Bunuel wrote:
A mechanized factory with over 3000 separate conveyor belts wants to minimize the cost associated with maintenance, repair, and replacement of these belts. The conveyer belts currently are composed vulcanized rubber around a cotton web base, but the factory owners are investigating new plastic polymer design. For any given size belt, the costs for belts of the two compositions are comparable. Compared to the current rubber/cotton belts, the plastic polymer belts are lighter and easier to move, so operating the conveyor belts made of plastic polymer would consume less electric energy. A change from rubber/cotton belts to plastic polymer belts would require minor modification to some of the drive cylinders of the conveyor belts, but the costs of these changes are negligible.
Which of the following would it be most useful to know in determining whether switching to the plastic polymer conveyor belts would be likely to help minimize the factory's cost related to its conveyor belt system?
(A) Whether a typical plastic polymer conveyor belt has an approximate serviceable life as least as long as the typical rubber/cotton belt of the same size and shape.
(B) Whether, in remodeling, the factory plans to increase the total number of conveyor belts in its mechanized system.
(C) Whether the crew that currently maintains the conveyor belts knows how to perform the modification to the drive cylinders necessary to switch to plastic polymer belts.
(D) Whether other mechanized factories with comparable number of conveyor belts in their systems have switched from rubber/cotton to plastic polymer conveyor belts.
(E) Whether the industrial supplier from which the factory traditionally has ordered its rubber/cotton conveyor belts also sells plastic polymer conveyor belts.
Magoosh Official Explanation
It would seem that in many ways, the costs associated with the two belt compositions are comparable, and the plastic polymer belts will help with energy savings in the long term. The question remains: are there any hidden long term costs associated with moving to the plastic polymer belts?
Choice (A) is the credited response. If the plastic polymer belts break down more, or simply don't last as long as the traditional belts, then replacing them will incur additional costs that would offset the savings from reduced energy consumption.
(B) is irrelevant: if the company plans to increase the number of belts, then that will have associated costs with either belt system. It doesn't affect the choice of belt.
(C) is not crucial: if they current crew does not know how to modify the system, perhaps the factory will have to hire specialist to come in on a one-time basis to switch over all the drive cylinders, but that's an isolated expense, like the installation costs, which would be offset by long term savings.
(D) would provide weak support at best: other factories might have made this switch for any number of reasons, so the fact that other factors have made this switch would not necessarily tell us anything about whether this particular factory will save money by doing so.
(E) is irrelevant: if the old merchant doesn't sell the old belts, they'll find a new merchant. Big deal. As long as the prices are comparable (which the prompt specifies), this indicates no big change in long term expenses.
close
07 Feb 2021, 09:41
15%
(02:31)
wrong 
