The Student Room Group

Edexcel Physics U4 IAL (WPH04/1)

I just finished off my U4 exam, it looked a bit harder than usual, however expect average boundaries. If anyone gets the paper, please do post it here. Please also discuss the paper here.

Thanks

Scroll to see replies

yo man there's another thread for this... but oh well... how did you find it? june 15 was a looot easier than this right? a lot of people around me were saying it was extremely easy though so i'm a bit scared
Reply 2
Original post by TheMadHatteress
yo man there's another thread for this... but oh well... how did you find it? june 15 was a looot easier than this right? a lot of people around me were saying it was extremely easy though so i'm a bit scared


I thought it was a very easy paper compared objectively to previous papers, probably 71/72 for full UMS.
Original post by Zacken
I thought it was a very easy paper compared objectively to previous papers, probably 71/72 for full UMS.


really? :frown: did you think it was harder than june 15? it 63 for an a* in june 15
Reply 4
Did any one get 25N before the big momentum question?
(edited 7 years ago)
Original post by oli4rg
Did any one get 25N before the big momentum question?

yeh
Reply 6
Original post by TheMadHatteress
yeh


me too!
What did you get for the velocity value?
And was it an elastic or inelastic collision :/
(edited 7 years ago)
Reply 7
Original post by Zacken
I thought it was a very easy paper compared objectively to previous papers, probably 71/72 for full UMS.


It was definitely easy. What did you write in the cyclist question though ?? I said that the banked track means that the cyclists don't need to steer as the force is already towards the centre. As for the helmet thing , The peak was lower because there is less change in momentum and so a lower area under the graph.

The only irritating question was the change of momentum of the alpha particle, how did you do that ??
Reply 8
Original post by AvWOW
me too!
What did you get for the velocity value?
And was it elastic or inelastic :/


I don't remember, but I said it was inelastic after calculating the KE using p^2/2m
Reply 9
Original post by omar5478
It was definitely easy. What did you write in the cyclist question though ?? I said that the banked track means that the cyclists don't need to steer as the force is already towards the centre. As for the helmet thing , The peak was lower because there is less change in momentum and so a lower area under the graph.

The only irritating question was the change of momentum of the alpha particle, how did you do that ??

For the helmet question I drew a lower peak but the area (change in momentum) I said would be the same...
foe the momentum question I only considered the horizontal components saying initial horizontal momentum is equal to final. I got some 3.70 value. Anyone got this???
(edited 7 years ago)
Reply 10
Original post by oli4rg
I don't remember, but I said it was inelastic after calculating the KE using p^2/2m

I got elastic, using 1/2mv^2... kinda worried about that
i got elastic too using 1/2mv^2
Reply 12
Original post by skeletonboy1
i got elastic too using 1/2mv^2

did you get something around 3.7 ms^-1 for the velocity?
for the helmet question i put smaller force and longer contact time bcz i remember from IGCSE those cushions are to increase contact time which reduce the force
Reply 14
Original post by omar5478
It was definitely easy. What did you write in the cyclist question though ?? I said that the banked track means that the cyclists don't need to steer as the force is already towards the centre. As for the helmet thing , The peak was lower because there is less change in momentum and so a lower area under the graph.

The only irritating question was the change of momentum of the alpha particle, how did you do that ??


Momentum is conserved. Area under graph needs to be same, peak needs to be lower.

Original post by AvWOW
I got elastic, using 1/2mv^2... kinda worried about that


It is elastic.
Original post by AvWOW
did you get something around 3.7 ms^-1 for the velocity?


yeah as i remember, and we only need to resolve when calculating velocities but no need when calculating K.E. right?
Reply 16
Original post by oli4rg
Did any one get 25N before the big momentum question?


Yes, that's correct.

Original post by AvWOW
did you get something around 3.7 ms^-1 for the velocity?


Correct. (ish, iirc)

Original post by skeletonboy1
for the helmet question i put smaller force and longer contact time bcz i remember from IGCSE those cushions are to increase contact time which reduce the force


Yes, that's correct.
Reply 17
Original post by skeletonboy1
for the helmet question i put smaller force and longer contact time bcz i remember from IGCSE those cushions are to increase contact time which reduce the force

yup I did the same.
haha everyone was saying they remembered it from IGCSE and I was like "what really"
Reply 18
Original post by skeletonboy1
yeah as i remember, and we only need to resolve when calculating velocities but no need when calculating K.E. right?

yup. Energy isn't a vector
Original post by AvWOW
did you get something around 3.7 ms^-1 for the velocity?


I got 3.41, I believe I calculated it by (6.9 - 6cos30)/cos60 (total horizental momentum before = total horizental momentum after)

Quick Reply

Latest