COLORADO

OT .
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

METRIC
CONVERSION
MANUAL

January 1994
This manual or any part thereof must not be reproduced
in any form without the following disclaimer.

The information presented in this publication haS been

prepared in accordance with recognized engineering
principles and is for general information only. While it
is believed to be accurate, this information should not
be used or relied upon for any specific application
without competent professional examination and
verification of its accuracy, suitability, and applicability
by a competent licensed engineer or other licensed
professional. Publication of the material contained
herein is not intended as a representation or warranty
on the part of the Colorado Department of
Transportation (CDOT) , that this information is suitable
for any general or particular use or of freedom from
infringement of any patent or patents. Anyone making
use of this information assumes all liability arising from
such use.

Caution must be exercised when relying upon the

specifications and codes developed by other bodies and
incorporated herein, since such material may be
modified or amended from time to time subsequent to
the printing of this edition. COOT bears no
responsibility for such material other than to
incorporate it at the time of the initial publication of
this edition, subject to the general comments set forth in
the preceding paragraph.
 Table of Contents

Preface ................................................... v

Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . vii

Chapter 1: Metric Units, Terms, Symbols, and Conversion Factors . . . . . . . . ... 1-1
Basic Metric . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1-1
Length, Area, Volume and Temperature . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1-7
Civil and Structural Engineering . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1-10
Metric Project Definition . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 1-12

Chapter 2: Right-Of-Way . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2-1

Preliminary Survey . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . 2-1
Design/Plan Preparation . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2-5
Utilities . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .2-6
Acquisition . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .2-6

Chapter 3: Roadway Design . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3-1

Drawing Sizes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3-1
Drawing Scales . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3-2
Units Used on Drawings . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3-2
Elevation and Contour Intervals .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3-3
Stationing and Cross-Section Intervals . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3-3
Angles and Horizontal Curves . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3-4
Survey Plotting Accuracy . . . . . . . . . . . . . ~ . . . . . . . . . . . . 3-8
Proposed Features on Roadway Plans . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3-8
Specifications . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3-9
Cross-Section Elements and Design Data . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3-10
Superelevation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . 3-20
Hydraulics . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3-24
Cost Estimation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3-30

Chapter 4: Structures . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4-1

Drawing Sizes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4-2
Drawing Scales . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4-2
Fasteners . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4-3
Units Used on Drawings . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4-3
Units for Structural Steel Design . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4-11
AASHTO Expressions. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4-14
Chapter 5: Materials . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5-1
Units . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . 5-1
Structural Steel . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5-2
Steel Fabrication . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5-3
Reinforcing Steel . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ... 5-4
Steel Plate . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5-5
Sheet Metal . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5-6
Steel Wire Strand . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5-7
Seven-Wire, Uncoated Strand
for Prestressed Concrete Structures . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 5-8
Concrete . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5-8
Sieves . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5-9
Hard Conversions for Construction Materials . . . . .. . . . . . . . 5-11

Chapter 6: Traffic . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6-1

Units . . . . . . . . . . . . . ' . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6-1
Sign Conversion Values . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6-1
Sign Conversion Techniques . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . .. 6-2
Basic Sign Types ... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6-3
Design Issues . . . . . . . . . . . . . . '. . '. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6-7
Standard Cases and Sign Conversion Details . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6-16
Work Zone Signs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6-21
Public Awareness Plan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6-22
Recommendations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6-23
Pavement Markings . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6-24
General Process Topics . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6-24

Chapter 7: Maintenance . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7-1

Maintenance Management System Database . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7-1
Maintenance Management System Activities Units . . . . . . . . . . . 7-1
Road Equipment and Shops . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7-3

Chapter 8: Planning . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ' . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8-1

Units . . . . . . . . . . . . ~ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8-1
Planning . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8-1
Pavement Management Program . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8-1
Intermodal . . . . . . . . . • . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 8-2
GIS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8-2
Traffic . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8-2
Field . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8-2
Data Management . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8-2

ii
Chapter 9: Environmental . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9-1
Units . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9-1
Noise Analysis and Leaking .
Underground Storage Tank Remediation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9-2
Archaeology Unit and Paleontology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9-3
Air Quality Unit . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9-3
Hazardous Waste Unit . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9-3
Biology and Ecology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9-4
History and Scenic Byways . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9-4
Miscellaneous Environmental Services . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9-4
Coordinating the Conversion Process . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9-5
Training and Internal Coordination . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9-5

Chapter 10: Computer Systems . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10-1

Computer Geometry (COGO) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10-2
Graphics · . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10-2
Engineering . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10-3
Hydraulics . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10-3
Management Systems . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10-4
Other Systems . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10-5

General References R-1.

Dolores Proj ect . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . A-I

iii
iv
 Preface

The United States must commit to metrication. Two overwhelming factors, the adoption of
the metric system by the remainder of the world and the changing global economy, mandate that
this nation must change.

This Guide has been written to provide an explanation of the need for the change, and to
serve as a resource to help bridge the gap between building roads in the English-based system
of units and the Metric system. It is intended that this guide be used as a reference manual for
CDOT employees in the Right-Of-Way, Design, Bridge, Materials, Traffic, Maintenance,
Planning, and Environmental areas.

The AASHTO Metric Task Force requested that each AASHTO Highway Subcommittee and
task force develop a position and recommendations addressing metrication items in their areas
of responsibility.

The AASHTO committees and task-forces are attempting to address the metrication impacts
in all areas of highway transportation. It is possible that different task forces will adopt different
criteria for the same items. It may be that as the highway industry begins to use the criteria,
they may be revised. Thus, some metric criteria in this guide may require change at a later
date.

The reader is advised to seek the most recent version of AASHTO policy on these issues.

v
vi
 Introdu ction

The United States is converting its transportation system to the metric system; and the date
that the Federal Highway Administration has established is September 30,1996. After that date,
no highway projects may be paid for with Federal Lands Highway or Federal-aid Highway funds
unless the plans, specifications and estimate (PS&E) are all in metric units.

LEGAL BASIS FOR HIGHWAY CONVERSION

Metric Conversion Act of 1975 & Omnibus Trade and Competitiveness Act of 1988

The impetus for the change came from Congress. The Metric Conversion Act of 1975
encouraged metrication, but left it as a voluntary activity. As a consequence, virtually no
metrication took place. The Omnibus Trade and Competitiveness Act of 1988 amended the 1975
Act to designate the modern metric system (System International or SI) as the preferred system
of weights and measures for U .S. trade and commerce. It also requires each federal agency to
convert to metric, and requires each federal agency to use metric in its procurements, grants,
and other business-related activities to the extent economically feasible.

These acts did not mandate that individual states, cities, counties, industries, or other
organizations convert to metric. However, these entities cannot obtain federal roadway money
unless they use metric. It is probable that all will convert to metric to remain eligible for road
funds, and it is best that we all convert quickly using consensus guidelines.

Executive Order 12770

In addition to the congressional legislation, Executive Order 12770 was issued in July 1991.
It required each federal agency to adopt a metric conversion plan by November 30,1991. Among
the other provisions of the executive order were instructions that the Department of Commerce
was to lead the metrication effort.

The Federal Highway Administration Metric Transition Plan was approved by the Secretary
of Transportation in October 1991. It laid out procedures and administrative policies for the
conversion, and established certain milestone dates. For example, after September 30, 1992,
FHWA publications and correspondence were to use metric as the primary system of units for
all measurements. FHWA manuals and documents were to be systematically revised and
republished in metric so they would be available to guide the conversion. The key date is
September 30, 1996. All construction contracts advertised for bids after that date must contain
only metric measurements for any federal lands highway or federal-aid highway construction
project.

vii
u.s. DOT Metric Conversion Planning Guidelines

On May 8,1990, the u.s. Department of Transportation (U.S. DOT) issued Order 1020.1C
which established policy and administrative procedures for the transition. A change to the order
was published in January of 1991. It was further amended and issued as Order 1020.1D on
March 23,1992. The Order defmes SI as the official metric system, and refers to ASTM E 380
and several other industry standards and documents for guidance on conversion from U. S. units
to SI.

The U.S. DOT order requires agencies to develop plans for conversion to SI to the extent
practical. These plans are to include specific dates for changeover to SI in procurements, grants
and other business-related activities. U.S. DOT is to participate in the Interagency Committee
on Metric Policy, and a U.S. DOT Metric Coordination Committee was created. The Order
also contains guidance to U.S. DOT agencies to assist them in completing their conversion
plans. .

The U.S. DOT Metric Coordinator indicated in early 1992, "It is now the policy of the
Department to pursue and promote an orderly changeover to the SI system. He also noted that
there were nine comprehensive metric conversion plans in place for the nine U.S. DOT
agencies, including the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA).

NECESSITY FOR CONVERSION

As of 1990, there were only three nations that had not converted to metric: Burma, Liberia,
and the United States. Subsequently, these three nations face serious difficulties in exchanging
information with other nations, in conducting international trade, and in performing engineering
or construction work with other countries.

The current global economy presents another serious difficulty. At the end of World War
II, the United States was the center of world commerce. At that time America produced 75 %
of the world's products; today that value has shrunk to 25%. The world economy has changed
rapidly, and industry in the United States is being placed at an increasing disadvantage because
of its non-metric system of measurements. American firms are sometimes excluded from doing
international business when unable to measure goods in metric terms. A few facts will help put
this into perspective:

• The European Community (BC) is composed of 12 nations and is potentially the world's
most powerful market, surpassing the United States. The EC specified that products with
non-metric labels will not be permitted for sale after 1992.

• The largest U.S. trading partners, Canada and Mexico, are predominantly metric
countries.

• Japan has identified the non-metric nature of U.S. products as a specific barrier to the
importation of U.S. goods.

viii
 BENEFITS OF METRIC CONVERSION

International Acceptance

Metric is the world's measurement language. Fewer and fewer cultures are familiar with
U.S. measurement units, and many are increasingly unwilling to overcome this hurdle in order
to purchase and utilize American goods. The costs associated with doing business in this
country (labor, taxes, tariffs, etc.) make it difficult for U.S. firms to produce their goods at
prices which are attractive to other nations. They do not need the additional handicaps of
non-standard sizes and a measurement system which is the exception rather than the rule.

International Competitiveness

Greater industrial efficiency and international competitiveness are available through the metric
system. Canada has already converted to metric. The Canadian Metric Association reported
that metric produced direct benefits in terms of reduction in design costs and times, increased
construction efficiencies, and improved material and component dimensioning techniques.

Private Sector Conversions Already Underway

Some U. S. businesses have already converted. One of the earliest industries to be affected
by metrics was the automobile manufacturing sector. General Motors made an early decision
that it must convert its manufacturing. Surprisingly, total conversion costs for GM were less
than 1% of their original estimates. ffiM and Otis Elevator are other examples of firms that
have switched to metric, in this case to increase international competitiveness and to reduce their
parts inventories. The wood industry has converted to metric for international sales. Timber
products are being shipped overseas in metric sizes.

Opportunity to Consolidate or Redesign

The conversion process allows industries an opportunity to rethink their designs and to
incorporate efficient practices. One way to do this is to designate fewer product sizes, reducing
inventories and eliminating some manufacturing equipment. Rationalization of fastener sizes
during metric conversion allowed ffiM to reduce its number of fasteners from 30,000 to 4,000.
The liquor industry reduced the number of container sizes from 53 to 7 during its metric
conversion.

International Market for Engineering Services

Many American design and construction firms have already begun using metric units for their
foreign work. Foreign billings for American architecture/engineering contracting firms
amounted to $3.2 billion in 1989, a substantial amount of business.

ix
Simplicity .

Perhaps the strongest argument in favor of the metric system is its simplicity of use. It is
completely decimal based. There is no need to convert from one type of measurement to
another type of measurement. For example, inches do not have to be converted to feet. Feet
do not have to be converted to miles. Tablespoons do not have to be converted to cups. There
is no requirement to change 27 feet, 8 114 inches into the equivalent number of yards.

The universal experience of every country that has converted has been that the metric system
was easier to learn and easier to use than the convoluted system currently being used in the
United States. It is just getting the transition underway that is hard. Once the mental leap has
been made, calculations are much, much easier.

One Unit for Each Property

One of the greatest advantages is that there is only one unit for measuring each physical
property. For example, pressure may be measured by psi, psf, kips! sf, inches of mercury or
other units in the conventional U.S. system. The SI system has only one unit for pressure, the
pascal. Another example involves power, which may be measured in hp, btu's, watts, and
several other terms. In SI, it is measured only in watts. Therefore, metric is a more coherent
system in that only one unit is used for each physical quantity and there are no conversion
factors to remember.

Conclusion

Metric's COherency, its simple base units, and its use of decimal arithmetic make it an
especially logical and useful measurement system.

The American construction community is able to meet the metric conversion challenge in
federal construction, and it is in our long term strategic interest to do so.

There will be initial effort involved. Firm resolve, close cooperation between the public and
private sectors, and creative application of our extensive talent and expertise will allow the
challenge to be successfully met.

x
CHAPTER ONE
Metric Units, Terms, Symbols, and Conversion Factors
BASIC METRIC

Base Units

There are seven metric base units of measurement, six of which are used in design and
construction (The seventh, mole, is the amount of molecular substance and is used in physics).

Quantity Unit Symbol

length meter m
mass• kilogram kg
time second s
electric current ampere A
temperature kelvin K
luminous intensity candela cd
··Weight· in common practice often is used to mean "mass·.

Celsius temperature (OC) is more commonly used than kelvin (K), but both have the same
temperature gradients. Celsius temperature is simply 273.15 degrees warmer than kelvin, which
begins at absolute zero. For instance, water freezes at 273.15 K and at 0 °C, while it boils at
373.15 K and at 100 °C. To move between Celsius and Kelvin, add or subtract 273.15.

Decimal Prefixes

Only two decimal prefixes are commonly used with the base units in design and construction:

Order of
Pref"1X Symbol Magnitude Expression
kilo k 1()3 1000 (one thousand)
milli m 10-3 0.001 (one thousandth)

The prefIxes mega (M) for one million (106), giga (G) for one billion (109), micro (p.) for one
millionth (10-6), and nano (n) for one billionth (l0-~ are used in some engineering calculations.

Decimal prefixes to the tertiary power of 10 are preferred. The prefIXes deci (d) for one
tenth (10-1), centi (c) for one hundredth (1O-~, deca (da) for ten (10 1), and hecto (h) for one
hundred (1Q2) have limited application in construction.

Metric Units, Terms, Symbols, and Conversion Factors 1-1

 BASIC METRIC (Cont'd)

Plane and Solid Angles

The radian (rad) and steradian (sr) denote plane and solid angles. They are used in lighting
work and in various engineering calculations. In surveying, the units degree (0), minute ('), and
second (") continue in use.

Derived Units

Fifteen derived units with special names are used in engineering calculations:

Quantity Name Symbol . Expression

frequency hertz Hz Hz = S-l
force newton N N = kg·m/s2
pressure, stress pascal Fa Fa = N/m2
energy, work, quantity of heat joule J J = N·m
power, radiant flux watt W W = J/s
electric charge, quantity coulomb C C = A·s
electric potential volt V V = W/A or J/C
capacitance farad F F = C/V
electric resistance ohm 0 0= VIA
electric conductance siemens S S = A/V or 0- 1
magnetic flux weber Wb Wb=V·s
magnetic flux density tesIa T T = Wb/m 2
inductance henry H H = Wb/A
luminous flux lumen 1m 1m = cd·sr
illuminance lux Ix Ix = Im/m2

Liter, Hectare, and Metric Ton

The liter (L) is the measurement for liquid volume. The hectare (ha) is a metric measurement
used in surveying. The metric ton (t) is used to denote large loads such as those used in
excavating.

Pronunciation

candela Accent the second syllable, can-dell-ah.

hectare Accent the first syllable: beck-tare. The second syllable rhymes with care.
joule Rhymes with pool.
kilometer Accent the first syllable: kill-o-meter.
pascal Rhymes with rascal.
siemens Sounds like seamen's.

1-2 Metric Units, Terms, Symbols, and Conversion Factors .

 BASIC METRIC (Cont'd)

Rules for Writing Metric Symbols and Names

• Print unit symbols in upright type and in lower case except for liter (L) or unless the unit
name is derived from a proper name.

• Print unit names in lower case, even those derived from a proper name.

• Print decimal prefixes in lower case for magnitudes 1<1 and lower (Le. k, m, p., and n)
and print the prefixes in upper case for magnitudes 106 and higher (i.e. M and G).

• Leave a space between a numeral and a symbol (write 45 kg or 2.37 mm, not 45kg or
2.37mm). Exception: No space is left between the numerical value and the symbols for
degree, minute and second of plane angle, and degree Celsius (write 45° or 20°C, not
45 ° or 20°C or 20° C.

• Do not use a degree mark (0) with kelvin temperature (write K, not OK).

• Do not leave a space between a unit symbol and its decimal prefix (write kg, not kg).

• Do not use the plural of unit symbols (write 45 kg, not 45 kgs), but do use the plural of
written unit names (several kilograms).

• For technical writing, use symbols in conjunction with numerals (the area is 10 m2);
write out unit names if numerals are not used (carpet is measured in square meters).
Numerals may be combined with written unit names in nontechnical writing (10 meters).

• Indicate the product of two or more units in symbolic form by using a dot positioned
above the line (kg. m • S-2).

• Do not mix names and symbols (write N· m or newton meter, not N· meter or
newton·m).

• Do not use a period after a symbol (write 12 gil, not 12 g. ") except when it occurs at
II II

the end of a sentence.

Metric Units, Terms, Symbols, and Conversion Factors 1-3

 BASIC METRIC (Cont'd)

Rules for Writing Numbers

• Always use decimals, not fractions (write 0.75 g, not * g).

• Use a zero before the decimal marker for values less than one (write 0.45 g, not .45 g).

• Use spaces instead of commas to separate blocks of three digits for any number over four
digits (write 45 138 kg or 0.004 46 kg or 4371 kg). Note that this does not apply to the
expression of amounts of money.

• In the United States, the decimal marker is a period; in other countries a comma usually
is used.

Conversion and Rounding

• When converting numbers from inch-pounds to metric, round the metric value to the
same number of digits as there were in the inch-pound number (11 miles at 1.609 km/mi
equals 17.699 kIn, which rounds to 18 kIn).

• Convert mixed inch-pound units (feet and inches, pounds and ounces) to the smaller
inch-pound unit before converting to metric and rounding (10 feet, 3 inches = 123
inches; 123 inches x 25.4 mm/in = 3124.2 mm; round to 3124 mm).

• In a "soft" conversion, an inch-pound measurement is mathematically converted to its

exact (or nearly exact) metric equivalent. With "hard" conversion, a new rounded,
rationalized metric number is created that is convenient to work with and remember.

Soft Metric

• Soft Metric means "No Physical Change". This implies the product in question will not
be physically modified to be used in a metric project.

• All that is required is that the product literature and engineering data on these products
be available with metric dimensions. It is acceptable if product literature contains both
metric and english dimensions. Since product literature costs can be substantial, firms
without metric product literature need only develop a supplement to their existing
literature. Supplements will be accepted as submittals for an interim period.

• There is no problem with competitive availability of soft converted products on a metric

project, since these same products are competitively available today.

• In the future, as standard international metric product sizes are developed by ISO
(International Standard Organization) or another standards organization, these products
may undergo modification to be compatible in the world market.

1-4 Metric Units, Terms, Symbols, and Conversion Factors

 BASIC METRIC (Cont'd)

Hard Metric

• Hard Metric means "Product Requires Physical Change. The product in question must
be physically modified in order to be efficiently utilized in a metric project, which is
planned on a metric grid.

• A handful of currently used construction products must undergo hard conversion to new
"I metric sizes.
I

Visualizing Metric

A few basic comparisons are worth remembering to help visualize metric:

• One millimeter is about 1125 inch or slightly less than the thickness of a dime.
One meter is the length of a yardstick plus about 3~ 113 inches.
One gram is about the mass (weight) of a large paper clip.
One kilogram is about the mass (weight) of a softbound model building code book (2.2
pounds).
One liter is about the volume of a 4 inch cube (100 mm x 100 mm x 100 mm). One liter
of water has a mass of 1 kilogram.

• One inch is just a fraction (1164 inch) longer than 25 mm (1 inch = 25.4 mm; 25 mm
= 63/64 inch).
Four inches are about 1116 inch longer than 100 mm (4 inches = 101.6 mm; 100 mm
= 3-15/16 inches).
One foot is about 3/16 inch longer than 300mm (12 inches = 304.8 mm; 300 mm =
11-13/16 inches).
Four feet are about 3/4 inch longer than 1200 mm (4 feet = 1219.2 mm; 1200 mm =
3 feet, 111A inches).

• The metric equivalent of a typical 2-foot by 4-foot ceiling grid is 600 x 1200 mm, so
metric ceiling tiles and lighting fixtures are about 3/8 inch smaller in one dimension and
3/4 inch smaller in the other.

• Similarly, the metric equivalent of a 4 by 8 sheet of plywood or drywall is 1200 x 2400

mm, so metric sheets are about 3/4 inch narrower and 1-112 inches shorter.

• "Rounding down" from multiples of 4 inches to multiples of 100 mm makes dimensions

exactly 1.6 percent smaller and areas about 3.2 percent smaller. About 3116 inch is lost
in every linear foot.

Metric Units, Terms, Symbols, and Conversion Factors 1-5

 BASIC METRIC (Cont'dl

Conversion Rules

• Wherever possible, convert measurements to rounded, rationalized "hard" metric

numbers. For instance, if anchor bolts are to be embedded to a depth of 10 inches, the
exact converted length of 254 mm might be rounded to either 250 mm (9.84 inches) or
260 mm (10.24 inches). The less critical the number, the "rounder" it can be, but ensure
that allowable tolerances or safety factors are not exceeded. When in doubt, stick with
the exact "soft" conversion.

• Round to "preferred" metric numbers. While the preferred numbers for the" 1 foot =
12 inches" system are, in order of preference, those divisible by 12, 6, 4, 3, 2 and 1,
preferred metric numbers are, in order of preference, those divisible by 10, 5, 2 and 1
or decimal multiples thereof.

• Use hand calculators or software conversion programs that convert inch-pounds to .

metric. .They are readily available and are indispensable to the conversion process.
Simply check with any store or catalogue source that sells calculators or software.

• Be careful with the decimal marker when converting areas and volumes; metric numbers
can be significantly larger than inch-pound numbers (a cubic meter, for instance, is one
billion cubic millimeters).

1-6 . Metric Units, Terms, Symbols, and Conversion Factors

 LENGTH. AREA. VOLUME AND TEMPERATURE

One metric unit is used to measure length, area, and volume in most design and construction
work:

• meter (m).

Rules for Linear Measurement (Length)

• Use only the meter and millimeter in building design and construction.

• Use the kilometer for long distances and the micrometer for precision measurements.

• Avoid use of the centimeter.

• For survey measurement, use the meter and the kilometer.

Rules for Area

• The square meter is preferred.

• Very large areas may be expressed in square kilometers and very small areas, in square
millimeters.

• Use the hectare (10000 square meters) for land and water measurement only.

• Avoid use of the square centimeter.

• Linear dimensions such as 40 x 90 mm may be used; if so, indicate width first and height
second.

Rules for Volume and Fluid Capacity

• Cubic meter is preferred for volumes in construction and for large storage tanks.

• Use liter (L) and milliliter (mL) for fluid capacity (liquid volume). One liter is 111000
of a cubic meter or 1000 cubic centimeters.

• Since a cubic meter equals one billion cubic millimeters, the cubic decimeter and cubic
centimeter may be used in limited applications, since they are multiples of 1000 in
volume measurement.

Metric Units, Terms, Symbols, and Conversion Facto~s 1-7

 LENGTH, AREA, VOLUME AND TEMPERATURE (Con1'd)

Area, Length, and Volume Conversion Factors

From To
,Quantity Inch-Pound Metric Multiply
Units Units By
Length mile km 1.609344
yard m 0.9144
foot m 0.304 8
mm 304.8 ·
inch mm 25.4
Area square mile km2 2.590
acre m2 4046.856
ha (10 000 m~ 0.404 685 6
2 .
square yard m 0.836 12736
square foot m2 0.092903 04
square inch . mm2 645.16
Volume acre foot m3 1 233.49
3 .
cubic yard m . 0.764 555
cubic foot m3 0.028316 8
cubic foot cm3 28316.85
cubic foot L (1000 cm3) 28.316 85
100 board feet m3 0.235974
gallon L (1000 cm3) 3.785 41
cubic inch cm3 16.387064
cubic inch mm3 16387.064

NOTE: Using the U.S. survey foot definition, one meter = 3937/1200 feet.

1-8 Metric Units, Terms, Symbols, and Conversion Factors

 LENGTH. AREA. VOLUME AND TEMPERATURE (Cont'd)

Temperature Conversion Table

Temperature
Metric U.S.
Value Equivalent
(Oe) (oF)

-51 -60
-40 -40
-35 -31
-34.4 -30
-17.8 0
-17.0 1
-1.1 30
0 32
1.7 35
3.4 40
7.2 45
20 68
40 104
46.1 115
48.9 120
148.9 300

Metric Units, Terms, Symbols, and Conversion Factors 1-9

 CIVIL AND STRUCTURAL ENGINEERING

The metric units used in civil and structural engineering are:

• meter (m)
• kilogram (kg)
• second (s)
• newton (N)
• Pascal (pa)

Rules for Civil and Structural Engineering

• There are separate units for mass and force.

• The kilogram (kg) is the base unit for mass, which is the unit quantity of matter
independent of gravity.

• The newton (N) is the derived unit for force (mass times acceleration, or kg • m/ S2). It
replaces the unit "kilogram-force" (kg±), which should not be used.

• Do not use the joule to designate torque, always use newton-meter (N. m).

• The pascal (pa) is the unit for pressure and stress. The term "bar" is not a metric unit
and should not be used.

• Structural calculations should be shown in MPa or kPa.

• Plane angles in surveying (cartography) will continue to be measured in degrees (either

decimal degrees or degrees, minutes, and seconds) rather than the metric radian.

• Slope is expressed in non-dimensional ratios. The horizontal component is shown first

and then the vertical. For instance, a rise of one meter in four meters is expressed as
4: 1. The units that are compared should be the same (meters to meters, millimeters to
millimeters, etc.).

• For slopes less than 45°, the vertical component should be unitary (for example, 20: 1).
For slopes over 45°, the horizontal component should be unitary (for example, 1:5).

1-10 Metric Units, Terms, Symbols, and Conversion Factors

 CIVIL AND STRUCTURAL ENGINEERING (Cont'd)

Civil and Structural Engineering Conversion Factors

From To
Quantity Inch-Pound Metric Multiply
Units Units By
Mass Ib kg 0.453592
kip (1000 Ib) metric ton (1000 kg) 0.453592
Mass/unit length plf kg/m 1.488 16
Mass/unit area psf kg/m2 4.88243
Mass density pef kg/m3 16.0185
Force Ib N 4.44822
kip kN 4.44822
Force/unit length plf N/m 14.5939
kIf kN/m 14.5939
Pressure, stress, psf Pa 47.8803
modulus of elasticity ksf kPa 47.8803
psi kPa 6.89476
ksi MPa 6.89476
Bending moment, ft-lb N-m 1.355 82
torque, moment of ft-kip kN-m 1.355 82
force
Moment of mass Ib-ft kg-m 0.138255
Moment of inertia Ib-ft2 kg-m2 0.042 140 1
Second moment of in4 mm4 416231
area ff m4 0.00863
Section modulus in3 mm3 16387.064
Temperature OF °C 519(OF - 32)

Metric Units, Terms, Symbols, and Conversion Factors 1-11

 METRIC PROJECT DEFINITION

A project is "metric" when:

• Specifications show SI units only

• Drawings show SI units only

• Construction takes place in SI units only

• Inspection occurs in SI units only

• Cost estimating is based on SI units only

This does not imply that construction products must change. Over 95 % of the products used
in construction today will undergo no physical change at all during the metric transition. All
that will occur is that the dimensions of the product will be identified in drawings, specifications,
and on product literature in metric units, a process called soft conversion.

There are a handful of products that must undergo a physical change now in order to be
efficiently used in metric construction. This process is called hard conversion. As international
standards are developed for more products, American products will then be hard converted to
those sizes, to enhance their export potential.

Dual Dimensions

Dual Dimensions shall not be used on metric projects.

Dual Dimension example: 102 mm (4 inches)

Dual dimensioning is a wasted effort. It has no effect in construction documents. When

English measurements are present, readers will use them and will ignore the metric
measurement. Exception: In some cases dual dimensions will be used in certain Right-Of-Way
documents (For more specific information, see the Right-Of-Way "Design/Plan Preparation"
section of Chapter 2).

An exact analogy is appliance directions given iri English and French. Most English-speaking
people will ignore the French instructions, and vice versa.

Summary

It is most important that drawings and specifications be metric exclusively. It is of secondary

importance if measurements are hard or soft metric.

When documents contain SI measurements only, the reader will learn metric in order to
execute the work.

1-12 Metric Units, Terms, Symbols, and Conversion Factors

CHAPTER TWO
Right-ot-Way

The following standards are given as a guide to the conversion of Right-of-Way activities to
the Metric system and can be used as guidance on how site plans and topographic maps are to
be executed.

PRELIMINARY SURVEY

The three primary federal agencies involved in the production of survey information for
public use are the National Geodetic Survey (NGS) in the Department of Commerce, the U.S.
Geological Survey (USGS) in the Department of Interior, and the Bureau of Land Management
(BLM) in the Department of Interior. All of these agencies are converting their data to metric
compatible formats.

The NGS, which maintains a database of horizontal and vertical survey control points, has
converted to metric.· The North American Datum (NAD) of 1983 and the North American
Vertical Datum (NAVD) of 1988 recently replaced the older NAD '27 and National Geodetic
Vertical Datum (NGVD) 1929 datums, which were less accurate.

Because Colorado has a High Accuracy Reference Network (HARN), the latest datum shall
be known as the NAD '83 (1992), based on a readjustment of the classical network in Colorado.
This reduces the + 1 meter error in the NAD of 1983 to +0.00 m. The NAVD of 1988 is now
NAVD '88 (1992).

The USGS produces topographic maps and digital products which are based upon NAD '27
geodetic coordinates and NGVD '29 elevations. Topographic maps and related digital data are
best used for location studies in the preliminary stages of design projects. These maps are, in
most cases, not accurate enough for final design and engineering design work.

The BLM is in the process of converting all public land survey/records to a geodetic
coordinate database which can be expressed in metric. units.

Surveyors and engineers working with these products and maps need to be aware of the
datums ·portrayed on the maps. When performing coordinate transformations, one should
proceed with caution as local variations have been discovered.

The Global Positioning System (GPS) has proven to be an efficient and useful tool for
performing preliminary surveys. The GPS methods yield coordinates in the World Geodetic
System (WGS) 1984, which for all practical and engineering purposes is the same as NAD '83
(1992) and is expressed in metric units. With technological advancements in GPS equipment

Right-Of-Way 2-1
 PRELIMINARY SURVEY (Cont'd)

and software, the metric-based NAD '83 (1992) datum is well-suited as the datum touse for
resource management and inventory, survey control, engineering projects, Geographic
Information Systems, and Land Information Systems well into the twenty-first century.

Colorado survey personnel will be using NAD '83 (1992) only.

Units

Quantity Unit Symbol

length kilometer, meter km,m
area square kilometer km2
hectare (10,000 m~ ha
square meter m2
0
plane angle degree (non-metric)
,
minute (non-metric)
second (non-metric) "

Surveying

• The definition of the U.S. Survey Foot dictates the following conversions:
0.304800610 m/ft., 2.54000508 cm/in., 39.37 in.lm, and 1 K13280.8333 ft.

• The 100 foot survey station shall be replaced with the 1 kilometer station.

• All survey angular measurements shall continue to be given in Degrees, Minutes, and
Seconds.

• All survey distance measurements shall be done in meters.

• All new or surveyed dimensions on Right-of-Way plans or survey plats shall be given in
metric units. Recorded deed distances shall be shown in parenthesis in the units
recorded, such as feet, rods, or chains.

• After switching to metric units, all set 3's and SDR33 data collectors must be taken to
the NOAA baseline for checking and verification before being used on a project. The
data collector and set 3's must be checked as a unit to prescribed parameters. Send
copies of the calibration data to the Survey Coordinator's office upon completion. Those
performing the calibration should experiment with ppm calculations and temperature and
pressure readings after the calibration procedure, but before leaving the baseline, to get
a feel for the impact of changing ppms on the distance measurements in meters.

Right-Ot-Way
2-2
 PRELIMINARY SURVEY (Cont'dl

Surveying (Cont'd)

Control Surveys

• Traverse Methods (Monument names remain the same in miles until kilometer posts are
installed in the field)
- Measure ill in meters
- Measure distances under 200' chained
- Measure angles in DD MM SS
- Measure distance in meters (sct and data collector)
- Single line tolerances go to ±O.OO8 m
- Measure temperature in degrees Celsius and pressure in millibars

• GPS Methods
- Measure ill in meters
- Measure temperature in 0 C
- Measure pressure in mb
- Report coordinates in NAD '83 (1992)
- Prepare obstruction diagrams in meters
descriptions (to reach) in meters and miles
- Measure references in meters to surrounding features

TMOSS Surveys

• Measure distances in meters

• Offset mode will require experimentation

• Coordinate made

• PICS upgrade is available to handle conversion

ROW Surveys

• . Measure section corner references in meters

• Descriptions of caps and monuments in meters and feet. Still use inches and feet so
original records can match new descriptions

• Measure in meters on property lines

Vertical Control

• Use Leica NA2002 levels for control elevations

• Use NAVD '88 (1992) elevations

Right-Of-Way 2-3
 PRELIMINARY SURVEY (Cont'd)

Right-ot-Way

• A Right-of-Way minimum of 20 m for local roads and from thereon in 10 m increments

is normally recommended. In restricted circumstances 5 m increments or less will be
permissible.

• Standard right of way widths between the proposed right of way lines shall be rounded
to the nearest 10 meters. In some instances, in urban areas, the widths may be given to
the nearest 5 meters.

Contour Intervals

• Utilize either 10, 5, or 2 meters as contour intervals, dependent on site slope.

Elevations

• Elevation measurements shall be given in meters. Benchmark elevations should be

converted from feet to meters.

Examples Benchmark is 314.15 feet.

Convert to 95.753

Sample Top of Curb ,TC 305.224

Sample Bottom of Curb BC 305.024

Sample Contour Lines: ,

---------- 106.000 ----------

---------- 105.500 ---------

Contour lineshave also been seen on foreign drawings in meters, such as 106, 106.5, 107,
etc. This system may also be used.

Right-Ot-Way
2-4
 DESIGN/PLAN PREPARATION

• All Right-of-Way and Construction Plans shall be drawn to metric scales:

Plan sheets: 1: 1000 (rural) [Use 1 m = 1000 m, not 1 em = 10 m]
1:500 (urban)
Ownership maps: 1:5000

• All Engineering Design shall be converted to metric units including the definition of the
degree of curve from the 100 foot arc definition to the radius definition.

The legal descriptions shall be written as follows:

• Angular measurement shall continue to be made in degrees, minutes, and seconds.

• Surveyed distances shall be given in meters.

• Deed distances shall be givenin parenthesis in the units they were recorded.

• Areas shall be given in both conventions. In urban locations, square meters shall be used
with the square footage given in parenthesis. In rural locations, hectares shall be used
with acres given in parenthesis.

• All Right-of-Way plan tabulation of properties sheets shall give both English and metric
units of area in tabular form.

• Right-of-Way professionals shall reserve the right to redraft any drawings in English
units for the purpose of public presentations and/or court proceedings.

Right-Ot-Way 2-5
 UTILITIES

ACQUISITION

• All appraisal reports shall be done using the units of measurement in which the surveys
were recorded. In the conclusion of value, the cost per unit area shall be shown in both
metric and English units.

• All Fair Market Value reports shall report the cost per unit area in both the metric and
English units.

• Acquisition and relocation agents shall report the cost per unit area to the property owner
in both the metric and English units.

Right-Of-Way
2-6
CHAPTER THREE

Roadway Design

The AASHTO Task Force on Geometric Design has reviewed the Policy on Geometric Design ·
0/ Highways and Streets (the "Green Book"), identified nine areas critical to basic geometric
design, and submitted initial recommendations addressing metrication items in Geometric Design
to the AASHTO Standing Committee on Highways. The committee's recommendations have
since been approved by AASHTO.

These values can be used by CDOT as interim design criteria until a complete version of A
Policy on Geometric Design o/Highways and Streets (the "Green Book") is published in 1995. ·

DRAWING SIZES

The ISO "A" series drawing sizes are preferred metric sizes for design drawings. There are
five "A" series sizes:

ISO Metric
Designation Sheet Size Replaces
AO 841 x 1189 mm 34 x 44 inches
Al 594 x 841 mm 22 x 34 inches
A2 420 x 594 mm 17 x 22 inches
A3 297 x 420 mm 11 x 17 inches
A4 210 x 297 mm 8llz x 11 inches

Sheet size "AO" is the base drawing size with an area of one square meter. Smaller sizes are
obtained by halving the long dimension of the previous size. All" A" sizes have a height to
width ratio of one to the square root of two.

All full-sized plan sheets should conform to the "Al" metric series size. Drawing borders of
17 mm will be used at the top and bottom and 6 mm at the right edge. The left border (binding
edge) will be 45 mm. Until the 841 mm metric paper roll width is commonly available we will
continue to use the 36" wide paper. The 2.9" excess width should be added to the left (binding
edge) border.

Roadway Design 3-1

 DRAWING SCALES

Metric drawing scales are expressed in nondimensional ratios. Nine scales are preferred: l: 1
(full size), 1:5, 1:10, 1:20, 1:50, 1:100, 1:200, 1:500, and 1:1000. Three others have limited
usage: 1:2, 1:25, and 1:250.

Metric Scales Percent Enlargement

Inch-Foot or Reduction Using
Preferred Other Scales Metric Scale
1:1 Full size No change
1:2 Half size No change
1:5 1" = 'A' -40%
1" = 1/a' -20%
1:10 I" = l' +20%
1:20 I" = 2' +20%
1:25 1" = 2' -4%
1:50 I" = 5' +20%
1:100 I" = 10' +20%
1:200 1" = 20' +20%
1:250 1" = 20' -4%
1" = 30' ~28%
1:500 1" = 40' -4%
1" = 50' +20%
1:1000 1" = 60' -28%
1" = 100' +20%

UNITS USED ON DRAWINGS

• Use only one unit of measure on a drawing. Except for large scale site or cartographic
drawings, the unit should be the millimeter (mm).

• Omit unit symbols but provide an explanatory note (" All dimensions are shown in
millimeters" or "All dimensions are shown in meters").

• Whole numbers always indicate millimeters; decimal numbers taken to three places
always indicate meters. .

• Where modules are used, the recommended basic module is 100 mm, which is similar
to the 4-inch module used in building construction (4 inches = 101.6 mm).

3-2 Roadway Design

 ELEVATION AND CONTOUR INTERVALS

Benchmark elevations will be directly converted from feet to meters. For example, a
benchmark elevation of 639.28 feet will be converted directly to 194.583 meters (639.28 ft. -:-
3.28084 ft.im = 194.583 m). Benchmark elevations should be shown to a 0.001 meter
accuracy.

When contours are shown on Bridge Layout sheets and other drawings, the contour interval
will be 0.2 meters. Each fifth contour representing an even meter elevation (202.0, 203.0, etc.)
will be emphasized and annotated. Intermediate 0.2 meter contours will not be annotated unless
they represent a high or low contour on the ground surface that cannot be determined by
interpolations between adjacent full meter contours.

A 0.2 meter contour interval is equivalent to about 8 inches. This will result in more tightly
packed contour lines than have been generated in the past. In rugged terrain or on steep slopes
the contour density may interfere with readability. When this occurs, the 0.2 meter contours
should be removed from the densely packed areas only. The even meter contours are to be
retained in these areas.

Metric Inch-Pound
Interval Interval
0.2 m 1 ft.
0.5 m 2 ft.
1m 5 ft.
5m 10 ft.

STATIONING AND CROSS-SECTION INTERVALS

A station concept based on 1 km (1 +000.00) will be used for metric plans. For example,
Station 12+273.96 indicates a point 273.96 m forward of kilometer Station 12+000.

Use an equivalent conversion from English to metric when re-establishing points from a
previously run survey. For example, P.I. Station 456+35 from a 1965 survey using English
units would be defmed as kilometer Station 13+909.548 (45,635 ft. -:- 3280.84 ft.lkm = 13.909
548 km) in a metric survey. The kilometer stationing ·on new alignments is arbitrary.

Standard cross-section intervals of 20 meters should be used where alignment is maintained

over existing embankments and through rolling terrain. Although 20 meters should be
considered the standard, a larger interval may be considered when uniform templates are used
over flat terrain. Additional cross-sections should be provided to reflect abrupt changes in either
the template or the existing ground.

The usual horizontal and vertical cross-section scale is 1:100 [Use 1 m = 100 m]

Roadway Design 3-3

 ANGLES AND HORIZONTAL CURVES

Angular measurement will continue to be expressed in Degrees, Minutes, and Seconds.

Radius definition of curves, with the radius expressed in meters, will be used rather than
Degree of Curve as we currently use.

For example, a 3 degree horizontal curve on new alignment (Radius = 1909.86 ft. or ·
582.125 meters) should be referred to as a 580 meter radius curve. Metric radius on paper
relocated horizontal curves should always be expressed in multiples of 5 meter increments.

On the other hand, alignments which incorporate a previously defined horizontal curve should
continue to express the radius to the closest 0.001 meter. If the 3 degree curve noted above is
a re-creation of a previously established curve, it should be assigned a 582.125 meter radius.

Listed below are three cases defining horizontal curves. In all three cases the curve starts
atP.C. Station 300+59.41 (English), equivalent to P.C. Station 9+ 162.108 (metric).

Case A: Normal English curve definition.

Case B: Metric definition assuming that Case A curve data defined the roadway centerline
from a previous survey and is to be retained. All curve data is a direct
conversion from English to metric.

Case C: Metric definition of a paper relocation starting at P.C. Station 9+ 162.108 having
approximately the same curvature as the Case A curve. Note that the radius is
given in a 5 meter increment.

Case A Case B CaseC

P.I. Sta. = 302+68.57 P.I. Sta. = 9+225.860 P.I. Sta. = 9+225.628
.1= 12 30' 0
.1 = 12 30'
0
.1 = 12 30'
0

D = 3 00'
0
R = 582.125 m R = 580.000 m
T = 209.16' T = 63.752 m T = 63.520 m
L = 416.67' L = 127.001 m L = 126.535 m

3-4 Roadway Design

 ANGLES AND HORIZONTAL CURVES (Cont'd)

Circular Curves

The following table gives IlUIllmum rounded radii in meters for limiting values of
superelevations for various design speeds.

Design Minimum rounded radius in meters

Speed
(kmIh) 6% maximum 8% maximum
superelevation superelevation
40 55 50
50 90 80
60 135 125
70 195 175
80 250 230
90 335 305
100 435 395
110 560 500
120 755 665
130 800 700
140 1000 850

Spiral Curves: .

Based on the radius definition of the curve, spiral parameter' A' is defined as:

where: A = rate of change of length per unit curvature of spiral

R = radius of circular curve in meters
~ = total length of the spiral curve in meters.

Roadway Design 3-5

 ANGLES AND HORIZONTAL CURVES (Cont'd)

Highway Curve Conversion Table for Various Metric Scales

1:200
(m)
0 0 IS' 1,164.25
0 0 30' 582.13
0 0 45' 388.08
1 0 0' 291.06
1015' 232.85
10 30' 194.04
10 45' 166.32
2 0 0' 145.53
2 0 IS' 129.36
2 0 30' 116.43
2 0 45' 105.84
3 0 0' 97.02
3 0 15' 89.56
3 0 30' 83.16
3 0 45' 77.62
4 0 0' 72.77
4 0 15' 68.49
4 0 30' 64.68
4 0 45' 61.28
50 0' 58.21
50 IS' 5S.44
5 0 30' 52.92
5 0 45' 50.62
6 0 0' 48.51
6 0 IS' 46 .57
6 0 30' 44 .78
6 0 45' 43 .12
7 0 0' 41.58
7 0 15' 40.1S
7 0 30' 38.81
7 0 45' 37.56
8 0 0' 36.38
8 0 15' 35.28
8 0 30' 34.24
8 0 45' 33.26
9 0 0' 32.34
9 0 15' 31.47
9 0 30' 30.64
9 0 45' 29.85
10 0 0' 29.11
10 0 30' 27.72
11 0 0' 26.46
II 030' 25.31
12 0 0' 24.26
12 0 30' 23.29
13 0 0' 22.39
13 0 30' 21.S6
140 0' 20.79
14 0 30' 20 .07
15 0 0' 19.40
16 0 0' 18.19
17 0 0' 17.12
18 0 0' 16.17
19 0 0' 15.32

3-6 Roadway Design

 ANGLES AND HORIZONTAL CURVES (Cont'd)

Radius Guide Conversion Table for Various Metric Scales

Represented Radius @

Roadway Design 3-7

 SURVEY PLOTTING ACCURACY

As a frame of reference, distances expressed in metric units will have the following accuracy
in English units:

• Closest 0.1 meters will be within 2" of the true distance.

• Closest 0.01 meters will be within 3/16" of the true distance.

With this in mind, survey distances and elevations transferred to plan sheets should be shown
as follows:

• Horizontal alignment data (curve information, equations, reference point tie-ins, etc.) and
Benchmark elevations should be shown to the closest 0.001 m.

• Roadway elevations, used for pavement tie-ins and vertical clearance computations,
should be shown to the closest 0.01 m.

• All horizontal pluses, offsets, physical feature dimensions and locations, etc. should be
shown to the closest 0.01 m.

PROPOSED FEATURES ON ROADWAY PLANS

The location of all proposed features should be given in meters or fractional parts of meters
to the following accuracy:

• All proposed horizontal alignment data should be given to an accuracy of 0.001 meters.

• Metric curve radii should be in 5 meter increments.

• Vertical profIle alignment data should be shown with V.P.I. Stations at even 10 m
stations, V.C. Lengths in 20 m increments, and V.P.I. Elevations given to 0.001 m
accuracy, where practical.

• All other vertical elevations (breaks in ditch grades, pipe invert elevations, etc.) should
be shown to the closest 0.01 meters.

• The location of all proposed features should be shown to the closest one meter, where
practical, and never closer than 0.1 meter. The following increments are recommended:

Drive locations-----------------------closest 1.0 meters

Culvert locations--------.----------~-Closest 1.0 meters
Horizontal ditch grade breaks--------Closest 1.0 meters
Guard raillimits-------------:-------Closest 0.1 meters

3-8 Roadway Design

 PROPOSED FEATURES ON ROADWAY PLANS (Cont'd)

Proprietary items, such as pipe sizes, which do not yet have a standard metric size, should
be converted to millimeters using a soft conversion and shown on the plans to the next lower
10 mm increment. This will avoid disputes over the use of material which does not meet the
given size if the soft conversion is rounded to the closest 10 mm increment.

For example, proposed pipe sizes should be shown as indicated below:

Inch-Foot
Metric Soft Conversion
Pipe Diameter Equivalent Show As
152 mm 6 in. 150mm
305 mm 12 in. 300mm
381 mm 15 in. 375 mm
610 mm 24 in. 600mm
914 mm 36 in. 900 mm

SPECIFICATIONS

All measurements in construction specifications should be stated in metric. Until existing

specification systems are fully converted, the specifier may:

• Specify metric products (Check to see if the products to be specified are available in
metric sizes).

• Refer to metric or dual unit codes and standards. ASHRAE, ASME, and ACI,
among others, publish metric editions of some standards. Two of the country's three
model code groups (BOCA and SBCCI) as well as ASTM and NFPA publish their
documents with dual units (both metric and inch-pound measurements). In addition, most
handicapped accessibility standards and a number of product standards are published with
dual units. The metric measurements are virtually exact, "soft" numerical conversions
that, over time, will be changed through the consensus process into rationalized, rounded
"hard" metric dimensions. For now, use the "soft" metric equivalents.

• Convert existing unit measurements to metric (Follow conversion rules on page 1-6).

Roadway Design 3-9

 CROSS SECTION ELEMENTS at DESIGN DATA
The following information is intended to summarize selected design and detailing "equivalent
values" as the translation from English to metric units is implemented.

Design Speed

Metric Value English Equivalent · Running Speed

(kmIh) (mph) (kmIh)

30 (18.64 mph) 20 30
40 (24.83 mph) 25 40
50 (31.07 mph) 30 47
60 (37.28 mph) 35 &40 55
70 (43.50 mph) 45 63
80 (49.71 mph) 50 70
90 (55.92 mph) 55 77
100 (62.14 mph) 60 85
105 (65.25 mph) 65 85
110 (68.35 mph) 70 91
120 (74.56 mph) 75 98

Shoulders

Metric Value English Equivalent

(m) (ft.)
0.6 (1.97 ft) 2
1.2 (3.94 ft) 4
1.8 (5.91 ft) 6
2.4 (7.87 ft) 8
3.0 (9.84 ft) 10

The Task Force, in establishing shoulder width values, attempted to recognize the value of
a shoulder width less than 1 m and provide flexibility for that instance. Always maintain lane
and shoulder widths in 0.1 meter increments.

3-10 Roa dw ay Design

 CROSS SECTION ELEMENTS & DESIGN DATA (Cont'd)

Lane Width

The values established by the AASHTO Task Force on Geometric Design are slightly
narrower (ranging from 4 to 10 percent less) than the corresponding Canadian values. Canadian
values are set in 0.25 increments. This level of preciseness (hundredths of a meter) appears to
be excessive for this element. The Task Force believes that preciseness to 1110 m is acceptable
and has set values accordingly.

Metric Value English Equivalent

(m) (ft.) Comparison
_2.7 (8.86 ft) 9 (1.56% less than 9 ft. lane)
3.0 (9.84 ft) 10 (1.60% less than 10 ft. lane)
3.3 (10.83 ft) 11 (1.55% less than 11 ft. lane)
3.6 (11.81 ft) 12 (1.58% less than 12 ft. lane)

The Task Force believes that the values established are in line with recent research regarding
lane widths and safety benefits (reports TRB 214 and NCHRP 15-12 - the latter currently in
progress). Furthermore, construction practices and the pavement striping process generally yield
lane widths somewhat less than 9, 10, 11, or 12 ft. The metric values established are typically
1.5 percent below the corresponding English values now specified. This difference is considered
negligible with respect to safety benefits. Some capacity reduction may theoretically result, but
in practical terms, such a reduction is not expected to be significant.

Vertical Clearance

Metric Value English Equivalent

(m) (ft.)
3.8 (12.47 ft) 12
4.3 (14.11 ft) 14
4.9 (16.08 ft) 16

The 4.9 m value is seen to be the critical value since the federal legislation required Interstate
design to have 16 ft. vertical clearance. In view of the fact that the Interstate, now virtually
complete, is based on this minimum clearance, the metric value should provide this clearance
as a minimum. The 4.9 m value accomplishes this objective. Other vertical clearance values
are not deemed to be as rigid as this value.

Roadway Design 3-11

 CROSS SECTION ELEMENTS & DESIGN DATA (Cont'd)

Guard Rail Dimensions

The offset from the face of guard rail to the shoulder break (formerly 3'-3") will now be 1.0
meters.

Barrier Supports Spacing

Metric Value English Equivalent

(m) (ft.)
2 6.56 ·
4 13.12
8 26.25

The value established by the Task Force is approximately 5 %. more than the current spacing
of roadside barriers, but facilitate easy understanding by the highway design engineer and will
establish improved acceptance of the conversion to SI units. The value can be either shown in
meters or millimeters (4.0 m or 4000 mm) as an example.

This dimension will not involve a change in the currently accepted barriers meeting
performance criteria. Industry will be required to provide minor retooling to meet the new
lengths of this change. The cost should be minimal and is not expected to increase the overall
construction cost of the project.

Clear Zone

With two exceptions, the Green Book refers to the Roadside Design Guide for clear zone
values. The two critical values are the clear zone for urban conditions and locals and collectors.
The Task Force has set the following:

Metric VaIue
(m)

Urban Conditions 0.5 (1.64 ft)

Locals/Collectors 3.0 minimum (9.84 ft)

3-12 Roadway Design

-1

CROSS SECTION ELEMENTS & DESIGN DATA (Cont'd)

Curbs

Metric Height English Equivalent

Curb Type (mm) (in.)
Mountable Curb 150 (max) 6
Barrier Curb 225 (max) 9

The definition of high speed/low speed has an impact on where curb is used.

• Low speed: 60 kmlh or less design speed

• High speed: 80 krn/h or more design speed

Deflection

Theoretical soft conversions will be made to the nearest 0.05 meter conforming to
replacement of NCHRP-230 (scheduled to be 350).

Sight Distance

Metric Value English Equivalent

Stopping Sight Distance (mm) (ft.)

Eye Height 1070 3.51

Object Height 150 0.5
Headlight Height 610 2

Metric Value English Equivalent

Passing Sight Distance (mm) (ft.)
Eye Height 1070 3.51
Object Height 1300 4.27

Roadway Design 3-13

 CROSS SECTION ELEMENTS & DESIGN DATA (Cont'd)

Sight Distance (Cant'd)

Provided are tables ill-I, llr-6, Ill-40, and I11-42, which were prepared to show various
suggested sight distance values.

Asswned Brake Reaction Coefficient Braking Stopping Sight Distance

Design Speed for of Friction Distance
Speed Condition (I) on Level Rounded
(km/h) (Ian/h) Time Distance (m) Computed for Design
(sec) (m) (m) (m)
30 30-30 2.5 20.8-20.8 0.40 8.8-8.8 29.6-29.6 30-30

40 4040 2.5 27.8-27.8 0.38 16.6-16.6 44.4-44.4 50-50

50 47-50 2.5 32.6-34.7 0.35 24.8-28.1 57.4-62.8 60-70

60 55-60 2.5 38.2-41.7 0.33 36.1-42.9 74.3-84.6 80-90

70 63-70 2.5 43.7-48.6 0.31 50.4-62.2 94.1-110.8 100-120

80 70-80 2.5 48.6-55.5 0.30 64.2-83.9 112.8-139.4 120-140

90 77-90 2.5 53.5-62.5 0.30 77.7-106.2 131.2-168.7 140-170

100 85-100 2.5 59.0-69.4 0.29 98.0-135.6 157.0-205.0 160-210
110 91-110 2.5 63.2-76.4 0.28 116.3-170.0 179.5-246.4 180-250
120 98-120. 2.5 68.0-83.3 0.28 134.9-202.3 202.9-285.6 210-290

Table m-l. Stopping sight distance (wet pavements).

3-14 Roadway Design

 CROSS SECTION ELEMENTS & DESIGN DATA (Cont'd)

Sight Distance (Cont'd)

Calculated Rounded
Design Speed Maximum Maximum Total Radius Radius
(kmIh) e f (e+t) (meters) (meters)
30 0.04 0.17 0.21 33.7 35
40 0.04 0.17 0.21 60.0 60
50 0.04 0.16 0.20 98.4 100
60 ~
0.04 0.15 0.19 149.2 150
70 0.04 0.14 0.18 214.3 215
80 0.04 0.14 0.18 280.0 280
90 0.04 0.13 0.17 375.2 375
100 0.04 0.12 0.16 492.1 490
110 0.04 0.11 0.15 635.2 635
120 0.04 0.09 0.13 872.2 870
30 0.06 0.17 0.23 30.8 30
40 0.06 0.17 0.23 54.8 55
50 0.06 0.16 0.22 89.5 90
60 0.06 0.15 0.21 135.0 135
70 0.06 0.14 0.20 192.9 195
80 0.06 0.14 0.20 252.0 250
90 0.06 0.13 0.19 335.7 335
100 0.06 0.12 0.18 437.4 435
110 0.06 0.11 0.17 560.4 560
120 0.06 0.09 0.15 755.9 755

Table ID-6. Minimum radius determined for limiting values of e and f,

rural highways and high-speed urban streets.

Roadway Design 3-15

 CROSS SECTION ELEMENTS & DESIGN DATA (Cont'dl

Sight Distance (Cont'd)

Calculated Rounded
Design Speed Maximum Maximum Total Radius Radius
(kmIh) e f (e+t) (meters) (meters)
30 0.08 0.17 0.25 28.3 30
40 0.08 0.17 0.25 50.4 50
50 0.08 0.16 ·0.24 82.0 80
60 0.08 0.15 0.23 123.2 125
70 0.08 0.14 . 0.22 175.4 175
80 0.08 0.14 0.22 229.1 230
90 0.08 0.13 0.21 303.7 305
100 0.08 0.12 0.20 393.7 395
110 0.08 0.11 0.19 501.5 500
120 0.08 0.09 0.17 667.0 665
30 0.10 0.17 0.27 26.2 25
40 0.10 0.17 0.27 46.7 45
50 0.10 0.16 0.26 75.7 75
60 0.10 0.15 0.25 113.4 115
70 0.10 0.14 0.24 160.8 160
80 0.10 0.14 0.24 210.0 210
90 0.10 0.13 . 0.23 277.3 275
100 0.10 0.12 0.22 357.9 360
110 0.10 0.11 0.21 453.7 455
120 0.10 0.09 0.19 596.8 595

Table ID-6, continued.

3-16 Roadway Design

.,

CROSS SECTION ELEMENTS & DESIGN DATA (Cont'd)

Sight Distance (Cont'd)

Calculated Rounded
Design Speed Maximum Maximum Total Radius Radius
(kmIh) e f (e+f) (meters) (meters)
30 0.12 0.17 0.29 24.4 25
40 0.12 0.17 0.29 43.4 45
50 0.12 0.16 0.28 70.3 70
60 ...,......
0.12 0.15 0.27 105.0 105
70 - 0.12 0.14 0.26 148.4 150
80 0.12 0.14 0.26 193.8 195
90 0.12 0.13 0.25 255.1 255
100 0.12 0.12 0.24 328.1 330
110 0.12 0.11 . 0.23 414.2 415
120 0.12 0.09 0.21 539.9 540

Table m-6, continued.

Roadway Design 3-17

 CROSS SECTION ELEMENTS & DESIGN DATA (Cent'd)

Sight Distance (Cent'd)

Stopping Rate of Vertical Curvature, K

Sight (length (m) per percent of A)
Assumed Distance
Design Speed for Coefficient Rounded Rounded for
Speed Condition of Friction for Design Computed 8
Design
(kmIh) (kmIh) (0 (m)
30 30-30 0.40 30-30 2.17-2.17 3-3
40 40-40 0.38 50-50 4.88-4.88 5-5
50 47-50 0.35 60-70 8.16-9.76 9-10
60 55-60 0.33 80-90 13.66-17.72 14-18
70 63-70 0.31 100-120 21.92-30.39 22-31
80 70-80 0.30 120-140 31.49-48.10 32-49
90 77-90 0.30 140-170 42.61-70.44 43-71
100 85-100 0.29 160-210 61.01-104.02 62-105
110 91-110 0.28 180-250 79.75-150.28 80-151
120 98-120 0.28 210-290 101.90-201.90 102-202
·Using computed values of stopping sight distance.

Table ID-40. Design controls for crest vertical curves based on stopping sight distance.

3-18 Roadway Design

 CROSS SECTION ELEMENTS & DESIGN DATA (Cont'd)

Sight Distance (Cont'd)

Stopping Rate of Vertical Curvature, K

Sight Oength (m) per percent of A)
Assumed Distance
Design Speed for Coefficient Rounded Rounded for
. Speed Condition of Friction for Design Computed a
Design
(kmIh) (kmIh) (0 .(m)
30 30-~0 0.40 30-30 3.88-3.88 4-4
40 40-40 0.38 50-50 7.11-7.11 8-8
50 47-50 0.35 60-70 10.20-11.54 11-12
60 55-60 0.33 80-90 14.45-17.12 15-18
70 63-70 0.31 100-120 19.62-24.08 20-25
80 70-80 0.30 120-140 24.62-31.86 25-32
90 77-90 0.30 140-170 29.62-39.95 30-40
100 85-100 0.29 160-210 36.71-50.06 37-51
110 91-110 0.28 180-250 42.95-61.68 43-62
120 98-120 0.28 210-290 49.47-72.72 50-73
'Using computed values of stopping sight distance.

Table ID-42. Design controls for sag vertical curves based on stopping sight distance.

Roadway Design 3-19

 SUPERELEVATION

Rural Design [e(max) = 0.06 m/m]

(Applleo 10 ' - ...... raodwoyI roIaIed about conl«Un. and four Ian. ~ wh. . . . . . ' - lane . . II roIaIed about Ibe inside edge or trawled "'Q')

f(max) 0.16 f(max) O.IS f(max) 0.14 f(max) 0.14

V(R) 47km1h V(R) SS kmIh V(R) 63. kmIh V(R) 70 kmIh
V(D) SOkmih V(D) 60kmIh V(D) 70 kmIh V(D) 80 kmIh

D z 0.- or eun. (IIuod lID a 31.48 III an: IeqIh dtllnlllon)

• - s........naIIoa
S '"' Suponlnalloa RUDOlf Dblance (Spiral LeagIb) I.e. DIIIanc:e !'rom • '"' 0.000 10 e '"' deaIp 1U.........1Ion
C - CIvwD RUDOlf D ......... I.e. DllIance I'roIIl • - 0.000 10 • = NC (0.020)
T ...SpIraI TIuvw DbIanI:e" I... LalAnI err.. or ClIne .nlb a spiral IranllIIon _ _doni dn:uIor ......
NC '"' Normal CIvwn
RC - a-.e CIvwD

NOTE: Shaded e, S, C, " T wI_ In Ibe table are where Iplral \raDIltIonI are .-omended.
Whene¥w Ibe "1Iuow dIoIanco oquala ar III&lOeds 0.5 m, Ibe use or spiral \raDIltIonI are I&ronIIY .-nmended.

3-20 Roadway Design

..,.,.,.
I ) SUPERElEVATION (Cont'd)

Rural Design [e(max) = 0.06 m/m]

(Applleo ... _ ..... roodwio,yI _ about .....lIne ...d foUr laD. ~ where - . _ laD. . . II _ about lb.....Id. edge of lraveled way)

f(max) 0.13 f(max) 0.12 f(max) 0.11 (max) 0 .09

V(R) 77km1h V(R) 85 kmIh V(R) 91 kmIh V(R) 98 krnIh
V(D) 90 kmIh V(D) 100 kmIh V(D) UOkmlh V(D) 120 krnIh

=
D Depoe ol Curw (IIuod OIl a 30.48 DI an: leacth deflnillon)
e=Superol_
S .. Superolewalloa RuDOlf 011_ (Spiral lAn&Ib) I... DII_ INm ... 0.4100 10 ... design IUperoIevaIIoa
C - Qvwa R......rr D......... L.. DbIaDce INm • - ..4100 10 • - NC (O.CI2II)
T - "SpIral TIl.- DbIaDce" I... LaIenJ otr. . ol curw "'Ib • Iplral ........1Ioa ... 1Iaa_ _ curw
NC - NonuaI CIowD
RC =< R-.e CIowD

NarE: Shaded .. S, C, A T w1ueo III the lable are ..bere Ipl.... _llIonIare ...............ded.
Wbennw the "u..- dIaIance eq...... or 0lIIC00dI 0.5 DI, the UN of aplral IralulIIonIIIH IIIronIIY ...............ded.

Roadway Design 3-21

 SUPERELEVATION (Cont'dl

Rural Design [e(max) = 0.08 m/m]

(App". 10 Iwo laDe ~ rotated about ....t....In. and four laDe ~ wb..... -=II ' - ........ 10 roIaIed about Ibe InsId. ecIp or trawled -.r)
f(max) 0.16 f(max) 0.15 f(max) 0.14 f(max) 0.14
V(R) 47 kmIh V(R) 55 kmIh V(R) 63 kmIh V(R) 70 kmIh
V(D) 50 kmIh V(D) 60 kmIh V(D) 70 kmIh V(D) 80 kmIh

D - Depw or Curw {Bued _ • 30M ID arc Iea&tb dellnllloD)

.aSU....-u-
S - S u , . . - - Ibmoli: DIotaDCO (Spiral 1Augtb) 1.0. DIo_ from • - 0.000 10 • - deoIp auponlftallon
C .. er-.. Runotr DIIIaDcio Lo. D ........ from • - 0.000 10 ., .. NC (0.020)
T '" "Spiral Tbrow DbIaDco" Lo. LaIenI off. . or aonw ..till • spiral InuulIIoD \'I. IIaadard drallar _
NC - Nara.J er-..
RC-=R-..er-..

NarK: SIIaded .. S, C. " T wi.... ID \be table are wb..... splrallnuultloaa are -...aded.
When_ \be "u..- _ eq.... or - - ' " 0.5 m. lb..... or oplral """"ltIoaa are olraa&lY ..........ded.

3·22 Roadway Design

 SUPERELEVATION (Cont'd)

Rural Design [e(max)

(AppUoo III _
= 0.08 m/m]
...... ~ roIaIed aboul . .torlln. IIIId rout ..... ~ ""..... .,.. _ ........ II raIaIed aboullb. buld. edge ollrawled ""1)
f(max) 0.13 f(max) 0.12 f(max) 0.11 f(max) 0.09
V(R) 77 kmIh V(R) 85 kmIh V(R) 91 kmIh V(R) 98 kmIh
V(D) 90kmlh V(D) 100 kmIh V(D) 110 kmIh V(D) 120 kmIh

D - 0.- 01 Curw (IIued ... a 30.48 m arc Ien&Ib clellnUIoa)

... Superelowlloa
=
S Superelowlloa RuDOlf Db....... (Spiral Lenctbl I.e. DII....... rrom • = 8.000 10 . . . cI.....u~
C - Crvwa RUDDtt DII....... Le. Db....... rrom ... 8.000 10 ... NC (0.020)
T - ·Splral TIuvw ........• I.e. lAI<nI orr.. 01 CUfft wlib a spiral lranlilioa ... llandan! circular """"
NC-NanMler-
RC-R_er-

NarE: Shaded .. S, C, I: T -.lUll III !be .....1..... ""... spiral lnuullloaa .... recommended.
Wbm....- !be "u.r- cIII....... oquala ............. 0.5 m. lb. 11M 01 spiral 1ranII_ are Iliaalb' _mended.

Roadway Design 3-23

 HYDRAULICS
Pipe/Conduit

Pipe is one of the most ubiquitous products in construction. It is made of a wide variety of
materials, including galvanized steel, black steel, copper, cast iron, concrete, and various
plastics such as ABS, PVC, CPVC, polyethylene, and polybutylene, among others.

Few, if any, pipe products have actual dimensions that are in even, round inch-pound
numbers, so there is no need to convert them to even, round metric numbers. Here are the inch-
pound names for pipe products (NPS or "nominal pipe size") and their metric equivalents (DN
or "diameter nominal"). The metric names conform to International Standards Organization .
(ISO) usage and apply to all plumbing, natural gas, heating oil, drainage, and miscellaneous
piping used in buildings and civil works projects. For pipe over 60 inches, use 1 in. = 25 mm.

Nominal Sizes
DN NPS
(mm) (in.)

6 118
7 3/16
8 114
10 3/8
15 112
18 5/8
20 3/4
25 1
32 lIA
40 PI2
50 2
65 2%
80 3
90 3%
100 4
115 41/2
125 5
Table of Nominal Pipe Sizes in Inches and Millimeters

3-24 Roadway Design

 HYDRAULICS (Cont'd)

Pipe/Conduit(Cont'd)

Nominal Sizes
DN NPS
(mm) (in.)

150 6
200 8
250 10
300 12
375 15
450 18
525 21
600 24
750 30
900 36
1050 42
1200 48
1350 54
1500 60
1650 66
1800 72
1950 78
2100 84
2250 90
2400 96
2550 102
2700 108
2850 114
3000 120
Table of Nominal Pipe Sizes in Inches and Millimeters (Cont'd)

Roadway Design 3-25

 HYDRAULICS (Cont'd)

Pipe/Conduit (Cont'd)

Pipe Thickness
Nominal
AASHTO SI English Value Rounded Down
(mm) (in.) Rounded Up (mm)
(mm)

1.02 0.040 1.1 (0.04331) 1.0 (0.03937)

1.32 0.052 1.4 (0.05512) 1.3 (0.05118)
1.63 0.064 1.65 (0.06496) 1.6 (0.06299)
2.01 0.079 2.1 (0.08268) 2.0 (0.07874)
2.77 0.109 2.8 (0.11024) 2.7 (0.1063)
3.51 0.138 3.6 (0.14173) 3.5 (0.13780)
4.27 0.168 4.3 (0.16929) 4.2 (0.16535)

Pipe Thickness .
Minimum
AASHTO SI English Value Rounded Down
(mm) (in.) Rounded Up (mm)
(mm)

0.91 0.036 1.0 (0.03931) 0 ..9 (0.03543)

1.17 0.046 1.2 . (0.04724) 1.1 (0.04331)
1.45 0.057 1.5 (0.05906) 1.4 (0.05512)
1.83 0.072 1.9 (0.07480) 1.8 (0.07087)
2.57 0.101 2.6 . (0.10236) 2.5 (0.09843)
3.28 0.129 3.3 (0.12992) 3.2 (0.12598)
4.04 0.159 4.1 (0.16142) 4.0 (0.15748)

3-26 Roadway Design

 HYDRAULICS (Cont'd)

Pipe/Conduit (Cont'd)

Pipe Corrugation Size

AASHTO SI English Equivalent
(mm) (in.)

68 x 13 (2.68 in. x .512 in.) 2% x 1f2

76 x 25 (2.99 in. x .984 in.) 3x1
125 x 25 (4.921 in. x .984 in.) 5x1
19 x 19 x 190 (.748 in. x .748 in. x 7.48 in.) *x * X
1
7 /2
*x 1
...
19 x 25 x 292 (.748 in. x .984 in. x 11.496 in.) X 111/2

Pipe Lengths
Metric Value English Equivalent Show As
(m) (ft.) (m)

2.4384 8 2.5 (8.2 ft.)

3.0480 10 3.0 (9.8 ft.)
4.8768 16 5.0 (16.4 ft.)
6.0960 20 6.0 (19.7 ft.)
7.3152 24 7.5 (24.6 ft.)
9.1440 30 9.0 (29.5 ft.)

Roadway Design 3·27

 HYDRAULICS (Cont'd)

Pipe/Conduit (Cont'd)

Metric Value English Value

Designated Size Permissible Variation
(Diameter of Pipe) Internal Pipe Diameter Pipe Diameter
(mm)
Min., mm Max., mm in. mm

100 100 110 4 101.6

150 150 160 6 152.4
200 200 210 8 203.2
250 250 260 10 254.0
300 300 310 12 304.8
375 375 390 15 381.0
450 450 465 18 457.2
525 525 545 21 533.4
600 600 620 24 609.6
675 675 695 27 685.8
750 750 775 30 762.0
825 825 850 33 838.2
900 900 925 36 914.4
1050 1050 1080 42 1066.8
1200 1200 1230 48 1219.2
1350 1350 1385 54 1371.6
1500 1500 1540 60 1524.0
1650 1650 1695 66 1676.4
1800 1800 1850 72 1828.8
1950 1950 2000 78 1981.2
2100 2100 2155 84 2133.6
, 2250 2250 2310 90 2286.0
Table of Designated Pipe Sizes for Circular Concrete Pipe in Inches and Millimeters

3-28 Roadway Design

 HYDRAULICS (Cont'd)

Pipe/Conduit (Cont'd)

Metric Value English Value

Designated Size Permissible Variation
(Diameter of Pipe) Internal Pipe Diameter Pipe Diameter
(mm)
Min., mm Max., mm in. mm

2400 2400 2465 96 2438.4

2550 2550 2620 102 2590.8
2700 2700 2770 108 2743.2
2850 2850 2925 114 2895.6
3000 3000 3080 120 3048.0
3150 3150 3235 126 3200.4
3300 3300 . 3390 132 3352.8
3450 3450 3540 138 3505.2
3600 3600 3695 144 3657.6
Table of Designated Pipe Sizes for Circular Concrete Pipe in Inches and Millimeters (Cont'd)

Roadway Design 3-29

 COST ESTIMATION

BAMS Proposal and Estimates System (PES) and Letting and Award System (LAS)

Converting from the currently used system of units to the metric system will present a few
minor issues for the BAMS PES and LAS modules:

• A new items list with a new spec yearis being created. It will contain all existing items
with changes for metric dimensions and metric units of measure.

• There will have to be an investigation of the impact on the system of having two lists of
items with the same item numbers and two different units of measure.

• Two versIons of the Code Book and Cost Data Book will have to be maintained during
the transitional period (Metric Code Books are currently available from the Cost
Estimates Unit).

• There will have to be a decision about whether to convert the old estimate data over to
the metric system.

The rest of the activities in the PES and LAS modules will not be affected. There is no
impact on the bid letting and award process for CDOT. The contractors will be forced to submit
bids with item quantities in metrics, but otherwise, there will be no changes in this area.

The brunt of the impact of this conversion will be felt by the Bid Monitoring Unit. The
major issue for BAMS concerns the conversion of existing data or future data for the DSS
module. Since this module relies heavily on historical data, AASHTO will need to address how
the conversion is to be handled (which factors will be used, etc.). Attached to a letter dated
January 31, 1992, was AASHTO's matrix entitled "Status of Metrication Within AASHTOWare
Products". The portion of the report dealing with BAMS said, "No scheduled or planned work
to include metric at this time in any modules. Because some modules use historic files, if metric
is added, development of a conversion process will be essential. "

The operation of the CES module will also be affected, as the historical data base derived
from the PEMETH model of DSS will be adversely affected by the change to metric.

3-30 Roadway Design

CHAPTER FOUR
Structures

The following standards shall be used in the conversion of Staff Bridge activities to the metric
system.

• Long Bridges will be those over 60 m in length.

• The bridge design detail and rating manuals shall be converted to metric units not later
than December 31, 1995. All plans and specifications prepared within the Branch and
to be included in PS & E packages advertised after September 30, 1996, will be in metric
units. Advertising dates shall be obtained from Regional Preconstruction Engineers.

• All inspection reports shall be reported in metric units beginning January 1, 1995. No
conversion is necessary for reports prior to that date; however, a metric conversion table
shall be included in each structure folder beginning January 1, 1995, to facilitate
comparative dimensions.

• Formula conversions contained with the current AASHTO Standard Specifications for
Highway Bridges and Structures, Fifteenth Edition, Appendix E, Metric Equivalents of
U.S. Customary Units shall be used in computations. These conversions represent a soft
conversion of all formulas within the specifications. Information Systems will .be
requested to prepare our computer programs for metric computations. Computer
programs not within the control of CDOT will hopefully be converted by the manager
of the programs. Such programs include BDS, PONTIS, SAP90, BRASS, etc.

• Conversions of all prefabricated elements shall be made on a soft conversion basis unless
and until industry modifies the dimensions of current products, such as Colorado G54
girders, structural members (e.g. 12BP53), etc.

• All equipment purchased after January 1, 1995, shall be capable of displaying metric
units. This does not preclude purchasing equipment capable of displaying metric units
prior to that date as new or replacement equipment.

• Structural calculations should be done in metric, but for computer programs and/or other
information not available in metric, soft conversion is acceptable to complete projects.

• Since no international trend exists on standardization of steel shapes, metric projects shall
use the same steel shapes currently used, only use the metric dimensions listed in ASTM
A6/ A6M. A6/A6M lists both inch and mm dimensions of the shapes. All LRFD
property, shape, and specification design data is available in metric from AISC for
A6/A6M steel shapes (phone Orders: AISC, Chicago, IL, (312) 670-5414).

Structures 4-1
 DRAWING SIZES

The following represents the numerical conversion of standard engineering paper and drawing
sizes which shall be used:

ISO Metric
Designation Sheet Size Replaces
Al 841 x 594 mm 22 x 34 inches
A3 297 x 420 mm 11 x 17 inches
A4 210 x 297 mm 8% x 11 inches

All full-sized plan sheets should conform to the" AI" metric series size. Drawing borders of
17 mm will be used at the top and bottom and 6 mm at the right edge. The left border (binding
edge) will be 45 mm. Until the 841 mm metric paper roll width is commonly available we will
continue to use the 36" wide paper. The 2.9" excess width should be added to the left (binding
edge) border.

DRAWING SCALES

AIA preferred metric scales, all multiples of 1, 2, or 5 shall be used in preparation of metric
scaled engineering drawings:

Metric Scales Architectural

1:2 1:2
1:5 3" = l'
1:10 Ph" = l'
1" = l'
1:20 *" = l'
l/z" = l'
1:50 14" = l'
1:100 Va" = l'
1:200 1116" = l'
I" = 20'
1132" = l'
1:500 I" = 40'
I" = 50'
1:1000 I" = 80'
1" = 100'

4-2 Structures
 FASTENERS

• Large projects shall use ASTM A325 and A490 metric bolts.

• There are 7 standard metric bolt sizes, which replace the 9 bolts currently used. They
are: 16, 20, 22, 24, 27, 30, and 36 mm.

• . Minimum order quantities may apply, so small metric projects should verify availability
during design.

UNITS USED ON DRAWINGS

• SI drawings shall use mm exclusively.

• So that it is not necessary to write "mm" after each dimension, each drawing should have
the following note on it: "ALL DIMENSIONS ARE MILLIMETERS (mm) UNLESS
OTHERWISE NOTED".

• SI drawings should almost never show decimal millimeters (e.g. 2034.5), unless a high
precision part or product thickness is being detailed. Use whole mm (e.g. 2035).

• Dual dimensions shall not be used on SI drawings.

• Shop drawings shall be submitted using mm only.

Other metric units to be used within the Branch include:

• The kilogram (kg) is the base unit for mass.

• The newton (N) is the derived unit of force (mass x acceleration = (kg· m/s2».

• The Pascal (pa) is the unit of pressure and stress (pa = N/m2).

• Structural calculations shall be shown in MPa or kPa.

• Loads shall be specified in kilopascals (kPa).

• Plane angles will continue to be designated in degrees (degrees, minutes, and seconds).

• Slope is expressed in non-dimensional ratios. The horizontal component is shown first

and then the vertical. For instance, a rise of one meter in four meters is expressed as
4: 1. The units that are compared should be the same (meters to meters, millimeters to
millimeters, etc.) .

• The table on page 1-10 (Civil and Structural Engineering Conversion Factors) contains
the engineering conversion factors which shall be used by all personnel of the Branch.

Structures 4-3
 UNITS USED ON DRAWINGS (Cont'd)

The following tables represent the soft conversion metric equivalents of U. S. Customary Units
as contained within the Fifteenth Edition of AASHrO. Unless and until the expressions within
AASHTO are revised to hard conversions, these conversions shall be used:

Length
Metric Value U.S. Equivalent
(mm) (in.)

2 1116
3 0.12
6 0.23
6 114
10 3/8
11 0.43
13 112
19 3/4
20 0.80
25 1
51 2
76 3
152 6
203 8
229 9
254 10
305 12

Metric Value U.S. Equivalent

(m) (ft.)
0.915 3
3.048 10
12.192 40
243.840 800

4-4 Structures
 UNITS USED ON DRAWINGS (Cont'd)

Load
Metric Value U.S. Equivalent
2669 N 600 lb.
3558 N 800 lb.
4537N 1020 lb.
5604N 1260 lb.
6761 N 1520 lb.
7962 N 1790 lb.
9341 N 2100 lb.
10,764 N 2420 lb.
12,321 N 2770 lb.
44.48 kN 10,000 lb.
108 kN ·24,000 lb.
142 kN 16 Tons
178 kN 20 Tons
445 kN 50 Tons
74.45 kg/m 501b.lft.
175 N/m 121b.lft.
1460 N/m 100 lb.lft.
23.13 MN/m 130 kip/in.
292 kN/m 20 kip/ft.
730 kN/m 50 kip/ft.
287.28 Pa 6 psf
957.6 Pa 20 psf
366 kg/m2 75 Ib.lft. 2
47,880 Pa 1 Tonlft. 2

Structures 4-5
 UNITS USED ON DRAWINGS (Cont'd)

Stress (Pressure)
Metric Value U.S. Equivalent
(MPa) (psi)

0.248 36
0.517 75
0.690 100
1.034 150
1.379 200
2.068 300
2.482 360
3.447 500
6.895 1000
8.274 1200
11.376 1650
12.411 1800
13.790 2000
20.684 3000
27.579 4000
34.474 5000
68.947 10,000

137.895 20,000
165.473 . 24,000
206.842 30,000
248.211 36,000
275.790 40,000
344.737 50,000
413.685 60,000
689.470 100,000
68947 10,000,000

172 369 25,000,000

199948 29,000,000

4-6 Structures
'j

I UNITS USED ON DRAWINGS (Cont'd)

Weight (Density)
Metric Value U.S. Equivalent
(kg/m3) (lb./ff)
480 30
801 50
961 60
1441 90 .
1602 100
1842 115
1922 120
2243 140
2320 145
2403 150
2482 155
2723 170
2803 175
3204 200
7208 450
7849 490

Structures 4-7
 UNITS USED ON DRAWINGS (Cont'd)

Temperature
Metric Value U.S. Equivalent
(OC) (oF)

-51 -60
-35 -31
-34.4 -30
-17.8 0
-17.0 1
-1.1 30
1.7 35
3.4 40
7.2 45
46.1 115
48.9 120
148.9 300

4-8 Structures
 UNITS USED ON DRAWINGS (Cont'd)

Miscellaneous
Metric Value U.S. Equivalent
96.5 kmlh 60 mph
160.9 kmlh 100 mph
9.81 mls2 32.2 ft.ls2
232.77 mm2/m 0.11 in2/ft.
264 mm2/m Va in2/ft.
529 mm2/m 0.25 in2/ft.
0.052 mlm 6/8 inlft.
0.035 ml1000 kg 1 IA in/Ton
M13.5 H 15
M18 H2O
MS HS
MS13.5 HS 15
MS18 HS 20
Metric Tons Tons

Structures 4-9
 UNITS USED ON DRAWINGS (Cont'd)

The following chart gives the new kPa loads that shall be used to replace the psf loads.

Metric Value English Equivalent Percent Metric

(kPa) (psO is Stronger
2.5 50 4.4
4 80 1.8
4.5 85 10.6
5 100 4.4
6 120 4.4
7.5 150 4.4
10 200 4.4
12 250 0.2
15 300 4.4
17 350 1.4
20 400 4.4
22 450 2.1
24 500 0.2
32 640 4.1

4-10 Structures
 UNITS FOR STRUCTURAL STEEL DESIGN

Although there are seven metric base units in the SI system, only four are currently used by
AISC in structural steel design. These base units .are listed in the following table.

Quantity Unit Symbol

length meter m
mass kilogram kg
time second s
temperature celsius °C

Similarly, of the numerous decimal prefixes included in the SI system, only three are used
in steel design.

Pref"1X Symbol Order of Magnitude Expression

mega M 106 I 000 ()()() (one million)
kilo k 1()3 1000 (one thousand)
milli m 10-3 0.001 (one thousandth)

In addition, three derived units are applicable to the present conversion.

Quantity Name Symbol Expression

force newton N N = kgom/s2
stress pascal Pa Pa = N/m 2
energy joule I I = Nom

Although specified in SI, the pascal is not universally accepted as the unit of stress. Because
section properties are expressed in millimeters, it is more convenient to express stress in newtons
per square millimeter (1 N/mm2 = 1 MPa). It should be noted that the joule, as the unit of
energy, is used to express energy absorption requirements for impact tests. Moments are
expressed in terms of N • m.

The following conversion factors relate traditional U.S. units of measurement to the
corresponding SI units:

Multiply by: to obtain:

inch (in.) 25.4 millimeters (mm)
foot (ft.) 304.8 millimeters (mm)
pound-mass (lb) 0.454 kilogram (kg)
pound-force (lbf) 4.448 newton (N)
ksi 6.895 N/mm2
ft-Ibf 1.356 joule (1)

Structures 4-11
 UNITS FOR STRUCTURAL STEEL DESIGN (Cont'd)

Note that fractions resulting from metric conversion should be rounded to whole millimeters.
Following are common fractions of inches and their metric equivalent.

Fraction Exact Conversion Rounded to:

(in.) (mm) (mm)

1116 1.5875 2
Va 3.175 3
3/16 4.7625 5
% 6.35 6
5/16 7.9375 8
3Ja 9.525 10
7/16 11.1125 11
Vz 12.7 13
5/s 15.875 16
19.05 19
*
7/8 22.225 22
1 25.4 25 .

Bolt diameters are taken directly from the ASTM Specification A325 and A490. The metric
bolt designations are as follows:

Diameter Diameter
Designation (mm) (in.)

M16 16 0.63
M20 ·20 0.79
M22 22 ·0.87
M24 24 0.94
M27 27 1.06
M30 30 1.18
M36 36 1.42

4-12 Structures
 UNITS FOR STRUCTURAL STEEL DESIGN (Cont'd)

The yield strengths of structural steels covered in the metric LRFD Specification are taken
from the metric ASTM Specifications. It should be noted that the yield points are slightly
different from the traditional values.

Yield stress Yield stress

ASTM Designation (N/mm~ (ksi)
A36M 250 36.26
A572M Gr. 345 345 50.04
A588M
A852M 485 70.34
A514M 690 100.07

On the basis of the above selection of units and conversion factors, the 1986 LRFD
Specification has been translated into the SI system. When necessary, formulas were revised
to make all coefficients non-dimensional. In most instances, this could be achieved by explicitly
showing the modulus of elasticity, E, in the formulation.

The converted LRFD Specification is offered to the federal agencies and consultants as an
interim document to facilitate design of metric demonstration projects. Itwill also serve as an
introduction of the SI units of measurement to the general design profession and fabricating
industry. More complete information is available in the Metric Guide for Federal Construction,
First Edition, prepared by the Construction Subcommittee of the Metrication Operating
Committee. The guide is available from the National Institute of Building Sciences in
Washington D.C. (Call 202-289-7800 for ordering information).

Structures 4-13
 AASHTO EXPRESSIONS

For convenience and completeness, a copy of the AASHTO expressions is reproduced within
this manual.

u.s. Customary Metric ""

Article 2.7.4.3 -
1,600 133
W; \IF;
6,000 499
W; \IF;
13,300 1.106
W; \IF;

13,300 [I - 1.43( ~: ) 1 " .

1,106 [I - 1,43( ~:}]
W; \IF;

7,0CIJ 581
W; VF;
2;4OOb 199.2b
VF; VF.:y
2O.0CIJ.WJ ~ 137.640~
dFy dEy

4·14 Structures
 AASHTO EXPRESSIONS (Cont'd)

u.s. Customary Metric

Figure 1.7.48

1 + h - 33 1 +_h__ 33
18 0.457 18

Article 3.8.2

50 . 15.24
L + 125 L + 38

Artide3.10

6.6852
R 0.795 2
R

Artide 3.14.1

1.435 + 43,8(0) (16.7 - W)

( L 15.2 .

Artide 3.21.1.3

0.32 Vf
Artide 3.24.3

( ~)p
32 20 (
S+.61)p
9.74 18

S+ 2)
( -n PIS
(
S + .61 )
9.74 P n .s

Structures 4-1 5
 AASHTO EXPRESSIONS (Cont'd)

U.S. Customary Metric

Article 3.24.5.1

O.8X + 3.75 0.8X +1.143

,
O.35X +3.2 0.35X + .98
'.
Article 3.24.10.2 ,

100 55
Vs ,. Vs
220, 121
.Vs Vs

Article 3.25.1
o·

p[.511og Io s - KJ p[.SI ~lo(39~36s) - 1::]

1,000
ap{.
'xl~+ !!tj
- Ro -Mo-' 6,~95 xI~ + Me
O"PLRo
!!tl-'
(s
(~) -:w) _( ~ ) (s - O~SO)

l.~ )(S.~ 10) -

(:}<s
"

(' : -0.25)

[ Ps ] res - 30) ]
:w . (s - [0) (s -
[ Ps ][ .75) ]
20 - (s -:- .25)

Article 4.4.12.2

5Wc !
.415 v'f;'

Article 8.5.3

0.000006 peedeg F 0.0000108 pee deg C

Article 8.7. I

Wl.s~
wU (0.0428) ~

57.000~ 4.729.77~

4·16 Structures
 . .
AASHTO EXPRESSIONS (Cont'dl

U.S. Customary Metric

'Article 8.15.2.1.1
i
7.5·VE"" .623 VE""

6.3 VE"" .' .523VE""

5.5VE"" .456VE""

Article 8.15.5.2.1

0.95Ye .019Vf;"

0.9~ + 1.100p...( '::) ::;; 1.6Vf;" 0.75 Vf:

r:, + 7.58 p... (Vd)
M -0.13~ v'Fc.
<

Article 8.15.5.2.2

0.9{1 + 0.0006 ~) Vi[ 10.84 [ .0068 +.0006.( ~)] ~ .

)
AI:tide 8.15.5.2.3

. 0.9 ( 1 + 0.0004 !:l

VE"" 10.84 [ .0068 + .004. ( !:.)] ~
,
lArtide 8.15.5.3.4
1.5 VE"" .125 VE""

Artide 8.1S.5.3.8

2VE"" .166~

Artide 8.1S.S.3~9

4~ .332~

Article 8.1S.5.6.3

\; . (0.8 + t)vr;- s 1.8~ (.066 + .~~)~ s . 149~

i

Structures
4-17
 AASHTOEXPRESSIONS (Cont'd)

U.S. Customary Metric

,
Article 8.15.5.6.4
,
0.9 ·.~ .(J75~ .
,

3~ - .249~

Article 8.15.5.7

~+2.200 PM
Vd .083 Vi[+ 15.168 p ':: .

1.8 Vi'; .•149 Vi[

l.4VFc :U6Vi[
.
L2Vi'; .•100~

Article 8.16.3.2.2'

0.85 ~l re ( · 87,000 ' ) 0.85 ~I C; ( 599.843 .)

fy , 87,000 + f,- fy 599.843 +fy
I,
I

I,.Article·8.16.3.3.3 :
,
;

( ~ H(0.85f~t f; ) (87 ~~ fJ + Prl . (bw

b )[(0.85 ~l-( f;) 599~843)
fy ( 599.843 + fy • + Pr]

Article 8.16.3.4.1

0.85 ~I;yd (C'd')( 87.000

87 001
- fy ). 0.85 ~I (f;d' ) (
fyd
599.843
599.843 +fy
)

,
.•
Artide 8.16.3.4.3

.
[0.85~lf;
fy + )]+p'e:)
87.000
87.(XXJ
fy fy [0.85 ~I (f;)
fy + +
( 599.843 )]
599.843. fy
p(f;)
., .~

87 (0)
"
[I _( d
+
d') ( 87,<00 fy ) ]
87,000
599.843 [I _ (d') (599.843 + fy)]
d 599.843

4-18 Structures
 AASHTO EXPRESSIONS (Cont'd)

u.s. Customary Metric

Artide·8.16.6.2.1

1.9 Vi[+ 2.soo Pw( 'X ) ,

1.58 Vi[ + 17.2 Pw ( ~) .

2~ .166~

·3.5Vr; .291~

Article 8.16.6.2.2

2(1 + 2.~Ac)~ 24.'1 (.0068 +

2.~Ac)Vr;
2~ o·

.. ..
.166 Vr;
.,,- .
Article 8.16.6.2.3
..

2·(1 + 5OON.~)~ 24.1 (.0068 + Nu

500~
)vc c

Article 8.16.6.3.4
-

3Ye .249Vr;
.
..
Artide 8.16.6.3,;8 . .
J

4Vr; .332~

Article 8.16.6.3.9 0

8Vr; _664~

Article 8.16~6.6.2

(2 + ~,.~ :$ 4 Vr; .083 (2 + ;Jv~ :$ .332 ~

Article 8.16.6 ..6.3 .

6~ .498~

2Vr; . . 166 Vr;

Structures 4-19
 AASHTO EXPRESSIONS CCont'dl

u.s. Customary Metric

Artide 8.16.6.7.1 ..
V,/l V,/l
2.14 ~ + 4.600p M.. .178 ~ + 31.716:p
M..
>
4~ .332y'ff

3y'ff .249~

2.5Vf" .208Vif

Article 8.16.8.3
.. ,
21 - 0.33 r.... + 8 (db) 144.790 - 0.33 r...i. + 55.12 (rib)
.-

Ar1ide 8.19.1.2

SObws .3447SOhws
c;- fy -

Article 8.25.1

o·vt; 18.97 At.; -

V'if
0.0004 dt,fy 5.8 x 10..z dt,fy

0.085 fy 0.026 fy
V'iTc 'If!c .

°Vi f~
0.034 fy
'If!c
_

0.03 dt,fy 0.361 dt,fy

'If!c VC
Article 8.25.2

6.7VC .556VC
fet fet

4-20 Structures
/
AASHTO EXPRESSIONS (Cont'd)

U.S. Customary Metric

Article 8.26.1

0.02dt,fl 0.240 dt,fy

V'it Vt
-
0.OOO3d6f~ .043 dt,fy

Artide 8.30.L2

0.03 dt,(te-20,000) 0.36 dt,(f;Tc!37.895)

c:,
. .
A., f. A.,f.
.~ S. ~~
0.20 Sw 2.4
.. .. .
,,'
Article 8.30.1.1

A.,f.
0.27 A.,~
Sw·. C
3.24 S• • ~

Article 9.15.1.1
-
3Vfi .. .249Vtl;

7.s~ .623~

Article 9.15.1.2
)
6Ye
.c .498VC

3Ye .249Wc

Artide 9.15.2.3

7.5~ .623Wc

6.3 Vr; .S23~ .

5.5 Vr; AS7Wc

Structures 4-21
 AASHTO EXPRESSIONS CCont'd)

U.S. Customary Metric

Article 9~16.2.1.1

17,000 - ISO RH 117.21 - ~.034 RH

0.80 (17,000 - ISO RH) > 0.80 (117.21 - '1.034 RH)

""\
Article 9.16.2.1.2 ~ ~
~\ t--- 33~~J" ./
OA28w3l2~

Article 9.16.2..1.4

20,000 - 0.4ES - 0.2 (SH +- CRJ 137.9 - OAES - 0"2 (SH + CR.J
20,000 - 0.3FR. - O.4ES - 0.2~ fay 137.9 - 0.3FR. - OAI;$ - 0.2 (SH + CR.J
18,000 - 0.3FR. - O.4ES - 0.2 (SH + CRJ 124.10 - 0.3FR.. - OAES - 0.2 (SH + eRe)

Article 9.17.4.1

foe + 15,000 fsc + 103.421

I Article.9.17.4.2
1

U. 2
6.895 d + "3 fsc

".Article 9.20.2.2

0.6 v'f;b'd + Vd +' ~

1.7v'f;b'd 218.76 v'f;b'd

4·22 Structures
 AASHTO EXPRESSIONS (Cont'd)

U.S. Customary -Metric

Article 9.20.3.1

8 -v'f"b'd .664 Vi[b'd

. ::..

Article 9.20.3~2

4--v'f"b'd .332 Vi[h' d

Article 9.20.3.3

5Ob', .345 b',

fs,. fs,.

.-
Article 9.rT.l --
,.

(r:a - ~ rsc)O
I
6.895 (r:a - ~ t.c)O

Article 10.2.2

0.0000065 perdeg F II x 10~perdegC

Article 10.15.2.1

14bD 0.03675
VFrIrtw v'F,.+t..
7500b 5L69b -
-F".v F,,1jI

Article 10.15.3

A = 0.02 Lj:y eOOO - R)

R EY .. 850
:

Article 10.16.11

11,000 913
~ VF.:
- "

Structures 4-23
 AASHTO EXPRESS'IONS (Cont'd)

u.s. Customary Metric

, , Article 10.20.2.1

(0.2272L - 11) s.s~ (0.339L - 4.98) S,f~J

(0.059L .:-. 0.64) S,fOlZ (O.I068L - 0.353) Sd~

12Mc '
~
Met. = O.8W~(ft - lb)

, Article 10.20.2.2

Article lC):.2S.3
. ", '

[
314 + (yield Pointof' steel)
400.000
1 [
314 + (yield point of steel) ]
2,758

"I8hIe 10.32.1A

Fa. ~50 x 1<r c..~\ V 0.7711 +9.87(d:\

SK\[J ~ (I
16.980 - 0.53 (KUrf

23.580' - 1.03 {KUlf

33.020 - 2.02 (KUr)2

47.170 -:- 4.12 (KUrf

42.450 - J.33 (KUr)2

135,000,740
(KUr)2

42,450 - 3.33 (~Lt 292.682 - .023 ( ~L ) 2

Article 10.32.3.3.3
1.59 x 100SfJ ) ,
F,. (I - 1.59 x l(}-s fJ F,. I - --=-=-..,.......,...--::..
( .00689

F,. (I - 1.27 x Io-Sf,) 1.27 x lQ-SfJ )

Fy ,I -
( --==---=:.
,00689

4-24 S~ructures
 AASHTO EXPRESSIONS CCont'd)

U.S. Customary Metric

Article 10:.32.4.2

Fy - 13.000 Fy - 89.50
20.000
x 600d 137.90 .
x 4"137d
- Fy - 89.50
Fy ;.~OOOx 3.000 v'd X3.32W
137.90

.Article 1034.2.1.3 .

3~2S0 210
Vi; vr;;

Article 10.34.2.1.5
.'
3,860 320..38
- Vi; Vi;

Article 10.34.2.2.2 \

1,625 134.875
Vi; .. Vi;;

Arude 10.34.2.2.4

1;930 160.39:
Vr;
..
vr.;; .

Article 10.34.3.1.1

DVc; ovt;;""
23.000 1,909

Article 10:.34:.3.2.1
-
Dv'f; D vr;:-
46.000 3 ~818

Article 10.34.4.1

7.33 x [07 -
(D/t-f
-- .. -

Structures 4·25
 AASHTO EXPRESSIONS (Cont'd)

U.S. Customary Metric

Article 10.34.4.2

6OOOVK· 1.52 x 1~ [1 + (D/do)2]

yp:-
y . F;.(D/t,..)2

7500VK
-
vp;- -
~.5 x 107 K
-
(D/t:w>2f7

Article 10.34.4.4

(00754 - O.34'!!")
F,.
Fy -

Article 10.34.5.2

b'Yt; b'Vc; .
2.250 186.75

Article 10.34.6.1 and 10.34.6.1

-b'~
~
12 33.000
b'
12
V Fr
227.54-
;

Article 10.35.1

(~) Fy (;) Fy
L 100
+ L 100
+
100
(f) + 10
3,300,000 100
(f) + 10
22,754-

Article 10.35.2.3

1,625 (34.875
Vr; vr:-
i
Article 10.35.2.5

4,000 332
vr: vr:
4-26 Structures
 AASHTO EXPRESSIONS (Cont'd)

U.S. Customary Metric

Article 10.35.2.7

5.000 415
vt: 0
vr:
Artidel0.35.2.9

6,000 498
vr: vr;.

Article 10.37.2..1

5,000 415
vr; .. Vf:.
•

Article 10.37.2.2

~. .. 622.5
vc: vr;

Article 10.37.2.3

10,000 830
vt;. vr;

Artide 10.37.2.4

V
f
1,625.

•
fb
+-
3
a
f +-
fb
• . 3

-
Article 10.37.3.1

4,250 352.75
Vfa + fb Yf~ + fb

Article 10.37.3.2

1,625 134.9
Yf.+fb ~

Structures 4·27
 AASHTO EXPRESSIONS (Conf'd)

. u.s. Customary Metric

Article 10.38.5.1.2

550(h + i)W~ 45.7 x l<r (h + i) wYf;

vflI233 ~ vflI2 (.042.8) Yf;

Article 10.39.4.2.1

509.62
VF;

[ (. I
Artide 10.39.4.2..2

.55 F,. - 0.224 F,. . 1 -

•
Sin
11"
"2
l3.3QO - b
x. 7.160
~
t
;.:.. .

I
.55 F,. - 0.224 F,.

Article 10.39.4.2.3

~ 1.103.9
vF; VF;
57.6 ( ~r x l<r 396.854 ( ~r
Article 10.39.4.3.2 .

3;070 v'k.
'\I'F:,.
Articles 10.39.4.3.4 and 10.39.4.4.4

6,650Yk 55L950Vk
v'F; VF;

.5SF, - 0.224 F~ I - ,;n ( i x 6;650 Vk-

. 3.580 '\lk
~) . I
1
.~5 F,. - 0.224 F,.
.
552 Vk- wVF:) j..
.::...r.r
297Yk .

4-28 Structures
( AASHTO EXPRESSIONS (Cont'd)

U.S. Customary Metric

Article 10.39.4.5.1

_ 2,600 216
-VF; vF.:"y
,

Article 10.48.1.1

2,055
-
VF;
19,230
-
VF;
Artide 10.48.2.1

~ , 182.6-' _
VF; n' y

l.i.m
VF; -

20,000;000 Ac
F,d

15,400 - 1,379 x lOS Ac

VF; F,d
,
1.015 >.;: -lOS lw' 6,998.43 x IOS~
D 0

Article 10.48.4 --

Rb = I - 0.002 (Dc lw) [Dc ~ -

_ - Ace lw _ fSxc
$1

>.. = 15,900
>.. = 12.500

M< ~ 91 X lo'(!fJV 0.772 J

lye
+ 9.87(~t -
18.250
vF;
L.- = [572 x lW 1r£!]"2 -
- FyS"c

Structures 4-29
 AASHTO EXPRESSIONS (Conf'd)

U.S. Customary Metric

Article 10.48.5.1

3,029.5
~
VF; VF;
)

Article 10.48.5.3

2,@
-
VF;

Article 10.48.6.1

. 73,CXYJ . 6,059
VF; -" YF;
,

Article 10.48.6.3

doVF; dovF;
23.000 1,909

Article 10.48.8.1

V
p
[c + Vi0.81(1 - c)
+ (dolD)2 -

Vp = 0.58 F,.o"", -

6000Vk
-
VF;
7SOOVk -
vF;
4.5 X 107 F -
(Dltw)2 y

Article 10.49.2

[8,250 1,514.75
~ ~

4-30 Structures
 AASHTO EXPRESSIONS (Cont'd)

U.S. Customary Metric

-
. Arlide 10.49.3.2

~ 3,029.5
VF; VF;
~

Artide10.50

2,200 182.6
VI.3fdd VI.3fdd
-'

Article 10.51.5.1

6,140 509.62 .
VF; . VF;
Article 10.51.5.2
( -
13,300 1.103.9
VF:..
y VF;
'.
,
vF:y
13,300 ..- -bt 1,~03.9 - ~ VF;
7,160 594
.. ..
..
Article 10.51.5.3 .,.,

13,300 1.103.9
VF, VF;
105
cr'
b x I~ .724(~rXl06

Artide 10.S1.5A.l

3,070v'k 254.81 Yk
v'F; v'F;

Article 10.51.5.4.2

6,650Yk 552Yk
VF::'."1 VF;
6.650 vk- ~ v'F; 552vk- ~ ~
3.580"Yk 297vk

Structures
4-31
 AASHTO EXPRESSIONS (Cont'd)

u.s. Customary Metric

Article 10.51.5.4.3

26~2lc ( !: rX ur .181 k ( !: r X lW

6,65OVk 552Vk
vF; VF;

Artide 10.51.5.5

2,600 215.8
VF; vF;

Article 10.55.2
'.
6,750 560
Vc; vc:
10.150 8,425
vc: vc:
13,500 1.121
Vc; Vf.
~ 2.200 -
fb
fs +3

Article 10.55.3

5.700 473
Vf.+fb Vf.+fb

2,200 182.6
Vf. +fb Vf. +fb

Article 13.3.3.2

L+l
8 L + 0.010
L L

Article 13.3.7.1

( l2Id)119 (.3/d)119

4·32 Structures
 AASHTO EXPRESSIONS (Cont'd)

U.S. Customary Metric

Article 16.3.4

fa - [!;E x(~r]
;,
fu - [48E
f; 3.28rf]
x(kD
Article 17.7.4.7·

98 17.2
~ VdcA

Structures 4-33
4-34 Structures
.)
CHAPTER FIVE
Materials

The following standards are given as recommendations to the conversion of Materials

activities to the metric system.

• The Materials Manual must be converted to metric units for use on pilot projects for
1994 and general use in 1995.

• All equipment must be calibrated using metric units.

• All existing and new software programs must be able to accommodate metrication.

• Programs written specifically for materials testing must be modified to accommodate

metrication with the assistance of Information Systems personnel.

UNITS

Quantity Unit Symbol

length millimeter min
meter m
kilometer km
area square millimeter mm2
square meter m2
volume liter L
cubic meter m3
mass gram g
kilogram kg
metric ton Metric Ton
temperature degree Celsius °C

Materials 5-1
 STRUCTURAL STEEL

The American Institute of Steel Construction has available their publication "Metric Properties
of Structural Shapes with Dimensions According to ASTM A6M," the inetric version of Part I
of the Manual of Steel Construction. This publication basically provides a soft conversion for
all conventional U.S. measurements for structural steel shapes to metric units.

There are three dominant world steel shape standards:

1. ASTM A6/A6M, American

2. TIS, Japanese Industrial Standard
3. DIN, Deutsches Instituet fuer Normung, (German)

A fourth is the BI, or British Imperial. None is dominant worldwide, but each is used
extensively. There is no international standard issued by ISO (International Standards
Organization), the official internatiorial group that develops worldwide standards.

The ISO standard is currently undergoing development, and will probably involve selection
of shapes from the three primary world standards, coupled with elimination of redundant shapes.

Since no international trend exists on standardization of steel shapes, AISC recommends that
metric projects use the same steel shapes currently used, only use the metric dimensions listed
in ASTM A6/A6M. A6/A6M lists both inch and mm dimensions. of the shapes. All LRFD
property, shape, and specification design data is available in metric from AISC for A6/ A6M
steel shapes (phone orders: AISC, Chicago, IL, 312-670-5414). Structural calculations should
be done in metric.

Fasteners

• Large projects must use ASTM A325, A490, and A615 metric bolts. The primary
benefit of using these new sizes is that there is a reduction in the number of bolts, from
nine to seven.

Metric Bolt Designation Diameter English Substitution

mm (in.)
M16 16 (0.63) 5fs
M20 20 (0.79) -
M22 22 (0.87) 7/a

M24 24 (0.94) -
M27 27 (1.06) IVa
M30 30 (1.18) 1%
M36 36 (1.42) -

5-2 . Materials
 STRUCTURAL STEEL (Cont'd)

Fasteners (Cont'd)

Many firms can make the hard metric sizes. Minimum order quantities may apply for a
period of time. Until these products become standard, verify that your project has sufficient
quantity to meet minimum requirements.

Standard Hole Diameters

Bolts Holes M-Bolts Holes
mm (in.) mm (in.) mm mm
12.7 1/2 14.3 9/16 - -
15.9 6fa 17.5 11/16 M16 18
19.0 20.6 13116 - -
-
*- - - M20 22
22.2 7/a 23.8 15116 M22 24
- - - - M24 26
25.4 1 27.0 1-1116 - -
28.6 IVa 30.2 1-3/16 M27 30
31.8 llA 33.3 1-5/16 M30 33
34.9 1% 36.5 1-7116 - -
- - - - M36 39
38.1 11/2 39.7 1-9/16 - -

STEEL FABRICATION

Many firms have the capability of fabricating steel from metric design drawings. Some of
these firms are:

Havens Steel, Kansas City, MO (Contact: 816-231-5724).

Steelco Div., Metropolitan Steel, Sinking Spring, PA (Contact: Ron Keating, 215-678-6411).

Materials 5-3
 REINFORCING STEEL

Metric projects will use ASTM A615M reinforcing bars, which come in Grades 300 and 400
(indicating 300 and 400 MPa yield strengths), for general purpose applications. Metric rebars
vary based on round values of cross-sectional area, which are specified by nominal diameter at
5 mm increments. There are 8 bar sizes, which replace the 11 bar sizes currently being used.
While many firms can make metric rebar, minimum order quantities apply. It should be
determined for each project if metric rebar is feasible, or if existing sizes should be used.

The following table shows the available metric rebar sizes and the current U. S. customary
rebar sizes in relationship to the respective diameters and cross-sectional areas.

Customary English Metric

System Equivalent
Metric Bar U.S. Customary
Designation Diameter Area Diameter Area
Designation
(in.) (in~ (mm) (mm2)

#3 0.375 0.11 9.5 71

10 11.3 100
#4 0.500 0.20 12.7 127
#5 0.625 0.31 15.9 198
15 16.0 200
#6 0.750 0.44 19.1 285
20 19.5 300
#7 0.875 0.60 22.2 388
25 25.2 500
#8 1.000 0.79 25.4 507
#9 1.125 1.00 28.6 641
30 29.9 700
#10 1.270 1.27 32.3 , j 817
35 35.7 1000
#11 1.410 1.56 35.8 1007
#14 1.693 2.25 43.0 1452
45 43.7 1500
55 56.4 2500
#18 2.257 4.00 57.3 2581

5-4 Materials
 STEEL PLATE

Metric Value Englisb Equivalent

(mm) (in.)

5 0.1969
5.5 0.2165
6 0.2362
7 0.2756
8 0.3150
9 0.3543
10 0.3937
11 0.4331
12 0.4724
14 0.5512
16 0.6299
18 0.7087
20 0.7874
22 0.8661
25 0.9843
28 1.1024
30 1.1811
32 1.2598
35 1.3780
38 1.4961
40 1.5748
45 1.7717
50 1.9685
55 2.1654
60 2.3622

NOTE: Over 60 mm up to 200 mm increase in 10 mm increments, and

over 200 mm in 50 mm increments (Based on ANSI Standard B323)

Materials 5-5
 SHEET METAL

Most specification references use gage number followed by the decimal inch thickness.

Example: 22 gage (0.034 inch)

Metric specifications use the absolute mm ·thickness. It is not the intent of this guidance to
change the thickness of currently used sheeting.

The following chart may be used to specify sheet metal. The thickness under "Specify" is
thinner than the actual gage thickness, since specifications give minimum thickness.

Gage Inch Exact Specify Percent Thinner

(mm) (mm) Than "Exact"
Value
32 0.0134 0.3404 0.34 0.1
30 0.0157 0.3988 0.39 2.2
28 0.0187 0.4750 0.47 1.1
26 0.0217 0.5512 0.55 0.2
24 0.0276 0.7010 0.70 0.1
22 0.0336 0.8534 0.85 0.4
20 0.0396 1.0058 1.0 0.6
18 0.0516 1.3106 1.3 0.8
16 0.0635 1.6129 1.6 0.8
14 0.0785 1.9939 1.9 4.7
12 0.1084 2.7534 2.7 1.9
10 0.1382 3.5103 3.5 0.3
8 0.1681 4.2697 4.2 1.6

This schedule was developed since no existing material was found to clearly identify existing
sheeting in metric units. Until a more efficient methou is developed to address this issue,
specifiers may wish to retain the gage number in specifications, and couple this with a rounded
mm size in parenthesis.

5-6 Materials
 STEEL WIRE STRAND

Mechanical Properties of Stainless and lIeat-Resisting Steel Wire Strand

, Minimum Breaking
Approx. Weight of Strength of Strand
Nominal Diameter Nmnber of Nominal Diameter Strand per kN (Ibi)
of Strand, Wires in of Stainless Wires, 304.8 m (1000 ft.),
DUD (in.) Strand · mm (in.) kg (Ib) Medimn High
Strength Strength

5.16 (13/64) 3 2.36 (0.093) 32.66 (72) 14.01 (3,150) 20.02 (4,500)

5.56 (7/32) 3 2.64 (0.104) 40.82 (90) 17.57 (3,950) 25.13 (5,650)

6.35 (14) 3 3.05 (0.120) 54.43 (120) 23.58 (5,300) 33 .58 (7,550)

7.94 (5/16) 3 3.68 (0.145) 79.38 (175) 34.25 (7,700) 48.93 (11,000)

9.52 (o/a) 3 4.19 (0.165) 102.06 (225) 44.48 (10,000) 63.61 (14,300)

5.56 . (7/32) 7 1.83 (0.072) 45.36 (100) 20.02 (4,500) 28.02 (6,300)
· 6.35 (14) 7 2.11 (0.083) 59.87 (132) 26.47 (5,950) 37.81 (8,500)

7.14 (9/32) 7 2.36 (0.093) 75.75 (167) 32.69 (7,350) 46.71 (10,500)

7.94 (5/16) 7 2.64 (0.104) 94.35 (208) 40.92 (9,200) 58.72 (13,200)

9.52 (3fa) 7 3.05 (0.120) 126.10 (278) 55.60 (12,500) 80.07 (18,000)

H.11 (7/16) 7 3.68 (0.145) 183.71 (405) 80.96 (18,200) 115.65 (26,000)

12.70 (Ih) 7 4.19 (0.165) 238.14 (525) 104.98 (23,600) 149.90 (33,700)

9.52 (3fa) 19 1.90 (0.075) 133:81 (295) 52.49 (11,800) 74.73 (16,800)

11.11 (7/16) 19 2.21 (0.087) 181.44 (400) 70.28 (15,800) 100.08 (22,500)

12.70 (lh) 19 2.54 (0.100) 240.40 (530) 93.41 (21,000) 133.45 (30,000)

14.29 (9/16) 19 2.79 (0.110) 290.30 (640) 112.98 (25,400) 161.02 (36,200)

15.88 (6/s) 19 3.18 (0.125) 374.21 (825) 146.79 (33,000) 209.07 (47,000)

19.05 (~) 19 3.81 (0.150) 539.78 (1,190) 211.29 (47,500) 300.25 (67,500)

22.22 (TIs) 19 4.44 (0.175) 734.82 (1,620) 284.69 (64,000) 406.57 (91,400)

NOTE: The diameter of the individual wires forming the strand shall not vary from
the nominal wire diameters by more than +0.025 mm (+0.001 in.).

Materials 5-7
 SEVEN-WIRE, UNCOATED STRAND FOR
PRESTRESSED CONCRETE STRUCTURES

The prestressing industry again uses the soft conversion for all dimensional units of
prestressing wire. This soft conversion is utilized worldwide and a copy of the equivalent
physical properties for Grade 270 low-relaxation strand, as provided by Florida Wire and Cable
Company, is provided below.

270 GRADE WW-RELAXATION ASTM A-416

Nominal Strand Diameter Minimum Strength Area
(mm) (in.) (kN) Ob.) (mm2) (in2)

10 (o/s) 102.3 (23,000) 54.8 (0.085)

11 (7/16) 137.9 (31,000) 74.2 (0.115)
12 (15/32) 160.1 (36,000) 85.8 (0.133)
13 (1h) 183.7 (41,300) 98.7 (0.153)
14 (9/16) 230.0 (51,700) 123.9 (0.192)
15 (0.600) 260.6 (58,600) 140.0 (0.217)

CONCRETE

Concrete strength is specified in megapascals (MPa). The following strengths are standard
in federal metric construction. The general purpose concrete strengths are reduced from 6
strengths to 4 strengths.

Strengths above 35 MPa shall be specified in 5 MPa intervals (40, 45, 50, 55, etc.).

Metric Value English Value Specify

(MPa) (psi) (MPa)
17.23 2500 20
20.67 3000. 20 or 25·
24.12 3500 25
27.56 4000 30
31.01 4500 35
34.45 5000 35

* If code requires ~ooo psi, then 25 MPa must be used, otherwise it is a professional judgement
on 20 or 25.

5-8 Materials
 SIEVES

Sieve Designation, (W) Permissible Variation

Nominal of Average Opelling Maximum Nominal
Sieve from the Standard Intermediate Individual Wire
Stan~ Alternative Opening Sieve Designation Tolenmce Opening Diameter
(in.)e (y) (z)G (x) (mm')

125mm 5 in. 5 ±3.70mm 130.0mm 130.9 mm 8.00

l06mm 4.24 in. 4.24 ±3.20mm 1l0.2mm llLl mm 6.40

100 IIlIIf 4'm.D 4 ±3.oomm 104.0mm 104.8mm 6.30

90mm 3~ in. 3.5 ±2.70mm 93.6mm 94.4mm 6.08

75mm 3 in. 3 ±2.20mm 78.1 mm 78.7mm 5.80

63mm 21J.z iii. 2.5 ±1.90mm 65.6mm 66.2mm 5.50

53mm 2.12 in. 2.12 ±1.60mm 55.2mm 55.7mm 5.15

50 IIlIIf 2'm.D 2 ±1.50mm 52.1 mm 52.6 mm 5.05

45mm 1~ in. 1.75 ±1.40mm 46.9mm 47.4mm 4.85

37.5 mm H~ in. 1.5 ±1.10mm 39.1 mm 39.5 mm 4.59

31.5 mm 114 in. 1.25 ±1.oomm 32.9mm 33.2mm 4.23

26.5 mm 1.06 in. 1.06 ±0.80mm 27.7mm 28.0mm 3.90

25.0 IIlIIf l 'm.D 1 ±0.80mm 26.1 mm 26.4 mm 3.80

22.4mm '4 in. 0.875 ±0.70mm 23.4mm 23 .7 mm 3.50

19.0 mm ~ in. 0.750 ±0.60mm 19.9 mm 20.1 mm 3.30

16.0mm ~in. 0.625 ±0.50mm 16.7 mm 17.0 mm 3.00

13.2mm 0.530 in. 0.530 ±0.41mm 13.83 mm 14.05 mm 2.75

12.5 mnf 1J.z'm.D 0.500 ±0.39mm 13.10mm 13.31 mm 2.67

1l.2mm 7/16 in. 0.438 ±0.35 mm 11.75 mm 11.94 mm 2.45

9.50mm ~in. 0.375 ±0.30mm 9.91mm 10.16 mm 2.27

8.oomm 5/16 in. 0.312 ±0.25 mm 8.41 mm 8.58 mm 2.07

6.70mm 0.265 in. 0.265 ±0.21 mm 7.05 mm 7.20mm 1.87

6.30 mnf 14'm.D 0.250 ±0.20mm 6.64mm 6.78 mm 1.82

5.60mm No.3 Ih" 0.223 ±O.IBmm 5.90mm 6.04mm 1.68

4.75 mm No.4 0.187 ±0.15mm·· 5.02mm 5.14 mm 1.54

4.oomm ·No.5 0.157 ±0.13 mm 4.23 mm 4.35 mm 1.37

3.35 mm No.6 0.132 ±0.11 mm 3.55 mm 3.66 mm 1.23

2.80mm No.7 0.11 ±0.095mm 2.975 mm 3.070mm 1.10

Ifboo avc_ diamcIcr of tbD wasp ODd of tbD oboot ......... tUm ocpua~\y. of tbD cloth of lIlY .~ aball_ dcvia~ from tbD IIOIIIioal valuce by more than tho followin&:
S~
•~_
coancr _ tiOO ,.... - s" S~ tiOO 10 125 ,.... - 7'h" S~ IiDor _ 125 ,.... - 10"
de8ip1jaao conap<lIIi 10 tbD .u- for \ell s~ apc_ rccommc::aIcc! by tbD IIIIcmaIioaol SIaDdards Organization, Gcrooova, Switzerland.
e Only appraotimoIc\y equivalcIIllO tbD metric .u- in Column 1.
D ~ .~ _ _ in tbD .tmdaftl _ _ • bIIllbcy hove bccD ineIudcod _ _ Ihcy .... in "'p'. ~

• ~ _ (3'h 10 635) .... tbD approocima~ _ of opc:uings pcr lincar iD.. bill it iI prcfcmd Iba1 tbD .~ be id<miflCd by tho standard dcIoignation in mID or I'm.
, 1000 ,....-1 DIm.
G Not """" _ S" of tbD ..,...me. ...y fall _ !be 1lmi.. act by tbD,..)..,. in CoIwm S md Co1umD 6.

Materials 5-9
 SIEVES (Coilt'd)

Sieve Designation, (W) Permissible Variation

Nominal of Average OpeoiDg Maximum Nominal
Sieve from the Standard Intermediate Individual Wire
Stan~ Alteruative OpeoiDg Sieve Designation Tolerance Opening Diameter
(in.)c (y) (z)G (x) (mm4)

2.36 mm No.8 0.0937 ±0.080mm 2.515 mm 2.600mm 1.00

2.OOmm No. 10 0.0787 ±0.070mm 2.135 mm 2.215 mm 0.900

1.70mm No. 12 0.0661 ±0.060mm 1.820mm 1.890mm 0.810

1.4Omm No. 14 0.0555 ±0.050mm 1.505 mm 1.565 mm 0.725

1.18 mm No. 16 0.0469 ±0.045mm 1.270mm l.330mm 0.650

l.00mm No. 18 0.0394 ±O.04Omm 1.080mm 1.135 mm 0.580

850 pmF No. 20 0.0331 ±35 pm 925 pm 970 pm 0.510

710 pm No. 25 0.0278 ±30 pm 775 pm 815 pm 0.450

600 pm No. 30 0.0234 ±25 pm 660 pm 695 pm 0.390

500 pm No. 35 0.0197 ±20 pm 550 pm 585 pm 0.340

425 pm No. 40 0.0165 ±19 pm 471 pm 502 pm 0.290

355 pm No. 45 0.0139 ±16 pm 396 pm 425 pm 0.247

300 pm No. 50 0.0117 ±14 pm 337 pm 363 pm 0.215

250 pm No. 60 0.0098 ±12 pm 283 pm 306 pm 0.180

212 pm No. 70 0.0083 ±10 pm 242 pm 263 pm 0.152

180 pm No. 80 0.0070 ±9pm 207 pm 227 pm 0.131

150 pm No. 100 0.0059 ±8pm 174 pm 192 pm 0.11 0

125 pm No. 120 0.0049 ±7pm 147 pm 163 pm 0.091

106 pm No. 140 0.0041 ±6pm 126 pm 141 pm 0.076

90 pm No. 170 0.0035 ±5 pm 108 pm 122 pm 0.064

75 pm No. 200 0.0029 ±5pm 91 pm 103 pm 0.053

63 pm No. 230 0.0025 ±4pm 77 pm 89 pm 0.044

53 pm No. 270 0.0021 ±4pm 66 pm 76 pm 0.037

45 pm No. 325 0.0017 ±3 pm 57 pm 66 pm IJ.030

38 pm No. 400 0.0015 ±3 pm 48 pm 57 pm 0.Q25

32 pm No. 450 0.0012 ±3pm 42 pm 50 pm 0.028

25p,rrP No. 500 0.0010 ±3pm 34 pm 41 pm 0.Q25

20p,rrP No. 635 0.0008 ±3pm 29 pm 35 pm 0.020

iJ'h:, o""rage> cliamclcr of ~ wasp and of ~ shoot wires, Ialo:n _Icly, of ~ cloth of 1lIIY oiovc ohall _ deviate &em ~ IIOIIIinal wluca by morc than ~ following:
Sic""" OOIU!ICf!bon 600 _ - 5 " S;""'" 600 10 125 _-7',0" S;""'" filler than 125 _-10"
• Thooc .1aDWd _;pwm. c:oonapca<IlO ~ _ for 1<0••ieve ape_ ~ by ~ Jar.c"",tia.l SIaDWda Orgomizatioo, ~ Switzerland.
< Only appnlII<imaIcly oquiwlaIllO ~ motric wl.... in CoIIllDll 1.
D Thooc .;"...,. am _ in ~ IIanducI acrioa, IU tbc:Y ha.c bccu inehlded bccauac tbcy ..., in c:amDOD _ .
• Thooc _ .. (3',0 10 635) om ~ _ _ IIUIDber of opcniDp per liDcar ilL, IU i. ia prcfCncd that ~ .ieve II<> id<:Dtificd by ~ .1aDWd dcaiguatioo in mm or I'm.
, 1000 _-1 111m.
• Not _ !bon 5" of ~ ClpCIIiDp may fall bctwccu ~ limill oct by ~ _ in Column 5 and Column 6.

5-10 Materials
 HARD CONVERSIONS FOR CONSTRUCTION MATERIALS

Structural Steel, M270

Min. Tensile Strength Min. Yield Strength Min. Yield Strength
Grade (MPa) (MPa) (ksi)
36 400 250 36
50 450 345 50
50W 485 345 50
70W 620 480 70

Reinforcing Bars, M31M

Grade Tensile and Yield Strengths
Metric English Tensile Strength Min. Yield Strength Min. Yield Strength
Value Value (MPa) (MPa) (ksi)
300 40 500 300 40
·400 60 600 400 60

Common Concrete Strengths (f'c)

Metric (MPa) 21 24 28 35 42 48 55
English (psi) 3000 3500 4000 5000 6000 7000 8000

Coefficient of Thermal Expansion

Metric Value . English Value
Steel 0.OOOO117/°C 0.00000651 OF
Concrete 0.OOOO108/°C 0.0000061 OF

Unit Weights
Metric Value English Value
Steel 7848.3 kg/m3 490 pef
Concrete 2402.5 kg/m3 150 pef

Materials 5-11
5-12 Materials
=-. .
<:>

CONCRETE REINFORCING
ASTM STANDARD METRIC STEEL INSTITUTE 13;M'
-<:>
M

REINFORCING· BARS
933 N. Plum Grove Road, Schaumburg,ll 60173 • '
Phone: (708) 517-1200
0 ' • ' 'j

-
<:>
N

BAR SIZE
DESIGNATION MASS
NOMINAL DIMENSIONS
DIAMETER AREA STANDARD METRIC
(kg/m) (mm) (mm2)
-
<:>

#10M 0.785 .11.3 100 HOOK DETAILS

In accordance with ACI 318M-89
<:>
#15M 1.570 16.0 200 All Grades 0- 6 db lor 110M through "'25M
o - Finished inside bend diameter
~
#20M 2.355 19.5 300 db - Nominal bar diameter '
0- B db lor 130M and 35M
0- 10 db lor 145M and 1 55M

#25M 3.925 25.2 500

=. .
<:>
#30M 5.495 29.9 700
# 35M 7.850 35.7 1000
#45M 11.775 43.7 1500
#55M 19.625 56.4 2500 BAR
D
= ....
-0
1. ASTM A615M Grade 300 is limited to size 110M through 120M.
SIZE
2. Check avaHability with local suppliers for 145M and 155M. fl0M 70 140 90 180
fl5M 100 180 130 260
-"~:",,~.~
For'2OM and'25M-'2d
O-"'d •• ~ ~'
75 mm
nOM 120 220 160 320
b n r--n Min. f25M 150 280 200 400

~I!
I
. ~
H' Hook"

~ .."::
Hook" f30M
f35M
240
290
400
460
300
360
500

;el ~~ r~o :r~! ~H

600

!!~ I AorG
/ !!e l
f45M
f55M
440
560
660
860
520
680
780
1020
o Q ~ -cit. ~0 ~ ~ 0 ~ i-<lb
i I . 0 , - i ,- MINIMUM MINIMUM
1'..... 90" Boom 135" 1" B•• m 135" GRADE YIElD, MPa TENSILE, MPa
STIRRUP HOOKS SEISMIC Billet fl0M-f20M 300 300 500
(TIe Bends Similar) STIRRUPITIE A615M flOM -f55M 400 400 600
f35M-f55M 500 500 700
BAR 90" 1350 BAR 1~ SEISMIC HOOK
D SIZE
Rail flOM-f35M 350 350 550
SIZE AorG AorG H* 0 AorG H* A616M fl0M-f35M 400 400 600
#1~ 50 100 100 70 1101\1 50 110 7t> Axle fl0M -f 35M 300 300 500
#15M 60 140 140 90 115M 60 140 90 A617M flOM-f35M 400 400 600
#2().A 120 310 200 120 1201\1 120 200 120 Low-Alloy
A706M fl0M-f55M 400 400 550
125M 150 400 260 150 125M 150 260 150
"H dimension Is Bpproximate. OCTOBER 1993
NOTE: An dimensions are in millimeters (mm).
CHAPTER SIX
Traffic

Most of the applications of interest to the Highway Subcommittee on Traffic Engineering are
conversions associated with measurements found in the Manual on Unifonn Traffic Control
Devices (MUTeD). These values include sign siZes, pavement marking widths: traffic signal
lens size, etc. Please note that the following values are recommendations only.

UNITS

Quantity Unit Symbol

length millimeter mm
meter m
kilometer km
area square meter m2
volume liter L
cubic meter m3
mass metric ton Metric Ton

SIGN CONVERSION VALUES

This list will not be exhaustive, but the principles set out should allow conversion of any
vatue encountered.

Dimension in inches x 25 = millimeters

Typical metric sign sizes 300mm
450 mm
600 mm
750 mm
900mm
1050 mm
1200 mm
1350 mm
1500 mm

The difference between a hard conversion(1 inch = 25 mm) and a soft conversion (1 inch
= 25.4 mm) is only 1.6 percent.

Traffic 6-1
 SIGN CONVERSION TECHNIQUES

Depending on the type of sign mounting (ground mounted versus overhead mounted), the
condition of the sign, the location of the sign, and the degree of legend alteration required for
metric conversion, different conversion techniques are appropriate.

Signs Mounted Overhead on Bridges, Trusses, and Cantilever Supports

For signs mounted overhead on bridges, trusses, and cantilever supports, the following
techniques are available:

• Partial Overlay (Using either a pop riveted aluminum panel or 3M-type sticky-back
overlays) - A partial overlay is the quickest, easiest, and cheapest sign conversion
technique and is appropriate if the sign panel is otherwise in good condition and only a
small portion of the panel needs to be changed. A good example for the use of a partial
overlay is as follows:

Convert: To: ~ ~~~'ii' ~@~ I

~W® ITil® £ W@
~ [k0ifil

• Replace Panel - replacement will probably be required if the existing panel is in poor
condition (letters peeling, defaced, bent, etc.), if the new metric legend is too large to
allow simple overlaying, or if "non-preferred" sign materials are encountered (raised
metallic letters, raised buttons for reflectivity, etc.). Replacing the panel is more
expensive, both in materials, equipment, and labor. A crane is needed to remove the old
panel and to hoist the new panel into place, which not only increases costs but also
disrupts traffic flow for a longer period of time requiring more sophisticated work zone
protection methods.

• Complete Overlay (Using an aluminum panel that is either clamped or pop riveted to
the old sign panel) - This alternative to replacing the panel speeds up installation since
it is not necessary to remove the old panel. It also has a lower material cost since the
thickness of the aluminum sign panel that is required for overlaying is less than for sign
panel replacement.

Ground Mounted Signs

For ground mounted signs, the following techniques are applicable:

• Partial Overlay - Partially overlaying large ground mounted signs has the same basic
characteristics as partially overlaying overhead mounted signs. However, for small
inexpensive ground mounted signs, such as speed limit signs and warning signs, it is
often just as easy to completely replace the sign.

6-2 Traffic
 SIGN CONVERSION TECHNIQUES (Cont'd)

Ground Mounted Signs (Cont'd)

• Replace Panel or Complete Overlay - panel replacement or complete overlays are easier
for ground mounted signs than for overhead signs since it is not necessary to work high
above the roadway. This also reduces costs and simplifies work zone traffic controls.

• Replace Supports - If the sign supports are defective (slip base buried, hinges installed
backwards, etc.), yet the sign panel is in good shape, the appropriate portion of the
legend can be overlaid and the sign panel reinstalled on new supports. This is less
expensive than installing an entirely new sign and scrapping the old one.

• Replace Entire Sign Installation - If both the supports and legend are in bad shape, or
if the sign is in the wrong location, the sign will need to be replaced. .

Depending on the situation at hand, we can expect to use most of these techniques during the
metric conversion process.

BASIC SIGN TYPES

Before discussing the various design issues that are associated with metric sign conversion
it is of value to identify and discuss the various types of metric distance and speed signs that are
typically encountered.

Destination Signs (such as those typically encountered on freeway and arterial

mainlines)

For Example:

Advance Guide Signs (without exit numbering)

For Example:
~~(9)D~Q1)@
~tt(?@@tt

~~OU II [K:;\]O[b~

Traffic 6-3
 BASIC SIGN TYPES (Cont'd)

Advance Guide Signs (with exit numbering)

For Example:
~ ~J:&~'ii'~(Q)~ .I
~W@ITi)~ ~W®
~ ~~Ib~

These are typically larger freeway signs with some of them being mounted overhead,
especially along urban Interstate areas. Since the bottom line of the sign is usually totally
devoted to the distance, the "Exit 1 Mile" or "1 Mile" legend can be easily overlaid with an
equivalent metric legend such as "Exit 2 Ian" or "2 km".

Interchange Sequence Signs

For Example:
'%IT'®[p)®Ihl@@ U?a@l

@[j'©Ihl~[J'©l ~W®

These signs are almost exclusively encountered on urban Interstate areas. They are typically
situated on an overhead structure that is located within the jersey barrier that forms the median.
. Whether or not a partial overlay can be used depends on the relative sizes of the new metric
legend and the old English legend. For example, we would like to overlay the "114" in the
above sign with "400 m", the "2" with "3 Ian" and the "3" with "5 km", however, there may
not be enough room to do so.

If there is insufficient room for a partial overlay ,a complete overlay may be needed with
abbreviations used or the "Ave", "St", "Blvd" and "Rd" words eliminated. If at all possible,
we will want to avoid having to use a larger sign panel which could require expensive
modification of the support structure.

Advance Rest Area/Service Center Signs (usually white on blue)

For Example:
~~~u ~[fa~~
1] ~D[L~

These are freeway signs that lend themselves well to a partial overlay.

6-4 Traffic
 BASIC SIGN TYPES (Cont'd)

Warning Signs (black on yellow, diamond-shaped with supplemental plaque)

For Example:

NEXT
7 MILES

Or rectangular in shape with special message.

For Example:
7''' ~I: - \'MlJIi\!IDmms Ii'lOM
II:!II.lDCiI' 8 1MIIlIlJg~

m1lDC~8 8TlJi.W Iffi!!l 1l.0~ ~

The smaller black on yellow diamond shape signs are typically found on arterials and,
because of their small size, are good candidates for complete replacement. The larger special
warning signs are typically found on freeways, with some of them being mounted overhead.
These larger signs are fitting candidates for a partial overlay.

Standard Speed Limit Signs

For Example:

SPEED
LIMIT
45
Given their relatively small size, complete replacement is appropriate for these signs.

Traffic 6-5
 BASIC SIGN TYPES (Cont'd)

School Speed Limit Signs (Ground Mounted)

For Example:
SCHOOL
SPEED
LIMIT
20
WHEN
FLASHING

Given their relatively small size, complete replacement is appropriate for these signs.

Ramp\Exit Speed Limit Signs

For Example:

RAMP

35
M.P.H.

Given their relatively small size, complete replacement is appropriate for these signs.

6-6 Traffic
 BASIC SIGN TYPES (Cont'd)

Advisory Speed Limit Signs (Black on Yellow - these signs are typically found in the
form of supplemental plaques located blow diamond shaped warning signs)

For Example:

25
M.P.H.
Given their relatively small size, complete replacement of the supplemental plaque IS
appropriate for those signs.

Miscellaneous Signs (Anything that does not fit into the above categories would be
classified here. This includes minor directional signs which provide distance
information for locations of interest such as parks, hospitals, post offices, etc.)

. Conversion method will vary by type of sign, but typically will involve complete replacement.

DESIGN ISSUES

There are a number of important design issues that must be considered in converting signs
to the metric system. These issues are discussed below:

Issue 1: Dualization

Dualization refers to the use of both English units and metric units to convey the same
information. Dualization may involve the use of English and metric units on the same sign
panel, on separate sign panels at the same location, or on separate signs in the same general
area. Another form of duallzation involves special "Metric equivalence" signs. These signs
provide general information that allows motorists to convert from English units to metric units.

The pervasive feeling amongst those involved in sign metrication is that, in general,
dualization is not a good feature. Consider the following quotes:

" ... there are strong indications that it would be desirable to avoid a transition period during
which distances are shown in both English and metric units on a single sign. This could be
confusing to a motorist. .. " (American Metric Journal, Ad Hoc Task Force Report on
Metrication of U.S. Highways, May/June 1975)

Traffic 6-7
 DESIGN ISSUES (Cant'd)

Issue 1: Dualization (Cont'd)

"Going straight to metric signing has worked well iIi some countries and deserves
consideration. This approach will cost less and avoid confusing comparisons." (FHWA
Metric Conversion Plan, June 1991)

Dualization often requires a larger sign to handle the expanded legend, which necessitates the
complete replacement of the sign panel rather than the use of inexpensive overlays. The use of
a larger sign panel may, in tum, require the use of larger support columns. In the case of
overhead signs, the entire support structure will need to be analyzed and may need to be
replaced or strengthened. The additional cost associated with dualization can be substantial.

If speeds or distances are rounded then dual legend signs can lead to confusing comparisons.
For example, a distance sign that is rounded to the nearest kilometer might have the legend
"Denver 1 mi 2 km", giving the indication that a mile equals 2 kilometers when a mile actually
equals 1.6 kilometers.

Dualization complicates the sign legend, making it more difficult for a motorist to read and
comprehend. A strong argument can also be made that dualization will allow U.S. motorists
to ignore the metric portion of the legend, concentrating instead on the portion of the legend
with English units. The end result will be that U.S. motorists will not "acquire a feel" for
metric speeds and distances, as they would if they were forced to rely on pure metric signs.

At some point dualization will have to give way to a pure metric system. When this happens,
there will be an additional cost to modify the sign legends in order to eliminate the English units.

The successful Canadian experience with "straight" metric conversion also argues against the
widespread use of dualization. In addition, the FHWA is recommending that states:

"Avoid dualization of measurements beyond FY 1993, unless it is determined that such usage
will be beneficial." (FHWA Metric Conversion Plan, June 1991)

For all of those reasons we are recommending that dualization not be used in the Colorado
Metric Conversion Project.

The exception would be the use of metric equivalence signs at the entrances to Colorado. In
the future, when certain safety-related signs are converted to the metric system (such as load
limit signs and vertical clearance signs), the use of dualization for a certain period of time might
be prudent as advocated by Australia:

" ... in some instances, especially where safety is involved, both the old and new units will
be given for a short period." (Manual for the Operation of Changing Signs to the Metric
System, National Association of Australian State Road Authorities, 1972)

6-8 Traffic
 DESIGN ISSUES (Cont'd)

Issue 2: Hard Versus Soft Conversions

A "soft" conversion is a direct conversion with little or no rounding. For example, using a
soft conversion approach 1 mile would become 1.6 kilometers and 55 mph would become 88
kmlh. On the other hand, a "hard" conversion uses rounding to obtain values that are in even
increments. Using a hard conversion approach, 1 mile would become 2 kilometers and 55 mph
would become 90 kmlh.

The feeling amongst those involved in sign metrication seems to be that, if possible, hard
conversions should be used. This is supported by the fact that in . Europe, Australia, and
Canada, speed limits are given in 10 km/h increments. The FHWA also encourages the use of
hard conversions, stating that the states should:

"Use hard conversions to the extent practicable. " (FHWA Metric Conversion Plan June 1991)

The use of hard conversions for distance signs has two important advantages:

• Hard conversions result in shorter legends that require less sign space, which avoids a
greater use of inexpensive overlays instead of expensive sign panel replacement. Soft
conversions that use either fractional distances (for example: 6 114 km) or decimal
distances (6.3 km) eat up more sign space than a hard conversion (6 km).

• Hard conversions result in sign legends that are easier to read. Also, soft conversions
that use decimals can easily be misread if quickly glimpsed by a passing motorist, with
6.3 km being read as 63 km. As the sign becomes old or dirty, the chance of the
decimal point becoming obscured increases.

Soft conversions have the obvious advantage of greater accuracy. But one can strongly argue
that the level of accuracy needed for highway distance signing is, in reality, not very great. The
following items appear to justify this assertion:

• The "Level of accuracy" of our existing English unit distance signing is most likely not
too precise. In the Orlando, Florida area, a comparison was made between the distance
stated on each sign and the actual distance to the location indicated on the sign. The
"distance discrepancy", in both miles and percent, was noted. The distance discrepancy
aggregated over all routes was about 15%, with the "average maximum" discrepancy
being 57%.

Traffic 6-9
 DESIGN ISSUES (Cont'd)

Issue 2: Hard Versus Soft Conversions (Cont'd)

• It is often not practical, or possible, to locate signs exactly where we want them.
Locational errors made during sign design or installation, the presence of physical
obstructions, or the desire to reduce the number of expensive overhead structures by
combining signs onto a single overhead unit,. often result in distance signs being placed
at other than the precise location desired. This is especially true on urban freeways
where there are many exits and points of interest that need to be signed, yet only a
limited number of sites for anything other than expensive overhead sign installations.
In this environment, signs tend to be combined on overhead structures in a manner that
clearly places practicality and cost considerations ahead of complete accuracy.

• It can be argued that the average motorist does not have an exact understanding of what
certain highway distances refer to. In a recent survey, . 17 motorists, of varying
backgrounds, were asked to answer the following question:

If you are driving on a freeway and see a sign that reads "Springfield 55", does the 55
refer to:

A) The distance from the sign to the freeway exit which leads to Springfield.

B) The speed limit in Springfield.

C) The distance from the sign to the City Limits of Springfield.

D) The distance from the sign to Downtown Springfield.

E) The population of the city of Springfield.

As we transportation professionals know, the correct .answer to the question is D.

Although all of the survey respondents had a general understanding of what the sign
meant (none of them picked answers B or E), the results clearly demonstrated that
most motorists do not have an exact understanding of what this common highway
. distance reference means (with 10 (53%) answering C and another 3 (16%) answering
A). It can be argued that, since the average motorist only has a general feel for what
distance references mean, precise distance indications are not of utmost important.

The bottom line is that the accuracy provided by soft distance conversions is just not needed.
The simplicity and cost savings associated with hard conversions is much more important. And,
as time goes by and large distance signs deteriorate and are replaced, we can have the best of
both worlds by relocating most of these signs to their exact distance locations. However, it
should be noted that certain safety related signs, such as load limit and clearance signs, may
require a level of accuracy that can only be obtained via soft conversions.

6-10 Traffic
 DESIGN ISSUES (Cant'd)

Issue 2: Hard Versus Soft Conversions (Cont'd)

The argument regarding hard and soft conversions essentially revolves around the degree of
rounding that is to take place for a given sign. For this project we have developed the following
policy regarding rounding on distance signs, a policy which favors simple hard conversions:

• All signs having an actual distance to the item which they refer of 800 or more meters
should be rounded to the nearest even kilometer (For example: 800 m is rounded to 1
kIn, 1.6 km is rounded to 2 kIn, and 9.3 kIn is rounded to 9 kIn).

• All signs· having an actual distance to the item which they refer of less than 800 meters
should be rounded to the nearest 100 meters (For example: 799 m is rounded to 800 m,
656 m is rounded to 700 m, and 446 In is rounded to 400 m).

This differs from both the Australian and Canadian approach to distance rounding. The
Australians use the following "softer" guidelines, which are more accurate, yet more
complicated:

"From 1 m to 999 m, 1 m increments in whole meters, followed by the symbol m; From

1 kIn to 4.9 kIn, 0.1 kIn increments, without the symbol km; From 5 km to 95 km, 0.5
km increments, without the symbol km; Above 10 km, 1 kIn increments, without the
symbol kIn. (Manual for the Operation of Changing Signs to the Metric System,
NAASRA, 1972)

For guide signs, the Canadians take a "hard" approach:

"All distances shown on guide signs shall be in kilometers rounded to the nearest whole
number. and shall be accompanied by the symbol "km". (Uniform Traffic Control
Devices for Canada, January 1976)

However, the following statements indicate that the Canadians do not always use a hard
approach for distance signing:

"All distances displayed on warning signs and associated tab signs should be in ~eters,
rounded to the nearest 50 m and using the symbol m." (Uniform Traffic Control Devices
for Canada, January 1976)

"Decimals, rather than fractions, should be shown in all cases." (Uniform Traffic Control
Devices for Canada, January 1976)

The question of using hard · or soft conversions in the cast of speed limit signs is a more
. difficult one giving rise to a number of engineering and legal issues. If all speed limits are
converted using a hard approach which rounds to the nearest 10 kIn/h, then some speed limits
will go up and some will go down. The biggest absolute increases in speed limits will be from
15 mph to 30 kIn/h (18.6 mph) - a 24% increase, from 35 mph to 60 km/h (37.3 mph) - a 6.6%
increase, and from 60 mph to 100km/h (62.2 mph) - a 3.7% increase.

Traffic 6-11
 DESIGN ISSUES (Cont'd)

Issue 2: Hard Versus Soft Conversions (Cont'd)

The use of hard conversions will undoubtedly require the modification of the legal statutes
that support speed zoning. For the Interstate system, laws will need to be passed at the federal
level enacting the appropriate equivalences. For other roadways, recent speed studies conducted
by the Colorado Department of Transportation should be used to established the proper metric
speed limit.

Since geometric design is typically based on a design speed that is 5 to 10 mph greater than
the posted speed limit, a slight increase in the actual speed limit should not pose a safety risk
with regard to geometrics (tapers, curves, etc.).

The signal timing issue is a bit muddier. A slight increase in a speed limit might be just
enough to require an increase in traffic signal clearance intervals. However, if such an increase
is needed, it could be easily made in the signal controller.

The current AASHTO Task Force on Geometric Design has recommended the adoption of
design speeds in 10 kmlh increments from 30 kmlh thru 120 kmlh, a decision that appears to
support hard conversion. The use of even 10 km/h design speed increments is consistent with
a hard conversion approach to posted speeds which would allow speed limits to be reasonably
set at 10 kmlh (6.2 mph) less than the design speed.

Michael Matthews of the University of Guelph in Guelph, Ontario completed a very

interesting study on the effect on vehicle speeds when signs are switched from English units to
metric units under a hard conversion process. He states that:

"These results clearly demonstrate that the changeover to metric signing has failed to
produce any significant long-term changes in travel speed parameters, even for those road
sites for which metrication resulted in an increase in permitted speed". (Impacts of
Highway Metrication on Traffic Accidents and Long-Term Trends in Vehicle Speeds for
Roads with Resultant Increased Speed Limits, Human Factors. 1979)

Mr. Matthews also found no significant effect on accident levels and concluded that
"metrication does not present the safety hazard suggested by critics of the metrication
programs."

Other countries, including Canada and Australia, have "bitten the bullet" and adopted hard
speed limit conversions with the exclusive use of iO kmlh speed increments. The evidence
suggests that this is 'a safe and reasonable approach.

6-12 Traffic
 DESIGN ISSUES (Cont'd)

Issue 3: Partial Units

If the decision is made to use partial units (something we believe should be avoided), then
decimals would be a more suitable choice over fractions. Not only do decimals take up less
space on the sign, but they are more in tune with the base-IO nature of the metric system.
Using decimals rather than fractions would also be more consistent with the Canadian approach.

If it is decided to use decimals, we would recommend rounding to the nearest 0.5 kilometers,
using decimals only for distances of less than 5 km, and using oversized decimal points to
increase visibility.

Issue 4: Type of Unit Suffix

In the case of distance signs, there are 4 basic alternatives for distance suffixes:

1. Use of Complete SuffIxes (kilometer and meter)

For Example:

~ W® [ffi~ £ W@
~ [k~~@[fffi)®it®1?

2. Use of Abbreviated SufilXes (km and m) - Either in an adjacent arrangement for

a permanent installation.

For Example:
[ [Ql @ IJil W@ [j'

Or in a supplemental plaque arrangement for temporary installation.

For Example:

Traffic 6-13
 DESIGN ISSUES (Cont'd)

Issue 4: Type of Unit Suffix (Cont'd)

3. Use of No SufilXes

For Example:

4. Use of Mixed Abbreviated SufilXes

For Example:

Note that, in this configuration, the use of a single supplemental plaque is not
possible because of the mixing of meters and kilometers.

Canada uses the abbreviated (km and m) while Australia uses the abbreviated suffix for
meters (m) and no suffIX for kilometers (although temporary use of the abbreviated km suffix
was used in Australia during the conversion period). We have been told by a transportation
engineer who previously lived in Holland that, in Europe, the abbreviated suffIX is used for
meters (m) while no suffIX is used for kilometers unless the kilometer distance has a decimal
element, in which case the abbreviated suffix (km) is used. Lower case letters are universally
used for metric speed and distance units.

It is our recommendation that, consistent with the Canadian approach, exclusive use be made
of the abbreviated suffIXes, both in mixed and unmixed signs. This will avoid the potential
confusion with miles that could result if the Australian approach is followed and the "km" is
omitted. As years go by and the driving populace becomes familiar with the metric system, the
"km" can be deleted; either through overlays or via sign attrition. The "m" will always be
needed to differentiate distances in meters from distances in kilometers.

Unless it is absolutely necessary to save an expensive sign panel that is otherwise in good
condition, we will want to avoid the use of supplementary plaques, opting for the adjacent
arrangement.

6-14 Traffic
 DESIGN ISSUES (Cont'd)

Issue 5: Speed Sign Legends

All speed limit signs make use of black letters on a white background, the standard regulatory
colors for speed limit signs as given in the MUTCD. However, the speed limit signs that are
currently in use in Australia and Europe add a red circle around the numerals, a color that is
used for regulatory purposes in the U.S, (on stop Signs, yield signs, and parking signs) but not
on speed limit signs. Internationally, all speed limit sign panels are rectangular in shape, with
the exception of the European sign panel, which is circular. In the U.S., the circular shape is
reserved for advance railroad crossing signs.

The two speed limit signs associated with Systems Technology were selected through a
simulation study by Systems Technology which observed U.S. motorist reactions to metric speed
signs. This study produced some interesting findings: .

"A red circle, which is consistent with international practice, gives an unambiguous cue
to metric sign format. Large km/h characters also give an unambiguous cue to metric
sign format." Signs with both of these features will give lower speed error rates and
quicker (earlier) driver responses." (A Simulator Study of Driver Reaction to Metric
Speed Signs, Systems Technology Inc, December 1979).

After considering the advantages and disadvantages of each of these speed limit signs, we
chose the first of the two Systems Technology signs for use. This sign has many advantages:

• The red circle makes it highly conspicuous and clearly differentiates it from the existing
U.S. speed limit sign (In fact, it is the lack of clear differentiation from the actuating
U.S. speed limit sign that eliminated the Canadian speed limit sign from further
consideration) .

• Excluding the SPEED LIMIT legend from the sign also helps to differentiate it from the
existing U.S. speed sign.

• Its rectangular shaped panel is consistent with MUTCD shape requirements. for speed
limit signs.

• The kmIh legend makes it quite clear that it is a metric sign.

The only potential drawback to this sign is that it uses the color red in the legend. However,
in our opinion this is a minor issue since other regulatory signs also use the color red and the
MUTCD could be easily modified to allow this CQlor for speed limit signs.

Since the majority of current U.S. speed signs end in 5 (about 70% of the speed signs in
Colorado are either 15, 25, 35,45, 55, or 65), rounding to the nearest 10 km/h has the added
advantage of providing another source of differentiation between the English signs and the metric
signs.

Traffic 6-15
 DESIGN ISSUES (Cont'd)

Issue 5: Speed Sign Legends

It is recommended that advisory speed limit signs be posted in increments of 10 km/h, which
is consistent with both Canadian and Australian practice:

"Advisory speeds should be posted in increments of 10 kmlh. " (Manual for the Operation
of Changing Signs to the Metric System, NAASRA, 1972)

"The speed shown [for advisory signs] should be in multiples of 10 kmlh." (Uniform
Traffic Control Devices for Canada, January 1976)

However, these sign panels should be square with the "km/h" legend provided below the
numerals and will not have the red circle around the numerals recommended for the regular
speed limit signs.

To reduce the number of signs and to show some consistency with Canada, the following
directive concerning minimum speed signs should be followed:

"When both maximum and minimum Speed signs are used, the minimum speed sign shall
be erected immediately below the maximum speed sign." (Uniform Traffic Control ·
Devices for Canada, January 1976)

STANDARD CASES AND SIGN CONVERSION DETAILS

Keeping the design issues discussed in the previous section in mind, we developed a standard
set of conversion cases and design details for both distance and speed signs. These items are best
illustrated through examples which modify the legends presented previously for each basic sign
type:

Destination Signs (without directional arrows)

Convert to:

~ cQ] ® [M) @ ~ [P)® ® ~~ ~mro

ID)@ [ft) w@ IT' «~ ~mro

Use complete panel replacement.

6-16 Traffic
 STANDARD CASES AND SIGN CONVERSION DETAILS (Cant'd)

Advance Guide Signs (without exit numbering)

Convert to:
~n~Dn[fi)®
~~[J@@~

~~ niF 11 ~1Ml

Advance Guide Signs (with exit numbering)

Convert to:

Use partial overlay.

The Canadians adhere to the following policy in locating Advance Guide Signs:

liThe primary Advance Guide sign should be located a distance of 2 kIn prior to the exit
gore. A preliminary Advance Guide sign at 4 kIn may also be employed if deemed
necessary, such as at major interchanges. In cases where it is not desirable, or possible,
to locate the sign at the exact 2 and 4 km points from the interchange, distances should
be shown to the nearest 0.5 km." (Uniform Traffic Control Devices for Canada, January
1976)

This policy seems reasonable and we would recommended following it, with the exception
that all distances would be rounded to the nearest .km.

Our general recommendation would be to convert all existing Advance Guide Signs with a
1 Mile legend to 2 km and all signs with a 2 Mile legend to 3 kIn, realizing that a distance
discrepancy will occur. If at some point in the future, these signs require replacing then they
would be relocated to the exact distance.

Traffic 6-17
 STANDARD CASES AND SIGN CONVERSION DETAILS (Cont'd)

Interchange Sequence Signs

Convert to:
r ~

)f®ll@ &,w® @OO [I'mJ

~WIDliil~ /kw@ ~a

({;@~© ~~W@] ~g
~ ~

If possible, use partial overlays. If this is not possible; abbreviate or eliminate "Ave",
"Blvd", etc. and use complete overlay. I

The Canadians adhere to ·the following policy concerning the use of interchange sequence
signs:

"On urban freeways having less than 2 kIn between interchanges, the interchange
sequence signs should be used in lieu of the advance guide sign for the affected
interchanges" (Uniform Traffic Control Devices for Canada, January 1976)

This policy appears reasonable and we would recommend its use. The MUTCD currently
provides no quantitative guidance on this issue.

Advance Rest Area/Service Center Sign

Convert to:

Use partial overlay.

6-18 Traffic
 STANDARD CASES AND SIGN CONVERSION DETAILS (Cont'dl

Warning Signs (Diamond-shaped with supplemental plaque)

Convert to:

INOOl
~
Use complete panel replacement.

Or for rectangular shape sign with special message.

Convert to:

"1 % ~[g=~[]!MG lFR(()£©

~ il~ IkImD
mlUl<C~~ ~£W [J[NJ [L@~ ~

Use partial overlay.

Standard Speed Limit Signs

Convert to:

km/h

Replace entire installation.

Traffic 6-19
 STANDARD CASES AND SIGN CONVERSION DETAILS (Cont'd)

School Speed Limit Signs (ground mounted)

Convert to:
SCHOOL

WHEN
FLASHING

Use complete panel replacement.

Ramp\Exit Speed Limit Signs

Convert To:
RAMP

60
km/h
Use complete panel replacement.

Advisory Speed Limit Signs

Convert To:

40
km/h
Use complete panel replacement.

6-20 Traffic
 WORK ZONE SIGNS

In order to provide consistency in distance and speed UIiits on the highways covered in this
project, we would recommend that all work zone signing also be converted to metric units. The
Canadians have developed a series of placement standards for. work zone signs. In general,
advance work zone signing is placed at the 2 km, 1 km, and/or 500 m points, with
supplementary distance plaques attached to the · construction zone warning signs at these
locations. This, of course, will require longer post lengths to meet minimum height
requirements for the signs.

Since work zone signing is safety-related, the use of dualization may be appropriate for a
certain time period with English unit plaques (1 mi, 112 mi and 114 mile) located directly below
the metric plaques. In addition, it might be prudent to intermix English speed limits with the
metric speed limits for a period of time.

Also, the "Construction, Next XX.X Miles" sign should be replaced by a metric equivalent
sign rounded to the nearest kilometer. .

Traffic 6-21
 PUBLIC AWARENESS PLAN

So that Motorists are not caught by surprise when the metric conversion takes place a public
awareness campaign would be appropriate. The following campaign elements are recommended:

• Install Metric Equivalence signs on all major entrances into Colorado, adding an overlay
which reads: "Signing Changes Begin in (month/yr) "

• Prepare radio and television spots for broadcasts 1 month prior to the beginning of sign
conversion and continuing through the completion of construction.

• Install Highway Advisory Radio signs (Tune Radio to AM for Metric Sign
Updates") at the major entrances to Colorado and coordinate with the Colorado Tourist
Development Council. These broadcasts would be used to provide greater detail on the
metric conversion system.

• Consider the installation of single-post signs at the on ramps to the major grade-separated
facilities. These signs would read:

~gU~~~ ~~@J~~
m~ QD~~

These signs would only be needed at locations where motorists are entering from a road
that has not been converted to the metric system.

• Make use of permanent Variable Message Sign system to provide metric information to
motorists.

• Contact the 3M Company concerning their free billboard advertising program to see if
it would apply to this public project.

• Inform the American Automobile Association (AAA) and the American Trucking
Association (ATA) of the changes so they can alert their members.

6-22 Traffic
( ) RECOMMENDATIONS

Based on the results of our literature search and review, and using a little common sense, the
following recommendations are made:

• Avoid dualization, except for the use of metric equivalency signs at the entrances to
Colorado and for safety messages.

• Use hard conversions to the maximum extent practical for distance and speed signing.

• Signs referencing distances of greater than or equal to 800 meters should be rounded to
the nearest whole kilometer. Signs referencing distances of less than 800 meters should
be rounded to the nearest 100 meters.

• The suffix "lan" should be used for all distances expressed in kilometers and the suffix
"m" should be used for all distances expressed in meters.

• Unless absolutely necessary, avoid the use of supplemental "lan" tabs on separate sign
panels located above the distance value. Instead, fabricate a new sign with the "lan"
suffix included as an integral part of the sign.

• Speed limits should be posted in even increments of 10 kilometers per hour. The federal
government should be encouraged to enact appropriate enabling legislation for the
interstate system. The new Metric speed limits on non-interstate facilities should be
established based on recent CDOT speed studies.

• The sign legend with the large numerals inside a red circle with the "lan/h" suffix below
should be used for standard speed limit signing.

• Install all minimum speed signs immediately below the associated speed limit sign.

• Consider following the Canadian methodology for work zone signing with dualization
used during a certain educational period.

• Implement a public awareness campaign that utilizes preconstruction "metric awareness"

signing on both the mainline and on-ramps, radio and television spots, and highway
advisory radio. Contact appropriate agencies (AAA, ATA, etc.) and disseminate
information on the metric conversion program.

In conclusion, it should be emphasized that, in the area of sign design and construction, the
"field of play" is constantly changing as existing signs are replaced or upgraded by maintenance
forces. Consequently, prior to commencement of construction and during the construction
process, the sign modifications reflected in our final design plans will need to be re-examined
to make sure . that all proposed changes are still appropriate. A significant amount of field
adjustment will undoubtedly be needed. .

Traffic 6-23
 PAVEMENT MARKINGS

Width in inches x 25 = millimeters

Typical metric widths 100 mm

150mm

200mm

Pavement marking lengths in feet x 0.30 = meters.

Typical hop-skip line of 10 feet and 30 feet = 3 m and 9 m.

The difference between a hard and soft conversion is 1.6 percent.

GENERAL PROCESS TOPICS

Contracts

• Stencils and dies will need to be stocked in both metric and English for quite a while,
until all of our current signs have been replaced.

Machinery in the Sign Shop

• The machinery that is rated in ton capacity will require adjustments.

• The measuring and calibrating devices attached to existing equipment will require retro-
fitted metric scales.

Field Equipment

• The Distance Measuring Instruments (DMI's) used for field inventory have a switch for
conversion to kilometers.

• The vehicle odometers of course are not as easily changed and since we do a great deal
of our work referencing this device, consideration should be given to ordering vehicles
with meter-based odometers once our reference system is changed over.

• The radar guns will eventually require modification or replacement.

6-24 Traffic
 GENERAL PROCESS TOPICS (Cont'd)

Signals

• The Face Size, Mast Arm length, Cabinet Dimensions, etc. must be converted along with
. : the entire standard when it is appropriate .

Format and Forms

• Specialized Staff Traffic forms and those with outdated units will require modification
to accommodate metrication.

Manuals and References

The following manuals and references must be converted to metric units:

• Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices

• Supplement to the MUTCD
• Traffic Control Devices Handbook
• Highway Capacity Manual
• Traffic Engineering Handbook
• Colorado Revised Statutes
• AASHTO Guide for Selecting, Locating, and Designing Traffic Barriers
• Roadside Design Guide
• Standard Highway Signs
• Supplement to Standard Highway Signs
• School Trip Safety Program Guidelines

Standards and Specifications

• The CDOT Standard Plans/S Standards must be converted to the metric system.

Materials and Supplies

• Scales, Measuring Tapes, Measuring Wheels, Radar Guns, Drafting Templates, Sign
Shop Templates and Dies must all be repIaced with metric equivalents.

Traffic 6-25
 GENERAL PROCESS TOPICS (Cont'd)

Software and Data Files

• The Sign Layout Program will need to have the entire "letter dimensioning" file redone
in metric (This will require that the FHWA or AASHTO provide us with the official
spacings and other dimensions).

• All proprietary and computational software will require replacement. This includes the
Highway Capacity Software, and Passer II.

Construction Unit

• Review and Revise Construction Manual (Traffic Related Items, e.g. The Inspection
Signing Section (614.09) will require dimension changes along with Sections 614.10 and
630, Inspection of Traffic Signal Systems and Traffic Control Review, respectively .)

• Review and Revise Construction Specification (Traffic Related Items, i.e. A multitude
of dimensioning/unit changes will be required. They are too numerous to list here. This
effort will require a detailed review of each Traffic related section.)

• Review and Revise Construction Procedures (Traffic Related Items, e.g. The construction
procedures and requirements are spelled out in the Specifications, Standards, and the
Construction Manual and they are scheduled for modification.)

Maintenance and Materials Unit

• Review and Revise the Maintenance Manual, and the Materials Manual as well as the
Roadway Design Manual (Traffic Related Items). A multitude of dimensioning/unit
changes will be required. They are to numerous to list here. This effort will require a
detailed review of each Traffic related section.

6-26 Traffic
CHAPTER SEVEN
Maintenance

The following is given as a guide to the conversion of Maintenance activities to the metric
system and can be used as guidance in the conversion.

MAINTENANCE MANAGEMENT SYSTEM DATABASE

• CDOT Form 909 (green Sheet) will accommodate metric maintenance data reporting
now. The computer program for reports must be rewritten to accommodate metric.

• The MMS program must convert to metric before the designated conversion date and
contain the proper CDOT-established parameters.

• The conversion to Metric must occur at or before the start of a Fiscal Year.

• All Historical Data will stay as is, and a computer program must be written to convert
the data so that historical data will be reported in metric form.

MAINTENANCE MANAGEMENT SYSTEM ACTIVITIES UNITS

• All Units of accomplishments, and Material Quantities must be converted to the metric
conversion units and quantities established by CDOT.

Quantity Unit Symbol

length millimeter mm
meter m
kilometer km
area square meter m2
square kilometer km2
hectare ha
volume liter · L
cubic meter m3
mass metric ton Metric Ton

Maintenance
7-'
MAINTENANCE MANAGEMENT SYSTEM ACTIVITIES UNITS (Cont'dl

Manuals

• The Maintenance Management System Manual must be converted to metric.

• The Manual of Maintenance Procedure must be converted to metric.

Maintenance

Maintenance in the field should have no major problems in converting to metric. The
following is a list of items that must be addressed:

• Training of field personnel.

• The changing of all signs.

• Mile points to reference points.

• Copies of manual use now in the field to metric.

Oversize Permits Extra-Legal Vehicles or Loads (Trucking Industry)

The following is a brief listing of items which must be changed as a result of the metric .
conversion:

• The rules and regulations pertaining to transport permits for the movement of extra-legal
vehicles or loads, 2 CCR 601-9.

• The Bridge Weight Limit Map.

• The Colorado Pilot Car Escort and Oversize Restriction Map.

• The Height Restriction Map.

• The rules and regulations pertaining to longer vehicle combinations.

• All permit-related DOT forms: DOT 51, 52, 59, 72, 74, 75, 79, 100, 729, 865, 934,
and 1085.

• The For Your Information (FYI) Pamphlets.

• All Colorado Revised Statutes, in particular 42-4-401 through 42-4-409.

7-2 Maintenance
MAINTENANCE MANAGEMENT SYSTEM ACTIVITIES UNITS (Cont'd)

Oversize Permits Extra-legal Vehicles or Loads (Trucking Industry) (Cont'd)

Other items which would require amendments, but which are not under Staff Maintenance's
authority include:

• All signing for:

. - Height clearance on bridges

- Load posted structures

• The Vertical Clearance Report

ROAD EQUIPMENT AND SHOPS

Equipment Management System (EMS)

• All current vehicles, including cars and trucks, contain a speedometer and odometer on
which miles are the base unit of measurement. As the nation goes metric, so will the
speedometers and odometers that come with the new vehicles. We must program in the
ability to track usage from some meters measuring miles and other meters measuring
kilometers.

• Currently all fuel is purchased in gallons. During the transition period we will need to
know, for each fuel purchase, the unit of measure used (gallons or liters) and the number
of units purchased. Some special computer programming and some forms changes must
be done to accommodate this.

• Some fields in the main inventory table of the equipment database contain data that is the
result of the current system of measurement. Some examples are:

Capacity = 32,500 lbs.

GVW, capacity = 2 & 112 Cubic Yards

Engine displacement = 466 cm.

All of these fields are descriptive only and must be changed (possibly with mass
updates).

Maintenance 7-3
 ROAD EQUIPMENT AND SHOPS (Cont'd)

Equipment Repair Shops

• The shops have already been impacted by the metric system of measurement and have
some tools to accommodate both standard and metric sizes of nuts and bolts. They are
in some instances also stocking both standard and metric sizes of nuts and bolts.

• Some precision measuring tools may need to be purchased that are calibrated in metric
units of measure. These include but are not limited to: micrometers, vernier calipers,
feeler gauges, dial gauges, pressure gauges, thermometers, torque wrenches, etc.

• Some decisions must be made on the need for replacing other tools.

Equipment Specifications

• Currently all major equipment manufacturers are listing both the English units of
measurement and metric units .of measurement in all of their printed literature. Little
effort will be required to change CDOT equipment bid specifications.

• Changes made by the manufacturers because of a different system of measurement are

of more concern. For example:

Currently we are buying snow plows that are 12 feet wide with replaceable cutting edges
that are 6 feet long and have bolt holes 6 inches apart. If the industry changes the width
to a round number on either side of 3657.6 mm. with a different bolt hole spacing than
152.4 mm., we must then either rebuild all old plows to the new size and hole spacing,
or order and stock both sizes of plow blades.

7-4 Maintenance
CHAPTER EIGHT
Planning

UNITS

Quantity Unit Symbol

length millimeter mm
meter m
kilometer km
area . square millimeter mm2
square meter . m2
mass gram g
kilogram. kg
metric ton Metric Ton
temperature degree Celsius °C

PLANNING

Overall, the planning unit will be reactive to other units.

• Future Transportation Plans must reflect metric units.

• Data requested by the unit must be provided in metric.

• No past plans will be converted to metric.

PAVEMENT MANAGEMENT PROGRAM

• All future software must handle metric units.

• The process of converting measurements such as International Roughness Index (lRI) and
rut depth from metric to English units, will be discontinued.

Planning 8-1
 INTERMODAL

• All databases must be established in metric units.

• Any other existing data must be converted by the hard conversion convention.

GIS .

• The ARCINFO software will continue to be run with metric units.

TRAFFIC

• Figures the Traffic unit is responsible for will be unaffected by the conversion to metric.

• The database "section termini" must be converted to read "reference point" rather than
"milepoint" .

FIELD

• The Distance Measuring Instruments (DMI) must be recalibrated to metric, and metric
tape must be purchased for all field personnel.

DATA MANAGEMENT

• The Integrated Roadway Information System (IRIS) database must be converted to metric
with the assistance of Information Systems personnel (This will be mostly technical in
nature, as the conversion will nearly all be performed as per the hard conversion
conventions) .

• Records with descriptions indicating state highway mileposts, which will be converted
to reference points must be converted to metric.

• New software must be acquired from FHWA so that all reports submitted to them will
be in metric units.

The consensus amongst personnel in DID is that the preferred course of action regarding
existing mileposts is that they remain and be converted to reference points. Removing them in
favor of kilometer posts would essentially result m
recreating all databases to reflect the new I
;,1

kilometer posts. This would create an inordinate amount of work for the GIS, Traffic, Pavement
Management and Data Management units, all of which keep their own databases.

8-2 Planning
 ---- -- - ----~ -
~

- - ~ ~------

CHAPTER NINE
Environmental

The Office of Environmental Services (OES) will complete the metrication of the Branch -
-through the combined efforts of the Unit Supervisors and the -metric conversion-coordinator;

- - UNITS

Quantity _ Unit - Symbol

length -.:- _ - - millimeter - ~-- ---
mm -
~
-
-.-
meter m
kilometer kIn
area square meter m2
-- -
1ari2
-

square kilometer
- --
hectare ha
volume
- -
--- - --
--
liter -- - --- -
L ----- - -

- cubic meter m3
volume rate of flow cubic meterlsecond m3/s
literlsecond Us
__ ~
-
_._ ~ __ r _ • _
- __ ~ _
~

-. - milligraffi- ~ ------- ~- --

mass - - mg
-
kilogram .. kg
- -
- - --.-~- ---

.,

Environmental
 -O~-=-_-_..,,= ___ ---.-.,. ___ --------'----'="----=_ --- -
_
-~ - - - -- , - -

'--'-,- '~'- .-
--- ~----- --- --- -_._ .

NOISE ANALYSIS AND LEAKING UNDERGROUND STORAGE TANK REMEDIATION

Noise Analysis Program

• _After Apri1 ~ 1993, all field measurements must be in both metric and Englisli uriits. __ -

. - -Noise manual tables and graphs must be converted to metric units during future ' use.
. - This must be done by the office that ·is the primary source of these tables and graphs. ----

---=- -~ ~__ Computer programs used to analyze and-predict traffic_'noise levels must accept metric _
~- units as well as English units. - -.-

. ---. Noise barrier panels should be dimenSioned in metric' units With English equivalents
~ ~c= ' showninparenthesis. -"' -· 'c'~"-.-'~' 0= ~C~ _ _. _ . _ •., . _ ~ . - -~~;'-'- - --. - .--

- eJ.ghted decibels" shown~

-- - -. --Traffic noise sound levels mustbe reported in units Called "A'=W
as dB(A).This unit-represents the sound from highway -traffic noise "weighted" ~ to
reflect noise levels as perceived by the human ear. This unit is used worldwide. Metric
units will be used in technical reports or research.

• The Noise Abatement Guidelines must be revised to include metric units. The extent of
these changes are limited to approximately four distance-related references. The updating
of referenced publications and federal _regulations wilLbe ~ the - responsibility -of ~ the
publisher. - _' __ ... -- - -- .

--- -
Leaking Underground Storage Tank (LUST) Remediation Program
--- -~ -, -~

.• After June1993,-all field measurements must be in' both metric and Englishunlts.

--- ." • .Contaminate levels must be recordea in metric units and expressed in parts per million
_=-=,-::-:::,(ppm) or parts'pe,r billion (Ppb). ~ · ~c~.~ _,~ _ . c - . ' --- - - . -----.-- •

• ~ Detailed Site Investigation forms must be changed to show metric and English units . .

. ~-'" .. ~'. .Computer programs used to compile and -analyze sto~ge tank data must accept metric
---~ --.-~ ~ - ~ data. -~ .-.. ~~ .....- o· -----~---;--'-., - - - ' - -,----- - ,-. -

_- ..
. - -.-
--..
~
~' ..
'- - _---
..:
- - .- - -
" ....... --.:c. - --
.,
-~ ,-- . --
," - .~-- - - ----
~,~
_. .::. .., - li"':_' _ "' -- ~.---:

- -""----'''-'---- -=~- -----=-=:: :~-..,. ~ --;. .--......;....,.- -,, --"~--~-.- :. .- ,

--- - --.-~--. ~~~--- -.--.~-~ --._._--.~-+~-':"--
.. -------"--·--:t~- . . -- --·-··--·-'-- ---.

, ,

-, ~

I··' ~ !-
 ARCHAEOLOGY UNIT AND PALEONTOLOGY

• All field measurements must be recorded in metric units.

• Projecfsite location information must be reCorded~in~-measurements reflecting the

· re!erence point units that comp~y with future C1?OT policy.

• Future maps, sketches and photographs and their scales must be shown in metric units.
- -
~ • 1'ilture transportation project reports must show both units of measuremenLand English
will be discussed for the general audience. The metric unit must be shown first in these
reports with the English units in parenthesis.

AIR QUALITY UNIT

• Future field measurements for -line source data, -(highways, intersections, etc.) must be
recorded in metric or converted to metric units and also show English units.

• Data input files for computer programs used to analyze air quality use a mixture of
· English and metric units. The output/results must be expressed in metric units. ·

• Air quality information for CDOT highway projects must be presented in language that
is understandable by the general public.

HAZARDOUS WASTE UNIT

• . Contaminate levels must be measured and reported in metric units. Contaminates in pure
water samples must be measured in (ppm) = milligrams per liter, etc. Contaminates in
_ soil or sludge samples must be measured in (ppm) = milligrams per kilogram, etc.

• CDOT hazardous waste reporting forms must be revised for metric conversions. The
__ Initial Site Assessment (ISA). checklist must also be revised. ISA sketch maps for
=.
:..:_·lo.c::a.tions must show. ametricand English scale for distances.- ~~--=-:-~~.--~ .. .

• Preliminary Site Investigation (pSI) reporting forms must be revised. PSI ~hecklists are
commonly provided by the consultants doing the work. All PSI forms as well as location
maps, field logs and project narratives must be revised to show metric and English
• notation. Laboratory results must be given in metric umts. . .

- . • -:Hazardous waste issues must be=discussed ·.m-documents=a:nd public meetings iii metric ~ _. =--:.. ~
units and also English units, as English units are usually more familiar to the audience.
 BIOLOGY AND ECOLOGY
g~;,, -:t -~-. ~-. : , :;:-~ . .::'"'.'-.~-' ~-=~==~ ~' ~ t ; ~~ { ~-t ~~~~~ ~-
~~~ff Field :nieastireriients,· plansiandinaps must be dimensioned ill. both metric and ~ English _ -
units. -
~ ~ -
• Areas must be converted to square meters or hectares, but will also show English units.
--~----- - ~::~~:·~f i ~:l~~r~,~~~·f,~~~~~f~~.ti~' - ~- -
• Stream flows and volumes must be given metric units withEnglish ~units in parenthesis. ~ -~--~----

-- --- "

• The Geographic Information System' (GIS) '-enviionmentaI base infonruition -must be ~ -=-=:::.~,-
programmed in metric units. All distance measurements will reflect metric units. Tnis
jnformationwill be available to CDOTRegion staff and others. - ~-.-
--"'"'-'-. - --------------"-- --~----- ~ -'._- ------ --- .---------- ----~---
. - -, - - --,-'---
-----:......-----.-------'-- --- -_. __ :-_--::----,.------ ------ ---- ------- .
-~-' ---,- - . ' AlLprojeet.clearanees ,mustbereportedinmetnc unitS~ -

,
- ,--- - -
• ,SeCtion 4(f) and 6(f) Evaluations must describe impacts to protected resources metric .,- --- - -- In
;
..

, - '~'-~~ahd'Eng1iSh~measurements and all maps ana pliotographs must be on metric andEnglish - ~----- --- --:
~-- ,-7~- scales.
--- ','-, c. - - - - - -- ---

--,-;..;
-----
._-_. -"-~ -~
-
-----"-
- ~
~- - ---..... • -
"~,-.----...,.--.
-<

" . • - 0- -~_ _ ".--. _ _ _ _ _+-"--_-,--:.-..:::.~.~::::

•• __ ._eccc' ..."'-"=c
.", -
----'---~-

. ::- ~"':'rr~-',' ~ .
, - .... - -.,. CI _ ; . .;::0- -

f~ ::~. ~i '-:'~',.. ----=:," ~~{:i~s_"-":l;_::~:,;;;:. ' ;~-:--~:!:~; ~.:.,:

..~- .. __ ~.__ ._ .-<;- _.___ ~:-: ..;:.i._ -
" •
-- -~.l.:!-~,: ,;-
 ----------
- - - - ------- - -

COORDINATING THE CONVERSION PROCESS

I ---
-
1 • In order to complete the Branch conversion to a metric program, OES must evaluate the
I influence of federal agencies that direct our activities, all agencies that coordinate with
.j - - --
our activities and those lhat are influenced by our activities.

• All Branches will need to review the legislation-that affects their office operations. - -~

• In the Office of Environmental Services each unit supervisor as well as each

,. . : ep.vironmental specialist must convert -regulatory guidelines and directive material to
metric units at the time it is needed and wherever necessary to comply with the CDOT
objective to convert to metric units. _

• Many state -agencies that coordinate project activities with us, -cooperate in joint
agreements, or review our documents will probably not start using metric language until
-the federally supported state agencies have completed their conversion process. The
·- CDOT metric conversion decisions and timetables must _b e communicated to the state -
agencies as early as possible. Also, both English and metric measurements must be
shown in technical reports, coOrdination letters and in environmental documents to reduce
the number of problems experienced during CDOT's conversion to the metric system.
-
• The metric literacy of the public audience must be considered whenever environmental
documents are developed and public meetings convened. Both metric and English units _
must be shown and presented or the conversions are explained at the time the units are
discussed. - - - -

TRAINING AND INTERNAL COORDINATION ._

• One general branch training session must be held during the early part of the conversion _
effort in order to discuss procedures and schedules for completing the metric conversion
process for the branch. _ -~ ~- -~

• Each staff member must be provided a metric conversion table or an electronic

conversion option.--:·~--=-=-~- _~: _____________ ~_ __ __ _ ___ ~ ______ .- -.- -- ~ --
- - -_. --- -- ---- - ------ --- -------...:.--"'---
,-
--
• OES members must become-familiar with the metric units used throughout CDOT as they
are -made available through the CDOT Metric Conversion Committee.

• - There must-be a continued coordination effort throughout CDOT. The OES staff must - --- - f- --.--;;
be aware of the conversion progress in other offices to enable them to assist .in _-
=-=~,.-:-==~:::--=---==--- ::. completing Department manuals, guides, etc. for-which OES shares ownership.- -Also,--'---'=-= ==-,.-:..-:
<- _-.- ·"'7fio.-'~ _-----=: it is important to be aware of .completed conversions that can be incorporated into OES -=--- --:. - :-. __ -'-
.project development work._
I --
~ - - -- - - - ---- ~

- -. . _ • OES. has identified fourteen CDOT directives that need either revisions -or replacement _-- .' - -
- ___ ~·-F~-·- --:-
_ - ::>-.'-
-- ana-metric conversioneonsideration must be pven 'iQ each. _ ~-- - _ --.. _-- _.~. -~ ..~~ --~~,..- --0-,_ "'" ~~- -
- - _ - - - - - _ -.. T _ r _.
J .
 '. ., -·f.JI -~~·~~~::~-~ ! 1t"~~ - X. \1-:"at10~ -.:---llL~-(:j~tu.~d i t ~ ;'. Xu! i .'~i t")C-1·f..l;~_tt:{lL7:j it; JllF.~Sl!r~rn\ ~.il~~" r(:_f'Li,_:ci:~ -: ! ~ 1 1i .

.f.ef~re:r~e(:- :"'~ ~j J .;t. H(irt~~ ~l %~ (~1 ~((;·i'~-i "-' r,·.!t t-:. i '~1i ll :rC- c~n~- {r rj --~ ~ ! (: {

~ r~:tfLlrt_t' rrausI:u.CtatiDE_-pj- ~'~ec.LJ~~p~Jr~--1·l tl~ ~i -;::iipF"~ _ l':C~Ui.~ll~_~ . c.' .L.1;.L~:~ +ur t:J liellL,-~Jld .~. t J ") .~ ; ~ sJ-,
'''-'I l( b~ di:;(:t.i ~~i;~;~ fo'" th0 i;~;; ,eml ihldlence, . rj'nc meldc 1111t: h " r.: f h~ :.;hn" 'll f1r2.i ji~ ib~sp
rep0Tt~ ,YiUl tiy' Erl i~Ji.:~L \i 'tl iS-jl p::tn:01fj(:s;j~.

hnUfe fIeld mc:·a.!:.tll::crlleilt~ tvr~lJl1t" S(YufCC (if,to. , tf:.igh i'.·(ly~, j ii,:(;f V('CtiOW:;, l:tC.} ;T:Hst \lt;
rf"!.~~"!t~~ it"! illfj..ri~~~,-;,:5.l.~~(:cr::~~(gr~-ru- tc~ r-T~~~~if} ~"-~~riiS- i~:n€~- i;~-~!.:' ~·1!~~<'.\ ~ }~;Jlglis1 '" 1Y: :--<-~,;'

r'- ])8t? llH1~L n. k .". for cornflj.,t~~pr~)g;W;,'j2" t.h~f~~ tcc& ~u}alyr~ an quality u:,;' ~; rni xi il;'~ of
~SnE;-:n-.sJ: (\-; h"~· n 1 0 trt:e:;-uilii~i:~·T- - ;T'1-I~~' (hJ r~p"f}t:-!Tt~:~TiJ""f~~~'-~'ttts i D.c"c~, .~~q-"~~ ~l:i:~ :r'ft- Td{!;i~f~¥:~ tfl~t~~

"- t; Cl~£{£1.~I; r~~~'::~~'-} ':T~-~~~1-~e¥.J,£tI[}~-. 'fO~Dl:" -ft-i"ld~:l- f~e~ ~r:~~~~·-?:~\rt~~b.::, J;t8-\' ~j;~lLili~~-- "J~~~---- --)\
IrfJ#~~.-g:ft€· .A-J~~~~z~!;, ~:.(fSJ~::?- ;~:~!"~'Clli't:1 fftVS t }t~;t:-- -b·e. t..e~:fied .: - J,~)~:' _:;~;:;;~:~TI:~?~;iLtt;:.~ f~~:.~
._______~_~_~-~:,~~~~1'~:o_P:;:~~~ _ f.~~l:l ~lfft;Lb-r~~~tri0: ~F~gltSf[_~~G~j~ ft1:f~ (tiS~J1Ges.:-~===~~=~ . c;.~ _-o~~_~ ~ ----=---=~_=

- ~~ - :'r.r~:I-~iih}it~'fi(}b; fl~t~-JJi~" ~r~t~~54iJyJ\ '(~"l StT rep'9rtiJjg' fOI1n;: faD:;L ~~ r~v~~i~ ~ ~ _Jf~t_ ~r;~c; i.:Jlst S art·
Ci}~~_~.l~; z~~:r JiT ~~~·f~~t::j-"~:=." G"re· cc f t~-~>'" {i!~:."? \~~k, ~·t-;:.s; fr.f~;:·.~1_:;-::3-:f? ~0': \:.IJ. T:~;l~lt.rrtl:;' "~t~ .:crL~ ·~s- ;"-:."-;~. "~ t\~~ -,,_,-=-__.
J

t::.~. rc;,i::;eiJt (r ~h.!)\'? lnetr f(~ ~~~~_ Fl1gh~~ .

. '

.: .L!. _ ' __

-,
- "- --B;60~~~ ~~.~j!;i~~~~;~I~~- .:-------' £nvironrnenta r~;'.::;
" . ..' . ;'::;1
_~" .il::,
. ' ~
_. _ _ ~!-.lt..-- _ • _ _ _ ._._ _
,. ~"
CHAPTER TEN
Computer Systems

This chapter covers all standard programs used excluding specialized traffic and bridge
programs. The expertise to review those packages is within their respective branches.

By and large the impact of a conversion to metric in our computer applications is very
minimal. The majority of the systems are already capable of working in metric simply by
hitting a default switch in the program set-up. The primary problem will be the loading of
metric standards tables to replace the existing English tables. This will take some time and
needs to be placed in the department's schedule for conversion.

There are a few problems associated with a conversion to metric:

• Most notably, neither the Hydrain or WSPro programs used by Hydraulics will work in
metric. Perhaps this will require new applications or maybe they can use these
applications with soft conversions. Some research in this area will be necessary.

• The BAMS-DSS Module also poses a problem, as it isa historical database dependent
on the units used in the past, in this case English. Some brainstorming will be required
here to determine the best solution. Since BAMS is an AASHTO sponsored product, it
is felt that the AASHTO task force in charge of BAMS should be responsible for this.

• The last problem that we foresee is with COGO and the R.O.W. applications. Actually,
the problem is not with the software, rather with the industry standard in providing legal
descriptions. It is not certain what influence the Transportation industry will have on the
legal and Real Estate businesses. We might be required to maintain an English version
, af COG.o to provide legal information.

• The conversion to metric may require us to determine new standards for significant
figures in calculations. For example, if linear measurements are kept to the hundredths,
the accuracy between feet and meters could be significant. This needs to be explored.

Computer Systems 10-1

 COMPUTER GEOMETRY (COGO)

The CDOT COGO program will easily accept metric figures, however:

• Many of the interfaces we have prepared for integrating COGO with MOSS · and
RoadCalc, for example, are evidently unit dependent. It has been estimated that
approximately 25 % of the internal code will need to be reviewed and perhaps revised to
facilitate interfaces and the metric print-out of information.

• A potential area of concern is the changes the department may wish to make to legal
descriptions. Will the legal and Real Estate market be forced to switch as well or will
their lobbying pressure force us to reach a compromise. This needs to be reviewed.

• Overall, COGO is ready for metric testing.

GRAPHICS

AutoCAD and Series 5000

Both AutoCAD and Series 5000 do have settings internal to the programs to reflect both
metric and English, and the conversion would require just a few keystrokes. Since neither
AutoCAD or Series 5000 have any tables, there is no impact here.

The only problems foreseen in the Graphics area is the number of user prepared "Macros"
and the "Standards" drawings that have been created. The users may need to evaluate their
applications and depending on the severity of the problem and the necessity of the application,
IS help may be necessary. The plan to convert standards should. consider AutoCAD drawing
time to properly reflect the impact.

PICS

PICS (project Item Coding System) in a sense is two applications in one. Part of PICS is
AutoCAD graphics tools. The majority of these are not unit dependent and will require little
effort to- be converted to metric. The second part is a coordinate and item description based
database. Currently it is only used during the project .life and as such will not be affected by
a conversion to metric. If some PICS files are historically recorded prior to the conversion,
some soft conversion will be necessary and a simple conversion program may be necessitated.

• Many specific Macros and subroutines that hinge on the drafting standards must be
corrected. Once the drafting standards are identified this will require as much as six
months to fix.

• Some minor changes to fonts and symbols are required.

• A File header identifying the files as English or metric needs to be added.

10-2 Computer Systems

 ENGINEERING

MOSS And RoadCalc

We are moving right into the strengths of these products by converting to metric. In fact
some problems we have encountered with MOSS will be eliminated, most particularly the
problems with significant figures in coordinates. MOSS always had problems going over 10,000
feet in elevation. Both products are being used by Ministries of Transportation in Canada with
good success.

Extreme caution will be required to convert the standards tables (Le. superelevation, etc.) to
assure we design using correct information. Many tables and related checks are internal to these
programs.

MOSS

• All Macros, UPM's, Input files and macros, and linesymbolfiles will need to be
reviewed .and modified as appropriate.

• Regions will need to be notified of changes and will need to review and modify their own
Macros/UPM's as appropriate.

• Some minor fixes on internal fonts and symbols will be required.

• Design standards will need to be incorporated~

RoadCalc

• Design standards will need to be incorporated.

HYDRAULICS
HEC2, which is the major Hydraulics progi'am, is already equipped for metric data.
However, we are not so fortunate with the Hydrain and WSPro applications. Evidently, neither
of these programs will operate in the metric environment. They are very dependent on English
nomographs. Two solutions are evident for these programs:

• Continue to use them, with hydraulic engineers making soft conversions back and forth.
This may be best until the piping industry manufactures everything in metric.

• Purchase new programs that accomplish the same task in metric. In fact, maybe both of
our programs will be rewritten to meet new user demands.

This is an area that will require additional research and effort to determine the best solution.

Computer Systems 10-3

 MANAGEMENT SYSTEMS

PSTS And BAMS

The actual operation of these programs is not unit dependent and therefore will require no
changes. However, the Item Codes and Tables are currently recorded using English. All of
these tables will need to be reentered using metric units. For BAMS, the problem that will be
encountered is with the historical module DSS. Some scheduling calculations in PSTS are based
on centerline miles and will need to be changed, although this problem should be easy to correct.

BAMS

• There are over 4,000 items to convert to create a metric Items List (NOTE: Standards
and specifications must be changed first).

• Item descriptions that are in our control must be changed (e.g. 0.2 Meter Concrete
Pavement).

• Other Item descriptions must be changed as industry makes the changes (e.g. 0.5 meter
CSP).

• Must have a development area that users cannot purposely or accidentally access (Cannot
use the existing development environment because CASpc is currently dependent upon
it).

• Must test Metric-BAMS with an existing project that has a diversity of items (Estimates
and data will be in both English and metric).

• Phase 1 of the Items List change must be made for appropriate items on the test project.
The data must be created in PES and transferred to LAS and then to CAS/CASpc for
testing of contractor payments.

• The common-unit conversion withinDSS must be modified for metric calculations

(CDOT has the option of waiting on this issue until AASHTO and the BAMS Task Force
make a determination and recommendation).

• InfoTech must have an overview report to the BAMS Task Force for review and
inclusion into the 94/95 BAMS Work plan. Meanwhile, CDOT has three options:

1) Make changes ourselves as reflected above.

2) Wait for InfoTech to make the changes (94/95).

3) Since Bob Clevenger is the Chairman of the AASHTO Task Force on Metric
Conversion, see if he can apply pressure through AASHTO to get the BAMS Task
Force to move quicker on this issue.

10-4 Computer Systems

 OTHER SYSTEMS

GIS

The GIS (Geographic Information System) is currently managed by the Division of

Transportation Development. They indicate that there will be no impact moving to metric. It
probably will require some lead time to assure data can be retrieved using a metric coordinate
base.

• DID must be contacted to determine the actual impact and time requirements.

IRIS

IRIS (Integrated Roadway Inventory System) is a roadway database based on mileposts.

Currently it is comprised of four modules:

Crashes Historical databases of accidents. Initial information comes from

DMV.

Structures Database of all structures locations and conditions.

Roadway
Characteristics List of traffic volumes, roadway geometry, etc.

Maintainable
Items Uploads of the MMS data used by maintenance.

The structures database is based on a higher degree of accuracy but is still dependent on the
mileposts. Some planning will be necessary to determine how to most accurately convert away
from milepost based data.

Computer Systems 10-5

10-6 Computer Systems
 General References

The following references were used in preparation of this manual and/or are available as aids
to a metric conversion.

METRIC CONSTRUCTION GUIDES

American Society for Testing and Materials (1916 Race Street, Philadelphia, PA 19103,
Phone: (215) 299-5585):

• ASTM E621, Standard Practice for the Use of Metric (SI) Units in Building Design and
Construction, 1984. 37 pp. 1984. $12.00.

National Institute of Building Sciences (publications Department, 1201 L Street N. W., Suite
400, Washington, DC 20005, Phone: (202) 289-7800):

• The Metric Guide for Federal Construction, 1st Edition, Operating Committee of the
Interagency Council on Metric Policy, National Institute of Building Sciences (NIBS),
Washington, DC, 1991. Written by NIBSspecifica1ly for the construction industry and
reviewed by metric experts throughout the country. Includes background on the federal
metric laws; facts on metric in construction; an introduction to metric units; a primer on
metric usage for architects, engineers, and the trades; requirements for metric drawings
and specifications; guidance on metric management and training;· and a list of current
metric construction references. 34 pp. $15.00 (including shipping and handling).

• GSA Metric Design Guide. Interim design .guide developed by the General Services
Administration (GSA) for use by federal project managers and their AlEs. Contains
practical architectural, civil, structural, mechanical, and electrical design information;
a list of available "hard" metric products; sample drawings; and related reference
information. 77 pp. $8.00; $5.00 if ordered with the above .Metric Guide for Federal
Construction.

National Technical Infonnation Service (5285 Port Royal Rd., Springfield, VA 22161, Phone:
(703) 487-4600).

• NBS Technical Note 990, The Selection of Preferred Metric Values for Design and
Construction. H.I. Milton, author. 75 pp.

General References R-1

 GENERAL METRIC INFORMATION

American Association of State and Highway Transportation Officials (444 N. Capital St.,
N.W., Suite 225, Washington DC 20001; Phone (202) 624-5800):

• Guide to Metric Conversion.

American National Metric Council (4330 East-West Highway, Suite 1117, Bethesda, MD
20814-4408; Phone: (301) 718-6508 for publications):

• ANMC Metric Editorial Guide. $5.00.

• SI Metric Training Guide. $5.00.

• Metrication for the Manager. $15.00.

National Technical Information Service (5285 Port Royal Rd. , Springfield, VA 22161; Phone:
(703) 487-4600):

• PB 89-226922, Metric Handbookfor Federal Officials (includes Federal Standard No.

376A of May 5, 1983, Preferred Metric Units for General Use by the Federal
Government). 45 pp. 1989. $17.00.

u.S. Government Printing Office (Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing

Office, Washington, D.C. 20402; Phone: (202) 783-3238):

• NIST Special Publication 330, 1991 Edition, The International System of Units (SI).
56 pp. August, 1991. $3.50.

• NIST Special Publication 811, Guide for the Use of the International System of Units.
Arthur O. McCoubrey, author. 34 pp. September, 1991. $2.50.

• "M~tric System of Measurement: Interpretation of the International System of Units for

the United States; Notice. Federal Register, December 20, 1990.

u.S. Metric Association (10245 Andasol Ave., Northridge, CA 91325; Phone: (818) 363-5606):

• Style Guide to the Use of the Metric System. $3.00; bulk discounts available.

• SI Metric Style Guide/or Written and Computer Usage. $2.00; bulk discounts available.

• Freeman Training/Education Metric Materials List. $38.00.

• Metric Vendor List. $28.00.

R-2 General References

 STANDARDS & SPECIFICATIONS

American Association of State and Highway Transportation Officials (444 N. Capital St.,
N.W., Suite 225, Washington DC 20001; Phone (202) 624-58(0):

• Standard Specifications for Transponation Materials. Two-volume set. Includes dual

units. $115.00.

American National Standards Institute, Inc. (11 West 42nd St., New York, NY 10036;
Phone: (212) 642-4900):

• ANSI/IEEE 268, American National Standard Metric Practice. 48 pp. 1982. $23.00.

American Society for Testing and Materials (1916 Race St., Philadelphia, PA 19103; Phone:
(215) 299-5585):

• ASTM E380, Standard Practicefor Use of the International System of Units (SI). 35 pp.
1992. $23.00.

CIVIL

American Congress on Surveying and Mapping (5411 Grosvenor Lane, Suite 100, Bethesda,
MD 20814; Phone (301) 493-0200):

• Metric Practice Guide/or Surveying and Mapping. 11 pp. 1978. $10.00.

American National Metric Council (4330 East-West Highway, Suite 1117, Bethesda, MD
20814-4408; Phone: (301) 718-6508 for publications):

• ANMC Metric Editorial Guide. Fourth edition. 16 pp. 1990. $2.00.

• Sl Metric Training Guide. 17 pp. 1991.

• Metric Guide for Educational Materials. 22 pp. 1977.

• Managing Metrication in Business and Industry. 203 pp. 1976.

General References R-3

 STEEL

American Institute of Steel Construction (Metric Publications, One E. Wacker Dr., Suite
3100, Chicago, IL 60601-2001; Phone: (312) 670-5414):

• Metric Properties of Structural Shapes with Dimensions According to ASTM A6M.

Metric version of Part I of the Manual of Steel Construction. $10.00.

• Manual of Steel Construction, Metric .Edition. To be published in 1994.

Industrial Fasteners Institute (1105 East Ohio Building, 1717 E. 9th St., Cleveland, OR
44114; Phone: (216) 241-1482):

• Metric Fastener Standards. $60.00.

STRUCTURES

Florida Wire and Cable Company (p. O. Box 6835, Jacksonville, FL 32236, Phone: (800)
874-0093).

• Physical Properties of Strand, Uncoated, Stress Relieved for Prestressed Concrete

Structures.

Ralph E. Anderson, Chief of Bridges and Structures, lllinois Department of Transportation.

• Memorandum on Metric Conversions. March 1, 1993

MEASURING INSTRUMENTS

Stanley Tools (800) 262-2161, Lufkin (912) 362-7511, or U.S. Tape (703) 256-1500.

• DuafUnit Tape Measures.

Staedtler-Mars (Model 987-18-1), Alvin (Model 117 PM), and Charvoz (Model 30-1261).

• Metric Scales and Templates.

American Standard (Call Ms. Barbara Munson at (703) 841-9585).

• Metric plumbing templates.

R-4 General References

,I

MEASURING INSTRUMENTS (Cont'd)

Sharp Instrument Company (Van Schaack Premium Group, 4747 W. Peterson, Chicago, IL
60646; Phone: (312) 736-5600):

• Sharp Model EL-344G Metric Calculator. Converts linear dimensions, areas, volumes,
liquids, pressures, and masses with two keystrokes. Very handy for simple conversions.
Under $20.00.

Radio Shack

• Metric Calculator (catalog #65-931). Hand-held metric conversion calculator.

Texas Instruments

• TI-1895I1 Metric Calculator. Hand-held solar calculator with 40 metric conversion

functions.

Timesaver Templates (13240 Valley Branch, Dallas, TX 75381):

• Metric templates.

Empire Berol USA (105 Westpark Drive, P.O. Box 2248, Brentwood, TN 37024):

• Metric templates.

ChartpaklPickett (1 River Road, Leeds, MA 01053):

• Metric templates.

Forestry Suppliers, Inc. [Mail-order company with free catalog - 532 pages] (p.O. Box
8397, Jackson, MS 39284-8397; Phone: 1-800-647-5368):
o·

• Metric Frisco Rods

• Metric Philadelphia Rods

• Micrometer Targets

• Much More!

General References R-5

R-6 General References