Lb/f to kn/m and not consistent

  • Thread starter violt
  • Start date
In summary, the conversation discusses the conversion of weight measurements from pounds per cubic feet to kiloNewtons per meter. It also mentions a discrepancy in the calculation, which may be due to an error in the conversion of meters to feet.
  • #1
violt
7
0
I'm trying to convert lb/f to kn/m.
A concrete has weight of 23.54 kiloNewton/cubic meter which is equal to 150 pounds per cubic feet.

For a beam with the following dimensions
width = 0.3m = 0.84 feet
depth = 0.5m = 1.9685 feet

for the beam weight per meter in metric, it is 23.54*0.3*0.5=3.531 kn/m
for the beam weight per foot in english, it is 150*0.98*1.96=290.62 lb/foot

But if I convert 290.62 lb/foot to kn/m. I don't get 3.531kn/m but 4.240181 kn/m
here's the calculation

290.62 lb/f * 3.28 f/m * 1kn/224.8lb = 4.24 kn/m

why not 3.531 kn/m??

Note this is not a homework. Thanks.
 
Mathematics news on Phys.org
  • #2
I didn't check the calculation, but I noticed you wrote 0.84 feet for the width but used 0.98 feet in a calculation a few lines down. Maybe that is where the error lies?
 
  • #3
I don't know where you got your meter and feet conversions from, but they are in error.

1 meter = 39.37 in. = 3.2808 ft.

1 foot = .305 m
 
  • #4
i got the error. It's formula in my excel which uses 0.6m instead of 0.5m. Anyway, thanks
 
  • #5


I can understand your confusion and frustration with the inconsistency in the conversion between lb/f and kn/m. This is likely due to rounding errors and conversion factors used in the calculations. It is important to note that converting between different units can sometimes result in slightly different values due to the use of different conversion factors and precision in calculations. In this case, the difference between 3.531 kn/m and 4.24 kn/m may be due to the use of different conversion factors for lb/f to kn/m. It is always important to double check your calculations and use the most accurate conversion factors available. Additionally, it may be helpful to consult with a conversion chart or use an online unit converter to ensure accuracy in your conversions.
 

Related to Lb/f to kn/m and not consistent

1. What is the conversion rate from pound-force per square inch (lb/f) to kilonewton per square meter (kn/m)?

The conversion rate from lb/f to kn/m is 0.00689476. This means that for every 1 lb/f, there are approximately 0.00689476 kn/m.

2. Why is it important to convert units consistently?

Converting units consistently is important because it allows for accurate and meaningful comparisons between measurements. In scientific research and engineering, precise measurements are crucial and inconsistent units can lead to errors or miscalculations.

3. How do I convert from lb/f to kn/m?

To convert from lb/f to kn/m, you can use the conversion rate of 0.00689476 or you can use an online unit conversion calculator. Simply enter the value in lb/f and select kn/m as the desired unit.

4. Are there any other units that can be used to measure force and pressure?

Yes, there are many other units that can be used to measure force and pressure. Some common units include newtons (N), pascals (Pa), and pounds per square inch (psi). It is important to use the correct units for the specific application or calculation.

5. Can units of force and pressure be converted to units of mass?

No, units of force and pressure cannot be directly converted to units of mass. Force is a measure of the amount of energy needed to change an object's motion, while mass is a measure of the amount of matter in an object. They are two separate physical quantities and cannot be converted to one another.

Similar threads

Replies
4
Views
5K
  • Introductory Physics Homework Help
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • Engineering and Comp Sci Homework Help
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • Introductory Physics Homework Help
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • Mechanics
Replies
13
Views
12K
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • Mechanics
Replies
17
Views
6K
  • MATLAB, Maple, Mathematica, LaTeX
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • MATLAB, Maple, Mathematica, LaTeX
Replies
5
Views
2K
Back
Top