Adiabatic expansion with temperature-dependent gamma

AI Thread Summary
The discussion focuses on solving a problem related to adiabatic expansion with a temperature-dependent gamma (γ). The initial approach involves using the formula for reversible adiabatic processes, PVγ = constant, and calculating initial volume with the ideal gas law. The user calculates γ as the quotient of specific heats, noting that it varies with temperature. They propose using initial and final values of γ in the equation but express uncertainty about this method. The conversation suggests that a calculus approach may be necessary to account for changes in volume and temperature due to the variable nature of γ.
usrename
Messages
1
Reaction score
0
Homework Statement
Two moles of a gas, whose initial temperature and pressure are 200ºC and 20 atm, undergo an adiabatic expansion until the temperature reaches 100ºC. Calculate the pressure and the volume at the end of the process if the constant pressure molar heat capacity follows this formula:
Relevant Equations
c_p= a + bT + cT²
The statement does not say whether the process is reversible or not, but I suppose the only way to solve the problem is by thinking it actually is.
I tried using the formula for reversible adiabatic processes, i.e. PVγ = constant. First, I calculated the initial volume with the ideal gas law. Then, I tried to find /gamma as the quotient between cp and cv. If I take cv to be cp - R, then the value of γ depends on temperature.
I think the way to do is by calculating P0V0γ0 using the value of γ at the initial temperature and then using γF, i.e. the value of γ at the final temperature, on the other side of the equation PFVFγF. However, I am not sure if I can use the formula this way.
Is this approach correct?
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
Since ##\gamma## is variable, I think you need to take a calculus view of ##PV^\gamma=c##. I.e. consider a small change in volume, and what that does to the temperature.
 
I multiplied the values first without the error limit. Got 19.38. rounded it off to 2 significant figures since the given data has 2 significant figures. So = 19. For error I used the above formula. It comes out about 1.48. Now my question is. Should I write the answer as 19±1.5 (rounding 1.48 to 2 significant figures) OR should I write it as 19±1. So in short, should the error have same number of significant figures as the mean value or should it have the same number of decimal places as...
Thread 'A cylinder connected to a hanging mass'
Let's declare that for the cylinder, mass = M = 10 kg Radius = R = 4 m For the wall and the floor, Friction coeff = ##\mu## = 0.5 For the hanging mass, mass = m = 11 kg First, we divide the force according to their respective plane (x and y thing, correct me if I'm wrong) and according to which, cylinder or the hanging mass, they're working on. Force on the hanging mass $$mg - T = ma$$ Force(Cylinder) on y $$N_f + f_w - Mg = 0$$ Force(Cylinder) on x $$T + f_f - N_w = Ma$$ There's also...
Back
Top