I don't want to create a stir of controversy for my very first post on this forum, but I'm curious why so many reviewers and vendor websites misuse ft/lbs to state muzzle energy specifications. I even noted a recent version of the AAFTA rules contained instances of the ft/lbs false units. I contacted the organization president and he graciously admitted the mistake and corrected the units in a revision. When I read reviews from authors who can't get the basic units for muzzle velocity correct, it diminishes their credibility. Please let's raise the intellectual bar in shooting sports (I've seen powder-burner reviews make the same error) and agree to use ft-lb or Joule (J) units to represent muzzle energy. This isn't a matter of being politically correct. It's a matter of being correct, period. Maybe this has been discussed before, but the prevalence of ft/lbs in common use demonstrates it bears repeating.
ft/lbs (ugh) vs ft-lb muzzle energy
- Thread starter k9rfz
- Start date
I don't want to create a stir of controversy for my very first post on this forum, but I'm curious why so many reviewers and vendor websites misuse ft/lbs to state muzzle energy specifications. I even noted a recent version of the AAFTA rules contained instances of the ft/lbs false units. I contacted the organization president and he graciously admitted the mistake and corrected the units in a revision. When I read reviews from authors who can't get the basic units for muzzle velocity correct, it diminishes their credibility. Please let's raise the intellectual bar in shooting sports (I've seen powder-burner reviews make the same error) and agree to use ft-lb or Joule (J) units to represent muzzle energy. This isn't a matter of being politically correct. It's a matter of being correct, period. Maybe this has been discussed before, but the prevalence of ft/lbs in common use demonstrates it bears repeating.
So you are saying people are confusing torque, with energy instead of linear distance? or perhaps explain the difference?
IMO it's irrelevant if the common mistake is understood by the majority of users.
IMO it's irrelevant if the common mistake is understood by the majority of users.
Upvote 0
I dont get it. What's the difference between ft-lb and ft/lb. Does it really matters? Imo it doesnt. If you know they are talking about foot pound, that's all that matters. Dont have to be nitpicky.
Upvote 0
G
Guest
Guest
I guess if we were sending a rocket to the moon it would matter with the Maths, but for us troglodytes here on the forum it doesn't matter.
Upvote 0
I find it interesting.
Yes, please continue by explaining what the benefits/disadvantage would be in changing the resulting data and how it would effect the overall outcome of the performance of an (air)gun.
I have brain cells dying off reading post about shooters not understanding why their two thousand dollar guns don't shoot slugs worth a crap. That is so much easier to understand and explain.
Yes, please continue by explaining what the benefits/disadvantage would be in changing the resulting data and how it would effect the overall outcome of the performance of an (air)gun.
I have brain cells dying off reading post about shooters not understanding why their two thousand dollar guns don't shoot slugs worth a crap. That is so much easier to understand and explain.
Upvote 0
Welcome to the forum. While our dialog may not follow scientific nomenclature, hopefully you will gain a knowledge of airguns, their use, maintenance and the enjoyment this sport can bring.
Upvote 0
If you don't care about proper units, then let's just measure pellet speed in ft-s rather than ft/s. Units have meaning and are important to keep formulas dimensionally valid. The ft-lb unit is a valid unit of kinetic energy. Distance multiplied by force is an amount of work. You can equate the amount of work done by all forces acting on the pellet to the change in kinetic energy the pellet undergoes as it is accelerated down the barrel. A ft/lbs is not a valid unit of energy. If you try to apply it in ballistic formulas, you'll get nonsense units in the results. Do not confuse a ft-lb of energy with the unit of torque that goes by the same units. A force of one pound applied perpendicular to a moment arm one foot from the axis of rotation produces a torque of one ft-lb. The two contexts are very different.
On a standard QWERTY keyboard, the "/" and "-" symbols are separated by two rows of keys. Perhaps the keyboard design referenced by one commenter is more typical for texting. Maybe the few people who use their texting devices to respond to online posts do make an occasional typographical error. The same argument isn't valid for authors writing lengthy reviews for publication who likely use a QWERTY keyboard.
We forfeit intellectual integrity when we accept mistakes just to appease common usage. Why resist using the right units and ridicule those who point out the flaw as 'nitpicky'? I had hoped to elevate the level of understanding on this forum rather than start a point of contention. Perhaps I expected too much from this forum's members.
On a standard QWERTY keyboard, the "/" and "-" symbols are separated by two rows of keys. Perhaps the keyboard design referenced by one commenter is more typical for texting. Maybe the few people who use their texting devices to respond to online posts do make an occasional typographical error. The same argument isn't valid for authors writing lengthy reviews for publication who likely use a QWERTY keyboard.
We forfeit intellectual integrity when we accept mistakes just to appease common usage. Why resist using the right units and ridicule those who point out the flaw as 'nitpicky'? I had hoped to elevate the level of understanding on this forum rather than start a point of contention. Perhaps I expected too much from this forum's members.
Upvote 0
To be honest until now I did not know the difference between the ft/lbs and ft-lb. But have made note and will try to use the correct ft-lb when talking about airgun energy.
I think most forgive the usage of ft/lb as most of us shooters have struggled for years to get manufactures, authors, and each other to use ft-lb instead of fps when talking about the power of air rifles. Finally after many complaints about fps when advertising power levels of airguns ft/lb is easily tolerated. We may never get Gamo, Pyramid Air, and any airguns sold at the big box stores to use ft-lb.
I think most forgive the usage of ft/lb as most of us shooters have struggled for years to get manufactures, authors, and each other to use ft-lb instead of fps when talking about the power of air rifles. Finally after many complaints about fps when advertising power levels of airguns ft/lb is easily tolerated. We may never get Gamo, Pyramid Air, and any airguns sold at the big box stores to use ft-lb.
Upvote 0
I use FPE and FPS. I am wrong twice a day (at least).
Is the issue that FT/LB can be read as Feet divided by Pounds instead of Feet*Pounds? I can see how that would grate on your eyes. I have issues when people conflate Point of Aim and Point of Impact. The thing is, those are my issues. I cannot hold others to use the language that I want them to use. Afterall, hist is the internet, this is not SPARTA!!!!!
Is the issue that FT/LB can be read as Feet divided by Pounds instead of Feet*Pounds? I can see how that would grate on your eyes. I have issues when people conflate Point of Aim and Point of Impact. The thing is, those are my issues. I cannot hold others to use the language that I want them to use. Afterall, hist is the internet, this is not SPARTA!!!!!
Upvote 0
I don't see the B-F-D or is it B/F/D or is it BFD. We simple folk get the gest of what someone is trying to say.
Upvote 0
+1
Thanks for pointing out the discrepancy. I'm glad you caught that before someone was seriously injured.
Thanks for pointing out the discrepancy. I'm glad you caught that before someone was seriously injured.
Upvote 0
I believe that most people view it simply as an abbreviation. In the automotive field I see torque expressed in both ft-lbs and lb-ft, as if the terms are interchangeable. The fact is that they are not, but we all know what they are describing nonetheless.
While I understand your desire for accuracy, I don't think the fact that other members are less technically disciplined is any cause for disparagement.
While I understand your desire for accuracy, I don't think the fact that other members are less technically disciplined is any cause for disparagement.
Upvote 0
I always thought the proper way to say it was lbs/ft, or lbs.-ft. It isn’t about the dash or the slash, but lbs. coming before ft.
Edit- just read the comment about its use in the automotive industry. Learn something everyday.
Edit- just read the comment about its use in the automotive industry. Learn something everyday.
Upvote 0
I’m glad to learn the proper verbiage, as learning is always a good thing. I guess periodicals worth their weight in salt should definitely use the correct language.
As for me, I use and will use FPS, FPE, POA, POI, as we all collectively know what we are saying.
As for me, I use and will use FPS, FPE, POA, POI, as we all collectively know what we are saying.
Upvote 0
Now that "The Big Bang Theory" has wrapped and "Fun With Flags" has not panned out, Sheldon is here to educate us on "Fun With Units" Watch his head spin with high RPM's with this one....lol
Happy Monday All!!
Happy Monday All!!
Upvote 0