Recently, Hydrofire has been working towards obtaining a safety certification from the

European Union for its hydrogen tanks. This certification will allow Hydrofire$$s tanks to be

shipped to the European Union countries, including the Schengen and non$-$Schengen

agreement areas. Management is confident that earning this certification would improve brand

image and significantly increase worldwide sales.

In order to get the certification, $90\%$ or more of the tank shell must have a pressure burst

level of at least $250$ bar $($one bar is equal to $100$ kPa of pressure$).$ Although the tanks are never

subjected to such high levels under normal operating conditions, this is an additional test

required by the EU$.$ Hydrofire$$s R&D team has been experimenting with various metals to

ensure that the strength of the tanks meet this standard. The proposed alternatives have similar

costs, and the performance data for each option is provided as follows:

Process Description Mean

Burst Level

Pressure $($bar$)$

Standard Deviation

Burst Level

Pressure $($bar$)$

Current Current design $2533\mathrm{.}4$

Alternative #$1$ Graphene Laced Steel $2553\mathrm{.}9$

Alternative #$2$ Chrome Vanadium Steel $2532\mathrm{.}7$

Alternative #$3$ Titanium Alloy Steel $2542\mathrm{.}5$

a$.$ Prepare a table that shows how effectively each process would address the certification

specification. $(4$ marks$)$

Note: Add columns to the above table to calculate z$-$values, probability, and to comment on

the capability. Show all calculations to receive full marks.

b$.$ Management would like to know which of the alternatives you recommend, if any, they

undertake considering the certification specifications. Evaluate feasible alternatives and

justify a single recommendation. $(2$ marks$)$