Volumetric flow rate.
Imperial quart per Hours to Cubic Centimeter per Weeks Converter — imp qt/h to cm3/wk
Convert Imperial quart per Hours (imp qt/h) to Cubic Centimeter per Weeks (cm3/wk) using the exact conversion factor (1 imperial quart per hours = 190,935.78 cubic centimeter per weeks). See the formula, worked examples, and conversion table.
Imperial quart per Hours to Cubic Centimeter per Weeks converter
Converter
Flow Rate Converter
Convert volumetric flow rates across metric, US, imperial, industrial, and scientific units.
Volumetric flow rate.
Result = input x 3.15700694e-7 / 1.65343915e-12.
Flow rate uses cubic meters per second as the base unit.
Reserved above the conversion cards and below the converter.
About Converting Imperial quart per Hours to Cubic Centimeter per Weeks
Imperial quart per Hours and Cubic Centimeter 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
cubic centimeter per weeks = imperial quart per hours × 190935.78
This factor comes from each unit's defined relationship to the category's base unit: 1 imperial quart per hours equals 3.157007e-7 base units, and 1 cubic centimeter per weeks equals 1.653439e-12 base units, so dividing one by the other gives the direct imperial quart per hours-to-cubic centimeter per weeks factor of 190935.78.
Simple example
1 imp qt/h × 190935.78 = 190,935.78 cm3/wk
1 imperial quart per hours = 190,935.78 cubic centimeter per weeks.
Real-world example
60 imp qt/h × 190935.78 = 11,456,146.8 cm3/wk
60 imperial quart per hours = 11,456,146.8 cubic centimeter per weeks.
Conversion table
| Imperial quart per Hours (imp qt/h) | Cubic Centimeter per Weeks (cm3/wk) |
|---|---|
| 0.1 imp qt/h | 19,093.578 cm3/wk |
| 1 imp qt/h | 190,935.78 cm3/wk |
| 10 imp qt/h | 1,909,357.8 cm3/wk |
| 60 imp qt/h | 11,456,146.8 cm3/wk |
| 100 imp qt/h | 19,093,578 cm3/wk |
| 1,000 imp qt/h | 190,935,780 cm3/wk |
Reverse conversion: Cubic Centimeter per Weeks to Imperial quart per Hours
1 cm3/wk × 0.000005237363055 = 0.0000052374 imp qt/h
1 cubic centimeter per weeks = 0.0000052374 imperial quart per hours.
imperial quart per hours = cubic centimeter per weeks × 0.00000523736305474
For a page dedicated to this direction, see Cubic Centimeter per Weeks to Imperial quart per Hours.
Understanding the Imperial quart per Hours (imp qt/h)
Volumetric flow rate.
Understanding the Cubic Centimeter per Weeks (cm3/wk)
Volumetric flow rate.
Reserved between the cards and the FAQ so the page stays balanced.
Frequently asked questions
How many cubic centimeter per weeks are in 1 imperial quart per hours?
1 imperial quart per hours equals 190,935.78 cubic centimeter per weeks, using the exact defined conversion factor rather than an estimate.
How do I convert imperial quart per hours to cubic centimeter per weeks?
Multiply the imperial quart per hours value by 190935.78. The converter above does this instantly to whatever precision you set.
How do I convert cubic centimeter per weeks back to imperial quart per hours?
Use the reverse factor: 1 cubic centimeter per weeks equals 0.0000052374 imperial quart per hours. You can also use the swap control in the converter above to flip the direction instantly.
What is a imperial quart per hours?
Imperial quart per Hours (imp qt/h) is a unit of flow rate.
What is a cubic centimeter per weeks?
Cubic Centimeter per Weeks (cm3/wk) is a unit of flow rate.
Is the imperial quart per hours to cubic centimeter per weeks conversion exact?
Yes. Both imperial quart per hours and cubic centimeter per weeks are defined by fixed standards rather than physical artifacts, so the factor of 190935.78 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.