Engineer: The efficiency of our product assembly process has declined

Question

Engineer: The efficiency of our product assembly process has declined because some of our machines have been malfunctioning often. The malfunction occurs because steel rods in some of the machines have been failing under stress. I believe that ____1____. Although steel rods are stronger than many types of rods (for example, iron rods), titanium rods are significantly stronger than these steel rods. Furthermore, ____2____.

Select for Statement 1 and for Statement 2 the two sentences that best complete the argument. Make only two selections, one in each column.

Bismuth83 · Answer

1. The text first states that there is a problem with the steel rods they have - the rods can't handle the stress. In other words, it's a question of strength.

2. After the first statement, the engineer clarifies that titanium rods are stronger than steel ones. That means the first statement is about the idea of using steel rods. So, the best matching answer would be, "we should replace the steel rods with titanium rods."

3. "Furthermore" means that the second statement is about another positive of the titanium rods. So, the best matching answer would be, "when replacement costs for steel rods are taken into account, the titanium rods are less expensive than steel rods."

4. Our answer is:   1 - we should replace the steel rods with titanium rods and 2 - when replacement costs for steel rods are taken into account, the titanium rods are less expensive than steel rods  .

Usernamevisible · Answer

This question follows a standard argument-completion structure in which a problem is identified, its cause is explained, and the speaker proposes a course of action supported by a justification.

The argument states that the efficiency of the assembly process has declined because machines are malfunctioning, and that these malfunctions occur because steel rods in the machines fail under stress. This establishes a clear causal chain: steel rod failure leads to machine malfunction, which in turn leads to reduced efficiency.

Given this structure, the first blank must propose a solution that directly addresses the identified cause. The most logical action is to replace the component that is failing. Among the options, the only one that directly targets the cause is the statement that the steel rods should be replaced with titanium rods. Other options either do not address the cause or introduce irrelevant elements.

For the second blank, the argument must provide support for why this proposed solution is sensible. While titanium rods are stated to be stronger than steel rods, strength alone may not justify replacement unless it is also economically reasonable. Therefore, the best supporting statement is the one that shows titanium rods are more cost-effective when replacement costs are considered. Since steel rods fail more frequently, they would need to be replaced more often, increasing their long-term cost. Titanium rods, being more durable, would reduce replacement frequency and thus overall cost.

Accordingly, the correct completions are:

Statement 1: we should replace the steel rods with titanium rods
Statement 2: when replacement costs for steel rods are taken into account, the titanium rods are less expensive than steel rods

egmat · Answer

Let's break down the argument structure first, then fill in both blanks.

The engineer presents a PROBLEM and then proposes a SOLUTION: 
-  Problem:  Steel rods in machines are failing under stress, causing malfunctions and reduced efficiency.
-  Blank 1 (Statement 1):  This follows 'I believe that...' — so it must be the engineer's RECOMMENDATION.
- The middle sentence tells us titanium rods are significantly stronger than steel rods.
-  Blank 2 (Statement 2):  This follows 'Furthermore' — so it must provide ADDITIONAL SUPPORT for the recommendation.

Finding Statement 1 (the recommendation): 
- Choice  1  ('machines are more efficient') — this isn't a recommendation, it's just a claim. Doesn't fit after 'I believe that.'
- Choice  2  ('replace machines with ones without rods') — the argument is about upgrading the RODS, not eliminating them entirely.
- Choice  3  ('replace steel rods with titanium rods') —  PERFECT. The problem is steel rods failing, and the next sentence explains titanium is stronger. This is the logical recommendation. 
- Choice  4  ('replace iron rods with titanium rods') —  Trap!  The machines have STEEL rods, not iron rods. Iron is only mentioned as a comparison.

So Statement 1 = Choice 3.

Finding Statement 2 (additional support): 
We've already established titanium is STRONGER. What other objection might someone raise? Cost! So Statement  2  should address the cost concern.
- Choice  5  says steel rods are LESS expensive than titanium — this would UNDERMINE the recommendation. Why switch to something costlier?
- Choice  6  says titanium rods are LESS expensive than steel when you factor in replacement costs —  this SUPPORTS the recommendation. Since steel rods keep breaking and need replacing, titanium actually saves money overall.

So Statement 2 = Choice 6.

The correct pair:  Row  3  for Statement  1 , Row  6  for Statement  2 . The argument flows logically: steel rods keep failing → replace them with titanium → titanium is both stronger AND cheaper long-term.

Answer: 3A, 6B

1	2
		the machines are more efficient
		we should replace the machines with other machines without rods
		we should replace the steel rods with titanium rods
		we should replace the iron rods with titanium rods
		when replacement costs for titanium rods are taken into account, the steel rods are less expensive than titanium rods
		when replacement costs for steel rods are taken into account, the titanium rods are less expensive than steel rods

Engineer: The efficiency of our product assembly process has declined

Prep Toolkit

Top 5 GMAT Debrief Videos

615 to 715 in 15 Days (Ria's Strategies)

More than Quant/Verbal Abilities: Speed vs. Accuracy

745 with Only Self-Prep and GMAT Club

From 555 to 765: 210-point Improvement

Perfect 805 Score Debrief by Julia

My Rewards

GMAT Two-part Analysis (TPA) Questions

Engineer: The efficiency of our product assembly process has declined

Prep Toolkit

615 to 715 in 15 Days (Ria's Strategies)

More than Quant/Verbal Abilities: Speed vs. Accuracy

745 with Only Self-Prep and GMAT Club

From 555 to 765: 210-point Improvement

Perfect 805 Score Debrief by Julia

My Rewards