Proving Efficiency | How to Prove Question on Heat Engines

  • Thread starter Thread starter jlmac2001
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Efficiency
Click For Summary
SUMMARY

This discussion addresses the proof that a heat engine with an efficiency greater than the ideal value of 4.5 can be connected to a Carnot refrigerator to create a system that requires no work input. The key equations involved are the efficiency formula, efficiency = 1 - Qc/Qh, and the coefficient of performance (COP) for the refrigerator, COP = 1/(Qh/Qc - 1). The second law of thermodynamics is central to the argument, establishing that the efficiency of the heat engine must exceed that of the Carnot engine operating between the same temperature limits. The conclusion is that this configuration results in a refrigerator with zero work input.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of thermodynamics principles, specifically the second law of thermodynamics
  • Familiarity with heat engine and Carnot refrigerator concepts
  • Knowledge of efficiency calculations in thermodynamic systems
  • Ability to interpret and manipulate equations related to heat transfer
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the second law of thermodynamics in detail
  • Learn about Carnot cycle efficiency and its implications
  • Explore advanced thermodynamic systems and their applications
  • Investigate real-world examples of heat engines and refrigerators
USEFUL FOR

Students and professionals in thermodynamics, mechanical engineers, and anyone interested in the principles of heat engines and refrigeration systems.

jlmac2001
Messages
75
Reaction score
0
I'm having trouble with proving the following question. Can someone please help, please.

(1) Prove that if you had a heat engine whose efficiency was better than the ideal value (4.5) you could hook it up to an ordinary Carnot refrigerator to make a refrigeratior that requires no work input.


I know that efficency = 1-Qc/Qh and COP=1/(Qh/Qc - 1)but how do i prove the above question?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Originally posted by jlmac2001
... if you had a heat engine whose efficiency was better than the ideal value (4.5) ...
Either I'm really ignorant of this thermo stuff, or you've gotten the wrong number for efficiency. I think it should always be less than unity.




Originally posted by jlmac2001
... you could hook it up to an ordinary Carnot refrigerator ...
My first step would be to draw a diagram. Make sure to include the hot and cold reservoirs and the directions of energy/heat flow. That should give a good picture of what's going on.
 


To prove this question, we can use the concept of the second law of thermodynamics, which states that no heat engine can have an efficiency greater than that of a Carnot engine operating between the same temperature limits. This means that for a heat engine with an efficiency greater than the ideal value of 4.5, its efficiency must be greater than the efficiency of a Carnot engine operating between the same temperature limits.

Let's assume that the heat engine in question has an efficiency of x, which is greater than 4.5, and let's also assume that the Carnot engine has an efficiency of y. According to the second law of thermodynamics, we know that x > y.

Now, if we hook up the heat engine with efficiency x to an ordinary Carnot refrigerator, the heat rejected by the heat engine (Qc) would be equal to the heat absorbed by the refrigerator (Qh). This is because the heat engine is operating at a higher efficiency, so it would reject less heat than the Carnot engine.

Using the equations you mentioned, we can write the efficiency of the refrigerator as y = 1 - Qc/Qh. Substituting Qc = Qh, we get y = 1 - 1 = 0. This means that the efficiency of the refrigerator is 0, which implies that no work input is required for the refrigerator to operate.

Therefore, by hooking up the heat engine with efficiency x to an ordinary Carnot refrigerator, we have created a refrigerator that requires no work input, thus proving the statement.
 

Similar threads

Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 20 ·
Replies
20
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
5K
  • · Replies 23 ·
Replies
23
Views
5K
Replies
14
Views
3K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
Replies
1
Views
3K