All categories

3 years ago

As Energy is added to ice, what happens to the temperature over time and why?

2 answers:

5 0

As ice melts into water, kinetic energy is being added to the particles. This causes them to be 'excited' and they break the bonds that hold them together as a solid, resulting in a change of state: solid -> liquid.

oksian1 [2.3K]3 years ago

4 0

Answer:

Explanation:

You might be interested in

A sewage lagoon that has a surface area of 10 ha and a depth of 1 m is receiving 8,640 m^3 /d of sewage containing 100 mg/L of b

Marysya12 [62]

Answer: Coefficient= 0.35 per day

Explanation:

To find the bio degradation reaction rate coefficient, we have

k= $\frac{(Cin)(Qin)-(Cout)(Qout)}{(Clagoon)V}$

Here, the C lagoon= 20 mg/L

Q in= Q out= 8640 m³/d

C in= 100 mg/L

C out= 20 mg/L

V= 10 ha* 1* 10

V= 10⁵ m³

So, k= $\frac{8640*100-8640*20}{20*10^5}$

k= 0.35 per day

6 0

3 years ago

A 132mm diameter solid circular section

Ganezh [65]

Answer:

not sure if this helps but

5 0

3 years ago

Three tool materials (high-speed steel, cemented carbide, and ceramic) are to be compared for the same turning operation on a ba

Tpy6a [65]

Answer:

Among all three tools, the ceramic tool is taking the least time for the production of a batch, however, machining from the HSS tool is taking the highest time.

Explanation:

The optimum cutting speed for the minimum cost

$V_{opt}= \frac{C}{\left[\left(T_c+\frac{C_e}{C_m}\right)\left(\frac{1}{n}-1\right)\right]^n}\;\cdots(i)$

Where,

C,n = Taylor equation parameters

$T_h$ =Tool changing time in minutes

$C_e$ =Cost per grinding per edge

$C_m$ = Machine and operator cost per minute

On comparing with the Taylor equation $VT^n=C$ ,

Tool life,

$T= \left[ \left(T_t+\frac{C_e}{C_m}\right)\left(\frac{1}{n}-1\right)\right]}\;\cdots(ii)$

Given that,

Cost of operator and machine time $=\$40/hr=\$0.667/min$

Batch setting time = 2 hr

Part handling time: $T_h=2.5$ min

Part diameter: $D=73 mm$ $=73\times 10^{-3} m$

Part length: $l=250 mm=250\times 10^{-3} m$

Feed: $f=0.30 mm/rev= 0.3\times 10^{-3} m/rev$

Depth of cut: $d=3.5 mm$

For the HSS tool:

Tool cost is $20 and it can be ground and reground 15 times and the grinding= $2/grind.

So, $C_e=$ $\$20/15+2=\$3.33/edge$

Tool changing time, $T_t=3$ min.

$C= 80 m/min$

$n=0.130$

(a) From equation (i), cutting speed for the minimum cost:

$V_{opt}= \frac {80}{\left[ \left(3+\frac{3.33}{0.667}\right)\left(\frac{1}{0.13}-1\right)\right]^{0.13}}$

$\Rightarrow 47.7$ m/min

(b) From equation (ii), the tool life,

$T=\left(3+\frac{3.33}{0.667}\right)\left(\frac{1}{0.13}-1\right)\right]}$

$\Rightarrow T=53.4$ min

(c) Cycle time: $T_c=T_h+T_m+\frac{T_t}{n_p}$

where,

$T_m=$ Machining time for one part

$n_p=$ Number of pieces cut in one tool life

$T_m= \frac{l}{fN}$ min, where $N=\frac{V_{opt}}{\pi D}$ is the rpm of the spindle.

$\Rightarrow T_m= \frac{\pi D l}{fV_{opt}}$

$\Rightarrow T_m=\frac{\pi \times 73 \times 250\times 10^{-6}}{0.3\times 10^{-3}\times 47.7}=4.01 min/pc$

So, the number of parts produced in one tool life

$n_p=\frac {T}{T_m}$

$\Rightarrow n_p=\frac {53.4}{4.01}=13.3$

Round it to the lower integer

$\Rightarrow n_p=13$

So, the cycle time

$T_c=2.5+4.01+\frac{3}{13}=6.74$ min/pc

(d) Cost per production unit:

$C_c= C_mT_c+\frac{C_e}{n_p}$

$\Rightarrow C_c=0.667\times6.74+\frac{3.33}{13}=\$4.75/pc$

(e) Total time to complete the batch= Sum of setup time and production time for one batch

$=2\times60+ {50\times 6.74}{50}=457 min=7.62 hr$ .

(f) The proportion of time spent actually cutting metal

$=\frac{50\times4.01}{457}=0.4387=43.87\%$

Now, for the cemented carbide tool:

Cost per edge,

$C_e=$ $\$8/6=\$1.33/edge$

Tool changing time, $T_t=1min$

$C= 650 m/min$

$n=0.30$

(a) Cutting speed for the minimum cost:

$V_{opt}= \frac {650}{\left[ \left(1+\frac{1.33}{0.667}\right)\left(\frac{1}{0.3}-1\right)\right]^{0.3}}=363m/min$ [from(i)]

(b) Tool life,

$T=\left[ \left(1+\frac{1.33}{0.667}\right)\left(\frac{1}{0.3}-1\right)\right]=7min$ [from(ii)]

(c) Cycle time:

$T_c=T_h+T_m+\frac{T_t}{n_p}$

$T_m= \frac{\pi D l}{fV_{opt}}$

$\Rightarrow T_m=\frac{\pi \times 73 \times 250\times 10^{-6}}{0.3\times 10^{-3}\times 363}=0.53min/pc$

$n_p=\frac {7}{0.53}=13.2$

$\Rightarrow n_p=13$ [ nearest lower integer]

So, the cycle time

$T_c=2.5+0.53+\frac{1}{13}=3.11 min/pc$

(d) Cost per production unit:

$C_c= C_mT_c+\frac{C_e}{n_p}$

$\Rightarrow C_c=0.667\times3.11+\frac{1.33}{13}=\$2.18/pc$

(e) Total time to complete the batch $=2\times60+ {50\times 3.11}{50}=275.5 min=4.59 hr$ .

(f) The proportion of time spent actually cutting metal

$=\frac{50\times0.53}{275.5}=0.0962=9.62\%$

Similarly, for the ceramic tool:

$C_e=$ $\$10/6=\$1.67/edge$

$T_t-1min$

$C= 3500 m/min$

$n=0.6$

(a) Cutting speed:

$V_{opt}= \frac {3500}{\left[ \left(1+\frac{1.67}{0.667}\right)\left(\frac{1}{0.6}-1\right)\right]^{0.6}}$

$\Rightarrow V_{opt}=2105 m/min$

(b) Tool life,

$T=\left[ \left(1+\frac{1.67}{0.667}\right)\left(\frac{1}{0.6}-1\right)\right]=2.33 min$

(c) Cycle time:

$T_c=T_h+T_m+\frac{T_t}{n_p}$

$\Rightarrow T_m=\frac{\pi \times 73 \times 250\times 10^{-6}}{0.3\times 10^{-3}\times 2105}=0.091 min/pc$

$n_p=\frac {2.33}{0.091}=25.6$

$\Rightarrow n_p=25 pc/tool\; life$

So,

$T_c=2.5+0.091+\frac{1}{25}=2.63 min/pc$

(d) Cost per production unit:

$C_c= C_mT_c+\frac{C_e}{n_p}$

$\Rightarrow C_c=0.667\times2.63+\frac{1.67}{25}=$1.82/pc$

(e) Total time to complete the batch

$=2\times60+ {50\times 2.63}=251.5 min=4.19 hr$ .

(f) The proportion of time spent actually cutting metal

$=\frac{50\times0.091}{251.5}=0.0181=1.81\%$

3 0

3 years ago

A patient has swollen feet, ankles, and legs, and has pain in his lower back. Tests show the level of urea, a waste product, in

myrzilka [38]

Answer: B Excretory

Explanation: Hope this helps :)

3 0

3 years ago

Which of the following best distinguishes between superficial design improvements and functional

Contact [7]

Answer:

Superficial design improvements are typically only trivial changes to a design, while functional design improvements can change the way a product or process is used to significantly enhance performance.

Explanation:

As a PC board designer, I would sometimes spend a certain amount of time making traces have shorter routes, or fewer layer changes or bends. (I wanted to make the layout "pretty.") In some cases, these changes are superficial, affecting the appearance only. In some cases, they are functional, reducing crosstalk or emissions or susceptibility to interference.

I deal with a web site that seems to be changing all the time (Brainly). In many cases, the same information is rearranged on the page—a superficial change. In other cases, the information being displayed changes, or the way that certain information is accessed changes. These are functional changes. (Sometimes, they "enhance performance," and sometimes they don't, IMO.)

In short ...

<em>Superficial design improvements are typically only trivial changes to a design, while functional design improvements can change the way a product or process is used to significantly enhance performance.</em>

8 0

2 years ago