Thermodynamic properties of ideal gases

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the thermodynamic properties of ideal gases, specifically focusing on the equations for specific energy and specific enthalpy. Participants explore the relationships between these properties and their dependence on temperature, volume, and pressure, as well as the mathematical reasoning behind certain assumptions in thermodynamics.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Conceptual clarification
  • Debate/contested
  • Mathematical reasoning

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants question why specific energy is expressed as u(T,v) instead of u(T,p), suggesting that the choice may be arbitrary but possibly more convenient.
  • There is a discussion about the derivatives of specific energy and specific enthalpy for ideal gases, with some participants seeking clarification on why certain derivatives are equal to zero.
  • One participant asserts that specific energy and specific enthalpy are functions of temperature alone for ideal gases, referencing mathematical reasoning and equations from thermodynamics.
  • Another participant emphasizes the need for a more intuitive understanding of why certain derivatives are zero, suggesting that the compressibility of ideal gases plays a role.
  • Participants engage in mathematical derivations to show that the internal energy and enthalpy of ideal gases are indeed dependent on temperature alone, referencing Maxwell's relations and the ideal gas law.
  • There are mentions of the limitations in the depth of explanations provided in textbooks, with some participants expressing surprise at the lack of detail in proofs related to these properties.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants generally agree that specific energy and specific enthalpy for ideal gases are functions of temperature alone, but there is no consensus on the best way to intuitively understand the reasoning behind certain mathematical results. Some participants express uncertainty regarding the arbitrary nature of property choices in thermodynamics.

Contextual Notes

Limitations include the potential for missing assumptions in the derivations, as well as the dependence on specific definitions and the context of engineering thermodynamics versus more theoretical approaches.

Who May Find This Useful

This discussion may be useful for students and professionals in thermodynamics, particularly those interested in the properties of ideal gases and the mathematical relationships governing them.

Saladsamurai
Messages
3,009
Reaction score
7
Here are some general questions regarding my current reading. I am looking in my text at 2 equations for specific energy and specific enthalpy:

u = u(T,v)\qquad(1)

h = h(T,p)\qquad(2)

Question 1: Are not the properties fixed by any 2 independent priorities? Why have we chosen to speak of u as u(T, v) in lieu of u(T, p) and the same for h ? Is it more convenient to out them in these terms for some reason?

Now, if we put (1) and (2) in differential form, we have:

du = \left(\frac{\partial{u}}{\partial{T}}\right)_v dT + \left(\frac{\partial{u}}{\partial{v}}\right)_T dv\qquad(3)

dh = \left(\frac{\partial{h}}{\partial{T}}\right)_p dT + \left(\frac{\partial{h}}{\partial{p}}\right)_T dp\qquad(4)

Question 2:

It says that for an ideal gas:

\left(\frac{\partial{u}}{\partial{v}}\right)_T \text{ and }\left(\frac{\partial{h}}{\partial{p}}\right)_T

are equal to zero. Can someone clarify this? Is there some mathematical reasoning behind this? Or is this simply something that we have observed? Or both?

Question 3:

Going along with assumptions above (i.e., dh/dp = 0 and du/dv = 0) we can assert that for an ideal gas, specific energy and specific enthalpy are both functions of temperature alone, correct?
 
Science news on Phys.org
The thermodynamic properties of ideal gases were originally derived as the limit case of results obtained from experiences with real gases. Later on, Boltzmann showed they could be computed from the statistical description of an assemble of non-interacting, point-like particles
 
Saladsamurai said:
Here are some general questions regarding my current reading. I am looking in my text at 2 equations for specific energy and specific enthalpy:

u = u(T,v)\qquad(1)

h = h(T,p)\qquad(2)

Question 1: Are not the properties fixed by any 2 independent priorities? Why have we chosen to speak of u as u(T, v) in lieu of u(T, p) and the same for h ? Is it more convenient to out them in these terms for some reason?

Now, if we put (1) and (2) in differential form, we have:

du = \left(\frac{\partial{u}}{\partial{T}}\right)_v dT + \left(\frac{\partial{u}}{\partial{v}}\right)_T dv\qquad(3)

dh = \left(\frac{\partial{h}}{\partial{T}}\right)_p dT + \left(\frac{\partial{h}}{\partial{p}}\right)_T dp\qquad(4)

Question 2:

It says that for an ideal gas:

\left(\frac{\partial{u}}{\partial{v}}\right)_T \text{ and }\left(\frac{\partial{h}}{\partial{p}}\right)_T

are equal to zero. Can someone clarify this? Is there some mathematical reasoning behind this? Or is this simply something that we have observed? Or both?

Question 3:

Going along with assumptions above (i.e., dh/dp = 0 and du/dv = 0) we can assert that for an ideal gas, specific energy and specific enthalpy are both functions of temperature alone, correct?

Q1: The state is fixed by any two independent, intensive, properties. As far as I know the choice is arbitrary (but I'm not 100% certain off the top of my head).

Q2: There is both a mathematical reason and it is something that can be observed.

Q3: Yes. In fact, that's what the math will show when you solve equations [3] and [4] above. I'm sure there should be a proof in your Thermo book. You'll probably see the more useful form of du = CvdT and dh = CpdT which also shows that for an Ideal Gas the internal energy and enthalpy are functions of temperature alone.

Hope this helps.

CS
 
stewartcs said:
Q1: The state is fixed by any two independent, intensive, properties. As far as I know the choice is arbitrary (but I'm not 100% certain off the top of my head).

Q2: There is both a mathematical reason and it is something that can be observed.

Q3: Yes. In fact, that's what the math will show when you solve equations [3] and [4] above. I'm sure there should be a proof in your Thermo book. You'll probably see the more useful form of du = CvdT and dh = CpdT which also shows that for an Ideal Gas the internal energy and enthalpy are functions of temperature alone.

Hope this helps.

CS

Q1: Right. I am thinking that the choices made here are more useful then others in some regard.

Q2: OK.

Q3: Right, however integrating (3) and (4) armed with the knowledge that dh/dp = 0 and du/dv = 0 is hardly a "proof" (and by the way, this is how my thermo book does it. Keep in mind this is "engineering thermodynamics.")

I was trying to come up with an intuitive way to show why dh/dp = 0 and du/dv = 0 (if one exists) for ideal gases. I was thinking along the lines that since an ideal gas is very compressible that when we change the pressure or specific volume "differentially" the effect is negligible.

Thanks again!
Casey
 
Saladsamurai said:
Q3: Right, however integrating (3) and (4) armed with the knowledge that dh/dp = 0 and du/dv = 0 is hardly a "proof" (and by the way, this is how my thermo book does it. Keep in mind this is "engineering thermodynamics.")

Well that's surprising that they don't go into detail! I'll see if I can help. First we have the total differential for u = u(T,v):

du = \left(\frac{\partial{u}}{\partial{T}}\right)_v dT + \left(\frac{\partial{u}}{\partial{v}}\right)_T dv

Also using the fundamental differential: du = Tds - pdv and dividing by dv while holding T constant we get:

\left(\frac{\partial{u}}{\partial{v}}\right)_T = T \left(\frac{\partial{s}}{\partial{v}}\right)_T - p

This next part is the part you probably haven't gotten to yet in your book which you would have figured out for yourself I'm sure once you read the associated chapter:

Use one of Maxwell's relations:

\left(\frac{\partial{s}}{\partial{v}}\right)_T = \left(\frac{\partial{p}}{\partial{T}}\right)_v

Substituting that relation into the previous equation gives:

\left(\frac{\partial{u}}{\partial{v}}\right)_T = T \left(\frac{\partial{p}}{\partial{T}}\right)_v - p

Now for an Ideal Gas we have the equation of state: pv = RT

Differentiating while holding v constant gives:

\left(\frac{\partial{p}}{\partial{T}}\right)_v = \frac{R}{v}

Now substitute that into the previous equation gives:

\left(\frac{\partial{u}}{\partial{v}}\right)_T = T \frac{R}{v} - p

and since the Ideal Gas equation of state can be arrange as p = RT/v we have the proof you are looking for:

\left(\frac{\partial{u}}{\partial{v}}\right)_T = T \frac{R}{v} - p = p - p = 0

This shows that internal energy is not dependent on the specific volume (since it is 0 just above).

Now from the very first equation we are only left with the first term on the RHS (since the second term was just shown to be zero):

du = \left(\frac{\partial{u}}{\partial{T}}\right)_v dT

Which confirms your intuition that the internal energy of an Ideal Gas is dependent on temperature alone.

Note that the coefficient in the last equation is defined as Cv (i.e. the specific heat capacity at constant volume). Or as I said before, the more familiar form is du = CvdT.

Hope that helps.

CS
 
BTW, the same can be shown true for the enthalpy (I was just too lazy to type anymore)! :rolleyes:

CS
 
stewartcs said:
BTW, the same can be shown true for the enthalpy (I was just too lazy to type anymore)! :rolleyes:

CS

No! This is more than enough! I will go through this in a little bit and make sure I understand it. And then I will return and post the solution to the enthalpy part now that I know where the starting point is.

Thanks for all of your time CS! :smile:

~Casey
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 23 ·
Replies
23
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
4K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 23 ·
Replies
23
Views
3K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 19 ·
Replies
19
Views
3K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K