Why m.N is not a Unit of Torque

In summary, the unit of torque is not m.N because it is defined as rFSinθ, which is not equivalent to 1 Joule even though 1 N.m is equal to 1 Joule. To avoid confusion, we use N.m for torque and Joules for energy. Similarly, other units such as pascals can describe multiple quantities. Historically, the units of work and torque were chosen as 'foot pounds' and 'pound feet', respectively, and this convention was carried over when switching to the metric system. This helps avoid complaints and confusion similar to those surrounding the direction of conventional electrical current.
  • #1
azizlwl
1,066
10
Why unit of torque is not m.N

1.Torque=rFSinθ =>m.N
2. 1 N.m = 1 Joule but 1 N.m in torque ≠ 1 Joule

For the above 2 reasons i reckon it should have unit of m.N.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
hi azizlwl! :smile:

a Newton-metre and a joule are the same thing

but we tend to use one for torque and the other for energy, to avoid confusion :biggrin:

see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joule#Confusion_with_Newton_metre
The use of Newton-metres for torque and joules for energy is useful in helping avoid misunderstandings and miscommunications​

(there are other units that describe more than one thing …

for example, the pascal is a unit both of pressure and of energy density :wink:)
 
  • #3
I read somewhere that we define the unit of torque as N m rather than m N, as the latter makes one want to say 'milli Newton'.
 
  • #4
A 'foot pound' was chosen, historically and arbitrarily, as the unit of work and a 'pound foot' was chosen as the unit of torque. When we went metric, the same convention regarding the order of force and distance was used. If it hadn't, then this forum would be cluttered with complaints about it - just like the whinges regarding the accepted direction of conventional electrical current.
 
  • #5


I would like to clarify that m.N is not a unit of torque because torque is defined as the measure of the force that causes an object to rotate about an axis. It is a vector quantity, meaning it has both magnitude and direction. On the other hand, m.N is a product of two different units - meters and Newtons. It does not have a specific direction and does not represent a rotational force.

Additionally, the unit of torque is not m.N because it does not follow the standard International System of Units (SI). The SI unit of torque is the Newton-meter (N.m), which is derived from the fundamental units of force (N) and distance (m). This unit is equivalent to a Joule (J), which is the unit of work or energy. However, torque and energy are two distinct physical quantities and cannot be used interchangeably.

In summary, the unit of torque is not m.N because it does not accurately represent the physical quantity of torque and does not follow the standard SI system. It is important to use the correct units in scientific measurements to ensure accuracy and consistency.
 

FAQ: Why m.N is not a Unit of Torque

Why is m.N not a unit of torque?

m.N is not a unit of torque because it is a combination of two different units - meters (m) and Newtons (N). Torque is a measurement of the force applied to an object multiplied by the distance from the point of rotation, and it is typically measured in units such as Nm (Newton meters) or lb-ft (pound-feet). Combining meters and Newtons does not result in a valid unit for measuring torque.

Can m.N be converted to a unit of torque?

No, m.N cannot be converted to a unit of torque. As mentioned before, m.N is not a valid unit for measuring torque. To convert from m.N to a unit of torque, you would need to know the force and distance values separately and use the proper conversion formula.

Is m.N a commonly used unit in science?

No, m.N is not a commonly used unit in science. The most commonly used units for torque are Nm and lb-ft, as they directly relate to the force and distance components of torque. Some other units that may be used in specific industries or regions include kg.m (kilogram meters) and oz-in (ounce inches).

What are some examples of when m.N might be used in scientific calculations?

There are no specific examples of when m.N might be used in scientific calculations. If you come across this unit in a scientific context, it is likely a mistake or a non-standard usage. It is important to always double check units and their definitions in scientific calculations to avoid errors.

Can m.N be used interchangeably with Nm or lb-ft?

No, m.N cannot be used interchangeably with Nm or lb-ft. As mentioned before, they are not equivalent units for measuring torque. Using them interchangeably can lead to incorrect calculations and misunderstanding of the force and distance components of torque. Always use the proper and recognized units for torque in scientific calculations.

Similar threads

Replies
6
Views
1K
Replies
9
Views
906
Replies
7
Views
2K
Replies
1
Views
2K
Replies
7
Views
1K
Replies
9
Views
1K
Replies
3
Views
5K
Replies
10
Views
747
Back
Top