Talk:Board foot

Calculation
When measuring board foot, do I truncate the length L for each board to the nearest foot? Or do I sum up all the lengths for all board and then truncate that number?

This makes a big difference in my case (on the order of 20% difference).

Board feet is (# of pieces * Thickness *Width*Length)/ 144 --gordonrox24 (talk) 19:43, 4 April 2009 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 1 one external link on Board foot. 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 http://web.archive.org/web/20070917200345/https://www.goldcoast.qld.gov.au/t_standard.aspx?PID=3398 to http://www.goldcoast.qld.gov.au/t_standard.aspx?PID=3398

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at Sourcecheck).

Cheers.—cyberbot II  Talk to my owner :Online 04:13, 28 February 2016 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Board foot. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070702205423/http://home.vicnet.net.au/~aholgate/jm/texts/bgobrshist.html to http://home.vicnet.net.au/~aholgate/jm/texts/bgobrshist.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 10:07, 22 July 2017 (UTC)

Conversion
100 BDFT 100 BDFT does not work, 100 bdft 100 bdft does work. Peter Horn User talk 21:37, 30 December 2020 (UTC)
 * Nor does 100 FBM Peter Horn User talk 21:41, 30 December 2020 (UTC)
 * 100 fbm does not work either. Peter Horn User talk 23:41, 30 December 2020 (UTC)

I'm not sure that this should "work". Nominally a "board foot" is 1" x 1' x 1', so 1/12 cu ft, and this volume could be converted to cubic metres, but it would not represent any actual property of the wood involved, so could be just misleading. IOW, the "board foot" is not really a unit of volume, it is a way of describing timber by referring to fictional dimensions of the tree the timber came from. Unless there is a corresponding system of nominal volume in the metric system, it is misleading to add "conversions" to lots of sizes in FBM or whatever. Imaginatorium (talk) 06:16, 1 January 2021 (UTC)
 * To show: 100 bdft 100 bdft This works. Peter Horn User talk 23:26, 6 January 2021 (UTC)

Dubious "Essex table"
I removed this statement: "An Essex table is a tabulation of the number of board feet in lumber of varying dimensions. ". The reference is extremely thin, and this all looks as though it might be circular. There are no doubt such conversion tables - you can see on in this video Youtube, but it is not clear what percentage of the time such tables are actually referred to with the "Essex" name. Searching for "Essex table" brings up mostly tables you might sit at. Imaginatorium (talk) 06:05, 1 January 2021 (UTC)