HSMWorks: Thread Milling Tutorial!
Vložit
- čas přidán 6. 07. 2024
- This quick tutorial walks through creating a Form Tool Thread Mill in SolidWorks then using that tool in HSMWorks (Or HSMxpress or Fusion360!) to create a thread milling CAM operation!
In this video, we're using a 0.495" OD Thread Mill from LakeShore Carbide to cut 3/4x10 threads in a piece of aluminum on the Tormach PCNC!
Interested in HSM? Click one of the two links below!
HSMExpress: bit.ly/1LcaPYy (Free!)
HSM Works: bit.ly/1LcaOnx
If you enjoy this NYC CNC video please hit the like button and share with a friend, it really goes a long way!
Recent Videos:
Turning & Threading on the Tormach CNC Lathe: • Turning, Facing & Thre...
DIY Arduino CNC machine with GRBL: • DIY Cheap Arduino CNC ...
Subscribe For More - czcams.com/users/subscription_c...
Follow on Twitter - / nyccnc
Facebook - / nyccnc
Instagram / saundersmachineworks
Music copyrighted by John Saunders 5 Reasons to Use a Fixture Plate on Your CNC Machine: bit.ly/3sNA4uH - Věda a technologie
You're inspirational man! I'm one whose real interest lies in getting my hands and mind on manufacturing, not the managerial-executive pseudo-engineering role handed over to me in my core job. Actually, engineers aren't even expected to touch the stuff, even not respected if they reveal their dreams of becoming a fabricator/machinist.
Faster than the S-key is to hold down your right mouse button while sketching and swype left (line tool), up (dimension), right (circle), or down (rectangles). Best modeling I've ever been taught.
Yes please do solidworks and hsm videos!
It sure is amazing what can be done on machines today, thanks for the tutorial.
Fantastic video mate. Very explanatory and helpful. Cheers Aaron
i am glad i really enjoyed the video.. it made thread milling so easy
Great video, I'll certainly check out HSMWorks. Having a stand alone CAD package always seemed to result in repeating CAM tasks when making model changes.
Wow John, very impressive!
I use this in Inventor HSM. It is GREAT to see that Autodesk set it up to cooperate and function identically between the AD and SW products. Every thing you did there was the exact same as in inventor. This will really help in the job market since it is a unified CAM platform.
Just a slight suggestion, there is one feature in HSM that lets you do the path off the existing geometry (post op). It is one of the stock settings. That is why when it did that plunge, it did a spiral from center, rather than engage and cut. You can set it to use the stock just after the drill op. Eliminates the spiral! Then set a .005 spring cut at 7IPM.
Also, I am quite eager to see your tutorials upcoming! It will be good to learn a second approach to it.
Clear video. Fast enough to keep attention, yet slow enough to pause easily, duplicate, and test. :-D
Thanks for slowing things down a bit, makes it easier to follow
Great stuff! I'm excited to see you work with Fusion 360, and hear what you think of it.
Any chance you'd redo this video with Fusion 360 (given its current limitations on defining tools)? Thanks!
This is a great introduction to thread milling, another tip is to make sure the feed rate during the initial arc-in is significantly lower than the rest of the cutting, the arc-in puts a lot of load on the thread mill and most manufacturers recommend a much lower feed rate while arcing in. Another note, we have a very accurate machine here with excellent tooling, there is no need to get our major and minor diameters from the regular "shop sheet" that's meant for shit quality taps, look up a real thread chart that list the different classes of internal threads (1B, 2B and 3B). Keep up the great videos!
Raffi A Arc on feed should be 30-50% of machining feed rate to be on the safe side.
Excellent video :-) You make it look easy :-)
Very nice Video, really informative very well explained .
Great stuff thanks
Game changing John! Thanks
Neat video thanks for sharing this! Oh that pucker factor goes up with those high dollar tools on even higher dollar material!! 2 Thumbs up
Looking forward to the software tutorials!
Thanks for slowing down the computer software parts.
Thanks for the videos.
Awesome video, thanks!
👍 gotta get a thread mill bit 😊
Good stuff, John
Thanks
John
Hi John,
Thanks for the video. I'm looking forward to your CAD/CAM tutorial. It sure won't hurt to pickup some tips and tricks! It looks like you already figured out all the hard stuff!
-mike
NYC CNC No, I'm still stuck in the manual world. I will make the jump to CNC someday (when funding allows) so I am interested in learning what I can ahead of time.
Do you have any smart ideas of how to build a thread cutting tool for us hobbyists(students) that dont have tons of money to spend on a threadmill. I just got my cnc converted mill working and did som test threadcutting with a grinded M10 tap that i removed all theet exept one. it workes but not so well. A tool out of HSS would be nice since it's so easy to get a hold of. is there some easy way to grind a hss tool good enough for hobby work? Or is a tool made with a lathe threading inset the only alternative? (even if it is much more expensive).
Love your videos!
thank you for tutorials
John,
Can you add cutter comp to your HSM post and can your Tormach read cutter comp? If so, thread mills are big fans of cutter comp. Also, a second deflection pass always helps. But using the cutter comp will give you much more on the fly and precise adjustability of your final thread form.
Quick question - do you think there's any possibility of thread milling plastic or aluminum using a Stepcraft? I know you have some familiarity with the machine. So I had to ask. Very nice video. Thanks for posting.
wait, won't this make your threads a parabola shape? I can't imagine a normal looking thread done this way, especially when the diameter of the cutter close to the hole diameter. i suppose you'd need a 5 axis to get rid of that. or is there another way?
Hi,
I do the majority of our work in 303 ss. We are cutting ANSI 0.75” -18 to 2.25”-20 2a and 2b threads on a Haas lathe with live tools. Would you turn the treads or use a 6000 rpm live tool and a thread mill? Thanks for your advice.
Excellent. Very well done. Thanks. Now, please teach us how to use HSM to do the same thing, except SP-400-33 (bottle threads)
Great video
I program thread mills by hand usually. Just the way im used to. Its ez, its just a bunch of circular interpolations with a K value thats equal to the pitch. (right-hand threads are programmed from the bottom up for climb milling)
PS. thread fit is what cutter comp is for. make sure your post includes cutter comp (g42 for right hand,, g43 for left hand)
When is Fusion 360 adding the form tool option to CAM?
Sometimes thread milling is the best and most practical way to cut threads, especially on large threads in hard to machine materials. I use Mastercam and mostly choose standard tools from the tool library. I also have the option of creating custom tools when required. I also set my tool parameters with a radial wear offset to adjust for pitch diameter and tool wear.
What's the best software and best way to do thread milling or any other machining process is what the user prefers.
John,
You should try out some stub end mills, and a set of screw machine drills will reduce your spot drilling time.
Half as long means four times as rigid.
Kap
Very nice thanks.
Sorry to go a little OT but how many parts, like your example, would you expect to be able to produce in aluminum with that threading tool before it won't produce a spec. part? Steel? I ask because you mentioned the price of the threading tool.
Lol The Pucker factor.. had to google that one, although i felt it straightaway.. :)
how do I create a tool like the one on Fusion 360? I tried in every way but could not find the way. ps. Congratulations on the video, keep it up!
Awesome!
What's your cnc mill again?
would of been nice to see u set up the tool
I need to know how to put in the overall tool length; including the holder. I can't find a video for HSMworks setting up and programming then putting in the CNC machine.
NYC CNC never bothers to answer anyone!
i have seen most of your videos and i really enjoy watching them!
Nice work
Can you give some idea about how to calculate feed and rpm for high speed machining?
I install Fusion 360 because i saw it in one of your videos, but i want to know how to calculate feed and speed in HSM
Thanks anyway
Great video. I want to thread a trapezoidal 10mm by 2mm pitch. Is it possible? What threadmill should I buy? Thank you very much.
NYC CNC it is this trapezoidal screw. www.ebay.com/itm/x3pcs-10x2-Trapezoidal-Spindle-Lead-screw-CNC-XYZ-Axis-200mm-to-400mm-/310732359064?var=&hash=item4859178598:m:mZWtUxpV7cF7KN1xI9Of38A
fusion or solidworks? what to buy ?
Nice sir
Hey Big John, have you every had a stepper go out?
yeppers, over the weekend. not sure if its the driver or motor. I will get in touch with tormach tue. they will walk me thru the processe of elimination.
Do you find that a 50% thread engagement is more common for large threads in aluminum as opposed to 75? Is there a diminishing return for thread pull out load with alum or some other reason? Just curious.
"Large threads in aluminum"? "50%"? Can you be more "specific" and give some examples? When it comes to "large threads in aluminum" if STRENGTH and QUALITY and DURABILITY are the ultimate goal, you only have "50% engagement" between the aluminum and the stainless/steel "thread insert" you put INTO that aluminum so you don't HAVE "aluminum thread" with a steel fastener screwed into it. If more manufacturer's would "bite the bullet" and just "Heli-Coil" or otherwise "insert" their "quality" aluminum parts/threaded holes at the "factory", there would be a hell of a lot fewer "experts" on how to thread aluminum "correctly" who clearly don't know their asses from a hole in the ground since the last thing you want with a "softer" and "weaker" metal is LESS THREAD ENGAGEMENT.
Hi You can also use G42 D xx and set it directly in the controller... So 4 ways..
now show us how to do it in my old engine lath . it an old Colchester school lathe with no screw cutting led screw it dos it threading & pitch by using the rack , i can get up to a 6 threads to the inch the same as my spindle nose . i have no threaded chasing dial , So scrolling out with a thread milling cuter is the best option . as i can position the tool at a defined start. position . & rotate the chuck slowly . give me feed back on this subject ?
How can that tool make an inclined plane (the spiral of the thread)? I don't get it ☹️
I can't find this type of tool anywhere.. what's the exact name for this?
To reduce the pucker factor run a ghost part 2" above :)
rather than using plunge, set your stock contour to resemble the stock removed from drilling. It will then automatically plunge, and it will remove all of the air-cutting the spiral does and skip straight to the good stuff.
Hi , I have some drawings to transfer into Blender, can a CNC machine read a file from Blender?
Awesome
FASTER METHOD!!!
Simply helical ramp using pass depth per inch to match thread pitch. Then offset the diameter to the thread depth measurement.
Extremely simple to do with any program that can cut a spiral cut for z depth.
Ignore the pitch angle ?
;- )
Told you you'd like it :- )
Do you have the pro version? Your menu looked slightly different, just wondering.
There should be a way to make all these families of software be able to "cross-communicate" with one another....efficiently, not totally open-source, but hey, why not?
Awesome video, as always
;-) good (they better!)
Congratulations for your 3D skills and CAM skills also. In deed you make it look easy all these operations.
I have a demand to everybody that follows you, John : Is there a 3D learning path in order to get how the CAD CAM softwares are working? And which one to choose? How you guys have donne it with your 3D soft? Thank you.
+NYC CNC I wanted to say : the learnin' method for 3D softwares :)
+NYC CNC :) Fusion works even if I don't have any CAD software? I saw that is like an plug in for Inventor or any Autodesk soft.
Thank you for you feedback. Thank you for your CNC teaching and sharing.
Thank u
Maybe make a time-link-thingy to the actual machining part, in case pple are impatient and wanna see the milling?
episode 2: 2-56 in stainless!
can we download a thread mill chart from you or where can we download one? Thanks
+Sherman Hunter www.physics.ncsu.edu/pearl/Tap_Drill_Chart.html
it was in the url of his video ;)
We just got hsmworks recently. Shaved a bunch of time off a job with a lot of slots using trochoidal strategy. There are a few gripes with when the cam software decides a rapid or not though. Have to play with lead in and lead out values which I feel shouldn't be a necessity but it is what it is. You purchase it or just using hsmxpress? If purchased which deal did you go through? We chose the yearly lease as it seemed like a better deal with what it included.
akromix He didn't purchase, Autodesk decided to give it to him free because of the CZcams presence.
That said, work on your "Make Default" values and you can easily tailor the software defaults to your needs and standards.
atomkinder67 A bit more than being on youtube his attitude to his work
The yearly option does seem much better.
Don't hate. ... Te fact that they "decided to give him the software" they give it to schools also ... It's called marketing ;- )
Become as good, or 1/8 as known and reputable, and I'm sure AD will send you a copy too.
J Alvi I'm not hating, but Autodesk doesn't give away commercial licenses to machinists who are just good. You said it yourself, it's marketing. I have no intention of becoming reputable. I'm a machinist, not a videographer (no offense meant John, some of us just can't shoot and edit video worth a damn).
Student licenses are an entirely different ballgame, and all the CAM players have some student version. Some are certainly better than others (Surfcam's for instance won't post code whatsoever, and can only be "used" by an instructor edition... or that was V6 anyway). Mastercam even has a full-featured version called Home Learning Edition that won't post code, but can open any format and file and be saved and opened in a normal license to post and run.
NYC CNC Maybe they could "pay" by offering your viewers a deal on the price. I'm part of a small 3 man workshop in NZ and we were quoted $30,000 plus maintenance for basic mill and turning. how does that compare to US prices?
how ya liking hsm works
After I created the construction circle of .6875 and "exit sketch" to select 2D toolpath, my construction circle disappears every time. Any ideas??
If the whole sketch disappears then you need to right click on the sketch and select 'show'. Also, View:Hide/Show:Sketches may be turned off.
If just the construction circle disappears, but the rest of that sketch is still there, then I have no idea.
maybe there's something wrong with how I imagine this in 3D, but won't there start to be an error in the shape of the groove when the diameter of tool is a significant part of the hole diameter?
i.e for a 60degree to cut a 60degree groove the tool has to be perpendicular to the groove, but it can't be since the thread pitch mean the groove is slightly tilted from horizontal
I agree, the same thought occurred to me, but it's apparently not a problem at the scale being used. Have to draw some pics and do some calculations to figure out at what point it would start to be a problem....if it is.
John, what's "tilted" is the thread path relative to the axis of the tool. You are effectively inserting a horizontal disk into a sloped slot, so the question is at what point won't it fit? Or, more accurately since the disk is creating the slot, at what point will the slot become distorted to fit the disk?
I suspect that the answer is that the slot will be fine, but the bottom of the slot...which is supposedly V-shaped like a tap would make it, is actually rounded due to the cutter being high on one end relative to the thread, and low on the other...with a smooth transition between the two points. If that's the case, it's actually better, since a curved transition is less likely to create a stress fracture than a sharp transition, and with 75% or less engagement, the bolt thread won't reach the milled thread bottom anyway. One way to find out would be to cut a threaded hole in half, and look at it with magnification to see what shape it is. If you are curious... :-)
A minor niggle...you said that all threads are 60 degree...that's true for American coarse and fine pitch threads, but there are other standards. For example, British Whitworth is, I think, 55 degrees. Not sure what Acme is, but it's not V-shaped anyway. Nearly all that we are likely to run into will be 60, but just pointing out it's not as universal as you implied.
Thanks for sharing, and for keeping the computer stuff to a speed us newbies could follow!
-- Mike
+Lasse Langwadt Christensen Most single profile thread mills I've seen have a recommended thread pitch range because of the distortion you're thinking of.
so! the zero sum of infinity is in every integral och prim of 2. and good you learn
Why don't you use cutter comp!? That's how I open the threads up when I'm thread milling! And I also tap 2"+ taps with my machine(obviously you can't with the tormach) but you new haas can tap 3/4-10 no problem. Plus it should have synchronized tap feature so you can tap blind holes with a tap to the bottom without the worrie of it floating!!!
pfft. why tap in a CNC? Thread-milling= way less headaches
Much easier than standard tapping on cnc
that's cool as
It looks like your root diameter was a little bit too big, you can see the flat edge on the thread
+Dolan Kang i think its from the chart he used said 50% surface contact so no i think it was entended that way.
but yeah he could have gotten a litle more engagement and have less of a flat. also he could have chamfer the top and bottom to make it cleaner i think but works ok like it is i think.
Hope you like that tool. I made it
It consistently doesn't cut deep enough for me, and I think I figured out the problem. Using the 3/4"-10 thread example, the tip of the cutting tool runs along the 3/4" diameter. The problem is that 3/4" is the O.D. of the screw with flats on it. That works if the O.D. of the cutting tool includes identical flats. I think you need to cut to the theoretical tip of the triangles.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unified_Thread_Standard
I added H/8 to the radius (H/4 to the diameter) to get to the theoretical triangle tip.
H=.866025*pitch = .0866025" for a pitch of .10".
H/4 = .0216".
H/4 added to the 3/4" diameter = .7716".
A shorter version for internal threads is: 'threading hole' = 'outside diameter of threads' + (.2165*pitch).
A .7716" diameter should be the perfect diameter to run the tip of the cutting tool for perfect threads. That said, that's very different than .750", making me question my whole premise. Please test this with your setup (Using 'Stock to Leave') before working on anything important. Too much material can be removed, too little destroys parts.
Update:
I tried this with a smaller thread and it does work. If I leave an extra .005" stock it's too tight to screw in, with no extra stock it's a tad loose for my taste. Cutting just to the screw O.D. was always way too tight. Also, I did external threads and the formula is slightly different. The theoretical cylinder you're cutting external threads against has a diameter of the screw diameter minus 7/4* H.
H=.866025*pitch = .0866025" for a pitch of .10".
7/4*H = .1516".
screw diameter minus .1516" = .5984" .
A shorter version for external threads is: 'threading cylinder' = 'outside diameter of threads' - (1.5155*pitch)
D--1.0825*p
Single point thread mill takes a lot longer then a multi point. You might wanna see what comes in the mail tomorrow. ;)
NYC CNC lol
nevermind went to link I saw in your video
Can't you just use your machine offsets to make the thread a little bigger?
Dustin Walden yes thats what there for
if you wanted it slightly looser all you had to do is run the threads one more time without changing anything, it will remove a very small amount and the fit would be perfect
There is a 'Repeat passes' button on the passes tab of the thread command specifically to re-do the final pass to eliminate error due to tool deflection.
Grear
I don't own a set anymore but having thread wires and knowing the logic behind a set will fill in the blanks for you. Way too much to get into here. Nobody on youtube messes with threawires because only old angry men with chip burns on their faces and hands seem to know about thread wire. Those guys hate being in videos. I'm telling ya straight John, get an old handbook out and read up on thread wires. I tell you this because you are so damn smart, seriously. I know I'm not wasting my breathe on you and the reward for me is watching your vids. My $0.02
Caleb Welte On the money mate. The only knowledge I have about thread wires I got from Keith Fenner. He has done a few videos where he talks about thread wires and how to use them. If I ever see a set at a yard sale I will be all over them, haha.
Not that knockin you, ( i like your videos ) but i think that program was simple enough to just program by hand. Small blocks with tooling diameter offsets to get proper thread clearance: .5 spot drill, G83 peck, .375 4 flute Carb EM using a simple G13 so there is just one spiral at full depth ( aluminum is butter ), and programmed toolpath with cutter comp on the thread mill. I have yet to learn all that much using solidworks or autodesk, but with simpler programs programming on the fly, i think, is much easier.
If only I could afford solidworks! I'm an Alibre guy and that was hard to justify the purchase and maintenance for a home shop. I wish Solidworks offered a hobby version.
+Roger Fries If you're a veteran, you can get the educational version for $20 from Dassault.
+leaftye
Great news for veterans! However I'm not one. Thanks to all of you who are! At this point I don't need Solid works. Fusion 360 does a great job.
Why did you say you wouldn't want to tap a 3/4-in hole with a standard tap, we use a standard taps and tap a 1-in hole where I work on our CNC no problem.
now listen. what is the radius of verktum vs tum 1
Thread forming tools are not all 60degrees!!! Some are 55 like Whitworth thread for example👍
esteban pared Whitworth wow its not 1950
in a previous video, you said hsmworks was 5 figures, an unjustifiable purchase for your shop. did hsm hook you up or what :) would be a smart move on their part.
show me the G code and ahut up
G code is the thing of a lpoved book
clicked on link,dead can't find server
You forgot the spring cut ;]
you should teach. Not only on CZcams tho. lol
Great video John! I'm surprised you didn't find a tutorial covering thread milling though. I created this video last September, it appears on the first page of Google's search results: czcams.com/video/i8-FNHdbf7E/video.html Its not as polished as yours, but the information is there, and the workflow is identical between Inventor HSM & HSMWorks.
NYC CNC Yeah... mine as compared to yours & Tactical Keychains, is clearly missing some actual chips flying.
no just a matematicial one cane you calculate te sum zero
its all almost the same it probably will be in a year or two
Why did you not counter sink the hole? No true machinist would have left that step out.
Inches... Why USA don´t be like the intire world and use metric scale.
I use metric units and I'm american, there are plenty of americans who use it especially because science/engineering classes which are exclusively done in metric. For example, NASA uses only metric.
Except the times they crash into planets...
Probably because we haven't invaded you yet lol
We use it where its applicable and practical and worthwhile and use "Imperial scale" where it works best. Just the way ALL "technologies" are used where appropriate by professionals smart enough to know that "new" doesn't make "old" obsolete or even "inferior". The reason the "Imperial scale" is still around is because of the many and well-known (to people who use both and know their "trade" and have common sense about "science" and "math" and "geometry" and "measurement" etc) flaws, faults and failings of "metric scale".
There is nothing quite as ridiculous as using a "base unit" in excess of 1 yard and then claiming the U.S. is ignorant for not using "metric scale". Its been several decades since any "major" U.S. manufacturer designed/engineered/manufactured major machinery using "Imperial scale" and companies like General Motors, Deere & Company, Caterpillar, General Electric etc have been using "metric scale" for several decades AS they've introduced new product lines and again where practical. Where "metric scale" is NOT "practical" is in "precision measurement/machining" where ".01mm" isn't even close to "accurate and precise enough" for true precision measuring/machining. One hundredth of a millimeter is more than three thousandths of an inch. Three thousandths of an inch is a huge "tolerance" when it comes to engines and other precision-machined machines/components where .003" could easily be twice the difference between a part with "correct" clearance and one that has none and is destined for destruction as soon as the completed machine is operated.
Its also ridiculous to complain that the U.S. and "Americans" are somehow "ignorant" or "stupid" for NOT using "metric scale" and further to claim that the "advantage" of "metric scale" is how EASY it supposedly is to use. You can't have it both ways. If "Americans" who can and do and constantly go back and forth between metric and Imperial and fractions and decimals (neither fractions or decimals are EXCLUSIVE to either metric or Imperial and DECIMALS LONG PRE-DATE THE "METRIC SYSTEM") and move back and forth between "units" at will and with ease are "ignorant" or "stupid" for not using the "easy" system, then those who advocate for the "easy" system apparently find Imperial too difficult.
The other (but not the last) laughable "benefit" to the "metric system" is the claim that its supposedly "base 10". I don't know what "metric system" you "foreigners" use but here in the U.S. the metric system is NOT "base 10". The "base units" of measure are the meter, the liter and the kilogram. But yet there are no "decimeters" or "decaliters" or "decigrams" in common usage that I'm aware of. There ARE "centimeters" which are ONE HUNDREDTH (1/100 or .01 and "1/100" is easier for MOST people to grasp since its associated with "percent" or "per hundred") OF A METER and "millimeters" which are ONE THOUSANDTH OF A METER and GRAMS which are ONE THOUSANDTH OF A KILOGRAM (GOTTA WONDER HOW THE "KILOGRAM" GOT TO BE THE BASE UNIT OF WEIGHT WHEN ITS A MULTIPLE OF THE SINGLE UNIT "GRAM" UNLESS YOU REALIZE THAT UNTIL RELATIVELY RECENTLY IT WAS IMPOSSIBLE TO "MEASURE" A SINGLE "GRAM") AND MILLILITERS WHICH ARE ONE THOUSANDTH OF A LITER BUT AS FOR "ORDERS OF MAGNITUDE I.E. MULTIPLES OF TEN IN THE METRIC SYSTEM THEY SEEM TO BE PRETTY MUCH NON-EXISTENT).
The other thing laughable about the "practicality" and "usefulness" and "superiority" of the metric system is that its not "intuitive" at all. A "meter" supposedly was originally chosen because its some fraction of the distance between latitude or longitude lines on the "surface of the Earth". Well, the Earth isn't a "perfect sphere" and that in and of itself makes the "meter" an imperfect "unit of measure". Equally "imperfect" is the "kilogram" as it relates to the "mass" of a volume of "pure water". Sans "distilled water" i.e. water boiled in a container, its vapor collected and condensed to make it "pure" and free of all "dissolve solids" there is no such thing as "pure water" or even "standard water" and its impossible to measure the "mass" OF any volume of water "independently" without some sort of container being weighed with and without the water or a "scale" that has a "tare weight" of zero and a built-in container that progressively filled with water would "weigh" 1000 grams when "one liter" of "pure water" was placed in that container.
Again, since the uses for "pure water" are few and far between and without knowing that the water WAS "pure" you'd never know if you had a "liter" when you reached 1000 grams or just 1000 grams of "impure" water and a "volume" of less than or more than "1 liter", the "metric system" pretty much fucking fails miserably when it comes to "volume" and "mass" and using one to determine the other and vice versa using a non-existent or at least irrelevant "standard" like "pure water". Of course TEMPERATURE also affects the DENSITY of "pure water" and without knowing the TEMPERATURE to a "precise" degree you STILL don't know that "1000 grams = 1 liter and vice versa".
Then there's the foolishness of metric "length" and "distance" measurement. Using that "1 meter" base unit means the base unit of measure is ridiculously LARGE for most "day to day" measuring tasks. And as such, what happens? People end up "breaking down" 1 meter into "centimeters" and "millimeters". The former FAR more often than the latter. So you're using WHAT? FRACTIONS OF A METER FOR YOUR "COMMON" MEASUREMENTS. And to EXPRESS those measurements "accurately" you're either forced to use a "centimeter" and "decimals" to forget about "millimeters" entirely OR a combination of both or just "round off" measurements. And because "1 meter" is roughly 39 inches and a distance longer than the MAJORITY of people can comfortably "stride", its essentially impossible to "pace off" meters with any degree of "accuracy".
Meanwhile, the "obsolete" and "antiquated" and "pointless" and apparently for metric fans "difficult" Imperial system adapts the "unit" to the JOB. Inches where they're most practical, feet from 12 inches through 36 inches and yards from there. Fractions of an inch OR decimal TENTHS/HUNDREDTHS/THOUSANDS/TEN THOUSANDTHS where precision and accuracy are desirable. And since a "foot" is called a "foot" because that's "roughly" the length of a human...foot or at least a MALE human foot in a SHOE OR BOOT of some kind give or take an inch or two and someone's ACTUAL foot length can EASILY be measured in INCHES and the math to convert a "stride" to some number of "yards" is pretty simple and even metric fans could probably manage it, its not IMPOSSIBLE to "accurately" step off yards and in fact since most people have to "stretch" to pace a yard the chances of them "overstepping" a distance and ending up measuring "long" while pacing are pretty low.
Of course the use of "yards" multiplied to get to "miles" is assumed to be "standard procedure" today but the fact is that a few "units" have been left by the wayside by the "metric supporters" trying to make Imperial look as impractical as the metric system is jumping from "one meter" to "one thousand meters". Again, thanks to the Imperial system's non-reliance and non-obsession with "simplicity", a "yard" becomes "obsolete" or at least "unnecessary" once someone has "measured" 5 1/2 of them which is "1 rod". Why "1 rod"? Well, surveyors use a "stick" known as a "rod" along with a "transit" for measuring the change of elevation between two points. And way back when that was probably close to the average height of the average adult male. Providing a man knew his own height "to the nearest inch" by simply using his height and adding or subtracting the correct number of inches - and "inch" being roughly the length of the last "knuckle" on an index finger meaning the "finger tip" containing the finger nail, even without a measuring tape at all a "rod" could be made for "accurately" surveying, measuring distance, etc.
There are other "obsolete" units such as "links" and "chains" and interestingly enough when you get to "chains" and you measure/survey a square "10 chains" on a side you've just laid out "1 acre". Which brings up an interesting question? What is the "metric equivalent" of an "acre"? There is none. How about "1 knot" i.e. the unit of "velocity" for "ships" both on the ocean and in the air? There isn't one. Nor is there a "metric equivalent" for the "nautical mile" which is directly related TO the "knot" being TWO THOUSAND YARDS vs. the "statute mile" i.e. "terrestrial mile" of "1760 yards". Seems like "nautical miles" were thought up to make "math" a little simpler since time x velocity calculations to determine "distance traveled" would be simplified using even "thousands" of yards. And there's one other reason for the "nautical mile" being 2000 yards vs. 1760 yards. If you TRAVEL "1760 yards" as the crow flies or on a "map" thanks to the CURVATURE OF THE EARTH and the fact that there IS NO SUCH THING AS A "STRAIGHT LINE DISTANCE" on the surface of the Earth or even while flying "above it" at a "fixed altitude", you'll actually travel "2000 yards" thanks to the "arc" your "ship" will travel along to go "straight and level" for "1 mile".
Seems like LONG before whoever thought up the "modern" and supposedly "superior" metric system people were using a far more practical and useful and adaptable and versatile "system" that really isn't a SYSTEM at all. The "Imperial system" is more like a "collection" of several "systems" someone with a little INTELLIGENCE and EXPERIENCE and COMMON SENSE can use as little or as much of as he or she wants to and without being TIED to a "system" that for 99% of "users" clearly is just as hard or confusing or mysterious as the "Imperial system" since so many "metric system supporters" have no idea how their "native" system even works when they talk about "base 10" and "simplicity" and "practicality" and how its so "easy".
That's a lot of text for someone who can't even do simple math and correctly identify their system of measurement. 0.01mm is 0.00039 inches. You'll struggle to hit that on any mill and would require grinding or some other abrasive finishing. You act like you can't go three place with metric. I see it every day in the aviation industry. Also, the U.S. does not use the Imperial system. That's a common misconception. We use the U.S. Customary System. There are notable differences, mainly in fluid measurement between the two.
Your whole argument can essentially be boiled down to ease of conceptualization; being able to relate a measurement to something you can visualize, i.e. your foot. For engineers, we don't care about pacing things off with our feet and it doesn't matter how units are defined. What matters is how efficiently we can convert and compute these numbers. Nothing comes close to metric in that regard. It doesn't matter if the guy in the field can't pace it off. He has measuring tools for that. It matters if the guy in the office got his numbers right.
Ironically, most U.S. units were officially redefined a long time ago. They get their current definitions straight from the metric system. For example, the U.S. government defines 1 yard as 0.9144 meters. Look it up! Also, 12 inches is pretty close to 300mm. Pretty easy to remember if you absolutely have to pace something.
John. Check out Onshape. It's made by the same engineering team as Solid Works. It's an online cad program that has a free level and multiple paid levels. The only difference between the paid and free are the number of files that you can keep private. On the free level, the first five files can be kept private. After that, the files can be accessed by anyone in the Onshape site. Great way for students and hobbyist to get their feet wet in CAD without having to come up huge money for it.
www.onshape.com
=