All categories

2 years ago

Cold forging makes metal more workable than hot forging. True False

Engineering

2 answers:

Whitepunk [10]2 years ago

7 0

Answer:

I don't really know but i have some info for you...

Explanation:

The cold forging manufacturing process increases the strength of a metal through strain hardening at a room temperature. On the contrary the hot forging manufacturing process keeps materials from strain hardening at high temperature, which results in optimum yield strength, low hardness and high ductility.

Pani-rosa [81]2 years ago

4 0

Answer:

false

Explanation:

You might be interested in

For the following conditions determine whether a CMFR or a PFR is more efficient in removing a reactive compound from the waste

andrew11 [14]

Answer:

The PFR is more efficient in the removal of the reactive compound as it has the higher conversion ratio.

Xₚբᵣ = 0.632

X꜀ₘբᵣ = 0.5

Xₚբᵣ > X꜀ₘբᵣ

Explanation:

From the reaction rate coefficient, it is evident the reaction is a first order reaction

Performance equation for a CMFR for a first order reaction is

kτ = (X)/(1 - X)

k = reaction rate constant = 0.05 /day

τ = Time constant or holding time = V/F₀

V = volume of reactor = 280 m³

F₀ = Flowrate into the reactor = 14 m³/day

X = conversion

k(V/F₀) = (X)/(1 - X)

0.05 × (280/14) = X/(1 - X)

1 = X/(1 - X)

X = 1 - X

2X = 1

X = 1/2 = 0.5

For the PFR

Performance equation for a first order reaction is given by

kτ = In [1/(1 - X)]

The parameters are the same as above,

0.05 × (280/14) = In (1/(1-X)

1 = In (1/(1-X))

e = 1/(1 - X)

2.718 = 1/(1 - X)

1 - X = 1/2.718

1 - X = 0.3679

X = 1 - 0.3679

X = 0.632

The PFR is evidently more efficient in the removal of the reactive compound as it has the higher conversion ratio.

3 0

2 years ago

An engineering firm just lost one of their larger customers. The firm president says that the solution to this problem is to fir

Shkiper50 [21]

Answer:

The engineers disagreed because their jobs were on the line

The ethical factors are:

The reason for the customer dumping the business is yet to be figured out

The need to keep cost to the lowest ebb in order to keep maintain profitability at the expense of employees' welfare

The are several ways of growing customer base which are yet to be exploited.

Explanation:

The engineers disagree because there is no direct connection between the company's loss of the customer and their proposed layoff of the engineers,at least no one strong evidence has been given by the president.

The ethical factors inherent in this case are as follows:

The reason for the customer dumping the business is yet to be figure out

The need to keep cost to the lowest ebb in order to keep maintain profitability.

The are several ways of growing customer base which are yet to be exploited.

There is a need for a fact-finding exercise to establish the main motive behind losing such customer,without which the company can run into more troubles in future,otherwise the company would keep firing its good hands each time a customer dumps it.

Also,the president had resulted into such decision in order to maintain company's margins,where then lies ethics of welfare economics?Welfare economics is about looking beyond margins and looking at issues from a wider perspective of fulfilling the needs of employees in order for them to put in their best performance,at least by granting them job safety.

The company could have also grown business by investing in new technology that sets it apart from competitors instead of just jumping into the conclusions of sacking employees in a business where the company's strength lies in quality of engineers that it has.

7 0

2 years ago

Do heavier cars really use more gasoline? Suppose a car is chosen at random. Let x be the weight of the car (in hundreds of poun

Alex17521 [72]

Answer:

Answer is explained in the explanation section below.

Explanation:

Solution:

Note: This question is incomplete and lacks necessary data to solve. But I have found the similar question on the internet. So, I will be using the data from that question to solve this question for the sack of concept and understanding.

Data Given:

x = 27 , 44 , 32 , 47, 23 , 40, 34, 52

y = 30, 19, 24, 13 , 29, 19, 21, 14

It is given that,

∑x = 299

∑y = 167

∑ $x^{2}$ = 11887

∑ $y^{2}$ = 3773

We are asked to verify the above values manually in this question.

So,

1. ∑x = 299

Let's verify it:

∑x = 27 + 44 + 32 + 47 + 23 + 40 + 34 + 52

∑x = 299

Yes, it is equal to the given value. Hence, verified.

2. ∑y = 167

Let's verify it:

∑y = 30 + 19 + 24 + 13 + 29 + 19 + 21 + 14

∑y = 169

No, it is not equal to the given value.

3. ∑ $x^{2}$ = 11887

Let's verify it:

For this to find, first we need to square all the value of x individually and then add them together to verify.

∑ $x^{2}$ = $27^{2}$ + $44^{2}$ + $32^{2}$ + $47^{2}$ + $23^{2}$ + $40^{2}$ + $34^{2}$ + $52^{2}$

∑ $x^{2}$ = 11,887

Yes, it is equal to the given value. Hence, verified.

4. ∑ $y^{2}$ = 3773

Let's verify it:

Again, for this we need to find the squares of all the y values and then add them together to verify it.

∑ $y^{2}$ = $30^{2}$ + $19^{2}$ + $24^{2}$ + $13^{2}$ + $29^{2}$ + $19^{2}$ + $21^{2}$ + $14^{2}$

∑ $y^{2}$ = 3,845

No, it is not equal to the given value.

4 0

2 years ago

Compact fluorescent bulbs are much more efficient at producing light than are ordinary incandescent bulbs. They initially cost m

Ilia_Sergeevich [38]

Answer:

ordinary bulb total cost is $39.54

fluorescent bulb total cost is $13.05

amount save = 39.54 - 13.05 = $26.49

resistance = 626.1 ohm

Explanation:

in the 1st part

bulb on time = 3 year = 4380 hours

life of bulb = 750 h

so number of bulb required = $\frac{4380}{750}$

number of bulb required = 6

cost of 6 bulb is = 6 × 0.75 = $4.5

cost of operation is = 100 × 4380 × $\frac{0.08}{1000}$

cost of operation = $35.04

so total cost will be = $4.5 + $35.04 = $39.54

and

when compare with florescent bulb

time = 3 year = 4380 h

life of bulb = 10000 h

so number of bulb required = $\frac{4380}{10000}$

number of bulb required = 0.43 = 1

cost of 6 bulb is = 1 × 5 = $5

cost of operation is = 23 × 4380 × $\frac{0.08}{1000}$

cost of operation = $8.05

so total cost will be = $5 + $8.05 = $13.05

in part 2nd

total amount save while compare bulb is

amount save = 39.54 - 13.05 = $26.49

and in part 3rd

resistance of bulb is

resistance = $\frac{v^2}{P}$

resistance = $\frac{120^2}{23}$

resistance = 626.1 ohm

6 0

2 years ago

During a medical evaluation, the doctor can __________.

Elan Coil [88]

Answer:

Treat the patient

i hope this is ur answer

8 0

2 years ago