Talk:Pound per square inch

message: The article begins well enough describing PSI, but then in the Magnitude section it uses terms like psia, psid, and psig which are never defined... what are these???Hydradix (talk) 05:47, 13 August 2016 (UTC)
thread_title: Undefined Terms: psia, psid, and psig

message: In the English speaking world, steam locomotive boiler pressures are normally expressed as x lb/in2. In Europe, they are normally expressed as x kg/cm2. Question is, how do you convert one to the other? Mjroots (talk) 08:58, 27 March 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Boiler pressure conversions

message: Gauge pressure is not relative to a standard or fixed atmospheric condition.  It is relative to the surrounding atmosphere.  A gas cylinder with the same absolute pressure would have different gauge pressures at sea level than at a higher altitude since the corresponding atmospheric pressures would be different.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.49.102.50 (talk) 12:37, 12 June 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Errors

message: user:217.207.165.251  asked
: Anyone able to give this in (K)g/cm^2?
Firstly it's not possible to do exactly this. kg is a unit of mass (not weight), pressure requires units of force. These have long been confused, but the SI system tries to be a little stricter in their use. So the nearest SI equivalent to this would be kgf/cm2 using the kilogram-force unit (weight) rather than the kilogram.
Then there's already the convenient unit of the technical atmosphere, which is equal to 1 kgf/cm2 (it's also within a few % of the usual standard atmosphere). This is in the article's conversion table already, maybe it just needs some clearer captioning?
Hope this helps Andy Dingley (talk) 11:24, 3 July 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  kg/cm^2 

message: I think that it would be a good idea to make clear whether the word "bike" in the sentence "Bike tire overpressure (common): Pg = 65 psi" refers to a motorcycle or a bicycle. 82.181.76.251 (talk) 01:55, 3 September 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Magnitude

message: If 1 psi = 6.894757 kpa (or 6.895 * 103 pa), then it should not be shortened (as in the table) to 1 psi = 6.894 * 103 pa.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 142.244.145.229 (talk) 17:16, 6 June 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Fixed. Wizard191 (talk) 17:48, 7 June 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Error? 

message: Full SCBA Self Contained Breathing Apparatus for toxic atmospheres
Full SCBA (Self Contained Breathing Apparatus) for toxic atmospheres
SCBA stands for self contained breathing apparatus so its saying the same thing twice like it is?  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 114.198.1.161 (talk) 05:21, 22 March 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Should this sentance read. 

message: :Feel free to state your position on the renaming proposal by beginning a new line in this section with *Support or *Oppose, then sign your comment with ~~~~. Since polling is not a substitute for discussion, please explain your reasons, taking into account Wikipedia's policy on article titles.
*Oppose; I think the spirit of WP:PLURAL allows for exceptions in cases like this. Red Slash 00:54, 10 December 2013 (UTC)
thread_title: Survey

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to  on Pounds per square inch. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add  after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add  to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20110801114928/http://www.uasinc.com:80/InfoGlossaryP.aspx to http://www.uasinc.com/InfoGlossaryP.aspx
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.
Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 19:03, 24 February 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Why is this article entitled in the plural? It should be the singular 'Pound per square inch', like all other articles on units (foot, not feet; pound, not pounds; kilogram, not kilograms; second, not seconds). Dondervogel 2 (talk) 15:01, 31 December 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: WP:PLURAL suggests that the article title should be the singular. --Kkmurray (talk) 15:41, 31 December 2016 (UTC)

text: The singular of the unit is pound per square inch and the plural is pounds per square inch. For values greater than 1, the plural is used, thus 10 pounds per square inch; for values less than one, the singular is used, thus 0.1 pound per square inch. This is not a case where the title only exists in the plural; numerous examples of the singular can be found: e.g. CRC Handbook of Chemistry and Physics, 97th Edition, National Cancer Institute Thesaurus, NIST Guide to the SI, US Post Office, US Army Corps of Engineers, etc. If the consensus is WP:IAR, that's fine, but it is not consistent with WP:PLURAL. --Kkmurray (talk) 14:38, 10 June 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Whether the title should be 'Pound per square inch' 

message: The guideline now clearly states that the article title should be in the singular, not plural, ostensibly requiring a move to Pound per square inch.  However, to avoid having to change the title twice, let's consider first whether the correct name should be Pound-force per square inch. My own preference is the latter, on the grounds that the psi is a unit of pressure (force per unit area), not mass per unit area. Thoughts anyone? Dondervogel 2 (talk) 23:56, 4 July 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: I vote for Pound per square inch.  It is possible to find references to support Pound-force per square inch, but they are rarer by about 3 orders of magnitude.  I think articles should be titled according to the actual English name of the subject, even if that name seems inaccurate or ambiguous.  When it comes to language, what is "correct" is ultimately determined by usage; while some very common usage can legitimately be categorized as erroneous, at some point, when 1 user in 1000 insists on sticking to the "correct" usage, it is that user, and not the other 999, who is in error--after all, the whole point of language is to facilitate communication between users.  You could argue similarly that Foot-pound should be called Foot-pound-force, but no one has ever heard of "foot-pound-force" so that would be (according to me anyway) silly.  Both these articles can and should contain a clarification in the first sentence or two that "pound" means "pound-force".  When it comes to titles, we should go not with what the name should be, but what it is.  Rracecarr (talk) 15:37, 5 July 2017 (UTC)
replies: text:  It is not the number of references that matter but their pedigree. The international standard IEEE 260.1IEEE 260.1-2004, IEEE Standard Letter Symbols for Units of Measurement (SI Units, Customary Inch-Pound Units, and Certain Other Units) lists the pound-force per square inch (not pound per square inch), with abbreviation psi and symbol lbf/in2. I propose we follow this international standard. Dondervogel 2 (talk) 21:47, 6 July 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: Madonna's name is Madonna Louise Ciccone, but putting that title at the top of the article would cause unnecessary confusion.  It's her real name, as can be verified by any number of reliable sources, but it's not the recognizable one.  So, the article is (appropriately in my opinion) called Madonna (entertainer).  No one wonders, when they arrive at the page, if they've come to the wrong place.   The term "pound-force per square inch" is used essentially never (less than 1/1000 as often as "pound per square inch").  So, while it may be attractive pedantically to use the former as a title, it would be detrimental to the utility of the encyclopedia. Rracecarr (talk) 05:21, 15 July 2017 (UTC)
replies: text:  Support Pound-force per square inch and divert from pounds and pound per square inch, I opposed the change to pound per square inch but if it is to change it would be preferable to pin it to a recognised standard.  I asked all the engineers in the office who were bemused by the singular pound per square inch and they were totally cool with pound-force per square inch and their blood pressures went down.  I'm only an architect so I defer to them on these matters. Ex nihil (talk) 08:53, 16 July 2017 (UTC)

text: All sensible engineering is done in metric units, let alone sciences. The only point in having psi here at all is to give a familiar and recognisable unit. Using pound-force is more accurate as a definition (which isn't something anyone cares about here), but it's also less clear to our readership. PSI is an anachronistic and obsolete unit - but it is not our role to try and fix or modernise it. Andy Dingley (talk) 17:37, 16 July 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Should the title be "Pound per square inch" or "Pound-force per square inch"? 

message: I looked at why the recently added convert gives a different value from that shown in the lead.
* → 
Convert defines the relevant units as shown below. That is followed by some calculations showing why the lead was displaying wrong and inconsistent values.
1 lbf  = 4.4482216152605 N
1 sqin = 0.00064516 m²
1 psi  = 4.4482216152605/0.00064516 = 6894.75729317 Pa
4.4482/(0.0254*0.0254)    ≈ 6894.7237894 → 6894.724
4.44822/(0.0254*0.0254)   ≈ 6894.7547895 → 6894.755
4.448222/(0.0254*0.0254)  ≈ 6894.7578895 → 6894.758
4.4482216/(0.0254*0.0254) ≈ 6894.7572695 → 6894.757
The correct value appears to be 6894.757, but achieving that requires 8 significant figures for the inputs, as shown in the last calculation. That seems excessive but it might be best, so I put it in the article. Johnuniq (talk) 03:23, 4 October 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: Thank you for posting this.  The difference seems to arise from an ambiguity in the definition of the pound-force.  I was to taking this to be 1 lbf = 4.4482 N (the value stated by IEEE 260.1), while you are using the product of 1 lb with the international standard accelration due to gravity (g_std), resulting in a different value for lbf and therefore also for lbf/in^2. What is the basis for using g_std in the definition of lbf? Is there a national or international standard or legal agreement that supports this definition? Dondervogel 2 (talk) 06:38, 4 October 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: I am unaware of an alternative definition for lbf but my knowledge could easily be outdated. Pound (force) has the 4.4482216152605 N value although of course that does not prove anything. I would be inclined to ask at WP:RD/S if no one here can clarify. Johnuniq (talk) 06:52, 4 October 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: IEEE 260.1 concerns standard letter symbols for units of measurement. It may kindly provide indicative approximate conversions to clarify which units are being discussed, but it does not purport to be the, or even a, definitive standard for conversions. BS 350:Part 1:1974 "Conversion Factors and Tables" was definitive for British standards. It gives 4.44822 as an approximation for the pound-force, noting that it is "in exact terms, 0.45359237 x 9.80665". It describes the lbf/ft2 as precisely 0.45359237 x 9.80665 / 0.3048^2 and the lbf/in2 as 144 lbf/ft2. It has been superseded by BS 350:2004 which is available from BSI for £262, but I doubt those values have changed. 92.19.24.9 (talk) 18:53, 21 October 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Value of 1 psi 

message: :The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion. 
The result of the move request was: Moved per WP:PLURAL   (t · c) buidhe 15:33, 1 June 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: Pounds per square inch →  – all titles use singular 151.231.196.178 (talk) 21:47, 24 May 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Requested move 24 May 2021 

message: It is usefull to know and i need to know It because i need to write something in my school project 109.166.138.207 (talk) 20:10, 15 May 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Who discovered it 

message: Perhaps it's just an isolated incident, but the text in conversions is overlapped with source code. I'm not sure how to edit it. Edit: This also happened on the page for a Vacuum. I think it's something to do with my session.TophatGuy14 (talk) 01:50, 29 June 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Conversions not displaying properly 

message: The redirect Ksi has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Readers of this page are welcome to comment on this redirect at  until a consensus is reached.  Morbidthoughts (talk) 02:21, 15 October 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  "[[:Ksi]]" listed at [[Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion|Redirects for discussion]]