Quality feet for cutting boards

[Bob D.]

The durometer of plastics/rubbers is usually measured in Shore hardness.

I would say that the black rubber ones were about 50 on the Shore A scale:

A larger image is in the link.
https://capitalrubber.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/10/DUROMETER-CHART-CRC.pdf

Could they make it any more confusing please?

Three offset overlapping scales, each ranged from 10 to 100.

Why not just one that runs from 0 (some ultimate squishiness to be determined), to 1000 (whatever you want to designate as the hardest known pliable material of the class). Plenty of room on that scale for everything to coexist.

All the current system does is when someone gives you a durometer number you have to ask "which scale". Leads to confusion and increases the probability of inaccurate interpretation. Reminds me of the NASA/Lockheed screw up with the metric system on the MARS Climate Orbiter back in 1998.

 

[Cheese]

Could they make it any more confusing please?

Three offset overlapping scales, each ranged from 10 to 100.

Why not just one that runs from 0 (some ultimate squishiness to be determined), to 1000 (whatever you want to designate as the hardest known pliable material of the class). Plenty of room on that scale for everything to coexist.

All the current system does is when someone gives you a durometer number you have to ask "which scale". Leads to confusion and increases the probability of inaccurate interpretation. Reminds me of the NASA/Lockheed screw up with the metric system on the MARS Climate Orbiter back in 1998.

It's probably left over baggage from the Rockwell hardness standards that were established prior to the Shore "softness" standards. I know there are at least 4 different Rockwell scales...maybe more.

 

[Packard]

Could they make it any more confusing please?

Three offset overlapping scales, each ranged from 10 to 100.

Why not just one that runs from 0 (some ultimate squishiness to be determined), to 1000 (whatever you want to designate as the hardest known pliable material of the class). Plenty of room on that scale for everything to coexist.

All the current system does is when someone gives you a durometer number you have to ask "which scale". Leads to confusion and increases the probability of inaccurate interpretation. Reminds me of the NASA/Lockheed screw up with the metric system on the MARS Climate Orbiter back in 1998.

It's probably left over baggage from the Rockwell hardness standards that were established prior to the Shore "softness" standards. I know there are at least 4 different Rockwell scales...maybe more.

I posted the image because it represents some degree of reference. 

We have Fahrenheit, Celsius, Kelvin, and Rankine temperature scales.  I think in Fahrenheit for temperature but in Kelvin for color.  Others go through their entire lives without ever thinking of Kelvin temperatures. 

I have to convert to Celsius though I know what 0 and 100 mean.  Rankine means nothing at all to me, though I know it is the equivalent of Kelvin in relation to Fahrenheit. 

The only point is that we need these scales.  We have Mohs scales, Rockwell scales, Brinell and Janko hardness scales. 

In our business, we use Rockwell hardness tests.  We always specify the scale we are using.  Almost always the 'C' scale for our work.  When we harden our tool steel it gets in the 60-65 C range.

 

[Bob D.]

I thank you for posting the graphic. First time I had seen the three alongside one another.

It just struck me as unnecessary to have three scales for to measure the same thing.