Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by A2ScienceGuy)
    For the question on the highest melting point, I was contemplating Aluminium (as it was 3+) and Silicon, but I put Aluminium, which is wrong. I gave a good, full explanation but any ideas if they will put CE=0 or if they have in the past for a similar question, or will they credit the explanation part?
    It will be chemical error I am afraid :/
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by A2ScienceGuy)
    For the question on the highest melting point, I was contemplating Aluminium (as it was 3+) and Silicon, but I put Aluminium, which is wrong. I gave a good, full explanation but any ideas if they will put CE=0 or if they have in the past for a similar question, or will they credit the explanation part?
    check 2015 chem 1 first question.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by A Sajid)
    rahhh youre pengers
    Thanks lol
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by A2ScienceGuy)
    For the question on the highest melting point, I was contemplating Aluminium (as it was 3+) and Silicon, but I put Aluminium, which is wrong. I gave a good, full explanation but any ideas if they will put CE=0 or if they have in the past for a similar question, or will they credit the explanation part?
    I think it would be CE=0 man, since they always dont credit the explanation if the initial element is wrong. If it was BP you would have been right with Al though.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    That cheeky copper carbonate question though, chucking in some unit 5 knowledge for the resits lol
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    I drew 6 bonding pairs, named it octahedral but put 90 and 120 (it's 90 and 180 I know 🙄) for the bond angles for the first shape.

    Then I drew 4 bonding pairs in a square planar and one lone pair at there top and said the bond angle was 90 for the second shape.

    Was its out of 4 or 5 marks? I think it was 5? And if so what mark should I have gotten for that question? I'm hoping like 4/5 but I'm just not sure if they would allow 90 for the second shape because although I drew a square planar, the lone pair surely would've had some effect on the angle.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    Thanks! Also, instead of displayed formula for the isomerism, I used structural formula... would they allow that either?
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    For the splitting molecule question or whatever it was I got C14H28 not C14H30 so where did I go wrong???

    Made so many mistakes 🙄 This was supposed to be my easiest exam
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by xambercx)
    For the splitting molecule question or whatever it was I got C14H28 not C14H30 so where did I go wrong???

    Made so many mistakes 🙄 This was supposed to be my easiest exam
    Maybe u added up an alkene instead of an alkane so missed out on the extra 2 H's?
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by A2ScienceGuy)
    Thanks! Also, instead of displayed formula for the isomerism, I used structural formula... would they allow that either?
    If it asks for displayed, I'm pretty sure they will only accept displayed
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by xambercx)
    I drew 6 bonding pairs, named it octahedral but put 90 and 120 (it's 90 and 180 I know 🙄) for the bond angles for the first shape.

    Then I drew 4 bonding pairs in a square planar and one lone pair at there top and said the bond angle was 90 for the second shape.

    Was its out of 4 or 5 marks? I think it was 5? And if so what mark should I have gotten for that question? I'm hoping like 4/5 but I'm just not sure if they would allow 90 for the second shape because although I drew a square planar, the lone pair surely would've had some effect on the angle.

    You will be penalized for putting 120 (and you would also be penalized for putting 180 anyways because they are all 90 in an octahedral), and the shape was seesaw BAs: 90, 120, 180 for the second one so you'll lose that mark. I think it was /4 so you'll get 2 marks.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Jackmilne95)
    That cheeky copper carbonate question though, chucking in some unit 5 knowledge for the resits lol
    How did it input unit 5 knowledge?
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    Paper was good tbh. Felt a little harder than most previous papers probably due to the new-ish style.. and a few odd parts to it.

    I do think I messed up on the percentage yield one though.

    (Original post by beckalouu)
    Oh dammit I don't know how but I got like 1.60% for the percentage yield? Really panicking now... Have to put a lot of work into units 2, 4 and 5 then :'(
    I also got 1.60%.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    The mass spectrometer question was pretty sneaky I thought because I read it and answered it but then when I re-read it I ended up changing my answer because it asked for similarities and differences between the mass spectrum that is produced not just in general so at first I put it would produce 2+ and possibly 3+ ions but then I changed it to it would have shorter peaks because the m/z is smaller due to the production of 2+ and 3+ ions. Did anyone else notice this? For the similarity I put that they would have the same abundance, I was just guessing really but think that's right...
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Bloom77)
    It's obvious that the grade boundaries would rise


    Posted from TSR Mobile
    If I recall correctly, the grade boundries were slightly lowered from the average. It was 76% for an A grade. Our school told us the average is usually 80% for an A in most subjects.

    It was a standard paper.
    Offline

    9
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Bailey2j09)
    How did it input unit 5 knowledge?
    You could use the observation for the CuCO3 ion I guess, however just saying effervescence was sufficient.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by vinchy)
    I put same abundance and different m/z
    So did I
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    Name:  image.png
Views: 78
Size:  316.0 KB
    (Original post by RME11)
    You will be penalized for putting 120 (and you would also be penalized for putting 180 anyways because they are all 90 in an octahedral), and the shape was seesaw BAs: 90, 120, 180 for the second one so you'll lose that mark. I think it was /4 so you'll get 2 marks.
    Its 90 and 180? We didn't need to name the specific shape I'm sure I will get the mark for putting 4 bonding pairs and 1 lone pair even if it wasn't entirely spaced out correctly.

    I'm sure it was out of 5? 3 marks for first shape (shape, name and angle) and 2 marks for second shape (shape and angle) if so I should get 3 hopefully?
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by A2ScienceGuy)
    For the question on the highest melting point, I was contemplating Aluminium (as it was 3+) and Silicon, but I put Aluminium, which is wrong. I gave a good, full explanation but any ideas if they will put CE=0 or if they have in the past for a similar question, or will they credit the explanation part?
    C=0
    It came up as the first question on last year's paper
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by RME11)
    You will be penalized for putting 120 (and you would also be penalized for putting 180 anyways because they are all 90 in an octahedral), and the shape was seesaw BAs: 90, 120, 180 for the second one so you'll lose that mark. I think it was /4 so you'll get 2 marks.
    It was out of 6
 
 
 
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • Poll
    Would you like to hibernate through the winter months?
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

    Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

    Quick reply
    Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.