A three step cycle problem check

  • Thread starter Thread starter Dari
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Cycle
Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion focuses on the efficiency calculation of a three-step cycle involving an ideal monoatomic gas (3.40 mol) transitioning through temperature changes from 200K to 500K. The calculations reveal that the total work done in the cycle is -4238.1 J, indicating that the system is performing work. The efficiency of the cycle is determined to be 33%, calculated using the formula W/Q(h), where Q(h) is derived from the heat added during the isometric process. The confusion regarding negative values for work and heat is clarified, emphasizing that negative work indicates the system is doing work and negative heat signifies heat release.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of the First Law of Thermodynamics
  • Familiarity with ideal gas laws and monoatomic gas properties
  • Knowledge of thermodynamic processes: isometric, adiabatic, and isobaric
  • Ability to perform calculations involving heat transfer and work
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the First Law of Thermodynamics in detail
  • Learn about the specific heat capacities (CV and CP) for monoatomic gases
  • Explore the derivation of efficiency formulas for thermodynamic cycles
  • Investigate real-world applications of heat engines and their efficiencies
USEFUL FOR

Students and professionals in thermodynamics, mechanical engineers, and anyone involved in the study or application of heat engines and energy efficiency calculations.

Dari
Messages
1
Reaction score
0
THE PROBLEM: A three step-cycle of an ideal monoatomic gas (3.40 mol) undergoes an (1) increase in temperature from 200 to 500K at a constant volume, is then (2) adiabatically expanded back to it's original pressure, then is (3) contracted at a constant pressure back to it's original volume. What is the efficiency of this cycle?


I'm very shaky on my thermodynamics - If someone could check over this answer to see if my calculations seem logical that would be very helpful, because there's no answer for this question in the back of my textbook. My original question about this problem was "I'm getting a negative number for total work, is this possible?" but then when I solved for heat gained by using the first law of thermodynamics it was also a negative number which gave me a positive percentage. Am I doing anything wrong, or is this correct?



my work goes as follows:
T(1) = 200
T(2) = 500
n = 3.40 mol
R = 8.31

Q = W + (delta)U
ISOMETRIC W = 0
ADIABATIC W = - (delta)U
ISOBARIC W = P x (delta)V

W(12) + W(23) + W(31) = W(total)
*because there is no work in an isometric process, W(12) = 0

W(23) is based on the negative change in internal energy, and with a monoatomic gas looks like -(3/2)(3.4 mol)(8.31)(500-200) = -12714.3

W(31) uses the constant pressure times the change in volume, or P(V(2) - V(1)), but because we don't have a number for pressure or volume, we take the ideal gas law and solve for the expanded equation PV(2) - PV(1), which ends up looking like: nRT(2) - nRT(1) = nR(T(2) - T(1)) = 8476.2

however the total work would then be negative, -4238.1


Then efficiency, which is the work divided by the total heat added/gained: W/Q(h) can be calculated. Q(h) is easily calculated because only one of the three processes adds heat - the isometric one. Taking the first law of thermodynamics, W = Q + (delta)U, so if work is equal to zero, Q = -(delta)U , which again is - (3/2)(3.4)(8.31)(500-200) = -12714.3

so W/Q(h) = -4238.1/-12714.3 x 100 = 33%
 
Physics news on Phys.org
A negative answer for total work implies that the system is doing work, since the W in the first law of thermodynamics refers to the work done on the system. This should be the case since the cycle is actually a heat engine. Similarly, a negative Q implies that the system is giving off heat.
 
Dari said:
Q(h) is easily calculated because only one of the three processes adds heat - the isometric one.

Not true. The amount of heat added during the isobaric process is

Q = n CP ΔT.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
1K
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
Replies
1
Views
1K
Replies
14
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 21 ·
Replies
21
Views
3K
Replies
4
Views
2K
Replies
3
Views
1K