Among the objectives of good introductory statistics courses is learning how to think about the Normal distribution. This question provides a nice example.
The key is to use units of measurement that are adapted to the distribution. That is, let the mean be the zero point and let the standard deviation be one unit. This is what a "Z score" measures.
In light of this, let's parse the question. To do so, I will use two fundamental facts: expectations add ("linearity of expectation") and variances of independent variables also add:
The mean volume of one pack is 1.55 ml, whence the mean volume of five packs must be five times as large, or 7.75 ml: this is the zero point.
Since the unknown variance of a single pack is $\sigma^2,$ the variance of the sum of five independent packs is $5\sigma^2.$ Therefore the standard deviation of the sum--the unit of measurement we must adopt--is $\sqrt{5\sigma^2} = \sigma\sqrt{5}.$
The question stipulates that in less than 0.5% of cases should the total be less than 7.5 ml. For the (standard) Normal distribution we remember (or can compute) that exactly 0.5% of cases are $2.57\ldots$ or more less than the mean. An example of this computation is
qnorm(0.5/100)
in R
or
=NORMSINV(0.5/100)
in Excel, for instance.
One aim of the introductory course is to help you reach the point where such considerations are automatic: you can do them in your head correctly, apart (perhaps) from the arithmetical calculations.
This preliminary work enables us to rephrase the question like this:
What unit of measurement, given by $\sigma\sqrt{5}$ for a five-pack of drugs, will re-express an amount of $7.5$ ml as being $2.57$ less than $7.75$ ml?
The solution obviously is
$$\sigma\sqrt{5} = (7.75 - 7.5)/2.57\ldots = 0.097\ldots,$$
implying
$$\sigma = \frac{0.097\ldots}{\sqrt{5}} = 0.0433797\ldots$$
Comparing this result to the question shows that the work in the question was entirely correct up to the point where "$\sigma/5$" appeared: the square root was lost. This suggests remembering to think in terms of variances rather than standard deviations.
Comparing this result to the older answers that were posted also shows how they were basically moving in the correct direction but made mistakes along the way, too. Because arithmetical mistakes are easy to make, when one has the chance it's a good idea to check probabilistic calculations with simulations. For instance, the following R
statement generates a large number of five-packs of drugs as described in the question (using the answer I obtained) and, to check my answer, computes the fraction with totals less than 7.5 ml:
mean(colSums(matrix(rnorm(5*1e6, 1.55, -0.25/qnorm(0.5/100) / sqrt(5)), nrow=5)) < 7.5)
(You can see all the data from the question embedded in this expression, along with the value 1e6
giving the number of five-packs to simulate.) When I run and re-run this code (which takes less than a second each time), I consistently obtain results between 0.0048 (0.48%) and 0.0052 (0.52%), in satisfactory agreement with the intended 0.5% target.
self-study
tag, read its tag-wiki, and indicate the specific help you need at the point you struck difficulty. $\endgroup$