> Oh, FFS!
>
> Apparently in the USA, 44 gallon drums are called 55 gallon drums because
> of their retarded gallon size. :-p
>
> Which leads to something as ludicrous an arguement over whether to call a
> wikipedia article "44-gallon drum" or "55-gallon drum". :-)
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:44-gallon_drum
>
Okay, so we now have, a 44 Gal (UK/CA old AU), the speptic 55 gal and the
Aussie 200 litre tank. $$ gal still means more to me that 200 lt :-)
I call it as 200 litres.
The septics can all it whatever the fuck they like, but it doesn't mean
anyone else has to.
--
Regards,
Noddy.
>Oh, FFS!
>
>Apparently in the USA, 44 gallon drums are called 55 gallon drums because
>of their retarded gallon size. :-p
>
>Which leads to something as ludicrous an arguement over whether to call a
>wikipedia article "44-gallon drum" or "55-gallon drum". :-)
>
>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:44-gallon_drum
If you wanted to be really pedantic there are two US gallons... the US
liquid gallon and the US dry gallon. The latter is based on grain
measurement (as they all were originally). IIRC the US dry gallon is
only marginally smaller than an imperial gallon.
You could therefore reasonably argue that an empty drum should have a
different capacity to a full one. ;-)
--
John H
Yes it does, your little friend, David Z :-)
He probably had his "bar mitzvah" and weeny clipped, spread "eagled" over
a "55 Gal" tank!
Tried to be as yanky as :-)
I call it 200 litre. We are different and need to implement our own
standards?
What's really retarded is the fact that the world's most advanced nation
(supposedly) still uses a gallon at all!
Michael
> What's really retarded is the fact that the world's most advanced nation
> (supposedly) still uses a gallon at all!
Because they're not metric.
Metric might be the "official" form of measurement in the US, but the public
by and large hasn't taken to it. Everything over there is still in miles per
hour, feet and inches, pounds and ounces, and gallons and quarts.
--
Regards,
Noddy.
If the US went metric, they'd be the same as the rest of the world by adopting
a simple uniform measurement - now thay can't have that....... so they
metricate the old common useage by measuring aeroplane dimensions in just
inches (then decimalising part of an inch) and weight in pounds (then
decimalising part of the pound).
We won't mention the metric ton (2200 lbs), short ton (2000 lbs) and of
course, the good ol' 2240 lb ton though.
** Posted from http://www.teranews.com **
They are two different sized containers. What's the problem?
> I thought it was the same size, but 200 l is when ullage space is
> excluded. Hence an oil drum being a 205 l drum, whilst a fuel drum
> is 200 l. Same size drum. ( I get quite a bit of drum fuel and bulk
> oils). That's also the way it is in Malaysia and Singapore too, in my
> experience.
Both measurements are nominal. It's the same drum in both cases.
> We won't mention the metric ton (2200 lbs), short ton (2000 lbs) and of
> course, the good ol' 2240 lb ton though.
The metric ton is the name that they use for the tonne (1000 kg).
By my calculations:
55 USRG (US Retarded Gallons) is 208.197 litres.
44 PROPER gallons is 200.024 litres.
:)
Prexactly what I think too. However I'll call it at 200 :-)
That's probably because it *is*.....
> Queen Anne's Wine Gallon. The imperial gallon is based on the Ale
> Gallon, which was abolished along with the wine and other gallons such
> as the corn gallon.
As long as they don't abolish the beer gallon, you can do whatever you want with
that other crap....
--
There are three signs of old age. The first is your loss
of memory; the other two I forget.
Just use SI units and call it as 200 :-)
they are the same size
I used to deliver fuel and oild
fuel was 200L due to the ullagespace required by law
oil was 205L and engine coolant was 208L
the drum has a capacity of around 210-211L
Kev
TSK
we heard you the first 30 fucking times
you call it 200
and your wrong
KEv
So, you just said 200L ?
I'll take the fuel capacity.
What's methanol capacity out of interest ?
Actually, they are 205 litre drums.
not they arn't
the volume depends on what product is in the drums
fuel is 200L
oils 205L
and some other liquids as much as 208L
the drums them selves have a volume of around 110L
Kev
Similar to those "big white cubes" that are said to be a cubic metre
but actually hold a bit over 1100L of water. I know they're originally
used for anything from Coke syrup to oil to vinegar.
> Similar to those "big white cubes" that are said to be a cubic metre
> but actually hold a bit over 1100L of water. I know they're originally
> used for anything from Coke syrup to oil to vinegar.
To paint tins, to ink, to oil filters, to coolant ...
To soap products, and used cooking oil. Flubox - I've got
a few at a friend's place. I have not tested the actual capacity -
seems a one metre cube.
With an IBC (plastic cube, nominal volume 1000L, inside a supporting
cage) you can cut the top off, which is what we do with stuff that
won't splash out. Slightly more efficient than pokey little 205L
drums, and easier to shift with a forklift.
>Kev
Different testing procedures in different countries using different
liquids/fluids/solids to determine nominal capacity perhaps?
Stuff it, let's just call them P76 drums!
--
Message posted using http://www.talkaboutautos.com/group/aus.cars/
More information at http://www.talkaboutautos.com/faq.html