Examiners Report/

Principal Examiner Feedback

Summer 2013

GCE Physics (6PH02)

Paper 01R: Physics at work.

Edexcel and BTEC Qualifications

Edexcel and BTEC qualifications come from Pearson, the worlds leading learning company. 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 for our BTEC qualifications.
Alternatively, you can get in touch with us using the details on our contact us page at
www.edexcel.com/contactus.
If you have any subject specific questions about this specification that require the help of a
subject specialist, you can speak directly to the subject team at Pearson.
Their contact details can be found on this link: www.edexcel.com/teachingservices.
You can also use our online Ask the Expert service at www.edexcel.com/ask. You will need an
Edexcel username and password to access this service.

Pearson: helping people progress, everywhere

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. Weve 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

Summer 2013
Publications Code US036629*
All the material in this publication is copyright
Pearson Education Ltd 2013

Grade Boundaries
Grade boundaries for this, and all other papers, can be found on the website on this link:
http://www.edexcel.com/iwantto/Pages/grade-boundaries.aspx

This is the fifth summer series in which Unit 2: Physics at Work has been
examined. The assessment structure is the same as that of Unit 1: Physics on the
Go, consisting of Section A with ten multiple choice questions, and Section B with a
number of short answer questions followed by some longer, structured questions
based on contexts of varying familiarity.
This paper allowed candidates to demonstrate their knowledge of content across
the whole specification for this unit, showing progression from GCSE or its
equivalent and answering questions to the depth appropriate to their level of
understanding.
There was less confusion about quantum phenomena than has sometimes been
seen, with very few using photoelectric effect explanations when discussing spectra,
for example.
For many candidates, areas for improvement include learning definitions for
standard terms in detail and being able to identify specific parts of longer
explanations of phenomena that apply to particular situations.
Section A
Question
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10

percentage of correct
responses
80
65
82
71
91
90
65
66
88
51

Candidates performed well on the majority of the multiple choice questions in

Section A, with questions 2, 7, 8 and 10 causing the most difficulty.
For question 2, candidates not choosing B usually selected D, suggesting that they
are familiar with the general form of the graph for a non-ohmic conductor and that
they know a filament bulb is one. They need to concentrate on a way of deciding
which shape matches a positive temperature coefficient and which a negative
temperature coefficient.
Question 7 had B as the favoured incorrect choice. This is a true statement, but not
one that explains negative temperature coefficient behaviour, a link with question
2.
B was the common incorrect choice for question 8. This is understandable as
students are much more likely to refer to an ampere as a coulomb per second than
they are to refer to a coulomb as an ampere second, making coulomb seem more
basic.
The common incorrect choice for question 10 was C. This would be correct if the xaxis represented time, but here at any given position Y is a quarter of a cycle ahead
of X.
Section B
Question 11
The majority of candidates scored at last one mark, the most commonly awarded
being the mark for a comment about current being the same in series or splitting
up for a parallel arrangement. They often suggested that the current would change
if the resistance changed but failed to be specific about an increase in resistance for
the circuit or that the current would decrease.
Question 12
The great majority gained all three marks for this question, following the normal
pattern of scoring more highly for calculations than for descriptions and
explanations. Candidates occasionally lost a mark by omitting the unit and a small
minority gave the lost volts as their final answer.
Question 13
(a) More than a quarter of the entry scored full marks, and most got at least
two. Where two marks were awarded they were for identifying diffraction at
the double slit and linking light bands to constructive interference or the
associated path difference or the similar description for the dark bands.
The second and third marks were not fully achieved for a variety of reasons
all involving a lack of correct detail in the answer. Some candidates
mentioned the path differences but didnt mention constructive and
destructive interference. Others merely discussed crest meets crest, trough
meets trough. Some lost a mark by mentioning waves being out of phase
rather than in antiphase and some stated phase difference but described it
in terms of wavelength.
(b) Nearly half of the candidates obtained a mark for describing coherence,
many of those not gaining the mark referring to a constant path difference,
which would be true with or without coherence. Although a lot of extra
information from candidates in parts (a) and (b) showed that they were well
aware that coherence is required for interference, very few understood why
and could explain it. Explanations rarely went beyond saying just that you
cant get interference without coherence.
(c) Slightly under half of the entry got a mark here, often for just saying it must
be a wave rather than linking it to interference or diffraction.

Question 14
(a) Most candidates quoted Q = It for the first mark, but only about a third
made a clear link between the quantities and the units as required. Very few
took the approach of full conversion of Ah to C.
(b-d) This sequence presented little difficulty. When students reversed the
numerator and denominator in the efficiency calculation, obtaining an answer
greater than 100% did not always suggest to them that they try again. On the
other hand, those who made a slip in part (b) or part (c) generally used their
answers to obtain a percentage below 100% regardless of which was input and
which was output.
Question 15
(a) Over half of the students got two marks or more, and most of the rest got
one mark. Marks were lost through lack of precision in expression or not
addressing the second part of the question, why refraction occurs for light
entering the Earths atmosphere, in sufficient detail. Candidates nearly
always mentioned a change in density or speed, but often just referred to
light bending. This is not sufficient for a description of refraction as it
equally implies a curved path. On the specific case of the Earths
atmosphere, they mentioned a change in speed, but often did not state that
this change was a decrease, as suggested by the diagram.
(b) Nearly everyone used the Snells law formula, but only about two thirds
used the correct angle of incidence, the rest usually selecting 26. Most used
64 calculated the angle of refraction correctly, and nearly half of the entry
went on to find the change in direction.
Question 16
(a) While well over three quarters gained three marks for completing the
calculation, the proportion gaining full marks was under half because the line
was often not drawn on the graph. The question didnt state use the graph,
but candidates should recognise from it that different points would give
different values of resistivity, so the best way to find the resistivity would
be to use the gradient of a best fit line.
Errors occasionally seen included omitting the unit, calculating from a pair of
values that gave a result outside the accepted range, converting 100 cm to
m incorrectly and getting R and mixed up in the formula.
(b) Candidates again lost marks by not giving answers to the specific situation
described. They often said that the temperature would be affected and
resistance would change without specifying an increase in either. Overall,
half of them got the mark for temperature increase, often saying it gets hot,
and a half of those the second mark.
Some tried to interpret the precaution in terms of personal safety, saying it
might cause a shock or a burn.
(c) The question referred to the table, so precautions needed to be related to
accuracy in the measurement of length, current or potential difference. Only
about a sixth chose a suitable precaution. One of the most frequent
suggestions was repeating the measurement of diameter and calculating the
average, but diameter, radius and cross-sectional area were not variables in
the table. Common accepted precautions were ensuring that the wire was

straight, avoiding parallax errors in reading analogue meters and avoiding

zero errors.
Question 17
(a) While few candidates scored full marks, a majority got at least two and the
range of marks was distributed progressively across the ability range. Most
students appeared to understand the general process, and some even added
details of absorption spectra although this was not specified, but others were
limited by imprecise language and lack of detail in their answers.
The most common marks were for describing moves to higher or lower
energy levels and for stating that energy levels are discrete, often in those
words. They only rarely referred to changes, or jumps, of unspecified
direction.
Many students linked energy level changes to photon emission, but did not
clearly state that the energy from the change is given out in the form of a
photon.
The limited number of energy level differences, rather than just energy
levels, was described more rarely still, as was the precise link between the
quantity of energy in the change and the energy of the photon, although the
equation was sometimes quoted.
Unlike previous occasions, there were very few references to work function
or other aspects of the photoelectric effect.
(b) A good majority identified the Doppler effect, although some opted for red
shift and lost credit. Most who identified blue shift could state that the
wavelength decreased or the frequency increased, although some were
unsure of the correct orientation of these quantities with regard to the
visible spectrum. Most who got that far knew that the star was approaching
the Earth, although some just stated that it was close rather than getting
closer.
(c) A quarter of candidates got this mark. For those who did, particle behaviour
tended to be mentioned more often than wave behaviour.
Question 18
(a) Over half got at least one mark, but under half of these were awarded the
second. Elements of the description were present in most responses, but
frequently in insufficient detail or not worded precisely. The mark most
commonly awarded was for compressions and rarefactions. When candidates
mentioned the direction of the oscillations, they often said something like
the oscillations are parallel to the wave movement. This answer requires
the description of the direction of the oscillations (or displacement) and the
direction of energy transfer, and the imprecise term wave movement could
be associated with either and is not sufficient to gain the mark. Move,
motion and movement are terms best avoided in this context.
(b) Nearly half identified the reason for clicks, but, despite the comparison with
continuous sound, many failed to link them with the reasons for pulses they
knew from the pulse-echo technique and attempted descriptions in terms of
animal behaviour. Others had some understanding but could not express it
clearly.
(c) (i-ii) Half complete this completely for four marks, and the great majority
calculated the time and applied distance = speed time. Things went awry

for a certain proportion at this stage through omitting the factor of 2

required in pulse-echo calculations.
A number of students got the frequency of the clicks confused with the
frequency of sound, thinking that 16 Hz could be ultrasound, and calculated
a wavelength of 96 m.
(c)(iii) Nearly half gained the mark. Of those who didnt, many mentioned that
the sound would return to the dolphin more quickly but did not suggest any
consequences.
(d) Most students repeated the range calculation from part (c)(ii) for the bat
and only got a single mark if they mentioned that the speed of sound in air,
of for the bat, was lower. Hence, most of them decided the dolphin had the
advantage. This shows a failure to appreciate the meaning of the term
precise.
Some used 16 Hz as a frequency to calculate a corresponding wavelength
for air and water. Others attempted to use the time between clicks for a
pulse length calculation. It may be that stating the speed of sound for air led
candidates to believe that a calculation was required. 19 (b) was a bit like
this in asking a question and presenting data, but in 19 (b) they were
specifically asked to carry out a calculation and had the required data.
Of those who successfully argued that the wavelength, or pulse length, in air
is shorter, only a minority linked it to better resolution.
Question 19
(a) Most candidates got the marks for a general understanding of the
photoelectric effect, but the marks for more precise description and
application to the particular situation was awarded less frequently. Over two
thirds got at least two marks for the idea that photons cause the emission of
electrons. Over half the entry proceeded to the third mark, often for a
correct reference to work function or for linking the emitted photons to the
flow of current.
Some failed to get the mark for the work function through imprecise
expression, often mixing it up with threshold frequency, for example the
photon must have a frequency greater than the work function, or the
electron must absorb more energy than the threshold frequency. For the
final mark on the mark scheme they needed to refer to the lack of photons
and the consequent lack of photoemission, but they did not always make
this link explicit. Occasionally they said that the photons would have
insufficient energy in the dark, but this did not seem to be a reference to
infrared radiation from the surroundings.
A number of candidates wrote everything they knew about the photoelectric
effect, often correctly and often containing quotes from previous mark
schemes. While it is reassuring that they have learned the full details of the
phenomenon, they need to be able to select which are needed to explain
specific situations.

(b) Close to half got the full four marks, again displaying greater facility with
calculations than explanations, even when they are more embedded in the
context.
Some candidates failed to convert eV to J and some stopped after having
done so. Units were occasionally omitted. A number of candidates completed
the calculations but couldnt make a suitable comparison with visible light
and/or ultraviolet to complete the explanation. Candidates approached the
question in different ways, often starting from the wavelength limits of the
visible spectrum.
(c) The majority defined amplitude satisfactorily, adding sufficient detail to
maximum displacement which is not sufficient alone as it could refer to a
distance travelled in a straight line. Some stated the vertical distance
between a crest and a trough or said things like maximum distance from a
centre.
(d)
(e) There was a widespread lack of understanding of this part of the question,
although nearly half scored at least one mark. A significant proportion of the
candidates thought that the frequency of the light changed in some way and
that this was related to the frequency of sound produced. Some connected
the pattern with standing waves and described the production of nodes and
antinodes or discussed longitudinal waves. Many other candidates did little
more than repeat the question without much added detail.
Of the candidates who displayed an appreciation of the context, many were
unable to set out the links from the pattern to the current in a sufficient
number of linked steps in a logical order. About a third got two marks for
two links, such as a greater intensity causing the emission of more electrons
and more electrons causing a greater current.

Further copies of this publication are available from

Edexcel Publications, Adamsway, Mansfield, Notts, NG18 4FN
Telephone 01623 467467
Fax 01623 450481
Email publication.orders@edexcel.com
Order Code US036629 Summer 2013

For more information on Edexcel qualifications, please visit

www.edexcel.com/quals

Pearson Education Limited. Registered company number 872828

with its registered office at Edinburgh Gate, Harlow, Essex CM20 2JE