Template talk:Convert/Archive August 2012

mpg

Fuel efficiency conversions have trouble reversing the output.

• 10 litres per 100 kilometres (24 mpg_‑US)
• 24 miles per US gallon (10 L/100 km)
• 10 miles per US gallon (24 L/100 km)
• 24 litres per 100 kilometres (10 mpg_‑US)  Stepho  talk  01:25, 21 July 2012 (UTC)

DONE. The subtemplate for "Convert/LoffAoffDflipSoffF" has been created. Thanks for reporting that problem in the very common units "mpgus" and "L/100km". -Wikid77 (talk) 08:15, 21 July 2012 (UTC)

Thanks but I think there may be more missing subtemplates.

• {{Convert|40|mpgus|L/100 km|abbr=on|1|disp=flip}} → 5.9 L/100 km (40 mpg_‑US)  Stepho  talk  07:38, 22 July 2012 (UTC)

For LRC (train)#Into production Something wrong here! 1 mile per US gallon (240 L/100 km), 240 litres per 100 kilometres (1 mpg_‑US)

On second thought, all is OK. Peter Horn User talk 23:56, 12 August 2012 (UTC)

A small bug

Note how the output of {{convert|-50|C|F}} shows a proper minus sign→−50 °C (−58 °F), but {{convert|-35|to|-40|C|F}} does not→−35 to −40 °C (−31 to −40 °F). Unless I'm missing something here, this should be fixed?—Ëzhiki (Igels Hérissonovich Ïzhakoff-Amursky) • (yo?); July 30, 2012; 14:28 (UTC)

• Yes, that has been a long-term problem, so for now, use Template:Convert/2 as an interim solution:

• {{convert/2 |-35|to|-40|°C|F}} → {{convert/2|-35|to|-40|°C|F}}

The result is exactly what is needed. I will try to get the other format corrected soon. -Wikid77 22:38, 13 August 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for the response.—Ëzhiki (Igels Hérissonovich Ïzhakoff-Amursky) • (yo?); August 15, 2012; 15:46 (UTC)

Some wishes I have

First off, I have done some converting in units vaguely known as "volumetric flow rates." While not particularly popular I suppose, I feel they have been neglected. I would like to see "cubic meters per second" convert directly to "US gallons per second" and not just "cubic feet per second." The gallon is just plain ubiquitous, and newspaper and scientific magazines use gallons heavily. I have one example to show you, namely a US mainstream magazine (Popular Mechanics) using source data in m³/s and converting it directly to gal/s in their article... See http://www.popularmechanics.com/technology/engineering/gonzo/4344681 which I use in this edit, seen here: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Water_hammer&diff=505707113&oldid=502679753 In this case, I had to manually add the "per second" due to the missing conversion of

• 256 cubic metres per second (67,600 US gal/s) ... which gives an error,
• while 256 cubic metres per second (9,040 cu ft/s) ... works,
• but 256 cubic metres per second () ... is just plain wrong and should be an error!

Secondly, I keep forgetting how to use significant figures, and the abbreviation "sigfig=x" always escapes me. How about permitting "sd=x" as a synonym for those of us who call it "significant digits"??? I like to saw logs! (talk) 08:30, 4 August 2012 (UTC)

• DONE - The unit-code would be USgal/s and Help:Convert for sigfig: The actual unit-code now to convert U.S. gallons per second is "USgal/s". The example:

• {{convert|256|m3/s|USgal/s |sigfig=3}} → 256 cubic metres per second (67,600 USgal/s)
• {{convert|256|m3/s|impgal/s|sigfig=3}} → 256 cubic metres per second (56,300 impgal/s)

The related unit-code is "impgal/s" as shown above. I apologize that August has been a very slow month for improvements, yet. As for the suggested option ("sd=x"), well that is a good idea (also shorter than "sigfig=x"), but it would take some time to get approved, so meanwhile, perhaps Help:Convert can be changed to emphasize sigfig=3 and similar. -Wikid77 22:38/00:25, 14 August 2012 (UTC)

Ok, but what about the erroneous conversion shown above? Here is the how I did it: {{convert|256|m3/s|ft/s|sigfig=16}} I like to saw logs! (talk) 06:09, 15 August 2012 (UTC)

Time Conversion

Can we have someone add a time conversion between: BP to BC AP to AD — Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.128.27.82 (talk) 15:53, 6 August 2012 (UTC)

BP is just a simple 1950-year difference (yes, "present day" is fixed at 1950 AD). At the time scales this is used for, that can be rounded to 2000 years with no meaningful loss of precision.

For AP, I'm not sure a linear two-way conversion is possible, because the calendar has been revised at various points through history.

Rhialto (talk) 10:55, 14 August 2012 (UTC)

How is it done?

1,500 horsepower (1,100 kilowatts) or 1,500 hp (1,100 kW) so as not to show the names of the units? Please remind me. "disp=/" does not work in the first one. Peter Horn User talk 18:14, 14 August 2012 (UTC) Peter Horn User talk 18:15, 14 August 2012 (UTC)

I found it in one of my sandboxes: 1,500 (1,100). But 1,500 horsepower (1,100 kilowatts) does not work. Peter Horn User talk 20:48, 14 August 2012 (UTC)

Torque Talk (blush...)

For quite some time now, it's soon two years since my first entry here in regards to such problems, the torque conversion template have been unstable and often turn up red. Right now I can get {{convert|13.8|kgm|Nm lbft|0|abbr=on}} 13.8 kg⋅m (135 N⋅m; 100 lb⋅ft) to work, but if I try to reverse it with Nm or lbft as the original unit then it no longer works:

{{convert|140|Nm|kgm lbft|0|abbr=on}} 140 N⋅m (14 kg⋅m; 103 lb⋅ft)
{{convert|140|Nm|lbft kgm|0|abbr=on}} 140 N⋅m (103 lb⋅ft; 14 kg⋅m)
{{convert|100|lbft|Nm kgm|0|abbr=on}} 100 lb⋅ft (136 N⋅m; 14 kg⋅m)

I maintain a table of conversion templates on a subpage (it often being important to use the original source unit rather than double converting), and every time I look at it a new part of the torque section is in red. Is there any particular expert I can refer to or can someone give me some coding pointers (I'm a near-infant in this department)? Thanks,  Mr.choppers | ✎  08:28, 14 August 2012 (UTC)

I don't know who helped out, but thanks a lot and roses and chocolate etcetera - Thanks!!!  Mr.choppers | ✎  17:27, 15 August 2012 (UTC)

Metric horsepower and/or Pfaerde Starke)

For DB Class V 60#Technology {{convert}} 475 kW (646 PS)??? instead of 478 kW (650 PS) which is NOT the same as 475 kW (637 hp) Peter Horn User talk 13:40, 21 August 2012 (UTC)

Plural values

I would like to try my hand at a template that would provide the proper plural of foot. Can someone suggest where I would find guidance? --Mfwills (talk) 15:41, 15 August 2012 (UTC)

singular 1 foot (0.30 metres), plural 2 feet (0.61 metres). Frietjes (talk) 16:06, 15 August 2012 (UTC)

I guess I misunderstood the template instructions. All it says is that "foot" will always return singular. I think I'll fix that. I would still appreciate guidance in how to create a template --Mfwills (talk) 15:29, 22 August 2012 (UTC)

what do you want the template to do? Frietjes (talk) 18:06, 27 August 2012 (UTC)

Richter magnitude scale

Please add conversion for the Richter magnitude scale to other scales, such as the Japanese model or Joule equivalent. 64.128.27.82 (talk) 20:50, 16 August 2012 (UTC)

• We need conversion formulas, and beware when the scales are not the same type of measurement, such as Richter different from JMA:

"Unlike the moment magnitude scale (formerly Richter scale), which measures the energy released by the earthquake, the JMA scale describes the degree of shaking at a point on the Earth's surface, and is analogous to the Mercalli intensity scale".
Some conversions would be "apples and oranges" like trying to convert lightbulb watts into volts, not the same type of measurement. -Wikid77 (talk) 17:22, 27 August 2012 (UTC)

Abbr=values not working on some conversions

The parameter |abbr=values seems to work fine on some conversions (such as km/mi) but not on others (particularly, C/F). It would be great if I could suppress the redundant abbreviations on tables such as the "Average sea temperatures" table at Rome#Climate. Getting rid of the repeated abbreviations would also significantly reduce the table's width, which may currently be causing problems for some browsers. Wilhelm Meis (☎ Diskuss | ✍ Beiträge) 03:28, 23 August 2012 (UTC)

try it now. Frietjes (talk) 15:26, 23 August 2012 (UTC)

Awesome! It works! Thank you. Wilhelm Meis (☎ Diskuss | ✍ Beiträge) 05:28, 24 August 2012 (UTC)

One million / 1.000.000 / 1,000,000 / ?

I came across a conversion template that translates square feet into acres and uses continental European dividers for the acres, even in English language articles.

6,135,630 square feet (140.855 acres)

The English and Americans would write both numbers using commas as dividers, thus:

6,135,630

140,855 (NOT 140.855)

Does anyone know how to correct this, please? (Or is this problem something on my own computer.) And thank you. Regards Charles01 (talk) 16:38, 31 August 2012 (UTC)

It's correct: the comma separates thousands, and the period separates the fractional part from the integer part.

One acre is defined as the area enclosed by a rectangle measuring one furlong in length by one chain in width. One furlong is ten chains; and one chain is 22 yards (one yard is of course three feet). The calculation is therefore (10 x 22 x 3) x (22 x 3) = 43560 square feet to one acre. If we now do the division, 6135630 / 43560 = 140.85468319559 acres. --Redrose64 (talk) 17:37, 31 August 2012 (UTC)

Thanks. That makes sense. Then I guess the bit that's unconventional in this example, at least for the non-scientific reader of non-scientific entries is showing this particular figure to three decimal places! Regards Charles01 (talk) 18:56, 31 August 2012 (UTC)