| Fluid ounces (fl oz) | Cubic millimeters (mm³) |
|---|---|
| 1 Fluid ounce | 28413.0625 mm³ |
| 2 Fluid ounces | 56826.125 mm³ |
| 3 Fluid ounces | 85239.1875 mm³ |
| 4 Fluid ounces | 113652.25 mm³ |
| 5 Fluid ounces | 142065.3125 mm³ |
| 10 Fluid ounces | 284130.625 mm³ |
| 20 Fluid ounces | 568261.25 mm³ |
| 25 Fluid ounces | 710326.5625 mm³ |
| 50 Fluid ounces | 1420653.125 mm³ |
| 100 Fluid ounces | 2841306.25 mm³ |
| Reference | Fluid ounces (fl oz) | Cubic millimeters (mm³) |
|---|---|---|
| A teaspoon | 0.175975 fl oz | 5000 mm³ |
| A can of soft drink | 11.6144 fl oz | 330000 mm³ |
| A wine bottle | 26.3963 fl oz | 750000 mm³ |
| A bathtub | 5279.26 fl oz | 150000000 mm³ |
| An Olympic swimming pool | 87987699 fl oz | 2.5 × 1012 mm³ |
The fluid ounce in the imperial system is a unit of volume equal to exactly 28.4130625 millilitres. Its symbol is fl oz. Twenty of them make an imperial pint and 160 an imperial gallon. It is the smallest unit of the imperial liquid chain in ordinary use, and its name records exactly what it was built to do.
The name is literal. The Weights and Measures Act of 1824 defined the fluid ounce as the volume occupied by one avoirdupois ounce of water, so a fluid ounce of water weighs an ounce. The modern definition is metric and the agreement is no longer exact, but it is close: a fluid ounce of water weighs 28.4 grams against the ounce's 28.35, a difference of two parts in a thousand.
The United States fluid ounce is a different quantity, and the relationship between the two is the most confusing pair of units in either system. A United States fluid ounce is 29.5735 millilitres, so it is four per cent larger than the imperial one. Yet a United States pint contains only sixteen of them where an imperial pint contains twenty, so the American pint ends up seventeen per cent smaller. The smaller unit belongs to the larger system and the larger unit to the smaller.
That reversal has practical consequences. A recipe calling for eight fluid ounces of milk means 237 millilitres in America and 227 in Britain, which is tolerable, but one calling for a pint means 473 or 568, which is not. Cosmetics, medicines and drinks all carry both figures on internationally sold packaging for exactly this reason.
British labelling now leads with millilitres. Toiletries, spirits and soft drinks are specified in metric units, with fluid ounces printed alongside for markets that expect them, and pharmacy long ago abandoned the fluid ounce and the fluid dram in favour of millilitres. What survives is culinary and conversational rather than legal.
Where an old British recipe uses it, the conversion is straightforward as long as the system is known: multiply by 28.4 for millilitres, and remember that the pint above it holds twenty and not sixteen. Getting the pint right matters more than getting the ounce right, because the error compounds with quantity.
One imperial fluid ounce equals 28.4130625 millilitres, 1/20 of an imperial pint, or about 0.961 US fluid ounces.
The cubic millimetre is a unit of volume equal to one thousandth of a cubic centimetre, written mm³. It is the volume of a cube one millimetre on each side, and it is exactly one microlitre. Which of the two names is used depends on whether the thing being measured is a solid or a liquid, and the distinction is entirely a matter of professional habit.
Machining measures productivity in it. The material removal rate of a milling cutter or a grinding wheel is quoted in cubic millimetres per minute, and that single figure captures what a machine and a tool can achieve better than spindle speed or feed rate can on their own. Comparing two cutting strategies, two tool coatings or two machines means comparing how many cubic millimetres of metal each turns into swarf per unit time.
Additive manufacturing inverts the same measurement. A fused-filament printer deposits ten to twenty cubic millimetres a second, a laser powder-bed machine rather less, and build time follows directly from the part volume divided by that rate. Because the volume of a component is known exactly from its model, the estimate is unusually reliable.
Wear and durability testing uses the unit to describe loss. A specific wear rate is stated in cubic millimetres removed per newton of load and metre of sliding, which allows materials of very different hardness to be compared on one scale. Bearing life, brake pad testing and coating evaluation all reduce to counting cubic millimetres that are no longer there.
Medical imaging works at the same magnitude. Micro-computed tomography of bone reports trabecular volume and porosity in cubic millimetres, tumour volumes in early imaging are given the same way, and voxel sizes in high-resolution scans are quoted as fractions of one. In each case the unit is small enough to describe structure rather than merely size.
Its identity with the microlitre is worth remembering when moving between fields. An engineer discussing a cubic millimetre of material and a biologist discussing a microlitre of solution are talking about the same quantity, and any calculation that mixes the two needs no conversion factor at all.
One cubic millimetre equals 1 microlitre, 0.001 cubic centimetres, 0.000000001 cubic metres, or about 0.000061 cubic inches.