Calculating Potential Energy from Pressure Differences in Gas Flows

AI Thread Summary
The discussion revolves around the potential energy generated from pressure differences in gas flows, particularly in relation to wind energy. It highlights how kinetic energy from moving air molecules, influenced by solar heating, can be harnessed for electricity generation. The conversation explores the complexities of calculating potential energy without relying on temperature differences, suggesting gravitational potential energy changes as an alternative method. Participants acknowledge the challenges of accurately determining the energy in wind due to varying molecular movements and the limitations of their current knowledge in fluid dynamics. Ultimately, the discussion emphasizes the intricate relationship between pressure, temperature, and energy in gas flows.
kishtik
Messages
96
Reaction score
0
Last week, I've read about a plane (A300 I think) being lousy on a platform at a park, turning left and right, to where the wind comes. And I pondered about the energetic nature of the winds at that pause.
We could generate electric from wind, from air molecules' kinetic energy. They had kinetic energy because they moved from higher pressure to the lower. There were pressure differences because different areas were heated differently by the Sun. So I thought the Sun gave the air some potential energy by creating pressure differences.
Consider a syringe (without the string). Close its mouth with your finger and push its piston. Really you are giving it a PE. I think this system behaves like a spring.

I pondered about how to calculate the potential energy in open air pressure differences (look at the attachment).
The difference between the final KE of a molecule and the initial KE of it had to give the KE gained from the pressure difference.
<br /> KE_f - KE_i=KE_p<br />
To calculate the final velocity, initial velocity must be known. No problem, we just need a thermometer.
<br /> KE= \frac{1}{2} mv^2= \frac{3}{2} kT<br />
Then we can return to our second formula. T_dif is the temperature difference.
<br /> \frac{1}{2} mv_f^2-\frac{1}{2} mv_i^2= \frac{3}{2} k T_\textrm{dif}=KE_p<br />
But when we say that two gases are at different pressures, it doesn't mean that their temperatures are different(PV=nRT).
I need a way to calculate KE_p without neccessity to the temperature difference.
After long minutes (err...) of thinking, I found that we could use the gravitational PE changes of the flows over the focuses (please look at the attachment again). I think Dh1 and Dh2 could be useful.
As you've seen these 5-min.-pause thoughts couldn't take me somewhere.
Next pause, I used a work approach.
If I could know how much work the wind does on a single molecule, I would feel like I was in heaven, but it didn't took more than a nanosecond to realize that this was impossible. First, all the molecules were traveling on different directions when the "air" was at rest. But no matter it was the high pressure area or other, the air was moving (as you can see at my stupid attachment) and this increased the sophistication of the subject and the confusion of the thinker. Second, I was only a high school student and did not know any way to find the average force on a molecule; more important, I knew nothing more than Bernoulli's effect about the fluid dynamics (which was very sophisticated, I learned from the tap in my bathroom).
Now, I know the subject is not very easy, but thinking about the nature became my lifestyle (perhaps since I read Richard Feynman).

www.geocities.com/sukreth/pressure.jpg
 

Attachments

  • pressure.jpg
    pressure.jpg
    12.4 KB · Views: 567
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
Originally posted by kishtik
And I pondered about the energetic nature of the winds at that pause. We could generate electric from wind, from air molecules' kinetic energy.
We already do: http://msnbc.msn.com/id/3878979/

The US has a wind capacity of 6,000 megawatts (not sure if that's continuous) - roughly equal to 6 nuclear reactors. Total world capacity is about 35,000 mw.

The easiest way to figure out how much energy is in the wind is by just using its speed and density. Speed is recorded continuously from weather stations. What you are doing pretty much is trying to calculate how fast the wind will blow. Its unnecessary and impossible to get accurate.
 
Last edited:


Originally posted by russ_watters
We already do: http://msnbc.msn.com/id/3878979/

I knew.
Its unnecessary and impossible to get accurate.
Yes. Sorry.
 
The rope is tied into the person (the load of 200 pounds) and the rope goes up from the person to a fixed pulley and back down to his hands. He hauls the rope to suspend himself in the air. What is the mechanical advantage of the system? The person will indeed only have to lift half of his body weight (roughly 100 pounds) because he now lessened the load by that same amount. This APPEARS to be a 2:1 because he can hold himself with half the force, but my question is: is that mechanical...
Some physics textbook writer told me that Newton's first law applies only on bodies that feel no interactions at all. He said that if a body is on rest or moves in constant velocity, there is no external force acting on it. But I have heard another form of the law that says the net force acting on a body must be zero. This means there is interactions involved after all. So which one is correct?
Thread 'Beam on an inclined plane'
Hello! I have a question regarding a beam on an inclined plane. I was considering a beam resting on two supports attached to an inclined plane. I was almost sure that the lower support must be more loaded. My imagination about this problem is shown in the picture below. Here is how I wrote the condition of equilibrium forces: $$ \begin{cases} F_{g\parallel}=F_{t1}+F_{t2}, \\ F_{g\perp}=F_{r1}+F_{r2} \end{cases}. $$ On the other hand...
Back
Top