Check Valves

This topic has expert replies
Senior | Next Rank: 100 Posts
Posts: 67
Joined: Sat Feb 16, 2008 8:07 pm
Location: Philippines
Thanked: 3 times

Check Valves

by fighting_cax » Tue Feb 03, 2009 3:35 pm
If the check valves in nuclear power plants do not function properly, other parts of the plants’ piping systems can be critically damaged. Check valves cannot be tested in actual operation, but they are disassembled as part of routine annual maintenance and any flawed parts are replaced. Therefore, power plant accidents attributable to malfunctioning check valves are unlikely to occur.
Which of the following, if true, most weakens the argument above?
(A) Approximately 80 percent of accidents in nuclear power plants are attributable to failures in piping systems.
(B) Check valves in nuclear power plants tend to wear out after a few years in operation.
(C) Disassembling check valves can expose workers to radiation if precautions are not taken.
(D) Flaws in any part of a check valve can be identified when the valve is disassembled.
(E) Errors made in the reassembly of check valves can go undetected.

Please explain.
Source: — Critical Reasoning |

Newbie | Next Rank: 10 Posts
Posts: 2
Joined: Mon Feb 02, 2009 6:59 pm

Answer: E

by cajain » Tue Feb 03, 2009 3:52 pm
Conclusion: Check Valve accidents wont happen because they are inspected annually by disassembling them and replacing faulty parts. What if the assembly was not done in a right manner.

Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
Posts: 221
Joined: Wed Jan 21, 2009 10:33 am
Thanked: 12 times
Followed by:1 members

by krisraam » Tue Feb 03, 2009 5:41 pm
IMO E

Legendary Member
Posts: 727
Joined: Sun Jun 08, 2008 9:32 pm
Thanked: 8 times
Followed by:1 members

Re: Check Valves

by umaa » Tue Feb 03, 2009 6:45 pm
fighting_cax wrote:If the check valves in nuclear power plants do not function properly, other parts of the plants’ piping systems can be critically damaged. Check valves cannot be tested in actual operation, but they are disassembled as part of routine annual maintenance and any flawed parts are replaced. Therefore, power plant accidents attributable to malfunctioning check valves are unlikely to occur.
Which of the following, if true, most weakens the argument above?
(A) Approximately 80 percent of accidents in nuclear power plants are attributable to failures in piping systems.
(B) Check valves in nuclear power plants tend to wear out after a few years in operation.
(C) Disassembling check valves can expose workers to radiation if precautions are not taken.
(D) Flaws in any part of a check valve can be identified when the valve is disassembled.
(E) Errors made in the reassembly of check valves can go undetected.

Please explain.
A - doesn't weaken
B - Strengthening the argument. Because annual maintenance is there
C - disassembling might cause radiation. This doesn't mean that its an accident or its because of malfunctioning
D - Strengthening the arg.
E - If the check valves reassembled with error, it might cause the accident (Check CAN in the argument)

After filtering the condensers, try to opposite them and see if they affect the argument.

For example. Errors made in the reassembly of check valves can be detected.

Legendary Member
Posts: 2326
Joined: Mon Jul 28, 2008 3:54 am
Thanked: 173 times
Followed by:2 members
GMAT Score:710

by gmatmachoman » Thu Feb 05, 2009 6:36 am
E weakens the argument.

Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
Posts: 344
Joined: Sun Sep 28, 2008 11:00 am
Location: USA
Thanked: 6 times
Followed by:1 members

by Bidisha800 » Thu Feb 05, 2009 9:25 pm
(E)
Drill baby drill !

GMATPowerPrep Test1= 740
GMATPowerPrep Test2= 760
Kaplan Diagnostic Test= 700
Kaplan Test1=600
Kalplan Test2=670
Kalplan Test3=570

Legendary Member
Posts: 1404
Joined: Tue May 20, 2008 6:55 pm
Thanked: 18 times
Followed by:2 members

by tanviet » Sat Feb 07, 2009 12:23 am
I see B also weakens, it is not sure that maintenance block wearing

Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
Posts: 100
Joined: Tue Aug 05, 2014 11:28 am

by mason77 » Sat May 14, 2016 1:15 am
I am leaning more towards B, but I'm not sure about it.