Lb/f to kn/m and not consistent

  • Context: Undergrad 
  • Thread starter Thread starter violt
  • Start date Start date
Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion centers on the conversion of lb/f to kn/m, specifically addressing discrepancies in calculated values for beam weight. The concrete density is established at 23.54 kN/m³, equivalent to 150 lb/ft³. Calculations for beam weight yield 3.531 kN/m using metric dimensions and 290.62 lb/ft using imperial dimensions. However, converting 290.62 lb/ft to kN/m results in 4.240181 kN/m, indicating an error in the initial metric calculations, attributed to incorrect dimensional inputs in Excel.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of unit conversions between imperial and metric systems
  • Familiarity with concrete density measurements (kN/m³ and lb/ft³)
  • Basic knowledge of beam weight calculations
  • Proficiency in using Excel for mathematical computations
NEXT STEPS
  • Research unit conversion formulas for lb/f to kN/m
  • Learn about concrete density and its implications in structural engineering
  • Explore common errors in dimensional analysis and how to avoid them
  • Investigate advanced Excel functions for accurate engineering calculations
USEFUL FOR

Structural engineers, civil engineers, and anyone involved in material weight calculations and conversions in construction projects.

violt
Messages
7
Reaction score
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
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?
 
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
 
i got the error. It's formula in my excel which uses 0.6m instead of 0.5m. Anyway, thanks
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
6K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
15K
  • · Replies 17 ·
Replies
17
Views
7K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K