64 small identical cubes are used to form a large cube

This topic has expert replies
Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
Posts: 227
Joined: Sun Apr 08, 2012 4:53 am
Thanked: 12 times
Followed by:3 members
64 small identical cubes are used to form a large cube .How many more cubes are needed to add one top layer of small cube all over the surface of the large cube ?

a)64
b)128
c)152
d)216
e)256

OA C

GMAT/MBA Expert

User avatar
GMAT Instructor
Posts: 16207
Joined: Mon Dec 08, 2008 6:26 pm
Location: Vancouver, BC
Thanked: 5254 times
Followed by:1268 members
GMAT Score:770

by Brent@GMATPrepNow » Tue Apr 16, 2013 2:03 pm
guerrero wrote:64 small identical cubes are used to form a large cube .How many more cubes are needed to add one top layer of small cube all over the surface of the large cube ?

a)64
b)128
c)152
d)216
e)256

OA C
64 cubes will create a 4x4x4 large cube.
If we add at top layer to all of the sides, we get a larger 6x6x6 cube
A 6x6x6 cube requires 216 cubes.

216 - 64 = 152, so the answer is C

Cheers,
Brent
Brent Hanneson - Creator of GMATPrepNow.com
Image

Senior | Next Rank: 100 Posts
Posts: 44
Joined: Tue Mar 12, 2013 2:27 pm
Thanked: 3 times

by J N » Tue Apr 16, 2013 2:53 pm
Poorly worded question.

If you only need to cover the existing surface area of 4x4x4 cube then need 96 more cubes.

GMAT/MBA Expert

User avatar
GMAT Instructor
Posts: 16207
Joined: Mon Dec 08, 2008 6:26 pm
Location: Vancouver, BC
Thanked: 5254 times
Followed by:1268 members
GMAT Score:770

by Brent@GMATPrepNow » Wed Apr 17, 2013 5:33 am
J N wrote:Poorly worded question.

If you only need to cover the existing surface area of 4x4x4 cube then need 96 more cubes.
I guess it comes down to whether the smaller cube's surface is covered if the edges are exposed. Given the potential for ambiguity, this question might not be GMAT-worthy.

Cheers
Brent
Brent Hanneson - Creator of GMATPrepNow.com
Image

Senior | Next Rank: 100 Posts
Posts: 44
Joined: Tue Mar 12, 2013 2:27 pm
Thanked: 3 times

by J N » Sat Apr 20, 2013 8:01 am
too much ambiguity for sure. even the way you did it i would not have gotten it because i would say there need to be 216 more cubes to cover the original 64 ( I would not subtract the 64 from count) .

Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
Posts: 468
Joined: Mon Jul 25, 2011 10:20 pm
Thanked: 29 times
Followed by:4 members

by vipulgoyal » Sun Apr 21, 2013 9:30 pm
what about 5x5x5 - 4x4x4 if min required