One business charges $22 per t-shirt that is custom made.
Another business charges $16 per t-shirt plus a $15 set up fee for custom made t-shirts.
How would you transform the first graph to make it become a non proportional graph with the same y-intercept as the second graph?
To transform the first graph into a non-proportional graph with the same y-intercept as the second graph, we need to add a constant value to the y-values of the first graph.
To calculate this constant, we can subtract the y-intercept of the first graph from the y-intercept of the second graph. In this case, the y-intercept of the first graph is $22, and the y-intercept of the second graph is $15.
$15 - $22 = -$7
Therefore, we need to add -$7 to all the y-values of the first graph to transform it into a non-proportional graph with the same y-intercept as the second graph.
To transform the first graph to make it become a non-proportional graph with the same y-intercept as the second graph, you can observe that the y-intercept of the second graph is $15 (the set up fee).
To incorporate this y-intercept into the first graph, you can introduce a fixed cost component that is added to the variable cost of $22 per t-shirt. This fixed cost component will represent the set up fee.
The transformed equation for the first graph would then be: y = $22x + $15, where y represents the total cost and x represents the number of custom-made t-shirts.
This equation ensures that the new graph will have the same y-intercept as the second graph, but the relationship between the x-values and the y-values will not be directly proportional due to the fixed cost component.
To transform the first graph into a non-proportional graph with the same y-intercept as the second graph, you need to introduce a fixed cost component that remains constant regardless of the number of t-shirts ordered.
In the given scenario, the second business charges a set-up fee of $15 in addition to the cost per t-shirt. This set-up fee is independent of the number of t-shirts ordered and can be considered as the fixed cost component.
To make the first graph non-proportional, you can introduce a similar fixed cost component by adding a constant value to the cost per t-shirt. Since the second graph has a y-intercept of $15 (representing the set-up fee), you need to add $15 to the cost per t-shirt in the first graph.
Therefore, the transformed equation for the first graph can be written as:
Cost per t-shirt = $22 (original cost per t-shirt) + $15 (fixed cost component)
This would result in a non-proportional graph with the same y-intercept as the second graph.