Volumetric flow rate.
Cubic foot per Weeks to Centiliters per Millisecond Converter — ft3/wk to cL/ms
Convert Cubic foot per Weeks (ft3/wk) to Centiliter per Millisecond (cL/ms) using the exact conversion factor (1 cubic foot per weeks = 0.000004682 centiliter per millisecond). See the formula, worked examples, and conversion table.
Cubic foot per Weeks to Centiliters per Millisecond converter
Converter
Flow Rate Converter
Convert volumetric flow rates across metric, US, imperial, industrial, and scientific units.
Context values
Some unit families need one extra value for a physically accurate result.
Volumetric flow rate.
Result = input x 4.68201829e-8 / 0.01.
Flow rate uses cubic meters per second as the base unit.
Reserved above the conversion cards and below the converter.
About Converting Cubic foot per Weeks to Centiliters per Millisecond
Cubic foot per Weeks and Centiliter per Millisecond both measure volumetric flow rate — how much volume passes a point over time — used to size pipes and pumps, monitor river or stream discharge, control industrial processes, and set medical infusion rates. Both are volumetric flow rate units.
Formula
centiliters per millisecond = cubic foot per weeks × 0.00000468201828571
This factor comes from each unit's defined relationship to the category's base unit: 1 cubic foot per weeks equals 4.682018e-8 base units, and 1 centiliter per millisecond equals 0.01 base units, so dividing one by the other gives the direct cubic foot per weeks-to-centiliter per millisecond factor of 0.00000468201828571.
Simple example
1 ft3/wk × 0.000004682018286 = 0.000004682 cL/ms
1 cubic foot per weeks = 0.000004682 centiliters per millisecond.
Real-world example
60 ft3/wk × 0.000004682018286 = 0.0002809211 cL/ms
60 cubic foot per weeks = 0.0002809211 centiliters per millisecond.
Conversion table
| Cubic foot per Weeks (ft3/wk) | Centiliter per Millisecond (cL/ms) |
|---|---|
| 0.1 ft3/wk | 4.682018e-7 cL/ms |
| 1 ft3/wk | 0.000004682 cL/ms |
| 10 ft3/wk | 0.0000468202 cL/ms |
| 60 ft3/wk | 0.0002809211 cL/ms |
| 100 ft3/wk | 0.0004682018 cL/ms |
| 1,000 ft3/wk | 0.0046820183 cL/ms |
Reverse conversion: Centiliter per Millisecond to Cubic foot per Weeks
0.000004682 cL/ms × 213583.1043 = 0.9999960945 ft3/wk
0.000004682 centiliters per millisecond = 0.9999960945 cubic foot per weeks.
cubic foot per weeks = centiliters per millisecond × 213583.104332
For a page dedicated to this direction, see Centiliter per Millisecond to Cubic foot per Weeks.
Understanding the Cubic foot per Weeks (ft3/wk)
Volumetric flow rate.
Understanding the Centiliter per Millisecond (cL/ms)
Volumetric flow rate.
Reserved between the cards and the FAQ so the page stays balanced.
Frequently asked questions
How many centiliters per millisecond are in 1 cubic foot per weeks?
1 cubic foot per weeks equals 0.000004682 centiliters per millisecond, using the exact defined conversion factor rather than an estimate.
How do I convert cubic foot per weeks to centiliter per millisecond?
Multiply the cubic foot per weeks value by 0.000004682018286. The converter above does this instantly to whatever precision you set.
How do I convert centiliter per millisecond back to cubic foot per weeks?
Use the reverse factor: 1 centiliter per millisecond equals 213,583.1043 cubic foot per weeks. You can also use the swap control in the converter above to flip the direction instantly.
What is a cubic foot per weeks?
Cubic foot per Weeks (ft3/wk) is a unit of flow rate.
What is a centiliter per millisecond?
Centiliter per Millisecond (cL/ms) is a unit of flow rate.
Is the cubic foot per weeks to centiliter per millisecond conversion exact?
Yes. Both cubic foot per weeks and centiliter per millisecond are defined by fixed standards rather than physical artifacts, so the factor of 0.000004682018286 used above is exact to as many digits as you choose to display.
What's the difference between volumetric and mass flow rate?
Volumetric flow rate measures the volume of fluid passing a point per unit time (for example, liters per second). Mass flow rate measures the mass instead. For a fluid of constant density the two are directly proportional, but for compressible fluids like gases, mass flow is often the more meaningful quantity.