Assume the same density. The mass goes as r^3. The gravity from an idealized point mass goes as r^-2. Then gravity goes as r^3/r^2 ~r.

Such a gravity estimate for these planets, assuming the same composition (wrong here) and disregarding compressibility (also terribly wrong if water worlds), is 40 – 70 % more.

It is interesting to note that cellular life doesn’t mind much for terrestrial range gravities. You can still have animals moving about in several g’s with the same type of muscles we have. With tension storage-release mechanisms like some insects and frogs, you can generate forces to move, with pauses and/or using parallel mechanisms, under 10′s, 100′s, if not 1000′s of g. (I’ll need to check that. But some accelerations created by their muscles are on that order.)

Likewise we can withstand 1000s of g (but not rapid shaking, like explosions) if liquid immersed, which is why a fetus can take a lot of accidental abuse.

And cells can withstand the pressure equivalent of 1000s of g in the deep ocean & crust.

It would be interesting to know, if Kepler-62e&f are water worlds, presumably with 100s of km of global oceans, how far down the cellular potential biosphere (habitable zone) goes disregarding pressure ices that will eventually “surface” (appear at depth). I don’t think anyone has touched that question yet.

What are the ‘G’ forces of these newly found planets ?