×
INTELLIGENT WORK FORUMS
FOR ENGINEERING PROFESSIONALS

Log In

Come Join Us!

Are you an
Engineering professional?
Join Eng-Tips Forums!
  • Talk With Other Members
  • Be Notified Of Responses
    To Your Posts
  • Keyword Search
  • One-Click Access To Your
    Favorite Forums
  • Automated Signatures
    On Your Posts
  • Best Of All, It's Free!
  • Students Click Here

*Eng-Tips's functionality depends on members receiving e-mail. By joining you are opting in to receive e-mail.

Posting Guidelines

Promoting, selling, recruiting, coursework and thesis posting is forbidden.

Students Click Here

Jobs

KIPS

KIPS

(OP)
I am drawing a blank in converting a KIP into a load specvified in Kn.

Can anyone supply a ratio or give me a clue0n how to  convert

RE: KIPS

Older engineers will remember (with a shudder) that a kip is just 1000 pounds-force.

RE: KIPS

darron,

1 kip = 1,000 lb-f = 4.448 kN

HTH


RE: KIPS

Focht3:  to this Bowles is right!!!!

and, I thought that kip was the name given to Laos currency!!!  

RE: KIPS

Converting to metric is easy!

A Kip is a Kilo-pound.

A hip is a hecta-pound.

A mip is a millipound.

A dip is a decipound.

A cip is a centi-pound.

Have phun!

RE: KIPS

Ingenuity is correct: 1 Kip = 4.45 kN.

Here, some additional information:
1 pound (lb) = 453.59 grs,  or   1 Kg = 2.205 lb
Kg = 9.80665 N = 2.205 lb, from where: 1 lb = 4.448 N
1000 lb = Kip = 4.448 N x 1000 = 4.448 kN

Kg/ cm2 = 14.223 psi
psi = 0.0703 Kg/ cm2  (this value is more exact)
N/m2= Pa ; and since: m2=(10)^6 mm2 ,(10)^6 Pa= MPa= N/mm2
MPa = 145 psi.

Now:
(f´c)^1/2, in psi= 1/145*(145 f´c)^1/2= 1/12(f´c)^1/2,MPa  

Also:
(f´c)^1/2 , in psi = 1/14.22*(14.22 f´c)^1/2 =       0.265* (f´c)^1/2 , Kg/cm2

For example,  vc = 2* (f´c)1/2 ,psi  =  0.53* (f´c)1/2 , Kg/cm2  = 1/6 * (f´c)1/2 , MPa

Is this important ?. I think so, and for this reason I posted  “Equivalence of units in ACI 318M-02” in the ACI Code Forum.

RE: KIPS

That's good DaveViking...Our Canadian neighbords should really appreciate that as they have the tendency of mixing prefixes and suffixes in English and French.

RE: KIPS

An e.u. is an "entropy unit." 1 e.u. = 1 cal/mol-K = 4.184 J/mol-K.

As far as the British using pounds vs. euros. I have no idea. Maybe they should all convert to talents. My air conditioner has a rating in Btu's and I haven't seen an Eu tu ("you too") air conditioner.

In all seriousness, I first heard the term "kip" in statics class many moons ago and was confused. During the evening's homework session, I looked it up (this was in the pre-web days) and made the "kilo-pound = kip" konnection. Whenever anyone asks me what a kip is (it happens a lot, really: I've had architects, ME's, EE's and even a couple of civil engineers not to mention the many laypeople ask) I tell 'em "it's a kilo-pound, get it? KIlo-Pound." That's the best way I've found to really explain it. In my first physics class metric (SI) was taught to us with a problem like "what's 2 x 10^2 withits?" Answer: 2 hecto-withits or "to heck with its."

US military design work is generally conducted using millimeters as the measure of length and kPa for pressure or area loadings; this is a pain as kPa simply is not an intuitive sounding unit of measure whereas kN/m^2 is.

RE: KIPS

DaveViking,
Right on, e.u. is an entropy unit ≡ cal/oK/mol.

Same here, "I first heard the term "kip" in statics class many moons ago and was confused;" it was also where I first saw # as shorthand for pounds (force, not £).

Graduate school involved bars and MPa, but I stayed out of trouble by converting to atmospheres.

RE: KIPS

I have worked in SI and imperial units for 25 years, sometimes on the same project. I found a calculator that really helps conversions, called Calc98, somewhat of an electronic handbook table.  You can download it from www.calculator.org

You need to know the basic units, but the calculator takes it from there.

RE: KIPS

Could someone please tell me why so many mech. engs refer to streses in psi as opposed to the much friendlier ksi ( kips per sq. inch )?

The FEA result may say that stress is 32000 psi, and I have to compare with the yield of A36 steel... I know it's really easy, but it just gets to me. Stress analysis is hard enough without the extra hurdles.

tg

RE: KIPS

Each Time I come along such discussion it never fails to surprise me that with all the advancement in the engineering technology today, the world is not yet able to really use one unit system that can be applied everywhere!
I don't really see the point in sticking with prejudice to an out dated unit system such as the inch-pound system (the so called empirical) that was good enough to be used in times when precision meant nothing.
I know engineers in the US , UK and some other countries may disapprove with me but come on guys, make way for the 22nd century!!!

             Drop By !!
www.geocities.com/concretesite

RE: KIPS

While were converting units between different systems:

It is commonly known that time is money, and knowledge is power.  It is not so commonly known that these relations have a strong impact on the structure of our society.  Hence:
    time=money

    knowledge=power

These relations can easily be substituted into the tried and true equation of work and energy:
    power=work/time

Therefore:
    knowledge=work/money

Solving for money:
    money = work / knowledge

Conclusions:
  • The more money you want to make, the more you need to work (no kidding)

  • The more knowledge you gain, the less money you can expect to make

  • Going back and putting "time" back in, it is clear that we work overtime only when we've done something dumb.
    Also, those with the most power get there through doing the most work, but I disagree that they didn't also do it for the money.

    STF

    RE: KIPS

    The USA and only two other countries (Liberia (in western Africa) and Myanmar (also known as Burma, in southeast Asia)) have not officially adopted the metric system. Fascinating!

    It is also fascinating is that the US Federal government (at least engineering and construction for the DOD) IS metric, but much (most!) of the USA is not.

    Metric is "10 times" better!

    RE: KIPS

    I am not going to argue the merits of each system. However, one must appreciate the tremendous resources and cost that the US will have to go through to change over to metric. Tools, machines, books, references, measuring tapes, not to mention the interface with existing systems and components are few of the things that must change to name a few..

    I had the pleasure of working with an older British Engineer whom I have immense respect. He does not think that the metric system did not do wonders for the UK and they do use it.

    The argument can be made for both systems. I think engineers should be trained and capable of using both systems.

    RE: KIPS

    But the US trading partners use the metric system. Unless the USA is going to significantly increase trade with Burma or Liberia, then it makes sense for the USA to finally and officially change to the metric system.

    Maybe the fact that the French "invented" the system has something to do with the USA not adopting it.

    I have used both measurement systems in Australia, Canada and the USA. Metric "wins" IMO.

    The $125 million NASA Mars Climate Orbiter mission may not have been "lost" in 1999 if the USA was fully and officially metric.

    For the merits on the metric system, see the US Metric Associations FAQ's at:

    http://lamar.colostate.edu/~hillger/qanda.htm

    RE: KIPS

    For my $0.02

    I have used both systems since grade school and continued to do so in my work now.

    I really don't see the problem with using one or the other and why engineers of all people vehmently oppose the use of the metric system.

    I do agree that it is logical to follow the units of world trade.  However, the system seems to work despite the three countries who are holding on the english units.

    RE: KIPS

    As soon as people started using mechanical and electronic calculators the logic of using the imperial system of units was lost and everyone should have changed to the SI system.

    To work logically on computers, decimal feet is the only way they can work internally and is also the easiest input method. Having to perform convoluted calculations just to convert feet, inches and fractions of an inch to decimal feet for input or for use in calculation is just plain stupid (there are 4 mathematical steps to do this, 4 mathematical symbols need to be input plus more numerical characters are required than for SI) when you can use a system where there are no such divisions, SI. m, cm or mm make like so easy for the person doing the input and for the program itself internally, simply move the decimal point to change between them.

    It must have been horrendous using a slide rule or an abacus with imperial length units and it is nearly as bad with electronic calculators.

    USA is not the only country thet would have to suffer a conversion process and the hassles with it. Australia, UK and Canada did it and so did many others and we all survived the experience and now I am glad we did. The SI system is much easier to work with, especially length units.
    Fortunately this is one USA will not win in the long term, SI is the worldwide unit system and a couple of intransigent countries have not moved to it yet.

    RE: KIPS

    Hi all,

    Like Qshake, I have used both imperial and SI units. At college (many years ago), I did an Ordinary National Certificate in Mechanical Engineering (in the UK) and the units were all imperial at that time. Later I went on to do a Higher National Certificate, but by this time the UK had gone metric and the units were SI. I have used SI units ever since and they are so much easier to handle. All the 10^6 and 10^3 etc. cancel out and you are left with just a simple sum to calculate. With the imperial system however, there is all that, divide by 12 to convert inches to feet and 1728 to convert cubic inches to cubic feet - what kind of numbers are those!! - to complicated!!

    Keep it simple (KIS).

    In reply to Lutfi - `cost of change over`. Although in theory the UK went metric 25 or 30 years ago, many of our steel sizes are in reality, still imperial sizes. Consequently we have steel `I` beams of, for instance, 457 x 191. This may sound an odd metric size (and it is), but is still, even after all these years, the old imperial steel rolls just converted to metric numbers (18" x 7.5"). Yes, many of our steels are still imperial in reality!! As you say, to expensive to change everything at once.

    Regards,
    Neilmo  








     

    RE: KIPS

    A few additional thoughts:

    1.  In the US, who are the major proponents of going Metric? Those in the machine tool industry, the industry that will benifit the most because of the retooling required.

    2.  Ingenuity, from what I've read, the loss of the Mars Orbiter was due to someone using the wrong conversion factor between the Imperial and Metric systems.  The person reviewing the Metric answer could not conceptualize the answer.  We engineers rely on our ability to know what psf and psi mean physically.  We loose that when we go to Metric units.  I've seen too many mistakes made trying to convert units, even in some of the trade journals!

    3.  State DOT's have been converting to Metric measurements, why? We don't trade the roads with a foreign county!  In fact, many of the DOT's have given up on the Metric conversions of reinforcing steel, it was just too confusing and lead to too many mistakes.

    Use the conversions when you HAVE to, but leave those of us old fuddy-duddies who don't want to ALONE!

    RE: KIPS

    jheidt - right on with #3.

    RE: KIPS

    Do I miss something? - we don't want to use the "metric" system - we want to use the SI system (System Internationale) (although I still like the "English").  Force is in kN, not kg-f.  I happen to like using kPa rather than kN/m2 because, well, the formatting is easier if you want to superscript the 2 in m2.  I've used both.  As I've stated in other threads - whatever system is used - SI, say - we need to use consistent units .  Some use MPa (my preference) and others will quote N/mm2 - then you have to go through the gyrations of dimensional cross-outs to see if they are equivalent.  

    RE: KIPS

    jheidt2543 is right - in those immortal words of rural wisdom, "don't fix it if it ain't broke."


    I go back and forth between the units, and see advantages to both.  But to say that no part of the SI system is difficult or confusing - even when you are conversant in it - is simply wrong.


    And as to the "rest of the world is right so the U.S. should change" argument: the last time I looked, WE were the ones doing most of the buying (hence our balance of trade problem.)  Seems to mee that you'd use OUR measurement system - if you want us to buy your products!


    RE: KIPS

    Curious...why does the US medical profession use non-English units (e.g. cc - cubic centimeter, mg - milligram etc)?

    RE: KIPS

    All,

    Please help me here as I am trying to recall a recent book on the introduction of the SI system.  Since I am trying desperately from memory to recall the issue I just can't put my finger on it...But wasn't there some error in the SI system for the meter?  

    Or did this have something to do with a survey of some land that was off due to an incorrect measurement...

    It seems to me that two fellas set off to chart or record something and had a great deal of difficulty.

    Well, I'm off to look that book up - I'll Be Back!

    I just thought it might had some history to this thread.

    RE: KIPS

    All right, back again as promised.

    The book is titled "The Measure of All Things" by Ken Alder.

    Here is an excerpt of a review on Amazon...

    "Alder delivers a triple whammy with this elegant history of technology, acute cultural chronicle and riveting intellectual adventure built around Delambre's and Mechain's famed meridian expedition of 1792-1799 to calculate the length of the meter. Disclosing for the first time details from the astronomers' personal correspondences (and supplementing his research with a bicycle tour of their route), Alder reveals how the exacting Mechain made a mistake in his calculations, which he covered up, and which tortured him until his death. "

    Any comments, perspectives, historic views?

    I was quite surprised to see this and have never known about it as long as I've worked with SI in grade school.

    RE: KIPS

    I do, too - in my lab.  The units of measurement are convenient for measuring relatively small soil samples.

    But I report soil unit weight in pcf and stress in ksf.  All of my other "typical" reporting values are dimensionless!



    RE: KIPS

    Any comments about the standard Kilogram losing weight?
    It seems that the platinum-iridium kilogram standard kept in France is losing weight (cold-fission? champagne fumes?) by about 3 parts in 108 per century.
    Does this mean the collapse of all Kg-based standards?
     
    Abstract of NY Times article:
    “Science Desk | May 27, 2003, Tuesday
    Scientists Struggling to Make the Kilogram Right Again
     By OTTO POHL (NYT) 1546 words
    Late Edition - Final , Section F , Page 3 , Column 2

    "In these girth-conscious times, even weight itself has weight issues. The kilogram is getting lighter, scientists say, sowing potential confusion over a range of scientific endeavor.
    The kilogram is defined by a platinum-iridium cylinder, cast in England in 1889. No one knows why it is shedding weight, at least in comparison with other reference weights, but the change has spurred an international search for a more stable definition.” (http://query.nytimes.com/gst/abstract.html?res=F30E15F83C550C748EDDAC0894DB404482)

    A more scientific story from NIST and efforts to create an electronic-based kilogram standard is at http://www.eeel.nist.gov/811/elec-kilo.html

    Some Internet commentary is at http://www.metafilter.com/mefi/26061

    RE: KIPS

    Just to add a novel twist to the discussion how does the clothing industry measure sizes?

    I've seen size 40 shirts (40" or 101.6cm) that actually ranged in size from 38" to 44".

    What about shoes, are the sizes related to length? Nope, well cannot possibly be when a size 10UK is about a size 12US which is about a size 9.5Aus.

    Are the sizes related to metric or english? Are the sizes related to ego?

    Thank god (or whoever you belive in) that we engineers have settle on two systems only, where an inch is an inch (which is 25.4mm) and where a kilogram is a kilogram (or 2.204622622 lb according to my HP15c), but hang in there I've also heard of a gallon and a US Gallon!


    bye
    sc

    RE: KIPS

    The metric system was adopted by Congress as the "official" system of measurement in the United States in either 1875 or 1876 (no, that's not a typo...1800's).  I suppose we are a bit slow to come around.

    RE: KIPS

    Lots of phun and quips with Kips sir,
    But what about "slugs" to make the mix stir.
    These weighty things have lost their "g's",
    For the masses just to please.

    RE: KIPS

    In Canada, we have the opposite problem: Our bureau of measurement thought that our Kilogram "copies" of the French prototype were getting heavier.  Now that France thinks that theirs might be getting ligher, nobody can tell which masses are going which way!

    STF

    RE: KIPS

    I believe that the US is officially on the SI system. I remember back in grade school when it first was rolled out (Carter, I think...that's what you get with an engineer as President). We started to see traffic signs go up with km as well as miles and speedometers started showing km/h along with mph.

    Certainly ANSI defines all units in terms of SI.

    The big problem is that the general population sees no value in switching units and, as previously stated, many industries are completely tooled in English units so the cost of changing is drastic.

    As an aide, I worked for a company developing a new inspection system and we were going to be progressive and do it all in SI. The problem is that it was hard/expensive to get material in nominal SI units so we either ended up with lots of decimal cm/mm dimensions or having to machine material that we'd have normally used with stock dims.

    Also, I once worked as a machinist at HP and everything we did was in mm.

    A final difficulty: I now work for a micro-company whose products are mostly sold in SI countries. However, I still dimension everything in inches because we don't have DRO's on our mills and my machinists would keel over if they had to multiply/divide by 25.4 everytime they dialed in a table movement.

    From a calculation viewpoint, I can't see why anybody would want to use English units.

    Finally, I learned about kips in Strength of Materials in 1986...I never saw it in any of my ME courses, books, or handbooks - seems to be a CE unit mostly.

    RE: KIPS

    Way to go, redhead.

    Slugs are your garden variety masses...

    RE: KIPS

    Nice one Dave.

    Redhead

    RE: KIPS

    From my perspective, since having multiple clients "officially" switch to SI and then back again, I am tired of the debate.  

    I think that SI is better for ease of use and precision, but Imperial units "rule" for proportioning and layout.  Hasn't anybody else muttered curses under their breath at the French when dividing something into three (equal?) parts????

    Curvbridger

    RE: KIPS

    And all the precision in the world doesn't mean anything if it isn't accurate!

    And if an engineer doesn't have a "feel" for things like the correct order of magnitude, then it's just a matter of time before they get into trouble on some design because they were precise and wildly inaccurate.  

    That's one thing the slide rule forced you to do and something that calculators and software don't do.  We certainly need to take advantage of technology, but at the same time we need to know what it's doing and be able to recognize when accuracy is obscured (maybe even lost) in lots of precise calculations -

    RE: KIPS

    To quote the 1989 Terzaghi lecturer  (an ASCE award given annually to an outstanding geotechnical engineer),

    "It is better to be approximate and correct than precise and wrong."


    RE: KIPS

    I love threads like these.  They are fun and informative - well, it shows that Engineers do have a sense of humour too!!   to all!!

    Two items from my ezperience with SI system.  1)  I saw dock "caissons" being designed (roughly 40m long) to riduculous numbers like 41131mm.  2)  I saw an article in a national engineering/construction magazine where the title was something like "304mm of sand and gravel covers site for working platform for piling contractor"  "Wow", I said.  I would never know that working platforms are so "precise".  Did the writer get the site engineer's comment as "a foot", then used his jim-dandy calculator and change 1ft to 12 inches, then 12 inches x 2.5 to get mm but, yeah, it should be a bit higher so I'll make it 304!!?  Probably.  ASCE has always sugested 305 as the equiv of a foot.  But, then who's foot.  Like the kg losing "mass", there are a number of different definitions of "foot", too.  

    Focht3 on his post previous to this has it right!  


    to all.

    RE: KIPS

    Personaly I prefer the slug, rod, pole or perch system.  But there, I admit I am somewhat conservative.

    RE: KIPS

    How many hogsheads to a puncheon?  Let's see... 2 tierces in a puncheon... a barrel is 3 1/2 gallons, and a butt is 2 hogsheads, or 4 barrels... okay, I have it now...  

    I think I forgot to carry a 3...

    STF

    RE: KIPS

    kenvlach:

    If they know the Kg standard is changing, why don't they use whatever it is they are checking it with as the standard instead ? Why do they even need it ? Does anybody ever use it ?

    p.s. - looks like you have to pay to read that article - typical NY Times.

    RE: KIPS

    SparWeb,

       There are 1.5 Hogsheads in a Puncheon.  Unfortunately, a Puncheon is either 84 gallons of wine, or 54 gallons of beer.  At least, both gallons are four quarts!

       My reference is The Mechanic's Calculator, Second Edition by William Grier Civil Engineer, MDCCCXXXV.

       An instructor I had in college insisted that we do unit balances in our calculations.  The obvious objective is that when you work out your weight as 150sq.in/sec, you know you have screwed up somewhere.  This makes unit conversions easier too.

       Any time I have seen calculations done by Europeans, they have been in the CGS system.  Is the SI system (as opposed to the metric system) really that popular out there?

                            JHG

    RE: KIPS

       One more thought about units...

       Check out literature that quotes the strength of a grade_12.9 screw (metric).  According to the web site I just checked, the 12 is the strength of the bolt in units of 100MPa.  I believe that this is what my Machinery's Handbook 26th edition claims too.

       I have seen literature listing the strength of these bolts in psi, and the conversion is not exact.  It becomes exact when I use my Machinery's Handbook 21st edition for a reference.  The number 12 is the strength of the bolt in units of 10kgf/mm^2.  One kilogram force equals approximately ten Newtons.

    Ref:

    http://www.mech.gla.ac.uk/~paulk/pde/nutnbolt.htm
    http://www.camcar.textron.com/NewHTML/grades.html

                          JHG

    RE: KIPS

    I work in the ft-lb system.  Most any aircraft I deal with was designed and built to dimensions in inches, loads in pounds, speeds in knots.  The Eurocopters and Fokkers are exceptions, being euro machines.  It's strange to read a fuselage diagram in milimeters, when the aircraft is over 20 metres long!  "At station 15673, we find the aft crew door..."

    Could I switch?  Of course.  I grew up in a canadian school, and spent the first 20 years of my life in metric, until I came into contact with REAL machines.  The dichotomy of canadian education vs. technology underpins my belief that theory and practice are two different things.

    The choice between SI and CGS is also determined by industry.  I would expect engineering to make more sense in Kg/meters, while chemistry would find grams much more useful.

    I use MathCAD all the time for my analyses.  It makes the units work effortlessly.  It can switch between all three systems easily.

    STF

    RE: KIPS

    KIPS are extensively used on floating facilities and ships.  Naval architects and people involved in Ballast Control.  If you ask what a kip is in a Naval Engineering forum, they'll respond with a "WHERE HAVE YOU BEEN IDIOT?  ARE YOU SURE YOU'RE AN ENGINEER?"

    RE: KIPS

    The biggest opponents of conversion to the SI was the “Oil Patch” and the aircraft industry.

    Like many I’ve work with both and seen many of the aforementioned conversion mistakes. Leaving off the suffix or changing units in midstream are quite common.  

    A problem that I’ve seen locally is the convention of using of SI units in dimensioning.  I worked on two large scale chemical plants that were designed and had some components constructed in Europe.  All dimensions on the drawings were in millimeters (6000,9000,etc.). They are teaching in schools to change to cm’s, etc.  Print in hand I tried to show the instructors at a technical school and Jr college this and got a response of, What are you trying to do confuse the issue.

    A very good conversion program is "Conversion Buddy" by Jim Presley.  He also has a another program Expression Buddy.
    You can dictate the accuracy in Conversion Buddy.

    They are available as a free download at:

      http://metrologyforum.tm.agilent.com/download4.shtml

    RE: KIPS

    My huge objection to the metric system is exactly what DaveViking stated.  The use of 'artificial' units like pascals. All that does is make it difficult to check your answer by analyzing units.  The only such really dumb example I know of in the English (Imperial not emperical) system is in the calculation of shear flow the use of VQ/Ib where Q is actually Ay. I hate to think how many thousands of hours have been wasted over the years by engineers searching through books mumbling "What the Hell is Q?".

    RE: KIPS

    I remember being confused and amazed learning the imperial units for a surveying unit at uni:

    25 links = 1 rod
    4 rods = 1 chain
    10 chains = 1 furlong
    8 furlongs = 1 mile
    3 miles = 1 league

    1 furlong x 1 chain = 1 acre
    640 acres = 1 square mile

    Thanks goodness for metres and hectares!

    RE: KIPS

    Unclesyd,

       I hope that engineering schools are NOT teaching people to use centimeters for dimensions!

       In an environment where people use both english and metric dimensions, they have to look different.  Millimeter and inch dimensions are hard to confuse.  I am not so sure about centimeters and inches.

       The nice thing about millimeters is that for a lot of stuff, you lose fractions and decimals.

                            JHG

    RE: KIPS

    I don't have any problem working with either the SI or the English system of units because we were taught to use both in the elementary grades at school. I would, however, like to see everybody agree on using one set of units for the reasons cited above. By the way, remember when those road signs that were posted in the US showing both metric and english units were riddled with bullet holes? Gives you an idea of the attitude the general public here has about converting over...


                                            Maui

    RE: KIPS

    Here's an obscure unit,
    1 poundal = the force that accelerates a pound mass one foot per second per second. (1 poundal= 1 lbm*ft/sec/sec)

    The only legitimate argument for converting to SI is that everyone else is doing it.  The guy that posted the thread couldn't convert from kips to newtons--hopefully he's not designing anything important.

    Viva la difference!

    Red Flag This Post

    Please let us know here why this post is inappropriate. Reasons such as off-topic, duplicates, flames, illegal, vulgar, or students posting their homework.

    Red Flag Submitted

    Thank you for helping keep Eng-Tips Forums free from inappropriate posts.
    The Eng-Tips staff will check this out and take appropriate action.

    Reply To This Thread

    Posting in the Eng-Tips forums is a member-only feature.

    Click Here to join Eng-Tips and talk with other members!


    Resources