales in tenths, albeit not in a good
> variety.
>
> I found that Lee Valley has a tape in tenths and it is OK, but I would
> rather have one from Fastcap. they have nice, high quality, durable
> products. Lee Valley has a left to right and a right to left reading
> tape, but you have to buy both. Fastcap usually has several features
> like this in one tape.
>

You realize that a tape measure in 10ths of an inch is just another
fraction?

Pat,

I, too, use 1/8's for calling out cuts with helpers. It has
nothing to do with anyone's abilities, it has more to do with
sound levels on a construction site. We tend to use the "3 and 7"
or the "22 and 6" pattern. It can even be done with hand signals
in extreme situations.

I had not considered going to tenths, but I do use them outdoors
on long tapes and shooting grade. It is hard for some of my guys
to shift gears. Maybe we should all move to tenths, but it means
lots of new tape measures. It might be more simple to force them
to work metric. It is a change that it is long overdue.

______________________________
Keep the whole world singing . . . .
DanG (remove the sevens)
[email protected]



"Pat" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
>
> "Leon" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
>>
>> "Edwin Pawlowski" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>> news:[email protected]...
>>>
>>> "Leon" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>>>>
>>>> You realize that a tape measure in 10ths of an inch is just
>>>> another fraction?
>>>
>>> I know of a few companies that translate all of their customer
>>> specifications to 16ths to avoid confusion. You won't find a
>>> box made 12 1/2", but it will be 12 8/16" Seems just as
>>> awkward at times.
>>>
>> I guess some people have a hard time with simple math.
>>
>
> I work to the nearest 1/8. A helper does the cutting so I call
> out 12 4 and they cut it. Many helpers don't understand
> fractions or tape measures. I would love to have a tape marked
> in 8ths. Maybe I could switch to tenths. I think I'll buy a
> couple and see.
>

On Sat, 21 Oct 2006 10:05:39 -0700, "Pat"
<[email protected]> wrote:

> Many helpers don't understand fractions or tape measures.

You have helpers that can't understand 3/8 vs. 3/4? <G>

:)

<[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> I'm taking a notion to get back to work now...
>

"Leon" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>
> You realize that a tape measure in 10ths of an inch is just another
> fraction?

I know of a few companies that translate all of their customer
specifications to 16ths to avoid confusion. You won't find a box made 12
1/2", but it will be 12 8/16" Seems just as awkward at times.

I got one from Lowes.



On 21 Oct 2006 07:15:11 -0700, "eganders" <[email protected]> wrote:

>I have been looking for a tape (say 16 or 25 ft) in tenths of an inch.
>I can't find that. The reason I am interested is that that would allow
>me to use english units and not have to screw around with fractions.
>THAT is my major concern. I don't care if the standard is metric or
>english, I just don't want to have to deal with fractions. For someone
>that is not working with the larger measurements such as meters and
>kilometers, that would solve most of the problems. I can get
>micrometers, dial indicators and scales in tenths, albeit not in a good
>variety.
>
>I found that Lee Valley has a tape in tenths and it is OK, but I would
>rather have one from Fastcap. they have nice, high quality, durable
>products. Lee Valley has a left to right and a right to left reading
>tape, but you have to buy both. Fastcap usually has several features
>like this in one tape.


Mike Alexander
PP-ASEL
Temecula, CA
See my online aerial photo album at
http://flying.4alexanders.com