The Optimal Bar Top Height

The Optimal Bar Top Height The most common height for a bar top, whether it is a kitchen breakfast bar, a basement wet bar, or a commercial bar down at the corner pub is 42-inches. Construction Conventions Standard conventions support the 42-inch bar height. Most pre-made backsplashes are four to six inches tall. When that height is added to the standard countertop height, the backsplash can slip underneath the overhang of the finished bar top for a smooth transition. Comfort The optimal and most ergonomic height for a top that services both the seated and standing user is 42 inches. With a bar stool of the proper height, it is comfortable to sit at a 42-inch bar. This is also a comfortable height for most people to lean against. Additionally, the bar top at this height is in easy reach of a standing person, so they can set their food and drink down without leaning over. A bar top is typically too high to serve as a good seated work surface and is mainly useful for leisure activities. The Multiple Benefits of Bars The main benefits for a bar top come from one person working standing up on one side and another sitting on the other. The bartender has a comfortable height to prepare drinks on his feet and the customer has a comfortable height to drink them while on a seat or standing. The standing bartender is also at a comfortable height to engage the seated customer, whether for the simple business transaction or for the age-old tradition of chatty banter or deep heart-to-hearts that often happen in this setting. The other benefit of a bar top is its aesthetic appeal. In another common context for bars: A kitchen bar top can divide the space up nicely by serving as a transition area, between the cooking area and the eating area.

How to Solve Proportions Using a Recipe

How to Solve Proportions Using a Recipe A proportion is a set of 2 fractions that equal each other. This worksheet focuses on how to solve proportions. Real World Uses of Proportions Modifying a budget for a restaurant chain that is expanding from 3 locations to 20 locationsCreating a skyscraper from blueprintsCalculating tips, commissions, and sales tax Modifying a Recipe On Monday, you are cooking enough white rice to serve exactly 3 people. The recipe calls for 2 cups of water and 1 cup of dry rice. On Sunday, you are going to serve rice to 12 people. How would the recipe change? If youve ever made rice, you know that this ratio - 1 part dry rice and 2 parts water - is important. Mess it up, and youll be scooping a gummy, hot mess on top of your guests crawfish à ©touffà ©e. Because you are quadrupling your guest list (3 people * 4 12 people), you must quadruple your recipe. Cook 8 cups of water and 4 cups of dry rice. These shifts in a recipe demonstrate the heart of proportions: use a ratio to accommodate lifes greater and smaller changes. Algebra and Proportions 1 Sure, with the right numbers, you can forgo setting up an algebraic equation to determine the amounts of dry rice and water. What happens when the numbers are not so friendly? On Thanksgiving, youll be serving rice to 25 people. How much water do you need? Because the ratio of 2 parts water and 1 part dry rice applies to cooking 25 servings of rice, use a proportion to determine the quantity of ingredients. Note: Translating a word problem into an equation is super important. Yes, you can solve an incorrectly set up equation and find an answer. You can also mix rice and water together to create food to serve at Thanksgiving. Whether the answer or food is palatable depends on the equation. Think about what you know: 3 servings of cooked rice 2 cups of water; 1 cup of dry rice25 servings of cooked rice ? cups of water; ? cup of dry rice3 servings of cooked rice/25 servings of cooked rice 2 cups of water/x cups of water3/25 2/x Cross multiply. Hint: Write these fractions vertically to get the full understanding of cross multiplying. To cross multiply, take the first fractions numerator and multiply it by the second fractions denominator. Then take the second fractions numerator and multiply it by the first fractions denominator. 3 * x 2 * 253x 50 Divide both sides of the equation by 3 to solve for x. 3x/3 50/3x 16.6667 cups of water Freeze- verify that the answer is correct. Is 3/25 2/16.6667?3/25 .122/16.6667 .12 Whoo hoo! The first proportion is right. Algebra and Proportions 2 Remember that x will not always be in the numerator. Sometimes the variable is in the denominator, but the process is the same. Solve the following for x. 36/x 108/12 Cross multiply: 36 * 12 108 * x432 108x Divide both sides by 108 to solve for x. 432/108 108x/1084 x Check and make sure the answer is right. Remember, a proportion is defined as 2 equivalent fractions:Does 36/4 108/12? 36/4 9108/12 9 Its right! Practice Instructions: Solve for the unknown variable. Check your answers. a/49 4/356/x 8/329/3 12/b5/60 k/652/949 s/36522.5/x 5/100a/180 4/100

Capital Punishment in the United Kingdom Research Paper

Capital Punishment in the United Kingdom - Research Paper Example The elimination of the death penalty in all circumstances eventually took place in 1998. Similarly, the 13th Protocol to the European Convention on Human Rights in 2004 outlawed the restoration of the death penalty, provided that the United Kingdom continued to be a party to the convention. History of Capital Punishment in the United Kingdom Hanging used to be the chief mode of execution in the United Kingdom since the 5th Century; other practices included drawing, quartering, beheading, burning at the stake, shooting, drowning, and hurling from cliffs. In 1196, the first person was hanged at Tyburn as a punishment for sedition. From 1351, the capital offences that attracted the death penalty included treason, witchcraft, murder, rape, piracy, robbery, arson, embezzlement of master properties, and theft (Davies 2007, p. 107). Efforts directed at the abolition of the death penalty had been ongoing since the late 1700s. In 1770, Sir William Meredith challenged parliament to consider pr oportionate punishments rather than capital punishments. Nevertheless, the proposal failed; however, it opened up the debate. Every year, there were over thousand death sentencing, although only a sizeable number of executions took place (Levinson 2002, p.155). In 1810, Sir Samuel Romilly remarked that United Kingdom had the most offences according to law to be punished by the death penalty. At its height, the criminal law, otherwise labeled as the â€Å"Bloody Code,† had categorized 220 crimes punishable by death. Sir Samuel Romilly attempted to convince parliament to de-capitalize minor offences, especially much of the Act of King William (Block & Hostettler 1997, p.109). Execution for crimes such as murder, robbery, and burglary were frequent; however, capital punishment for minor offenders were mainly not carried out. Nevertheless, in some instances, children could be executed for crimes such as stealing. A death sentence could be commuted on the grounds of benefit of cle rgy, official pardons, or execution of military duty (Stearman 2008, p.47). Statistics indicate that, between 1770 and 1830, close to 35,000 death sentences were handed out, out of which about 7,000 executions happened. At the time, prisons comprised of small, crowded, and badly run institutions, a situation that led to incorporation of punishments like transportation of offenders to distant lands such as America and Australia. During the 1830s, the masses had started to express doubts on the punishments (Block and Hostettler 1997, p. 110). Many more prisons were built while the old ones were extended to avail a fresh mode of punishment. The overriding notion centered on making prisons unpleasant places to stay in order to discourage people from committing crimes. Reform In Europe, reforms on the subject of the death penalty, championed by academics, started around 1750. Year 1808 witnessed abolishment of capital punishment for pickpockets and lesser offenders. This set the onset fo r the reform process perpetuated over the next fifty years. Nevertheless, capital punishment remained operational even though the government occasionally commuted the death penalty. The Judgment of Death Act 1823 awarded power to judges to commute the death penalty excluding cases of treason and murder (Levinson 2002, p.156). The Punishment of Death Act 1