A kneepad manufacturer tested a new kneepad design for use in industrial settings. In order to be rated for the intended use, the kneepads each needed to withstand a force of 100 newtons (N) on the outside of the kneepad without distorting the inside by more than 5 millimeters. During testing, the force on each kneepad was steadily increased until the kneepad failed. The table shows the manufacturer's results from testing 100 of the kneepads.
If these results correctly predict the performance of this kneepad design, what is the probability that one of the kneepads will require a force of 145 N or greater to cause failure?
- A. 53%
- B. 22%
- C. 75%
- D. 25%
Correct Answer & Rationale
Correct Answer: D
To determine the probability of a kneepad requiring a force of 145 N or greater to cause failure, we analyze the data provided. The correct option, 25%, indicates that one-fourth of the kneepads are expected to fail under this force, aligning with statistical predictions for this design. Option A (53%) overestimates the likelihood, suggesting more than half will fail, which is not supported by the data. Option B (22%) underestimates the probability, indicating fewer kneepads will fail than expected. Option C (75%) is excessively high, implying a significant majority would fail, which contradicts the predicted performance. Thus, 25% accurately reflects the failure rate at this force threshold.
To determine the probability of a kneepad requiring a force of 145 N or greater to cause failure, we analyze the data provided. The correct option, 25%, indicates that one-fourth of the kneepads are expected to fail under this force, aligning with statistical predictions for this design. Option A (53%) overestimates the likelihood, suggesting more than half will fail, which is not supported by the data. Option B (22%) underestimates the probability, indicating fewer kneepads will fail than expected. Option C (75%) is excessively high, implying a significant majority would fail, which contradicts the predicted performance. Thus, 25% accurately reflects the failure rate at this force threshold.
Other Related Questions
Which statement describes a weakness of the investigation in the passage?
- A. None of the hypotheses are directly related to the ice core data.
- B. The Greenland ice sheet is far away from the site of the explosion in Russia.
- C. Several of the hypotheses rely on unproven processes or estimated values.
- D. A few micrograms of ammonia is insufficient evidence for a conclusion.
Correct Answer & Rationale
Correct Answer: C
Option C highlights a significant weakness, as relying on unproven processes or estimated values can lead to unreliable conclusions, undermining the investigation's credibility. Option A is incorrect because hypotheses can be related to data in broader contexts, even if not directly. Option B misrepresents the geographical relevance; distance alone does not invalidate the connection between the ice core data and the explosion. Option D, while suggesting a concern about evidence quantity, does not address the fundamental issue of reliance on unproven processes that can skew the investigation's outcomes.
Option C highlights a significant weakness, as relying on unproven processes or estimated values can lead to unreliable conclusions, undermining the investigation's credibility. Option A is incorrect because hypotheses can be related to data in broader contexts, even if not directly. Option B misrepresents the geographical relevance; distance alone does not invalidate the connection between the ice core data and the explosion. Option D, while suggesting a concern about evidence quantity, does not address the fundamental issue of reliance on unproven processes that can skew the investigation's outcomes.
The roller coaster diagram shows a set of cars moving downward from position 1 to position 2. As the cars travel from position 1 toward position 2, their...
- A. gravitational potential energy; total energy
- B. kinetic energy; gravitational potential energy
- C. total energy; kinetic energy
- D. gravitational potential energy; kinetic energy
Correct Answer & Rationale
Correct Answer: A
As the roller coaster cars move from position 1 to position 2, they descend, resulting in a decrease in gravitational potential energy due to their lower height. However, their total energy—comprising both kinetic and potential energy—remains constant, assuming negligible friction. Option B incorrectly suggests that kinetic energy increases while gravitational potential energy decreases, but it does not address total energy. Option C misrepresents the relationship by stating total energy changes, which it does not. Option D also fails, as it inaccurately implies that gravitational potential energy is the only energy type being discussed.
As the roller coaster cars move from position 1 to position 2, they descend, resulting in a decrease in gravitational potential energy due to their lower height. However, their total energy—comprising both kinetic and potential energy—remains constant, assuming negligible friction. Option B incorrectly suggests that kinetic energy increases while gravitational potential energy decreases, but it does not address total energy. Option C misrepresents the relationship by stating total energy changes, which it does not. Option D also fails, as it inaccurately implies that gravitational potential energy is the only energy type being discussed.
Two people are standing at the edge of a high cliff. One person throws a rock horizontally off the cliff. Which uncontrolled part of this investigation can prevent the rocks from hitting the ground at the same time?
- A. gravity
- B. mass of the rocks
- C. air resistance
- D. strength of the person
Correct Answer & Rationale
Correct Answer: C
When a rock is thrown horizontally, it is influenced by both gravity and air resistance. Gravity acts equally on both rocks, ensuring they fall at the same rate. The mass of the rocks does not affect the time it takes to hit the ground in a vacuum, as all objects fall at the same rate regardless of mass. The strength of the person throwing the rock only affects the initial horizontal velocity, not the fall time. However, air resistance can vary based on the shape and size of the rocks, potentially causing differences in descent time. Thus, air resistance is the uncontrolled factor that can prevent the rocks from hitting the ground simultaneously.
When a rock is thrown horizontally, it is influenced by both gravity and air resistance. Gravity acts equally on both rocks, ensuring they fall at the same rate. The mass of the rocks does not affect the time it takes to hit the ground in a vacuum, as all objects fall at the same rate regardless of mass. The strength of the person throwing the rock only affects the initial horizontal velocity, not the fall time. However, air resistance can vary based on the shape and size of the rocks, potentially causing differences in descent time. Thus, air resistance is the uncontrolled factor that can prevent the rocks from hitting the ground simultaneously.
best explains the ammonia deposits found in ice core samples from the time of the Tunguska Event. The evidence that best supports the validity of this hypothesis is the-
- A. Hypothesis 2
- B. heat produced by fast-moving objects in the atmosphere
- C. Hypothesis 1
- D. match between measured and predicted amounts of ammonia
Correct Answer & Rationale
Correct Answer: A,D
The ammonia deposits found in ice core samples from the time of the Tunguska Event suggest a significant environmental impact. Hypothesis 2 (Option A) likely proposes a link between the event and the ammonia presence, making it relevant for explaining the deposits. Option B, which discusses heat from fast-moving objects, does not directly address ammonia production or accumulation. Hypothesis 1 (Option C) may not provide sufficient evidence or detail to support the ammonia findings. Option D highlights the alignment between measured and predicted ammonia levels, reinforcing the validity of Hypothesis 2 as it connects empirical data with theoretical expectations.
The ammonia deposits found in ice core samples from the time of the Tunguska Event suggest a significant environmental impact. Hypothesis 2 (Option A) likely proposes a link between the event and the ammonia presence, making it relevant for explaining the deposits. Option B, which discusses heat from fast-moving objects, does not directly address ammonia production or accumulation. Hypothesis 1 (Option C) may not provide sufficient evidence or detail to support the ammonia findings. Option D highlights the alignment between measured and predicted ammonia levels, reinforcing the validity of Hypothesis 2 as it connects empirical data with theoretical expectations.