![]() |
| Negative Rate of Work |
| Working together |
|
Emily Sledge
MGMAT STAFF
|
Those are pretty un-OG-like numbers, so I believe you about the source :-)
Anyway, both approaches are correct, but the second approach (adding the rates) is better than the first (working together formula), in my opinion. Several reasons: 1) There are fewer steps in the calculation. 2) The calculation steps themselves are easier (450/5.5 = 4500/55 = 900/11 is much better than 1/75 - 1/900 = 12/900 - 1/900 = 11/900 = 1/A, therefore A = 900/11) In fact, your explanation for the first approach threw me because I think there is an error/typo in it: 1/A does not equal 1/81 exactly--looks like you might have been approximating because the calculation was such a pain! 3) They give you the rates outright--you can immediately combine them, no preliminary calculations required. You might note that the "working together formula" and "adding the rates to get the combined rate" are the same thing--the formula is based on adding the rates. So what's the distinction? The "working together formula" is more useful for problems in which you don't know one of the individual rates, but are given the combined rate. The "adding the rates" shortcut is most useful on problems (such as this one) in which you know the individual rates and are asked to calculate the total time, or less likely, simply the combined rate. |
||||||||||||
|
|
|||||||||||||
| Negative Rate of Work |
|
||
|
Powered by phpBB © phpBB Group
Content © Manhattan GMAT Forums
*GMAT and GMAT CAT are registered trademarks of the Graduate Management Admission Council,
which neither sponsors nor endorses this test preparation service.
Content © Manhattan GMAT Forums
*GMAT and GMAT CAT are registered trademarks of the Graduate Management Admission Council,
which neither sponsors nor endorses this test preparation service.


