Volumetric flow rate.
Cubic Meter per Weeks to Imperial quart per Weeks Converter — m3/wk to imp qt/wk
Convert Cubic Meter per Weeks (m3/wk) to Imperial quart per Weeks (imp qt/wk) using the exact conversion factor (1 cubic meter per weeks = 879.8769932 imperial quart per weeks). See the formula, worked examples, and conversion table.
Cubic Meter per Weeks to Imperial quart per Weeks 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 / 1.8791708e-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 Imperial quart per Weeks
Cubic Meter per Weeks and Imperial quart per Weeks 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
imperial quart per weeks = cubic meter per weeks × 879.876993196
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 imperial quart per weeks equals 1.879171e-9 base units, so dividing one by the other gives the direct cubic meter per weeks-to-imperial quart per weeks factor of 879.876993196.
Simple example
1 m3/wk × 879.8769932 = 879.8769932 imp qt/wk
1 cubic meter per weeks = 879.8769932 imperial quart per weeks.
Real-world example
60 m3/wk × 879.8769932 = 52,792.61959 imp qt/wk
60 cubic meter per weeks = 52,792.61959 imperial quart per weeks.
Conversion table
| Cubic Meter per Weeks (m3/wk) | Imperial quart per Weeks (imp qt/wk) |
|---|---|
| 0.1 m3/wk | 87.98769932 imp qt/wk |
| 1 m3/wk | 879.8769932 imp qt/wk |
| 10 m3/wk | 8,798.769932 imp qt/wk |
| 60 m3/wk | 52,792.61959 imp qt/wk |
| 100 m3/wk | 87,987.69932 imp qt/wk |
| 1,000 m3/wk | 879,876.9932 imp qt/wk |
Reverse conversion: Imperial quart per Weeks to Cubic Meter per Weeks
879.8769932 imp qt/wk × 0.0011365225 = 1 m3/wk
879.8769932 imperial quart per weeks = 1 cubic meter per weeks.
cubic meter per weeks = imperial quart per weeks × 0.0011365225
For a page dedicated to this direction, see Imperial quart per Weeks to Cubic Meter per Weeks.
Understanding the Cubic Meter per Weeks (m3/wk)
Volumetric flow rate.
Understanding the Imperial quart per Weeks (imp qt/wk)
Volumetric flow rate.
Reserved between the cards and the FAQ so the page stays balanced.
Frequently asked questions
How many imperial quart per weeks are in 1 cubic meter per weeks?
1 cubic meter per weeks equals 879.8769932 imperial quart per weeks, using the exact defined conversion factor rather than an estimate.
How do I convert cubic meter per weeks to imperial quart per weeks?
Multiply the cubic meter per weeks value by 879.8769932. The converter above does this instantly to whatever precision you set.
How do I convert imperial quart per weeks back to cubic meter per weeks?
Use the reverse factor: 1 imperial quart per weeks equals 0.0011365225 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 imperial quart per weeks?
Imperial quart per Weeks (imp qt/wk) is a unit of flow rate.
Is the cubic meter per weeks to imperial quart per weeks conversion exact?
Yes. Both cubic meter per weeks and imperial quart per weeks are defined by fixed standards rather than physical artifacts, so the factor of 879.8769932 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.