Design Water Bottle in SolidWorks

A: A looks boring, which is why it gets skipped. If the gauge is drifting low, your apparent pass is fiction, and the longer dwell times are a clue. B feels decisive, but changing acceptance pressure on the floor without an MOC breaks the test basis. C is how marginal designs escape into production; trends don't fix themselves. D confuses failure modes — leaks at the neck are about hoop stress and creep, not impact.

A: A sounds pedantic; mold finishes do live on part drawings in plastics. C might be true in some markets, but nothing here proves it. D is cosmetic. B is where the physics bite — draft on what should be a controlled sealing surface shifts contact stress and shows up later as marginal leak results.

A: A feels intuitive but drops section modulus where hoop stress is highest. C is tempting for schedules, but higher temperature moves you further into the creep regime and muddies comparison. D misses that functional failure comes long before burst. B addresses the local stress riser that FEA usually flags red in these bottles.

A: A comes straight from σ = p·r/t, and the geometry fits the assumption. B sneaks in material behavior to dodge arithmetic — redistribution doesn't halve basic membrane stress. C doubles radius by mistake. D applies a safety factor before you've even checked allowable, a classic spreadsheet habit.