Why is the Conversion Factor for kg-force 0.1?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Karol
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    System Units
AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on the conversion factor for kilogram-force (kgf) and its relationship to mass measurements. It clarifies that 1 kgf is equivalent to the weight of 1 kg of mass under Earth's gravity, which is approximately 10 N. The confusion arises from the distinction between kg-mass and kg, leading to incorrect conversions. Participants emphasize that using different measurement systems can complicate calculations, particularly when converting between kg-mass and kg-force. Ultimately, the consensus is that the kilogram-force unit should be avoided for clarity in scientific contexts.
Karol
Messages
1,380
Reaction score
22

Homework Statement


The specific mass of iron doesn´t seem right in the technical system.
Iron is about 8[gr/cm3]
I know the weight of 1[m3] steel is about 8 tons.

Homework Equations


The definition of the kilogram-force unit in the tehnical system is the weight of a mass of 1 kilogram:
1[kgf]=>1[kg]x10

The Attempt at a Solution

`
That was the definition, now:
1[kgf]=0.1[kg-mass]x10
=>1[kg]=0.1[kg-mass]
8[gr/cm3]=8000[kg/m3]
I have to divide the mass with 10 to get gk-mass:
8000[kg/m3]=800[kg-mass/m3]
And in a book it´s written that a certain metal wire has a density of 10,300[kg-mass/m3]
So my solution is about 10 times too low
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Karol said:

Homework Statement


The specific mass of iron doesn´t seem right in the technical system.
Iron is about 8[gr/cm3]
I know the weight of 1[m3] steel is about 8 tons.

Homework Equations


The definition of the kilogram-force unit in the tehnical system is the weight of a mass of 1 kilogram:
1[kgf]=>1[kg]x10

The Attempt at a Solution

`
That was the definition, now:
1[kgf]=0.1[kg-mass]x10
=>1[kg]=0.1[kg-mass]
8[gr/cm3]=8000[kg/m3]
I have to divide the mass with 10 to get gk-mass:
8000[kg/m3]=800[kg-mass/m3]
And in a book it´s written that a certain metal wire has a density of 10,300[kg-mass/m3]
So my solution is about 10 times too low
one kgf (which is not an SI unit) is the weight of one kg of mass on planet earth.
A kilogram of mass (designated as kg) has a weight of about 9.8 Newtons (call it 10 N) in SI units. But you are not using SI, so you are dividing by 10 when you shouldn't be.
 
I don´t talk about Newtons, only kg and kg-mass.
If 1[kgf]=0.1[kg-mass]x10 is correct (is it?) and with the definition of kgf, then to convert from kg-mass to kg i have to multiply by ten, no?
 
Karol said:
I don´t talk about Newtons, only kg and kg-mass.
If 1[kgf]=0.1[kg-mass]x10 is correct (is it?) and with the definition of kgf, then to convert from kg-mass to kg i have to multiply by ten, no?
No, that is not correct. A kg-mass and a kg are one and the same. If you multiply kg-mass , which is a kg, by 10 (or actually 9.8 m/sec^2, let's use 10), you get the weight of one kg in the SI unit of Newtons, on Earth.

It gets very confusing when using different systems of measure like SI, metric, technical, or Imperial units.

A kg of force is actually F = (m/g)(a), where m is in kilograms, g is 10, and a is the acceleration in m/sec^2. On Earth, when you calculate the weight of 1 kg of mass, the acceleration is g or 10 m/sec^2, so the equation becomes F = (m/g)(g), the g's cancel, so F =m. That is , one kg of mass weighs one kg of force, on Earth. The book answer is correct.
 
Why is F=(m/g)a? especially why (m/g)? does it come from the definition of kg-force?
 
Karol said:
Why is F=(m/g)a? especially why (m/g)? does it come from the definition of kg-force?
yes, it's a conversion factor. Another way to look at it is to rewrite Newtons 2nd Law as
F = kma and W = kmg. m is in kg and a or g is in m/s^2. If you want your force or weight in Newtons , k= 1. If you want your force or weight in kg-force, k = 0.1 (in round numbers). The kg- force unit should be avoided whenever possible.
 
I multiplied the values first without the error limit. Got 19.38. rounded it off to 2 significant figures since the given data has 2 significant figures. So = 19. For error I used the above formula. It comes out about 1.48. Now my question is. Should I write the answer as 19±1.5 (rounding 1.48 to 2 significant figures) OR should I write it as 19±1. So in short, should the error have same number of significant figures as the mean value or should it have the same number of decimal places as...
Thread 'Calculation of Tensile Forces in Piston-Type Water-Lifting Devices at Elevated Locations'
Figure 1 Overall Structure Diagram Figure 2: Top view of the piston when it is cylindrical A circular opening is created at a height of 5 meters above the water surface. Inside this opening is a sleeve-type piston with a cross-sectional area of 1 square meter. The piston is pulled to the right at a constant speed. The pulling force is(Figure 2): F = ρshg = 1000 × 1 × 5 × 10 = 50,000 N. Figure 3: Modifying the structure to incorporate a fixed internal piston When I modify the piston...
Thread 'A cylinder connected to a hanging mass'
Let's declare that for the cylinder, mass = M = 10 kg Radius = R = 4 m For the wall and the floor, Friction coeff = ##\mu## = 0.5 For the hanging mass, mass = m = 11 kg First, we divide the force according to their respective plane (x and y thing, correct me if I'm wrong) and according to which, cylinder or the hanging mass, they're working on. Force on the hanging mass $$mg - T = ma$$ Force(Cylinder) on y $$N_f + f_w - Mg = 0$$ Force(Cylinder) on x $$T + f_f - N_w = Ma$$ There's also...
Back
Top