IASbaba’s Daily CSAT Practice Test
ARCHIVES
Daily CSAT Practice Test
Everyday 5 Questions from Aptitude, Logical Reasoning, and Reading Comprehension will be covered from Monday to Saturday.
Make the best use of the initiative. All the best!
To Know More about Ace the Prelims (ATP) 2021 – CLICK HERE
Important Note:
- Don’t forget to post your marks in the comment section. Also, let us know if you enjoyed today’s test 🙂
- After completing the 5 questions, click on ‘View Questions’ to check your score, time taken and solutions.
Test-summary
0 of 5 questions completed
Questions:
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
Information
To view Solutions, follow these instructions:
- Click on – ‘Start Test’ button
- Solve Questions
- Click on ‘Test Summary’ button
- Click on ‘Finish Test’ button
- Now click on ‘View Questions’ button – here you will see solutions and links.
You have already completed the test before. Hence you can not start it again.
Test is loading...
You must sign in or sign up to start the test.
You have to finish following test, to start this test:
Results
0 of 5 questions answered correctly
Your time:
Time has elapsed
You have scored 0 points out of 0 points, (0)
| Average score |
|
| Your score |
|
Categories
- Not categorized 0%
| Pos. | Name | Entered on | Points | Result |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Table is loading | ||||
| No data available | ||||
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- Answered
- Review
-
Question 1 of 5
1. Question
Read the following passage and answer the questions that follow each passage. Your answer to these questions should be based on passage only.
Emotions often trump reason. The Cauvery water dispute is turning out to be less about water and irrigation and more about linguistic chauvinism and regional identity. Nothing else can explain the mindless violence in Karnataka and Tamil Nadu over the Supreme Court order asking the former to release water to the latter, keeping in view the distress situation in both States in a season of deficit rainfall. Many of the acts of violence have been perpetuated in the two States by chauvinistic, fringe organisations that have little to do with the farming community or its interests. It is clear that there is insufficient water in Karnataka’s reservoirs to meet the full irrigation needs of both States. The point of the Supreme Court order was to make the States share their distress and not to magically fulfil the needs of farmers on both sides. But political parties and some media houses, especially regional language television channels, have sought to portray the issue as one that pits the people of one State against that of the other. Indeed, the two major national parties, the Congress and the Bharatiya Janata Party, have taken different stands in the two States on this issue. No party or State government appears to believe it can afford to be seen as taking even so much as a conciliatory step toward defusing the crisis. On some previous occasions when Karnataka released water in a distress year the State government did so quietly so as to not give chauvinistic elements any opportunity to inflame passions. Cauvery is an inter-State dispute, but this is no reason to turn the issue into a raging controversy that draws the peoples of the two States into confrontation!
What was the purpose behind Supreme Court’s order regarding Cauvery water?
Correct
Solution (b)
The point of the Supreme Court order was to make the States share their distress and not to magically fulfil the needs of farmers on both sides….
The passage clearly states that the Supreme Court acknowledges the shortage of water in both states and wanted them to share their problems and mitigate them by sharing river water.
Hence, option B is correct
Incorrect
Solution (b)
The point of the Supreme Court order was to make the States share their distress and not to magically fulfil the needs of farmers on both sides….
The passage clearly states that the Supreme Court acknowledges the shortage of water in both states and wanted them to share their problems and mitigate them by sharing river water.
Hence, option B is correct
-
Question 2 of 5
2. Question
Read the following passage and answer the questions that follow each passage. Your answer to these questions should be based on passage only.
Emotions often trump reason. The Cauvery water dispute is turning out to be less about water and irrigation and more about linguistic chauvinism and regional identity. Nothing else can explain the mindless violence in Karnataka and Tamil Nadu over the Supreme Court order asking the former to release water to the latter, keeping in view the distress situation in both States in a season of deficit rainfall. Many of the acts of violence have been perpetuated in the two States by chauvinistic, fringe organisations that have little to do with the farming community or its interests. It is clear that there is insufficient water in Karnataka’s reservoirs to meet the full irrigation needs of both States. The point of the Supreme Court order was to make the States share their distress and not to magically fulfil the needs of farmers on both sides. But political parties and some media houses, especially regional language television channels, have sought to portray the issue as one that pits the people of one State against that of the other. Indeed, the two major national parties, the Congress and the Bharatiya Janata Party, have taken different stands in the two States on this issue. No party or State government appears to believe it can afford to be seen as taking even so much as a conciliatory step toward defusing the crisis. On some previous occasions when Karnataka released water in a distress year the State government did so quietly so as to not give chauvinistic elements any opportunity to inflame passions. Cauvery is an inter-State dispute, but this is no reason to turn the issue into a raging controversy that draws the peoples of the two States into confrontation!
According to the passage, the violence in states of Tamil Nadu and Karnataka is over which issue?
Correct
Solution (c)
The Cauvery water dispute is turning out to be less about water and irrigation and more about linguistic chauvinism and regional identity. Nothing else can explain the mindless violence in Karnataka and Tamil Nadu over the Supreme Court order asking the former to release water to the latter, keeping in view the distress situation in both States in a season of deficit rainfall.
Go through the first few sentences of the paragraph, it can be clearly inferred that the violence is over the Cauvery river water. Options A and B can be eliminated as they mention not the actual issue for violence, but what it’s turning out to be
Hence, option C is correct
Incorrect
Solution (c)
The Cauvery water dispute is turning out to be less about water and irrigation and more about linguistic chauvinism and regional identity. Nothing else can explain the mindless violence in Karnataka and Tamil Nadu over the Supreme Court order asking the former to release water to the latter, keeping in view the distress situation in both States in a season of deficit rainfall.
Go through the first few sentences of the paragraph, it can be clearly inferred that the violence is over the Cauvery river water. Options A and B can be eliminated as they mention not the actual issue for violence, but what it’s turning out to be
Hence, option C is correct
-
Question 3 of 5
3. Question
In a race of 800m, if the ratio of the speeds of two participants Priya and Ramya is 3:4, and Priya has a start of 120m, then Ramya beats Priya by?
Correct
Solution (b)
As Priya has a start of 120m, Priya has to cover 680m while Ramya has to cover 800m
Now, when Priya covers 3m, Ramya covers 4m
Hence, when Ramya covers 800m, Priya covers (800 * 3) / 4 = 600m
Therefore, Ramya beats Priya by 80m.
Incorrect
Solution (b)
As Priya has a start of 120m, Priya has to cover 680m while Ramya has to cover 800m
Now, when Priya covers 3m, Ramya covers 4m
Hence, when Ramya covers 800m, Priya covers (800 * 3) / 4 = 600m
Therefore, Ramya beats Priya by 80m.
-
Question 4 of 5
4. Question
A & B can make paintings in 6 days; B & C can make those paintings in 10 days. If A, B & C together can finish the work in 4 days, then A & C together will do it in
Correct
Solution (a)
We are given that, A, B and C together complete the work in 4 days
We can write (A+B+C)’s 1 day work = 1/4
Similarly, (A+B)’s 1 day work = 1/6 days and (B+C)’s 1 day work =1/10
Since the work is divided in combination and we are asked to find out the combined work of (A + C), so we can find out,
(A + C)’s 1 day work = [2 (A+B+C)’s 1 day work] – [(A+ B)’s 1 day work + (B+C)’s 1 day work]
= 2(1/4) – [ (1/6) + (1/10) ]
= 7/30
Hence, A & C together can complete the work in 30 /7 days = 4(2/7) days.
Incorrect
Solution (a)
We are given that, A, B and C together complete the work in 4 days
We can write (A+B+C)’s 1 day work = 1/4
Similarly, (A+B)’s 1 day work = 1/6 days and (B+C)’s 1 day work =1/10
Since the work is divided in combination and we are asked to find out the combined work of (A + C), so we can find out,
(A + C)’s 1 day work = [2 (A+B+C)’s 1 day work] – [(A+ B)’s 1 day work + (B+C)’s 1 day work]
= 2(1/4) – [ (1/6) + (1/10) ]
= 7/30
Hence, A & C together can complete the work in 30 /7 days = 4(2/7) days.
-
Question 5 of 5
5. Question
Age of mother 10 years ago was 3 times the age of her son. After 10 years, mother’s age will be twice that of his son. Find the ratio of their present ages.
Correct
Solution (d)
We are given that; age of mother 10 years ago was 3 times the age of her son
So, let age of son be x and as mother’s age is 3 times the age of her son, let it be 3x, three years ago.
At present: Mother’s age will be (3x + 10) and son’s age will be (x + 10)
After 10 years: Mother’s age will be (3x + 10) +10 and son’s age will be (x + 10) + 10
Mother’s age is twice that of son
(3x + 10) +10 = 2 [(x + 10) + 10]
(3x + 20) = 2[x + 20]
Solving the equation, we get x = 20
We are asked to find the present ratio.
(3x + 10): (x + 10) = 70:30 = 7:3
Incorrect
Solution (d)
We are given that; age of mother 10 years ago was 3 times the age of her son
So, let age of son be x and as mother’s age is 3 times the age of her son, let it be 3x, three years ago.
At present: Mother’s age will be (3x + 10) and son’s age will be (x + 10)
After 10 years: Mother’s age will be (3x + 10) +10 and son’s age will be (x + 10) + 10
Mother’s age is twice that of son
(3x + 10) +10 = 2 [(x + 10) + 10]
(3x + 20) = 2[x + 20]
Solving the equation, we get x = 20
We are asked to find the present ratio.
(3x + 10): (x + 10) = 70:30 = 7:3
