Engineering references that specify formulas with variables with specified units, instead of constants with defined units, are a travesty.

I refer to Crane Technical Paper 410 in this instance.

Why would I want

ΔP = 32000 μ L v/d^2 (for laminar flow)

You'd expect this to be a normal formula, which you do your own dimensional analysis, but no. Units are specified. But not even on the same page, no no, on a "nomenclature" page you have to know to look for.

ΔP in Pa

μ in cP

L in m

v in m/s

d in mm

When I could have

ΔP=32 μ L v/D²

and YOU use whatever units you want.

Hell I could even put imperial units in here if I were a masochist. Very upsetting.

Engineering textbooks/technical papers need to find Pure Math Jesus.

Formulas with hidden units? Not even once.

Crane TP 410. How could you?

For your consideration, I submit my design for a new ASME standard. The Scaling Banana.

cross-posted from: https://mander.xyz/post/13061179

A technique called transformation toughenening uses a bunch of small particles of zirconia dispersed in alumina causing compressive stresses at crack tips preventing them from propogating and increasing toughness

Janney Coupler, used to connect rail cars https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Janney_coupler

The only numbers I will ever spell are one and zero, and only when using them as a pronoun, or for emphasis, respectively.

Is there ever a reason to not to use symbols when dealing with numbers? Why would "fourteen whatevers" ever be preferable to "14 whatevers". It's just so much easier to read numbers as symbols, not spelled out.

(Caveat, not including multipliers, like "273 billion").

Its just easier

cross-posted from: https://lemmy.world/post/16859856

No going back

I know the max rated temperature for my GPU is 92°C, but that doesn’t mean it’s your target temperature!