• We need your support!

    We are currently struggling to cover the operational costs of Xtremepapers, as a result we might have to shut this website down. Please donate if we have helped you and help make a difference in other students' lives!
    Click here to Donate Now (View Announcement)

HOW WAS PHYSICS PAPER 2 AS!!!!!!!!!!!

Messages
267
Reaction score
184
Points
43
n for the steel question, they asked us 2 name 2 other quantities..i wrote area at first n then changed to radius/diameter (not sure which 1)...coz it was stated there as quantity measured..n area cnt really be measured rite..any opinion guys??
i wrote
1: original length using meter rule
2: diameter using micrometer screw gauge then calculate area by using the formula.......
 
Messages
326
Reaction score
172
Points
53
nope. there is work done against frictional force
The gain in potential energy was in fact equal to the output power because output power = Total energy-work done against friction. So the gain in potential energy was the effective work output once you subtracted the frictional force. The kinetic energy was obviously constant because the log was moving with constant velocity. :p
 
Messages
326
Reaction score
172
Points
53
No it was not because some work is also done against friction. (This should be sufficient for 2 marks) So output power would be rather the sum of gain in potential energy per unit time and work done against friction per unit time. :)
OUTPUT POWER is the effective power once you subtract the work done against friction. Have you ever calculated efficiency of a system? If you have then you might remember that output power is the effective power. :D
 
Messages
57
Reaction score
14
Points
8
OUTPUT POWER is the effective power once you subtract the work done against friction. Have you ever calculated efficiency of a system? If you have then you might remember that output power is the effective power. :D
Please read up some books before u say this.
Efficiency= EFFECTIVE power output/ energy input.
Output power refers to effective power + power loss.
 
Messages
57
Reaction score
14
Points
8
The gain in potential energy was in fact equal to the output power because output power = Total energy-work done against friction. So the gain in potential energy was the effective work output once you subtracted the frictional force. The kinetic energy was obviously constant because the log was moving with constant velocity. :p
you don't understand the ques dudette
 
Messages
719
Reaction score
2,644
Points
253
It was in equilibrium, because it was moving at constant velocity, no resultant force acting on it and no resultant moment either.
are u sure about that? i wrote the same thing as you but when u apply
F=ma
since a=0
F-850=0
F=850
(850 is resistive force)
So there is a resultant force on it
 
Messages
719
Reaction score
2,644
Points
253
n for the steel question, they asked us 2 name 2 other quantities..i wrote area at first n then changed to radius/diameter (not sure which 1)...coz it was stated there as quantity measured..n area cnt really be measured rite..any opinion guys??
nah area and radius are both correct because u need to measure the radius to get the area so its kinda like measuring the area so both r correct it think;)
 
Messages
242
Reaction score
99
Points
53
I know, but most of my friends tell me that since we are taking inverse of V/t, the power will come infront and it will become negative :S..
I hope you and I are right. My uncertainty value was 8.9 X 10^-5

also , my value of C came 1.035X10^-3
in the next question after uncertainty, the significant figure one,
I wrote it as : 1.04 X10^-3 + or - .089 X 10-3

is it right? some of them are telling I have to round up .089 to .09 :S.. what are your remakrs about that?


BTW, if my uncertainty value is wrong, will they allow ecf for the appropriate significant figure question ?

ANYONE LOOKING AT THIS, WOULD BE NICE IF YOU ANSWERED .. :) thanks.
dont worry, its fine, but u should have rounded to 3 sig fig as in all the data there were 3... Any body very sound in math would know that in place of w/t you could substitute it in to X and solve the eqation....now no need for inverse.....mine was 0.00104+-0.00009 ( which is confirmed correct)
 
Messages
242
Reaction score
99
Points
53
Oh, and also, for the very last part of question two where you had to state and explain the over all change in energy, what did you write?
only about the conversion of GE to KE at the plate and then again about the conversion of KE to GE at B?
well i wrote that the change in gpe is grater then change in KE which suggests that some energy is lost during the balls collision with the ground...
 
Messages
242
Reaction score
99
Points
53
OUTPUT POWER is the effective power once you subtract the work done against friction. Have you ever calculated efficiency of a system? If you have then you might remember that output power is the effective power. :D
total output power is just work done/time taken....not useful work done/time taken.............i say my car has a 20Kilo Watt powered engine, in order to calculate top speed i have to subtract power against resistence first.......it isnt included as you assume...any how..gain in pe was less as the motor does work against resistive forces too.
 
Messages
13
Reaction score
19
Points
13
in phy paper i wrote that micro meter screw guage will be used to calculate cross-sectional are rather than dia will be measured by micro meter and then area???? will i be penalised???
 
Top