Talk:Drum (container)

• I've at least triple the arty length. Someone needs to do some metric conversions. I'm taking on building a whole table of weights and measures because of this penance (I nominated Drum Wrench for VfD — what else can you call it? LOL) piece.
• BTW, the measurements given are undersize approximations of actual measurements. For length, diameter it should be ok to round up a few millimeters. Figure you have 3/8ths of inch for fudge factor. [[User:Fabartus| fabartus || TalktoMe]] 20:35, 17 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Contradiction

This article contradicts 44 gallon drum —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 68.162.29.10 (talk) 00:41, 31 March 2007 (UTC). "Drums such as these have a standard nominal volume of 55 US gallons (44 Imperial gallons) and are referred to properly as 55 gallon drums" contradicts the title of 44 gallon drum

55/44 gallon drum was merged in this article

Following long discussion of the naming conflict at Talk:44-gallon_drum, consensus was reached to move the article here as a subsection. I have done this. Additionally, I used US gallons as the primary unit in this section because consensus was reached in the aforementioned discussion that it is more broadly accepted among English speakers. The article now needs some proofreading and editing because I'm sure a lot of things are redundant since the move. Please feel free to make improvements where needed! Phasmatisnox (talk) 12:07, 8 August 2008 (UTC)

Correction. There is no consensus to use US gallons. It is precicely because consensus could not be reached betweeen using US or Imperial gallons, that this merge was proposed as a "tie breaker". So to avoid restarting that edit war, I propose we use metric units as the primary throughout the article. Roger (talk) 12:57, 8 August 2008 (UTC)

OK, I'm not sure what the proper WP definition for "consensus" is, but there is obviously preference to the US gallon unit. Using metric units doesn't make sense in this application because with the exception of an upcoming trend in Australia, none of the English-speaking world calls it that. Eschew obfuscation. WP is for humans. Phasmatisnox (talk) 18:25, 9 August 2008 (UTC)

Contrary to the statement that "none of the English speaking world call it that" (55 Gallon drum)? It's been my experience that the English speaking world outside the US and UK is entirely metric, the UK is mostly metric and most people in the UK talk in liters unless they are in a pub ordering beer. Aviation fuel and car fuel are sold in litres or dekalitres in the case of Jet Fuel. Metricmike (talk) 16:01, 27 September 2010 (UTC)

We should continue to use whatever type of units were in this article before the other article was merged into it. Ditto for spelling, etc.. --Athol Mullen (talk) 04:21, 10 August 2008 (UTC)

Wrt the long discussion at Talk:44-gallon_drum, I note that "55 gallon drum" now returns 158,000 finds in Google vs. 592,000 for "44 gallon drum". I can't understand how the situation reversed, but that's what I see. 130.133.86.231 (talk) 17:25, 12 March 2010 (UTC)

3/4" and 2" pipe sized bung holes

A minor point, before someone tries to convert 3/4" and 2" to metric. The sizes mentioned are actually pipe sizes, based on the nominal inside diameter of standard iron pipe as it developed over the years. The actual size is about 1/4" or so larger than that listed. I changed the article to mention the correct nomenclature as NPS.

I also took the liberty of mentioning Polyethylene (spelled diferently in UK non-scientific arenas) as it seems to be the typical plastic used (due to cost and impact resistance etc) abbreviated PE or HDPE. WonderWheeler (talk) 07:18, 14 May 2009 (UTC)

It should be converted to metric using the proper metric designations of Diameter Nominal (DN) in which 3/4 in is DN20 and 2 in is DN50. 68.105.199.216 (talk) 12:40, 20 January 2013 (UTC)

Nominal Capacity

It's been my experience that the nominal capacity (listed capacity) on these drums is 200 Litres, 44 Imperial Gallons, 55 US Gallons. It always stuck me that the original design might have been 200 litres, the "roundest" figure which was then converted to a Nominal Imperial and US Gallon. I think the present Nominal capacity needs to be changed. Any comments? Metricmike (talk) 19:42, 31 May 2010 (UTC)

When such containers are filled in the US, they put in 55 US gallons. In the (now former) Imperial gallon using countries they were filled with 44 Imperial gallons. In metric countries they put in 200 litres. In all cases the containers themselves are identical in all relevant respects - only the ullage varies. Roger (talk) 11:40, 2 June 2010 (UTC)

These drums were originally designed to hold 200 L, but not to the brim. There is an intended 8 L excess space to allow for expansion when the contents are exposed to higher temperatures and to eliminate spillage when the lid is removed. 55 gallons - 208 L would be a fill to the brim, which would overflow and spill easier. If the contents state 55 gallons and it is not a fill to the brim, then the purchased is cheated. 68.105.199.216 (talk) 12:48, 20 January 2013 (UTC)