Take the 2-minute tour ×
Mathematics Stack Exchange is a question and answer site for people studying math at any level and professionals in related fields. It's 100% free, no registration required.

I have the following equation:

$\frac{n\times2.2046}2\times0.0284130625$

to: convert kg to lbs, divide by $2$, then convert the result from oz to L

is there a shortcut to do this without the conversion to imperial?

yeah, I know this is probably a very elementary question, math has never been my strong suit.

share|improve this question
    
The kilogram is a unit of mass, while the liter is a unit of volume... –  Guess who it is. Aug 9 '12 at 13:40
    
What are you actually trying to calculate? –  celtschk Aug 9 '12 at 13:48
    
this is a nutrition thing: basic amount of water before factoring in environment, etc = half of body weight (in pounds) in oz of water per day, hence the mass to volume conversion. –  bee.catt Aug 9 '12 at 13:53
    
"this is a nutrition thing: basic amount of water before factoring in environment" - should've mentioned that to begin with. Where did you obtain this formula? –  Guess who it is. Aug 9 '12 at 13:56
    
sorry, J.M., I should have explained that better. If you mean the equation for lbs:oz, I have found it in various places, couldn't give you an exact reference without searching it out again, it gives a similar result to 1L:1000cal. As for the equation above, it was what I was able to come up with myself to take a stored metric value, perform the imperial equation, and return a metric result. –  bee.catt Aug 9 '12 at 14:04

1 Answer 1

up vote 1 down vote accepted

$1$ pound is $16$ ounces, and $1$ litre of water has mass very, very close to a kilogram (apparently only about 0.999975 kg). So you should be able to multiply the mass in kg by $\frac{1}{32} = \frac{1}{2} * \frac{1}{16}$ to get effectively the same result.

share|improve this answer
    
Thank you very much, this seems to give a satisfactory result. In my case, I expressed it as kg*0.03125, is this correct? –  bee.catt Aug 9 '12 at 14:32
    
@bee.catt It's the same –  Cocopuffs Aug 9 '12 at 15:22
    
That is, half an ounce per pound. But OP's formula (and yours as well) do not account for the mass of a liter (which has nothing to do with the problem); they both also ignore the difference between a pound of water (weight) and 16 fluid ounces of water (a US fluid pint, by volume, which weighs 1.04375 pounds, despite the American saying "A pint's a pound".) However, if it clear that the assumption_is that the body weight is in _pounds avoirdupois, but the water is measured in US fluid ounces, the difference between a pint and a pound doesn't matter. –  Brian Hitchcock Jul 29 at 9:29
    
But keep in mind, if you are in a Commonwealth country that uses Imperial fluid ounces, you don't need quite as many as you would of US fluid ounces, because an Imperial fluid ounce is about 4% bigger than a US fluid ounce. –  Brian Hitchcock Jul 29 at 9:40

Your Answer

 
discard

By posting your answer, you agree to the privacy policy and terms of service.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.