Respuesta :
Answer:
B. Design 1 would cost less because it requires 24 fewer feet of fencing than Design 2.
Step-by-step explanation:
We are required to find the plan which would cost less in fencing.
Design 1: A square having area 1296 square feet.
Area of the square = [tex]Side^2[/tex]
i.e. [tex]1296=a^2[/tex]
i.e. a= 36 feet.
So, perimeter of the square = [tex]4a[/tex]
i.e. Perimeter of the square = 4 × 36 = 144 feet.
Design 2: Two rectangles with dimensions 15 × 36 feet each.
Here, the fencing is around the plot as well as along the line dividing the land.
That is, the fencing is applied at 4 sides of length 15 feet and 3 sides of length 36 feet,
So, Perimeter of the land= 15 × 4 + 36 × 3
i.e. Perimeter of the land= 60 + 108
i.e. Perimeter of the land = 168 feet.
Thus, the difference between the perimeters = 168 - 144 = 24 feet.
Hence, we get,
Design 1 would cost less because it requires 24 fewer feet of fencing than Design 2.
Design 1 would cost less in fencing because it requires 24 fewer feet of fencing than design 2.
Area of the square plot = 1296 square feet
Side of the square plot = √1296 =36 square feet
What is the perimeter of a square with side a?
The perimeter of a square with side a is a².
So according to design 1, total fencing needed = 36*4 =144 feet
According to design 2, total fencing needed = fencing of two plots with dimensions of 15 feet by 36 feet each - fencing along dividing lines
Fencing needed for one rectangular plot=(15+36)*2 =102 feet
Fencing needed for two rectangular plot=204 feet
Since we are adding the fencing of the dividing line twice so we need to subtract the fencing of the dividing line.
According to design 2, total fencing needed = 204-36 = 168 feet
So, difference between design 1 and design 2 = 168-144 =24 feet
Hence, design 1 would cost less in fencing because it requires 24 fewer feet of fencing than design 2.
To get more about perimeters visit:
https://brainly.com/question/19819849