Temperature change in an isentropic flow of an ideal gas

AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on the confusion surrounding isentropic processes in ideal gas flow, particularly regarding temperature changes and heat transfer. An isentropic process is defined as both reversible and adiabatic, meaning there should be no heat transfer with the surroundings and no friction losses. However, when compressible gas flows through a nozzle, a temperature gradient can occur, leading to internal heat transfer, which seems to contradict the concept of reversibility. The analogy of gas-filled balloons illustrates that while the process can be adiabatic, internal temperature gradients can still exist without significant heat exchange. Ultimately, the key point is reconciling the definitions of isentropic processes with the realities of temperature gradients in gas flows.
citrouille
Messages
3
Reaction score
0
I am a bit confused by the definition of an isentropic process in the flow of an ideal gas.

isentropic implies reversible & adiabatic.

for a process to be reversible, there are no losses to friction (viscosity in this case),
for a process to be adiabatic, there is no heat transfer with the surroundings.

That being said, when a compressible gas flows through a nozzle, there is a temperature change. When this happens, a temperature gradient occurs. Where there is a temperature gradient, heat transfer occurs within the gas. I was always taught that, according to the 2nd principle of thermodynamics, a heat transfer due to a temperature gradient (from hot -> cold areas) is irreversible...which is directly contradicting the definition of a reversible & adiabatic flow...

Hope this is a pertinent question...

Thanks a lot for any help.
 
Science news on Phys.org
citrouille said:
I am a bit confused by the definition of an isentropic process in the flow of an ideal gas.

isentropic implies reversible & adiabatic.

for a process to be reversible, there are no losses to friction (viscosity in this case),
for a process to be adiabatic, there is no heat transfer with the surroundings.

That being said, when a compressible gas flows through a nozzle, there is a temperature change. When this happens, a temperature gradient occurs. Where there is a temperature gradient, heat transfer occurs within the gas. I was always taught that, according to the 2nd principle of thermodynamics, a heat transfer due to a temperature gradient (from hot -> cold areas) is irreversible...which is directly contradicting the definition of a reversible & adiabatic flow...

Hope this is a pertinent question...

Thanks a lot for any help.

Imagine a bunch of balloons containing gas. Imagine that they expand when they fly out of a window. The expansion of the gas cools the gas in the balloons. Yet, there is not any significant heat exchange between the balloons. That's because there's not enough time permitted for that exchange of heat to be significant. Thus, it is adiabatic.
 
kmarinas86 said:
Imagine a bunch of balloons containing gas. Imagine that they expand when they fly out of a window. The expansion of the gas cools the gas in the balloons. Yet, there is not any significant heat exchange between the balloons. That's because there's not enough time permitted for that exchange of heat to be significant. Thus, it is adiabatic.

I do not have a problem with the fact that the process is adiabatic (no heat transfer with the surroundings). My problem is with the fact that the transformation is reversible, and yet there is a spatial temperature gradient which would cause heat transfer within the gas (not with the surroundings). Heat transfer due to a temperature gradient within the gas is irreversible...maybe I'm thinking too much...sorry
 
citrouille said:
kmarinas86 said:
Imagine a bunch of balloons containing gas. Imagine that they expand when they fly out of a window. The expansion of the gas cools the gas in the balloons. Yet, there is not any significant heat exchange between the balloons. That's because there's not enough time permitted for that exchange of heat to be significant. Thus, it is adiabatic.

I do not have a problem with the fact that the process is adiabatic (no heat transfer with the surroundings). My problem is with the fact that the transformation is reversible, and yet there is a spatial temperature gradient which would cause heat transfer within the gas (not with the surroundings). Heat transfer due to a temperature gradient within the gas is irreversible...maybe I'm thinking too much...sorry

If you count the separate balloons as members of the same "gas", you can easily see how there is not significant transfer of heat, not even between parts of the gas.
 
kmarinas86 said:
If you count the separate balloons as members of the same "gas", you can easily see how there is not significant transfer of heat, not even between parts of the gas.

That makes more sense ! Thanks a lot for clearing that up.
 
Thread 'Thermo Hydrodynamic Effect'
Vídeo: The footage was filmed in real time. The rotor takes advantage of the thermal agitation of the water. The agitation is uniform, so the resultant is zero. When the aluminum cylinders containing frozen water are immersed in the water, about 30% of their surface is in contact with the water, and the rest is thermally insulated by styrofoam. This creates an imbalance in the agitation: the cold side of the water "shrinks," so that the hot side pushes the cylinders toward the cold...
Back
Top