Vous êtes sur la page 1sur 21

TOKYO

DISNEYLAND'S
SPACE MOUNTAIN
DERAILMENT:THE
SPACE MOUNTAIN
ROLLER COASTER
RIDE BROKE AN
AXLE DURING THE
MIDDLE OF THE
RIDE CAUSING ONE
OF THE TWO
ROLLER COASTER
CARS TO DERAIL ON
JUNE 26, 2004.

MOHD DZUL EFFENDI


BIN MOHD NOOR
G02990
EMM5023 RELIABILITY ASSESSMENT
OF STRUCTURE

TABLE OF CONTENTS

1.0 INTRODUCTION .................................................................................................................... 2


2.0 CAUSE OF THE SPACE MOUNTAIN INCIDENT ...................................................................... 3
2.1 Cause Of The Incident ...................................................................................................... 3
2.2 Countermeasures And Plan For Improvement ................................................................ 4
2.3 Tentative Schedule For Reopening The Attraction .......................................................... 5
3.0 A DEPENDABILITY CASE FOR GLOBAL UNIFICATION OF MEASUREMENT SYSTEMS ........... 5
4.0 THE TRANSITION CHALLENGES ............................................................................................ 7
5.0 ADDITIONAL INFORMATION FOR MEASUREMENT UNITS................................................... 9
5.1 Advantages Of Si Units ..................................................................................................... 9
5.2 Advantages Of The English System ................................................................................ 16
6.0 CONCLUSION ...................................................................................................................... 19
7.0 REFERENCES ....................................................................................................................... 20

1.0 INTRODUCTION
Space Mountain is a roller coaster attraction in Tomorrowland at Tokyo Disneyland
at the Tokyo Disney Resort in Urayasu, Chiba, Japan. It opened on April 15, 1983, Tokyo
Disneyland's opening day. It is the first Space Mountain attraction to open on the same day
as the park it is located in. The track layout of Tokyo Disneyland's Space Mountain is
identical to that of Space Mountain at Disneyland, and was thematically identical to the
1977 Disneyland version until 2006, when the attraction was closed for refurbishment.
Space Mountain reopened with an updated, more futuristic theme, on April 28, 2007.
SPACE MOUNTAIN

Tokyo Disneyland
Land

Tomorrowland

Designer

WED Enterprises

Manufacturer

WED Enterprises

Attraction type

Roller coaster

Theme

Spaceflight

Propulsion method

Chain lift

Opening date

April 15, 1983

Vehicle capacity

12

Cars per vehicle

Guests per car

Ride duration

2:45 minutes

Length

3035 ft (925.1 m)

Track height

75 ft (22.9 m)

Maximum speed

32 mph (51.5 km/h)

Height requirements

40" (102 cm)

Number of lifts

Sponsored by

The Coca-Cola Company of Japan

On December 5, 2003, a roller coaster train derailed as it was returning to the


station. No riders were injured, and the ride was closed pending an investigation. In January
2004, an investigation completed by Oriental Land Company, the park's owner/operator,
determined that an axle on the train had failed because its diameter was smaller than the
specifications for the part required. The attraction re-opened in February 2004, after 17
park officials were reprimanded for the incident.

2.0 CAUSE OF THE SPACE MOUNTAIN INCIDENT


Oriental Land Co., Ltd. announces the completion of the investigation into the
incident which occurred on December 5, 2003 at the Tokyo Disneyland attraction Space
Mountain. The attraction is scheduled to reopen in mid-February upon implementation of
the required improvements.

2.1 CAUSE OF THE INCIDENT


2.1.1 DIRECT CAUSE OF THE AXLE BREAKAGE
The incident occurred when the axle of the ride vehicle's rear wheels broke, causing
the vehicle to derail during the operation of the attraction. Detailed analysis and
investigation were conducted focusing on the cause of the breakage. It was determined that
the gap between the axle which broke and its bearing exceeded the design specification.
This wider-than-specified gap resulted in excess play between the axle and its bearing and
3

caused more vibration than normal during the operation of the vehicle, placing excessive
stress on the installation screw nut at the tip of the axle. This fatigue fracture of the axle was
the direct cause of the breakage.
While the design specifies that the gap between axle and its bearing should be about
0.2 mm, the actual gap in this case was over 1 mm.

2.1.2 REASON FOR THE GAP BEING WIDER THAN DESIGNED


The axle that broke was one of 30 axles received in October 2002. All 30 axles were
thinner than the design specification, which resulted in the gap between the axles and their
bearings to be greater than the specified width. This abnormal situation occurred due the
following:
In September 1995, the design specification for the size of the axle bearing for Space
Mountain vehicles was changed from inches to the metric scale. Accordingly, the axle
diameter was also changed, in this case from 44.14mm to 45.00mm. However, appropriate
action to revise and maintain the design drawings was neglected. Consequently, two
different drawings existed within our company after the changes were made and the old
drawing showing the 44.14 mm diameter was used to order (in August 2002) the axles that
were delivered in October 2002. It has been confirmed that other axles ordered and
delivered between September 1995 and October 2002 were all of the required size
(45.00mm).

2.2 COUNTERMEASURES AND PLAN FOR IMPROVEMENT


The following countermeasures have been or are being implemented to prevent the
recurrence of this type of incident.
1. Countermeasures:
Immediate safety inspection of all roller-coaster-type attractions (implementation
completed). Checking of validity and conformity of the design drawings of the vehicle parts
vital to the running of roller-coaster-type attractions (implementation completed). Re4

education of maintenance staff for ride-type attractions regarding safety and quality control
(now being implemented).
2. Improvements:
Reinforcement of control and management by newly establishing a "Ride Control Group" to
be responsible for a unified system of ordering, inspection upon delivery and quality control
of important ride vehicle parts as well as maintenance of design drawings (implementation
completed). Thorough use of gauges made exclusively for measuring the axle and hole
diameters at the work site (now being implemented). Strengthening of the said axles (now
being implemented).

2.3 TENTATIVE SCHEDULE FOR REOPENING THE ATTRACTION


Space Mountain will reopen upon confirmation of safe operation through
implementation of the above measures and thorough testing. At this point, the attraction is
scheduled to restart operations in mid-February.
Oriental Land Co., Ltd. sincerely apologizes for causing concern and inconvenience to
so many of its Guests and the general public due to the Space Mountain derailment
incident. We are determined that this type of incident will not happen again and will make
every effort to continue to build the public's trust regarding the safe operation of our Parks.

3.0 A DEPENDABILITY CASE FOR GLOBAL UNIFICATION OF


MEASUREMENT SYSTEMS
The growth of technology and the resulting sociotechnical systems makes the
consequences of potential accidents increasingly devastating for health, safety and
environment. Therefore, every reasonable effort must be made to reduce risk by reducing
the probability of occurrence, which can largely be done by removing causes of these
failures. Figure 1 contains a fault tree depicting three types of measurement conversion
errors. There are various types of inadequacy of these measurements, from insufficient
precision of the instruments used, to improper measuring units associated with the
5

measurement, to errors in conversion between measurement units from the same system
or different systems of measurement, or due to different reference systems.
The errors that come from instruments cannot be completely eliminated, but can be
reduced, while the errors related to measurement systems can be eliminated. More
precisely, all of the following types of faults and resulting potentially hazardous failures can
and should be eliminated, as soon as practically possible:

Incorrect units input/output between two different measurement systems

Incorrect conversion of units between two different measurement systems

Incorrect conversion between units of the same measurement system


By applying ALARP (As Low As Reasonably Practicable) at the socio-technical-system

level (country/state), the appropriate risk mitigation for the first three types of faults
which are also represented in the fault tree (see Figure 1) would be the elimination of the
cause and, hence, the hazard altogether.
This means eliminating the need to convert from one measurement system to
another by adopting a single common system that is universally accepted. Assuming that,
sooner or later, all countries would have to adopt the globally accepted unique
measurement system, there are only two practical courses of action:

The transition to the global unique measurement system is performed as soon as


practically possible

The transition to the global unique measurement system is not performed, thus
being indefinitely postponed
Through a simple comparative cost benefit analysis of the previously mentioned

alternatives, it is evident that assuming equal benefits the second alternative has a
higher cost because it includes the transition cost of the first alternative, as well as the costs
of non-dependability (including non-safety) incurred by prolonging the dual measurement
system status quo. Therefore, the cost of the first alternative, thus eliminating the hazard, is
not disproportionate with the risk. Arguably, then, the best mitigation is the adoption of one
measurement system to eliminate errors (see Figure 1) due to the use of two different
measurement systems. In addition, if the choice for the unique system would be a purposely
designed measurement system like the metric system, then at least the probability of error

due to incorrect conversion between units of the same measurement system would
decrease as the conversions are more intuitive and straightforward in the metric system.

Figure 1: Measurement Errors Types Fault Tree.

4.0 THE TRANSITION CHALLENGES


All that being said, one could wonder why the transition to the unique metric system
was so long, and why its not completed yet. Based on various studies of social change and
government policy, this kind of change to the fabric of a society is difficult to perform
because:

To begin the transition process, the leaders of the organization (be it a government
or a corporation) have to convince many stakeholders to buy in.

Transition has a non-zero cost and nobody wants to bear it.

After the transition has begun, social and individual inertia, and the power of habit,
have to be overcome.
To make matters worse, these transition challenges create an additional negative

side effect, as they make it more likely that conversion errors will occur during the period of
adaptation, simply due to the fact that the old and new systems of measurement will be
used in parallel for a while, at least in peoples minds.
Despite these transition difficulties and the increased risk associated with the
transition itself, there is no advantage in delaying the transition because:

It was quite clear, at least for the last half-century, that eventually all countries
would have to switch to the metric system, which is the international standard. The
transition is a necessary evil for all.

Delaying the transition prolongs unnecessarily the window of exposure of the


sociotechnical system (country, company) to a higher risk than would exist after the
transition, which is also undesirable and unjustifiable.

Transition risk might increase in time due to the overall increased complexity of a
society viewed as systems of systems, where the multiplication of systems leads to
an increase in the level of sophistication of the systems, as well as the increase of
interconnectivity between those systems. Some possible mitigation for the risks
arising during measurement system transition have been proposed and used in
practice: e.g., dual listing and signage.

5.0 ADDITIONAL INFORMATION FOR MEASUREMENT UNITS


5.1 ADVANTAGES OF SI UNITS

Table 1: Si unit and categories


SI is one of the largest systems of unit. It has many advantages over other system of
units like MKS or FPS or CGS. Few of them are enlisted below:
1. SI is a coherent system of units i.e. a system based on a certain set of
fundamental units, from which all derived units are obtained by multiplication or
division without introducing numerical factors i.e. units of a given quantity are
related to one another by powers of 10.
2. SI is a rational system of units, as it assigns only one unit to a particular physical
quantity.
3. For example joule is the unit for all types of energy. This is not so in other
systems of units. e.g. in MKS system, mechanical energy is in joule, heat energy is
in calorie and electric energy is in watt hour.
4. SI is an absolute system of units. There are no gravitational units on the system.
The use of factor g is thus eliminated.
5. S.1 is a metric system i.e. the multiples and sub multiples of units are expressed
as powers of 10.
6. In current electricity, the absolute units on the S.I, like ampere for current, volt
for potential difference, ohm for resistance, Henry for inductance, farad for
capacity arid so on, happen to be the practical units for measurement of these
quantities.
7. SI is an internationally accepted system
9

All systems of weights and measures, metric and non-metric are linked through a
network of international agreements supporting the International System of Units. The
International System is called the SI, using the first two initials of its French name Systme
International d'Units.

The key agreement is the Treaty of the Meter, signed in Paris on

May 20, 1875. Forty-eight nations have now signed this treaty, including all the major
industrialized countries. The United States is a charter member of this metric club, having
signed the original document back in 1875.
The SI is maintained by a small agency in Paris, the International Bureau of Weights
and Measures (BIPM, for Bureau International des Poids et Mesures), and it is updated
every few years by an international conference, the General Conference on Weights and
Measures (CGPM, for Confrence Gnrale des Poids et Mesures), attended by
representatives of all the industrial countries and international scientific and engineering
organizations. As BIPM states on its web site, "the SI is not static but evolves to match the
world's increasingly demanding requirements for measurement."
At the heart of the SI is a short list of base units defined in an absolute way without
referring to any other units. The base units are consistent with the part of the metric
system called the MKS system. In all there are seven SI base units:
1.

the meter for distance,

2.

the kilogram for mass,

3.

the second for time,

4.

the ampere for electric current,

5.

the kelvin for temperature,

6.

the mole for amount of substance, and

7.

the candela for intensity of light.

Other SI units, called SI derived units, are defined algebraically in terms of these
fundamental units. For example, the SI unit of force, the newton, is defined to be the force
that accelerates a mass of one kilogram at the rate of one meter per second per second.
This means the newton is equal to one kilogram meter per second squared, so the algebraic
relationship is N = kg.m/s2. Currently there are 22 SI derived units. They include:
1.

the radian and steradian for plane and solid angles, respectively;
10

2.

the newton for force and the Pascal for pressure;

3.

the joule for energy and the watt for power;

4.

the degree Celsius for everyday measurement of temperature;

5.

units for measurement of electricity: the coulomb (charge), volt (potential), farad
(capacitance), ohm (resistance), and Siemens (conductance);

6.

units for measurement of magnetism: the weber (flux), tesla (flux density), and
henry (inductance);

7.

the lumen for flux of light and the lux for luminance;

8.

the hertz for frequency of regular events and the Becquerel for rates of
radioactivity and other random events;

9.

the gray and Sievert for radiation dose; and

10.

the katal, a unit of catalytic activity used in biochemistry. Future meetings of the
CGPM may make additions to this list; the katal was just added in 1999.
The General Conference on Weights are Measures has replaced all but one of the

definitions of its base (fundamental) units based on physical objects (such as standard meter
sticks or standard kilogram bars) with physical descriptions of the units based on stable
properties of the Universe.
For example, the second, the base unit of time, is now defined as that period of time
in which the waves of radiation emitted by caesium atoms, under specified conditions,
display exactly 9 192 631 770 cycles. The meter, the base unit of distance, is defined by
stating that the speed of light, a universal physical constant, is exactly 299 792 458 meters
per second. These physical definitions allow scientists to reconstruct meter standards or
standard clocks anywhere in the world, or even on other planets, without referring to a
physical object kept in a vault somewhere.
In fact, the kilogram is the only base unit still defined by a physical object. The
International Bureau of Weights and Measures (BIPM) keeps the world's standard kilogram
in Paris, and all other weight standards, such as those of Britain and the United States, are
weighed against this standard kilogram.
This one physical standard is still used because scientists can weigh objects very
accurately. Weight standards in other countries can be adjusted to the Paris standard
kilogram with an accuracy of one part per hundred million. So far, no one has figured out
11

how to define the kilogram in any other way that can be reproduced with better accuracy
than this.
The 21st General Conference on Weights and Measures, meeting in October 1999,
passed a resolution calling on national standards laboratories to press forward with research
to "link the fundamental unit of mass to fundamental or atomic constants with a view to a
future redefinition of the kilogram." The next General Conference, in 2003, will surely
return to this issue.

Following are the official definitions of the seven base units, as given by BIPM.

1.

Meter (m) distance "The metre is the length of the path traveled by light in
vacuum during a time interval of 1/299 792 458 of a second."

2.

Kilogram (kg) mass "The kilogram is equal to the mass of the international
prototype of the kilogram."

3.

Second (s) time "The second is the duration of 9 192 631 770 periods of the
radiation corresponding to the transition between the two hyperfine levels of the
ground state of the caesium 133 atom."

4.

ampere (A) electric current "The ampere is that constant current which, if
maintained in two straight parallel conductors of infinite length, of negligible
circular cross-section, and placed 1 metre apart in vacuum, would produce
between these conductors a force equal to 2 10-7 newton per metre of
length."

5.

Kelvin (K) temperature "The kelvin is the fraction 1/273.16 of the thermodynamic
temperature of the triple point of water."

6.

Mole (mol) amount of substance "The mole is the amount of substance of a


system which contains as many elementary entities as there are atoms in 0.012
kilogram of carbon 12. When the mole is used, the elementary entities must be
specified and may be atoms, molecules, ions, electrons, other particles, or
specified groups of such particles."

7.

Candela (cd) intensity of light "The candela is the luminous intensity, in a given
direction, of a source that emits monochromatic radiation of frequency 540
12

1012 hertz and that has a radiant intensity in that direction of 1/683 watt per
steradian."
Now to explain the English Customary Weights and Measures. Here you will find
that the English units are rich in history and customs. In all traditional measuring systems,
short distance units are based on the dimensions of the human body. The inch represents
the width of a thumb; in fact, in many languages, the word for "inch" is also the word for
"thumb." The foot (12 inches) was originally the length of a human foot, although it has
evolved to be longer than most people's feet. The yard (3 feet) seems to have gotten its
start in England as the name of a 3-foot measuring stick, but it is also understood to be the
distance from the tip of the nose to the end of the middle finger of the outstretched hand.
Finally, if you stretch your arms out to the sides as far as possible, your total "arm span,"
from one fingertip to the other, is a fathom (6 feet). A lot of different units for a measure of
length, wouldnt you agree?
Historically, there are many other "natural units" or English units of the same kind,
including the digit (the width of a finger, 0.75 inch), the nail (length of the last two joints of
the middle finger, 3 digits or 2.25 inches), the palm (width of the palm, 3 inches), the hand
(4 inches), the shaftment (width of the hand and outstretched thumb, 2 palms or 6 inches),
the span (width of the outstretched hand, from the tip of the thumb to the tip of the little
finger, 3 palms or 9 inches), and the cubit (length of the forearm, 18 inches). And the
different English customary units and their differences continue to grow.
In Anglo-Saxon England (before the Norman conquest of 1066), short distances seem
to have been measured in several ways. The inch (ynce) was defined to be the length of 3
barleycorns, which is very close to its modern length. Remember that inch was also defined
as the width of a thumb. The shaftment was also frequently used, but it was roughly 6.5
inches long. Several foot units were in use, including a foot equal to 12 inches, a foot equal
to 2 shaftments (13 inches), and the "natural foot" (pes naturalis, an actual foot length,
about 9.8 inches). The fathom was also used, but it did not have a definite relationship to
the other units.
You can see how quickly defining a foot could be come in this time period. When the
Normans arrived, they brought back to England the Roman tradition of a 12-inch foot.
Although no single document on the subject can be found, it appears that during the reign
13

of Henry I (1100-1135) the 12-inch foot became official and the royal government took steps
to make this foot length known. A 12-inch foot was inscribed on the base of a column of St.
Paul's Church in London and measurements in this unit were said to be "by the foot
of St. Paul's". Henry I also appear to have ordered construction of 3-foot standards, which
were called "yards," thus establishing that unit for the first time in England. William of
Malmsebury wrote that the yard was "the measure of his [the king's] own arm," thus
launching the story that the yard was defined to be the distance from the nose to the
fingertip of Henry I. In fact, both the foot and the yard were established on the basis of the
Saxon ynce, the foot being 36 barleycorns and the yard 108.
Meanwhile, all land in England was traditionally measured by the gyrd or rod, an Old
Saxon unit probably equal to 20 "natural feet." The Norman kings had no interest in
changing the length of the rod, since the accuracy of deeds and other land records
depended on that unit. Accordingly, the length of the rod was fixed at 5.5 yards (16.5 feet).
This was not very convenient, but 5.5 yards happened to be the length of the rod as
measured by the 12-inch foot, so nothing could be done about it. In the Saxon landmeasuring system, 40 rods make a furlong (fuhrlang), the length of the traditional furrow
(fuhr) as plowed by ox teams on Saxon farms. These ancient Saxon units, the rod and the
furlong, have come down to us today with essentially no change.
Longer distances in England are traditionally measured in miles. The mile is a Roman
unit, originally defined to be the length of 1000 paces of a Roman legion. A "pace" here
means two steps, right and left, or about 5 feet, so the mile is a unit of roughly 5000 feet.
For a long time no one felt any need to be precise about this, because distances longer than
a furlong did not need to be measured exactly. It just didn't make much difference whether
the next town was 21 or 22 miles away. In medieval England, various mile units seem to
have been used. Eventually, what made the most sense to people was that a mile should
equal 8 furlongs, since the furlong was an English unit roughly equivalent to the Roman
stadium and the Romans had set their mile equal to 8 stadia. This correspondence is not
exact: the furlong is 660 English feet and the stadium is only 625 slightly-shorter Roman
feet.
In 1592, Parliament settled this question by setting the length of the mile at 8
furlongs, which works out to 1760 yards or 5280 feet. This decision completed the English
14

distance system. Since this was just before the settling of the American colonies, British and
American distance units have always been the same. However, other measurements were
not standardized and differences can be seen in these measurements; e.g. weight and
volume
Now for the bottom line to English customary units.

Because of their many

eccentricities, English customary units clearly are more cumbersome to use than metric
units in trade and in science. As metrication proceeds, the English units are less and less in
use. On the other hand, these traditional units are rich in cultural significance. We can
trace their long histories in their names and relationships. We should not forget them, and
it is unlikely that we will, even when Britain and America complete their slow conversion to
the metric system. The American economy of the 22nd Century may be completely metric,
but probably Americans will still call 30 centimetres a "foot" and 1600 meters a "mile."
And how does the use of the metric system over customary English units compare to
trades individuals? Many trades people use only linear measures; therefore, the change is
an easy and positive one for them from three kinds of units (feet, inches, and inchfractions) to one (millimetres). A metric tape measure usually is the only new tool they
require and extensive classroom work is rarely needed to convert inches to feet to yards,
etc.
Plumbing and HVAC personnel must learn the additional metric measures for mass, volume,
pressure, force and temperature; however, most seem to welcome the change to a simpler,
decimal-based system. Electricians, of course, have always worked in the metric world of
volts, amps, and watts.

15

5.2 ADVANTAGES OF THE ENGLISH SYSTEM

Table 2: Units and categories


For any of you familiar with SI, you probably know that the English system of
measurements holds few advantages. So why hasn't the U.S. converted? The primary
advantage to hanging on to the English system is cost of conversion. For example, in 2009,
NASA stated that the conversion of the space shuttle program to SI would cost $370 million.
This was a price tag for which NASA simply did not have the funds. In another example,
when Great Britain began to process for metrification in the 1990s, the estimated cost for
changing all of its road signs was the equivalent of between $1.5 and $1.8 billion.
The second advantage of continuing with the English system is customary usage. For
example, distances in football and baseball are closely linked to feet and yards, and decades
of records are kept in these units. Cooking is another area where customary units in the U.S.
are quarts, cups, ounces, pounds, etc. Finally, our culture is filled with sayings, such as, 'Give
him an inch and he'll take a mile.' It just isn't the same to say, 'Give him 2.54 centimetres
and he will take 1.61 kilometres.'
The United States still uses a system called the U.S. Customary System, which is
based on the English system of measurement. Over the last 200 years, nearly every other
nation of the world has officially adopted SI. Even Great Britain has switched, with a few
16

exceptions. In addition, the scientific world, as well as trade and commerce, uses the metric
system, even in the U.S.
The English system of measurement had a good run, but there are a number of
disadvantages of this system that we will explore in this lesson.
English System of Measurement Defined
What is the English system of measurement? It is a system of weights and measures
that evolved over time and was once the de facto standard throughout much of the world.
The best definition of this system comes with the British Weights and Measures Act of 1824.
This act defined a standardized set of measures for the British Empire, known as the
Imperial Units. Here is a table listing several examples of these:

5.2.1 SELECTED IMPERIAL UNITS (1824)


The complete history of the English system of measurement spans many centuries.
Countless books and articles have been written about this subject, and only a small fraction
of the information will be summarized here. We'll be focusing on a few of the more
interesting cases.
First, length. These units go back to the early Romans who settled in Britain. They
defined a 'mille,' which means '1,000' in Latin, as a distance of 1,000 paces of two steps
each. At about 5 feet per double-pace, a 'mille' became known as a 'mile' and was equal to
5,000 feet. The Romans were also fond of dividing things by 12, so a 12th of a foot in Latin
was an 'uncia,' which later became the 'inch.'
Some of the English units of length came about by decree. For example, there is a
legend that King Henry I, who ruled from 1100 to 1135, announced that a yard would be
defined as the distance from the tip of his nose to the end of his thumb. In the latter part of
the 16th century, Queen Elizabeth I decreed that a mile would be exactly 8 furlongs (a
furlong was 660 feet), which works out to be 5,280 feet. This replaced the previous 5,000foot mile.

17

5.2.2 SECOND CENTURY ROMAN STONE


In the early history of the British Isles, stone weights were used extensively but
varied in value from Scotland to Ireland to England and even county by county. The stone
measure also varied by what was being weighed. For example, a stone of wool might weigh
14 pounds, but a stone of glass might be 5 pounds. Finally, in 1824, the stone was defined as
exactly 14 pounds.
Finally, let's discuss volume. The British gallon was precisely defined by the 1824 Act
as: 'equal in volume to 10 pounds avoirdupois of distilled water weighed at 62 degrees
Fahrenheit with the barometer at 30 inches, or 277.274 cubic inches.' But it was not always
this way. The first dry gallon was described by Edward I in 1303 as eight pounds of wheat.
This led to wide-ranging interpretations and lack of standardization. Finally, Parliament, in
1696, defined a dry gallon to be a cylinder 18.5 inches in diameter and 8 inches deep. The
dry gallon was also called the 'Winchester bushel.' They defined a liquid gallon, also called a
'corn gallon,' to be 268.8 cubic inches, which was exactly 1/8th of the dry gallon.

18

6.0 CONCLUSION
1. Tokyo Disneylands Space Mountain roller coaster came to a sudden halt just before
the end of a ride on December 5, 2003. This startling incident was due a broken axle.
The axle in question fractured because it was smaller than the designs requirement;
because of the incorrect size, the gap between the bearing and the axle was over
1mm when it should have been a mere 0.2mm (to picture this, imagine that the
gap is the thickness of a dime, compared to what it's supposed to be, the thickness
of two sheets of common printer paper). The accumulation of excess vibration and
stress eventually caused it to break. Though the coaster derailed, there were no
injuries. Once again, unit systems caused the accident. In September 1995, the
specifications for the coasters axles and bearings were changed to metric units. In
August 2002, however, the English unit plans prior to 1995 were used to order
44.14mm axels instead of the needed 45mm axels.

2. While diversity may be a desirable safety feature in some cases such as redundant
diverse channels architecture it is definitely not desirable for measurement
systems. The solution to the problem of different measurement systems has existed
for a long time, but due to mostly historic legacy and social, cultural and institutional
inertia, it was slowed at the expense of dependability (safety, availability, security,
etc.) of many systems, with significant costs. A list of arguments has been presented,
supporting global adoption of the metric system as the single measurement system,
as both a way of eliminating risks with no benefit and unnecessary non-quality costs
and their negative impact on the efficiency of the safety

19

7.0 REFERENCES
1. http://disney.wikiaglobal.com/wiki/Space_Mountain_(Tokyo_Disneyland),
02/01/2016.
2. http://www.mouseinfo.com/forums/tokyo-disney-resort/13134-olc-spacemountain-accident-report-released.html, 02/01/2016.
3. http://study.com/academy/lesson/english-system-of-measurement-definitionhistory-advantages-disadvantages.html, 02/01/2016.
4. The Dangers of the Metric Feet Yard Multiple Measurement Systems Usage Effect
on Safety, Emil P. Vlad Melbourne, Victoria, Australia, 02/01/2016

20