Which is correct?

LXWXH or LXWXH/1728

Heaterguy45

Dear convert-me.com forum visitors,

Our forum has been available for many years. In September 2014 we decided to switch it to read-only mode. Month after month we saw less posts with questions and answers from real people and more spam posts. We were spending more and more resources cleaning the spam until there were less them 1 legitimate message per 100 spam posts. Then we decided it's time to stop.

All the posts in the forum will be available and searchable. We understand there are a lot of useful information and we aren't going to remove anything. As for the new questions, you can always ask them on convert-me.com FaceBook page

Thank you for being with us and sorry for any inconveniences this could caused.

3 posts
• Page **1** of **1**

Which is correct?

LXWXH or LXWXH/1728

Heaterguy45

LXWXH or LXWXH/1728

Heaterguy45

- heaterguy45
**Posts:**1**Joined:**Mon Nov 07, 2005 11:09 pm**Location:**DFW, TEXAS

heaterguy45 wrote:Which is correct?

LXWXH or LXWXH/1728

Heaterguy45

For a rectangular solid, L x W x H, and the volume is in the cubic form of the linear dimensions used, ie all dimensions in inches gives cubic inches. If centimeters, the result is cubic centimeters. As long as all three dimensions are in the same units, this is universal.

The 1728 factir in your other formula is the number of cubic inches in a cubic foot. If all your dimensions are inches, then it gives an answer in cubic feet. Personally, I think it is better to treat the conversion of cubic inches to cubic feet as a separate problem. Embedding in the formula makes the formula non-universal and wrong except for the special case of three dimensions in inches and a required answer in cubic feet.

- Guest

3 posts
• Page **1** of **1**