Metric Dimensions Style

Hey there,
I like to make a proposal: Architectural metric dimensions
Why not bring metric dimensions in a easy format like this:

When we read measures we know that they are in Meters…Lengths over 1 m like this: 1,27 or 23,87 or 120,04
For lengths under 1 m we only type for example 87 (we don’t need a leading zero, we recognize that now cm is meant because there is no komma)
Lengths with mm will get a superior Number. Like this for cm: 34³ and like this for m: 2,84² or 17,78²

Small gaps and short distances narrow after another will be possible to make dimensions like this:
3² or 7² instead of 0,032 and 0,072. Or 87² instead of 0,872. It will give us the possibility to perhaps still get the measures drawn without a leading line…often i think the numbers will fit in but then they don’t and they overlap and you have to pull them apart and/or with leading line…

Would this be a cool thiiiinnng? What do yo mean?

Most standards only use mm, I believe.
It could get quit messy out there.
I once ordered some timber and I was to pick it up later in the evening with a trailer.
The pieces of wood could easily fit in my pockets as the guy interpreted my dimensions as mm, like he was suppose to, instead of m what I intended.
After that mistake, I never used other than mm, again.

1 Like

Usually superscript numbers denote “power of”. I have seen someone else make the same feature request. It seems that the convention is used in a somewhat small part of Europe. I think that normal decimal notation would be safer.

What do you do if you want a measurement of 167mm (for example)?

Can’t see your suggestion catching on, frankly. Too much water under the bridge.

I meant for floor plans it would be very easy like this:

and It was meant to also privide the possibility to extend with the unit of measure if one wants it to.

but yes you are right it would be safer, in case you forget to insert the unit of measure on the top of the plan

162 mm would only be 16² —> you know it because there is no comma used, metric floorplans are in m, aren’t they?

thanks a lot

In the UK / RI etc floor plans are in metric and always in mm [whole numbers, no decimals] - 15 or 150 or 5400 etc
Survey drawings etc are always in m, given to 3dp to the right of the point - so the number to the right of the decimal point shows what it’d be as mm 5.400 or 1234.677
We also use a . rather than a , as the decimal separator.
The , is used to separate list items and sometimes it’s used to separate 1000 chunks in large numbers - even though the correct way is a - i.e. 1 000 000 rather than 1,000,000

• In Carpentry school we learned that everything is written in cm and the high number represents mm. Perhaps for technical drawings of beams and rafters.
• For metal drawings are only mm common
• In architectural floor plans (the above meantioned standard) like for 17.873 m → 17.87³ or 17,87³. It is often used in our region. The separator between m and cma can be comma or point, mostly a point is used too
• When I handwrite measures I don’t write 4,3 cm i only write 4³, finish
I am aware that this is a regional “tic” and a “nice to have”.
The main advantage ist that you don’t have these leading zeros. In floor plans you often have measures under one meter tugether with often up to 20 - perhaps 50 m in one plan. The measures under perhaps 1 to 50 cm dont have much place for the number of the dimension - no leading zeros is a benefit then. Yes you have the possibility to write everything in mm but in my opinion it is not so nice if you have to write perhaps 12 000 instead of only 12.00. Yes a little bit hair-splitting but I can see some advantages, especially the place advantage in the lower cm / mm lengths…

This topic was automatically closed 91 days after the last reply. New replies are no longer allowed.