Author Topic: ft/lbs versus lb/ft  (Read 2139 times)

AZRedhawk44

  • friends
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 13,987
ft/lbs versus lb/ft
« on: September 15, 2010, 10:39:56 AM »
Ammo "energy" is measured in ft/lbs on the box.

However, energy = mass * velocity^2.

Torque is often referenced as ft/lbs.

What is the difference between Torque and Energy?  Why is ammo presented incorrectly?
"But whether the Constitution really be one thing, or another, this much is certain - that it has either authorized such a government as we have had, or has been powerless to prevent it. In either case, it is unfit to exist."
--Lysander Spooner

I reject your authoritah!


Regolith

  • friend
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 6,171
Re: ft/lbs versus lb/ft
« Reply #2 on: September 15, 2010, 10:45:49 AM »
Torque is a vector, while energy is a scalar. Hence, ft-lbs is used for energy and lbs-ft is used for torque in order to keep the two from getting confused.
The price of freedom is eternal vigilance. - Thomas Jefferson

Necessity is the plea for every infringement of human freedom. It is the argument of tyrants; it is the creed of slaves. - William Pitt the Younger

Perfectly symmetrical violence never solved anything. - Professor Hubert J. Farnsworth

280plus

  • friend
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 19,131
  • Ever get that sinking feeling?
Re: ft/lbs versus lb/ft
« Reply #3 on: September 15, 2010, 10:49:05 AM »
Wait, now I'm confused...  =|
Avoid cliches like the plague!

Jim147

  • friends
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 7,606
Re: ft/lbs versus lb/ft
« Reply #4 on: September 15, 2010, 10:55:17 AM »
Maybe we should put it all in newton meters.

jim
Sometimes we carry more weight then we owe.
And sometimes goes on and on and on.

BAH-WEEP-GRAAAGHNAH WHEEP NI-NI BONG

Regolith

  • friend
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 6,171
Re: ft/lbs versus lb/ft
« Reply #5 on: September 15, 2010, 10:56:26 AM »
Ft-lbs is often used interchangeably for both torque and energy.  Since this got confusing, it was proposed that pound-foot (lbs-ft) be used for torque, and ft-lbs for energy.  Sometimes this is followed, sometimes its not.  Which makes it more confusing, actually.

But, AFAIK, lbs-foot is supposed to be used only for torque.
The price of freedom is eternal vigilance. - Thomas Jefferson

Necessity is the plea for every infringement of human freedom. It is the argument of tyrants; it is the creed of slaves. - William Pitt the Younger

Perfectly symmetrical violence never solved anything. - Professor Hubert J. Farnsworth

Tallpine

  • friends
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 23,172
  • Grumpy Old Grandpa
Re: ft/lbs versus lb/ft
« Reply #6 on: September 15, 2010, 11:45:03 AM »
Quote
pound-foot (lbs-ft)

Sounds painful  :O
Freedom is a heavy load, a great and strange burden for the spirit to undertake. It is not easy. It is not a gift given, but a choice made, and the choice may be a hard one. The road goes upward toward the light; but the laden traveller may never reach the end of it.  - Ursula Le Guin

280plus

  • friend
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 19,131
  • Ever get that sinking feeling?
Re: ft/lbs versus lb/ft
« Reply #7 on: September 15, 2010, 11:50:54 AM »
Pounds -shoe : the amount of energy expended by one mad Russian pounding a table with his shoe while screaming, "We will bury you!!"

 =D
Avoid cliches like the plague!

sanglant

  • friend
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 3,475
Re: ft/lbs versus lb/ft
« Reply #8 on: September 15, 2010, 06:38:00 PM »
pound shoe, i thought that was what you threw at the politician that had just insulted your honor. :laugh:

drewtam

  • friend
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 1,985
Re: ft/lbs versus lb/ft
« Reply #9 on: September 15, 2010, 07:57:44 PM »
Ammo "energy" is measured in ft/lbs on the box.

However, energy = mass * velocity^2.

Torque is often referenced as ft/lbs.

What is the difference between Torque and Energy?  Why is ammo presented incorrectly?

Ammo is not presented incorrectly. Energy is also force * distance. In this case, the distance is not a lever arm like torque! The distance is the how far the force pushed a mass. If you exert 1lb of force on a block, and move it 1 ft across the ground... then you transferred 1lb-ft of energy. In this example the energy was dissipated by the friction of the ground.

Torque is force perpendicular to the lever arm. Torque units can be more clearly expressed by using a perpendicular sign between the force and the distance, i.e.  lbs_|_ft  or  N_|_m.
Most technical papers use the short hand N_m for torque.

Its confusing because we don't use the metric system. Force, mass, torque, and energy are all very confusing in the english system because they were in use before modern definitions were established and so they blur the old definitions with the modern.

Metric...
measures of Energy: joules, kilo joules, kilo watt - hour
measures of torque: Nm
I’m not saying I invented the turtleneck. But I was the first person to realize its potential as a tactical garment. The tactical turtleneck! The… tactleneck!

zahc

  • friend
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 5,803
Re: ft/lbs versus lb/ft
« Reply #10 on: September 15, 2010, 08:52:10 PM »
Except, you will find Nm used for energy fairly often. In fact, everyone besides scientists seems to be allergic to using Joules, like nobody will understand what they are if they say "Joules". So we pay for electricity in Watt-hours, and photographic strobes are rated in Watt-s. Battery capacities are unhelpfully given in Amp-hours (voltage being assumed/unknown) and all of these quantities could simply be expressed in Joules.
Maybe a rare occurence, but then you only have to get murdered once to ruin your whole day.
--Tallpine