Volumetric flow rate.
Cubic Meter per Weeks to Cubic Millimeter per Seconds Converter — m3/wk to mm3/s
Convert Cubic Meter per Weeks (m3/wk) to Cubic Millimeter per Seconds (mm3/s) using the exact conversion factor (1 cubic meter per weeks = 1,653.439153 cubic millimeter per seconds). See the formula, worked examples, and conversion table.
Cubic Meter per Weeks to Cubic Millimeter per Seconds 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 1.65343915e-6 / 1e-9.
Flow rate uses cubic meters per second as the base unit.
Reserved above the conversion cards and below the converter.
About Converting Cubic Meter per Weeks to Cubic Millimeter per Seconds
Cubic Meter per Weeks and Cubic Millimeter per Seconds 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
cubic millimeter per seconds = cubic meter per weeks × 1653.43915344
This factor comes from each unit's defined relationship to the category's base unit: 1 cubic meter per weeks equals 0.00000165343915344 base units, and 1 cubic millimeter per seconds equals 1e-9 base units, so dividing one by the other gives the direct cubic meter per weeks-to-cubic millimeter per seconds factor of 1653.43915344.
Simple example
1 m3/wk × 1653.439153 = 1,653.439153 mm3/s
1 cubic meter per weeks = 1,653.439153 cubic millimeter per seconds.
Real-world example
60 m3/wk × 1653.439153 = 99,206.34921 mm3/s
60 cubic meter per weeks = 99,206.34921 cubic millimeter per seconds.
Conversion table
| Cubic Meter per Weeks (m3/wk) | Cubic Millimeter per Seconds (mm3/s) |
|---|---|
| 0.1 m3/wk | 165.3439153 mm3/s |
| 1 m3/wk | 1,653.439153 mm3/s |
| 10 m3/wk | 16,534.39153 mm3/s |
| 60 m3/wk | 99,206.34921 mm3/s |
| 100 m3/wk | 165,343.9153 mm3/s |
| 1,000 m3/wk | 1,653,439.153 mm3/s |
Reverse conversion: Cubic Millimeter per Seconds to Cubic Meter per Weeks
1 mm3/s × 0.0006048 = 0.0006048 m3/wk
1 cubic millimeter per seconds = 0.0006048 cubic meter per weeks.
cubic meter per weeks = cubic millimeter per seconds × 0.0006048
For a page dedicated to this direction, see Cubic Millimeter per Seconds to Cubic Meter per Weeks.
Understanding the Cubic Meter per Weeks (m3/wk)
Volumetric flow rate.
Understanding the Cubic Millimeter per Seconds (mm3/s)
Volumetric flow rate.
Reserved between the cards and the FAQ so the page stays balanced.
Frequently asked questions
How many cubic millimeter per seconds are in 1 cubic meter per weeks?
1 cubic meter per weeks equals 1,653.439153 cubic millimeter per seconds, using the exact defined conversion factor rather than an estimate.
How do I convert cubic meter per weeks to cubic millimeter per seconds?
Multiply the cubic meter per weeks value by 1653.439153. The converter above does this instantly to whatever precision you set.
How do I convert cubic millimeter per seconds back to cubic meter per weeks?
Use the reverse factor: 1 cubic millimeter per seconds equals 0.0006048 cubic meter per weeks. You can also use the swap control in the converter above to flip the direction instantly.
What is a cubic meter per weeks?
Cubic Meter per Weeks (m3/wk) is a unit of flow rate.
What is a cubic millimeter per seconds?
Cubic Millimeter per Seconds (mm3/s) is a unit of flow rate.
Is the cubic meter per weeks to cubic millimeter per seconds conversion exact?
Yes. Both cubic meter per weeks and cubic millimeter per seconds are defined by fixed standards rather than physical artifacts, so the factor of 1653.439153 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.