Aqa chem 4/ chem 5 june 2016 thread

Scroll to see replies

Is chromatography allowed??

Yes - there's not a lot else it could be I don't think?

Since only one of the compounds was sufficiently polar, it would be attracted to the stationary phase.

Reply 1561

Saldudsjen123

Original post by Cadherin

Yes - there's not a lot else it could be I don't think?

Since only one of the compounds was sufficiently polar, it would be attracted to the stationary phase.

Would filtration not be allowed? It's the other thing I could think of:/

Reply 1562

Cadherin

Original post by SirRaza97

112. The ratio was 3:1 so I thought well ³⁵Cl must be both if the atoms is it's the most abundant.

I think 112 and 114 will be allowed, as the probability of 35 : 35 is equal to that of 35 : 37.

Reply 1563

SubwayLover1

Original post by Cadherin

Yes - there's not a lot else it could be I don't think?

Since only one of the compounds was sufficiently polar, it would be attracted to the stationary phase.

I said you could heat and distill off the alcohol?

Reply 1564

rosslegg

I don't know what all the fuss is about, there were some challenging applications but nothing we don't already know. Hoping for at least 90ish :smile:

Reply 1565

Cadherin

Original post by SubwayLover1

I said you could heat and distill off the alcohol?

Isn't there a risk of hydrolysis?

Reply 1566

DexterMabel

Original post by amsib

long story short 2016 is going to be the year with no vets, medics or dentists
Thanks aqa :congrats:

I had applied for veterinary and now I'm going to have to get an Ace chem 5 if I want to get in 😭😭

Reply 1567

ellageorgena

Original post by DexterMabel

I had applied for veterinary and now I'm going to have to get an Ace chem 5 if I want to get in 😭😭

Same so let's pray and cry together please😭

Reply 1568

Cadherin

Original post by rosslegg

I don't know what all the fuss is about, there were some challenging applications but nothing we don't already know. Hoping for at least 90ish :smile:

I agree, it wasn't impossibly difficult, but was nasty in places and I was strapped for time.

Reply 1569

jessyoung

Original post by Cadherin

I think 112 and 114 will be allowed, as the probability of 35 : 35 is equal to that of 35 : 37.

Do you remember what the formula was??

Reply 1570

Cadherin

Original post by jessyoung

Do you remember what the formula was??

ClCH2COCl I think?

Reply 1571

Owensmith16

how many marks would that test for acycl chloride be worth...i didnt see the cl so did tollens reagent instead, stupidly

Reply 1572

Paddycat12

Original post by rosslegg

I don't know what all the fuss is about, there were some challenging applications but nothing we don't already know. Hoping for at least 90ish :smile:

yeah alright mate, how do you think that is going to help anyone who isn't feeling too confident.

Reply 1573

Ebaysass

Guys even if you feel the paper was fine, even if you feel like you don't care or even if you feel this might not actually do anything, its still worth a try.....

give this and look and signnnnnnn it!!!!!!!

http://www.ipetitions.com/petition/lower-grade-boundaries-for-chemistry-unit-4-2016

and share it with everyone, the more awareness the better!!

(edited 7 years ago)

Reply 1574

26december

Can anyone help me with some CHEM5 stuff? I'm having trouble rearranging the equation for ∆G = ∆H - T∆S... I was doing a question where it asks for ∆S and the ∆G, ∆H and temperature given so I'm just wondering how you change the equation and what would it be if it asked for value of ∆H?

Reply 1575

cookiemonster15

That paper was literally ridiculous. The style of it seemed so different to the previous years, that, and the fact that the wording of the questions were so awkward, I had to read the stem of the questions (especially all those one and two markers) so many times before I could actually figure out what they were saying!

And the worst thing was, I was feeling so ready for this exam which is actually so very rare. I had gone through every single thing in the book and looked at so many past papers, I went in thinking that there was only so much that they could do to make CHEM4 harder. *Snorts* Yeah right.

I knew all my mechanisms inside out, I spent so long memorising them and drawing them all out, figuring out which mechanism corresponds with which compounds. I knew my equilibria - one of the few topics that I was actually quite confident on. I had finally figured out how to find the rate determining step. After months of practice, I could work out the PH of buffer without a problem. I knew my nitration equations, I knew my Friedel-Crafts and my acylation reactions. And did any of that come up?

uh.......no.

Waste of a year. Thanks AQA, I appreciate that.

And here I thought that the exam was actually going to be alright.

(I swear to god, Biology on thursday better not be this bad)