Andrew, thanks for testing the converter for me!
The converter is just a vehicle to test the conversion routines. Its 3-way interface is a nifty way to show all results at the same time.
Most of the work went into the conversion from fractional inches. Defining what is allowed, parsing what is entered, and refining the error reporting takes up the bulk of the code.
If you know of a more accurate conversion for length, let me know and I'll use it.
The current conversion factors have been gleaned online, and appear to be consistent across converters from several different sites:
1 inch = 25.4 mm
1 kg = 2.2046226218487756 pounds
1 litre = 0.03531466672148859 cubic foot
Ultimately the routines will be used in my "boxnotes" software, which is used to calculate box volume (amongst other things)
It seems that this little sample converter has gained some popularity. I'm toying with the idea of turning it into an actual calculator, but that's a more serious project. If there is a demand, it could be worth doing, but it's never going to rival the more serious scientific software.
Meanwhile, I could just leave it as a converter and add mass and volume. Which others were you thinking of?
The converter is just a vehicle to test the conversion routines. Its 3-way interface is a nifty way to show all results at the same time.
Most of the work went into the conversion from fractional inches. Defining what is allowed, parsing what is entered, and refining the error reporting takes up the bulk of the code.
If you know of a more accurate conversion for length, let me know and I'll use it.
The current conversion factors have been gleaned online, and appear to be consistent across converters from several different sites:
1 inch = 25.4 mm
1 kg = 2.2046226218487756 pounds
1 litre = 0.03531466672148859 cubic foot
Ultimately the routines will be used in my "boxnotes" software, which is used to calculate box volume (amongst other things)
It seems that this little sample converter has gained some popularity. I'm toying with the idea of turning it into an actual calculator, but that's a more serious project. If there is a demand, it could be worth doing, but it's never going to rival the more serious scientific software.
Meanwhile, I could just leave it as a converter and add mass and volume. Which others were you thinking of?
Hi Collo,
glad to help and be enlightened.
Temperature, velocity, money, mass, etc.
regarding the inch to mm conversion. I had been under the impression that 25.4 was absolute, but when researching conversions during our change over from manual (old fashioned theodolite) surveying to Total Station (laser and modulated infra-red) surveying I came across an accurate figure which I cannot (easily) find (pre www days) it struck me as being important when measuring in miles or thousands of yards that become mm in the calculation that the 8th significant figure becomes significant. We used it thereafter. I left all this behind about 15years ago.
Maybe www & google can help me find it again.
glad to help and be enlightened.
Temperature, velocity, money, mass, etc.
regarding the inch to mm conversion. I had been under the impression that 25.4 was absolute, but when researching conversions during our change over from manual (old fashioned theodolite) surveying to Total Station (laser and modulated infra-red) surveying I came across an accurate figure which I cannot (easily) find (pre www days) it struck me as being important when measuring in miles or thousands of yards that become mm in the calculation that the 8th significant figure becomes significant. We used it thereafter. I left all this behind about 15years ago.
Maybe www & google can help me find it again.
I've managed to integrate the Imperial routines into the existing "flare-it" software.
I would be interested to hear what you think about its usability. It can be accessed directly (176kb) from:
http://www.users.bigpond.com/bcolliso/flare-it.exe
regards
Collo
ps: If you're not sure what the software is for.....
..and would like to know more.....
The software is the end result of tests done on 15 flared ports and written up at:
http://www.users.bigpond.com/bcolliso/flare-testing.htm
Earlier results were discussed at length in this marathon 6 page thread on the Subwoofer forum:
http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=64528&highlight=
The latest results were briefly discussed in this thread:
http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=75510
I would be interested to hear what you think about its usability. It can be accessed directly (176kb) from:
http://www.users.bigpond.com/bcolliso/flare-it.exe
regards
Collo
ps: If you're not sure what the software is for.....
..and would like to know more..... The software is the end result of tests done on 15 flared ports and written up at:
http://www.users.bigpond.com/bcolliso/flare-testing.htm
Earlier results were discussed at length in this marathon 6 page thread on the Subwoofer forum:
http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=64528&highlight=
The latest results were briefly discussed in this thread:
http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=75510
I've just uploaded the latest version of my "boxnotes" program, containing the new imperial measurements option.
This was a major undertaking, and was the reason for developing the routines in the first place. !
I'll now have some time to look at a calculator.
Here's a screenshot of "boxnotes" in all it's imperial splendor
This was a major undertaking, and was the reason for developing the routines in the first place. !
I'll now have some time to look at a calculator.
Here's a screenshot of "boxnotes" in all it's imperial splendor
Attachments
Hi,
I was brought up on imperial measurement.
Having used dual measurement for over 30 years now, it is easy to visualise in either system.
Looking at your measurements and seeing all those foot, inch and fractions, just shows how unwieldy imperial is. I am glad that the UK went metric way back in '75. It is so much simpler.
I just wonder when our school children will start to think in only metric (mm & m not cm), so many still quote inches. It obviously comes from parents and grandparents and seems that two generations is not enough to eliminate the obsolete.
Well done Collo, that looks like an impressive piece of software.
I was brought up on imperial measurement.
Having used dual measurement for over 30 years now, it is easy to visualise in either system.
Looking at your measurements and seeing all those foot, inch and fractions, just shows how unwieldy imperial is. I am glad that the UK went metric way back in '75. It is so much simpler.
I just wonder when our school children will start to think in only metric (mm & m not cm), so many still quote inches. It obviously comes from parents and grandparents and seems that two generations is not enough to eliminate the obsolete.
Well done Collo, that looks like an impressive piece of software.
I agree!
The first time I saw the screen fully populated with imperial data, I thought "how can anyone make sense of this". Anyway, I imagine that those who are forced to work that way, will be happy that they're catered for.
Your comment about "only metric (mm & m not cm)," is interesting. I too, think in mm or metres but not cm. The cm just doesn't seem to be of much use, at least for building speakers.
The first time I saw the screen fully populated with imperial data, I thought "how can anyone make sense of this". Anyway, I imagine that those who are forced to work that way, will be happy that they're catered for.
Your comment about "only metric (mm & m not cm)," is interesting. I too, think in mm or metres but not cm. The cm just doesn't seem to be of much use, at least for building speakers.
Metres is the universal standard unit. Millimetres is the standard engineering unit.
At school, they teach centimetres. I guess they are closest to inches, and are easiest to make use of in a non technical environment. I even like to use them when building. I'd rather use one decimal place than millimetres.
IMO, it is practical versus proper. I guess you could provide an option, not that people like to see options infinitum. Also, not all (naturally) speaker builders are engineers.
At school, they teach centimetres. I guess they are closest to inches, and are easiest to make use of in a non technical environment. I even like to use them when building. I'd rather use one decimal place than millimetres.
IMO, it is practical versus proper. I guess you could provide an option, not that people like to see options infinitum. Also, not all (naturally) speaker builders are engineers.
Hi,
I would forget cm. It's part of the cgs SI system, as used by scientists.
That is, I believe, where the UK schools' problem emanates from. All the other teachers bump into the scientists regularly and hear cm being talked about and wrongly assume that they must be part of the metric system. Not many engineers work in teaching (the wages are too poor in the UK) and so no one enlightens them.
Leave cgs where it belongs, as a specialist science system.
I would forget cm. It's part of the cgs SI system, as used by scientists.
That is, I believe, where the UK schools' problem emanates from. All the other teachers bump into the scientists regularly and hear cm being talked about and wrongly assume that they must be part of the metric system. Not many engineers work in teaching (the wages are too poor in the UK) and so no one enlightens them.
Leave cgs where it belongs, as a specialist science system.
- Status
- This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.