wph11 01 Pef 20220818
wph11 01 Pef 20220818
wph11 01 Pef 20220818
June 2022
International A Level Physics WPH11 01
Edexcel and BTEC Qualifications
Edexcel and BTEC qualifications come from Pearson, the UK's largest awarding body. We
provide a wide range of qualifications including academic, vocational, occupational and
specific programmes for employers. For further information visit our qualifications websites
at www.edexcel.com or www.btec.co.uk.
Alternatively, you can get in touch with us using the details on our contact us page at
www.edexcel.com/contactus.
ResultsPlus is Pearson's free online service giving instant and detailed analysis of your
students' exam results.
Pearson aspires to be the world’s leading learning company. Our aim is to help everyone
progress in their lives through education. We believe in every kind of learning, for all kinds of
people, wherever they are in the world. We’ve been involved in education for over 150 years,
and by working across 70 countries, in 100 languages, we have built an international
reputation for our commitment to high standards and raising achievement through
innovation in education. Find out more about how we can help you and your students at:
www.pearson.com/uk.
June 2022
This paper was concerned with the physics of forces, including gravitational forces, tension,
reaction, and forces in fluids due to drag and upthrust as well as the effects of forces on the
motion of objects in one and two dimensions. The effects of forces on the shape and
structure of the materials of which the objects are made was also examined, and candidates
were expected to apply abstract principles of mechanics to contexts they should have
studied as well as new or more unfamiliar contexts.
On the whole, candidates were well prepared for this exam and showed good ability in the
more basic applications and simple recall questions such as Q11(a), the Newton’s third law
question, Q12(b) on the steel cable and Q14(a), the regenerative brakes question. Candidates
were able to deploy a good range of different strategies to solve problems where there were
a variety of possible approaches, such as in Q13(b), the coat hook question and Q19, the
viscometer question.
Explanations of physical phenomena were less well attempted; this was particularly evident
in Q15, the Galilean thermometer question, where candidates did not clearly show to which
part of the narrative their explanations referred and often became confused as to what
exactly it was that they were trying to explain. In Q14(b)(ii), Q16(b) and 19(c) candidates often
failed to address the main physical process at play, although there were many good attempts
made. Candidates should be encouraged not to rush into answering questions without first
reading them thoroughly.
Final answers must be correctly rounded, not truncated, and truncated values in multi-stage
calculations will not generally yield the required value for the final mark. It is advisable that
candidates should use calculators to retain all significant figures for values carried forward
and only round answers for the final line.
It was very pleasing to see the high standard of English in many papers, although there were
a significant number of papers where the candidate’s command of English did not seem
adequate for the demands of this paper.
Multi-Choice Items
Correct
Subject Comment
response
Power and
1 C Time taken = work done ÷ power.
units
Upthrust and
2 B Upthrust is constant but drag increases with speed.
drag
Scalars and
3 D Work is a scalar.
vectors
5 B
of g for g.
Newtons’s 2nd
6 B Acceleration is greater for a smaller mass.
law
Elastic strain
7 D For same force, strain energy is proportional to extension.
energy
Velocity/Time Displacement is found from the area under the graph, area
8 D
graphs below the t – axis counting as negative.
Spring
10 B Stiffness = change in force ÷ change in length.
stiffness
Multi-choice items were generally well-answered, candidates who scored well in Section A
generally went on to score a good mark overall in the paper.
SECTION B
Exemplar items show examples of answers which scored full marks unless otherwise stated.
Candidates needed to say why these two particular forces are not a Newton 3rd law pair, and
those who referenced the diagram correctly were able to access both marks. General
statements about the conditions required were not enough, for example stating that the
forces should be of the same type would only score marks if it was stated that these two are
not.
Candidates generally answered this question well and many gained both marks with most
candidates getting at least one of the two options.
The Newton 3 rd law pair of the upward magnetic force F on the disc is a downward magnetic
force F on the base. This caused some confusion for many candidates, with a good many not
showing this force at all. Most candidates were able to draw an upward force on the base,
which is the reaction from the table, although a significant number mislabelled it. There were
also a few candidates who did not notice the context and wrote “upthrust” or “drag”.
The description of elastic limit was not well stated by most candidates. Merely stating that
the cable no longer behaves elastically does not tell the examiner that the candidate
understands what 'elastic' means, and many candidates neglected to mention that for elastic
behaviour, the return to original length occurs after the load is removed.
Most candidates were able to score both marks for this question. Occasionally a spurious
unit was seen which prevented the second mark from being scored. A ratio of two quantities
with the same unit does not have a unit and may also be expressed as a percentage.
Candidates should be reminded that marks are not awarded for final answers expressed as
fractions.
Similar to the previous question, most candidates were able to score both marks for this
question. There were the occasional incorrect or missing units, and, rarely, candidates
muddling stress with strain and answering the questions the wrong way around, thus scoring
no marks.
Very few candidates scored both marks for this question. The hook is an extended body in
equilibrium, requiring the moments to balance. As drawn in the paper there is an
unbalanced anti-clockwise moment which must be balanced by the reaction force. Few
candidates realised this, with most drawing a reaction force in line with and opposite the
force from the screw. Without the correct annotation, even that did not score a mark.
There are a several different ways to approach this question, the most popular was to
compare the moment due to three coats with the maximum moment available from the
screw. This question was generally answered very well although many candidates did not
obtain the final mark because they showed that the hook could support two coats but did
not show that three coats were too many. Lack of a clear comparison was also a reason why
many candidates did not score the final mark.
Most candidates scored well with this question. Those candidates that did not score full
marks generally did not use the kinetic energy formula correctly, added the useful energy to
the kinetic energy or had the efficiency equation upside down.
This was a straightforward question that most candidates had little trouble answering.
Confusion arose when candidates remembered that drag forces can slow a car down, so said
that the greater the drag force the slower the car.
This question tested a candidate’s ability to account for how the kinetic energy of the moving
car was dissipated as the regenerative braking system slowed the car down. The work done
against or by air resistance accounts for a greater proportion of the dissipated energy for
greater initial velocity. Candidates should be encouraged to use correct technical language
when answering these types of questions; very few candidates mentioned work done, and
even fewer mentioned energy dissipation.
The question was principally about Archimedes’ principle and many candidates did indeed
give good answers once they began to talk about the relative sizes of the vertical forces
acting on the bulb. Many candidates knew that flotation depends on the relative densities of
the liquid and the bulb, but no marks were available for simply comparing densities, an
explanation as to why the density is important was required.
A common error was to bring the viscosity of the liquid into the explanation. Viscosity only
has an effect while the bulb is moving, but the speed at which the bulbs move is not relevant
to how the thermometer works, so examiners ignored mention of viscosity unless
contradictions arose. It is notable that confusion between the effect of upthrust and viscous
drag also appeared in Q19(a).
As with many multi-mark extended response questions there were a significant number of
blank responses. Centres should remind candidates that many of the marks are available for
simple statements, even when there is confusion about how to approach a full answer. In
this question a statement of Archimedes’ principle, or a statement that the weight of a bulb is
constant, are worth indicative content marks by themselves, so marks can be scored even
without a full explanation.
Responses scoring full marks for this question were very rare. Centres should encourage
candidates to construct clear narratives for these types of question. In this case the narrative
is: the bulb floats, the temperature rises, the bulb sinks. A clear account of each stage in the
right order is the most likely way to score all the marks.
The Kite
Candidates are expected to know how to draw an accurate parallelogram or triangle of forces
in order to find the resultant or equilibrant of two forces not at right angles. Many candidates
clearly know how to do this using the cosine rule, but only one mark was available for using
that method (although candidates are encouraged to check their answers this way if they
know how to do it).
Those candidates who drew the angle between the two forces correctly generally went on to
score all the marks. Those who drew free body force diagrams but did not then construct the
parallelogram generally scored no marks. The general exhortation to use a sharp pencil, ruler
and to measure to the nearest millimetre or degree applies to questions like this one.
This question tested candidates’ understanding of force resolution by asking them to explain
how measurements from a photograph could give a value for the tension in the kite string.
Most candidates realised that an angle needed to be measured, but it was important to state
how and which one. Good answers gave a clear account of the process and reasoning behind
it. Common mistakes generally involved muddling the angle with the co-angle and vagueness
with regard to how the weight of the mass and holder was to be determined.
This question provided few difficulties for candidates and most scored all three marks. A few
candidates showed the value by substituting 150 kg for car Q into the momentum equation
to obtain a value of 248 kg for car P. Centres should warn candidates that a reverse working
will not usually score full marks in a “show that” question, and also that the result of a
calculation must be shown to one more significant figure than the “show that” value.
Question 17 (a)(ii)
Most candidates seemed to know that the law of momentum conservation only applies when
no external forces act, but a great many candidates did not state how the condition applied
to this situation. Without mentioning the cars or the system no mark could be awarded.
Question 17 (a)(iii)
This calculation could be done for either car, since the magnitude of the forces on each is the
same. Most candidates were able to score full marks on this question.
The question asked for an explanation in terms of Newton’s laws, so explanations that did
not mention the laws by name did not score full marks. Most candidates scored marks for
application of the third law. Fewer candidates were clear about there now being a non-zero
resultant force on car P, with some saying that there was a reduced resultant force. A
negative resultant force where there had been zero before is not “reduced”.
Calculating the vertical component of the ball's velocity presented few difficulties for most
candidates.
Question 18 (b)
Most candidates who scored full marks on this part used the quadratic method, although
several candidates successfully executed the two part calculation where the maximum height
and time to maximum height were calculated and the time to fall from there to 11 m added.
The most common incorrect approach was to find the time to maximum height and double
it, giving a time that is too long.
Question 18 (c)
Most candidates that attempted this question had little difficulty in multiplying the horizontal
component of velocity with the time found in part (b). Many candidates did not obtain the
final mark because there was no comparison made with a relevant value in the final line.
Question 19 (b)(i–ii)
Question 19 (b)(i)
This was a simple three step calculation that candidates had little difficulty with. The most
common cause of error was in calculating the volume of the sphere, a formula that
candidates are expected to know.
Question 19 (b)(ii)
There were many ways to deduce whether Stokes’ law applied. A popular way was to
calculate the theoretical terminal velocity and compare it with the observed velocity, another
was to calculate the theoretical drag and upthrust and compare it with the weight of the
sphere. Common errors included forgetting to multiply mass by g in obtaining the upthrust
or forgetting about the upthrust altogether.
Question 19 (b)(iii)
This was a simple recall question and most candidates were able to give one of the correct
options. Centres should remind candidates that if only one condition is asked for only one
should be given, there is no advantage in a second, and a risk that if it is wrong it will negate
the mark. Examples of wrong extra options included “constant temperature” and “terminal
velocity”, neither of which are required for Stokes’ law. The most popular answer was that
there should be laminar flow around the sphere.
Question 19 (c)
The falling sphere viscometer relies on Stoke’ law being obeyed, so answers needed to
describe how the terminal velocity must be kept low. Very few candidates scored full marks
on this question, and many just quoted the terminal velocity formula without any
explanation, despite being instructed not to use calculations.
Something about the effect of lower viscosity on drag, and how the diameter affects drag and
weight were required. There were many blank answers. A simple statement that the viscosity
of blood is less than that of glycerol would have scored a mark.
Many candidates showed high levels of skill and knowledge of physics in this paper and it
was very pleasing to see some of the excellent examples of the efficient solutions candidates
presented, especially in Q13(b), the coat hook question and Q18(c), the golfer question.
Grade boundaries for this, and all other papers, can be found on the website on this link:
https://qualifications.pearson.com/en/support/support-topics/results-certification/grade-
boundaries.html