Calculating work from a quasi-static process for an ideal gas

  • Thread starter Thread starter trah22
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Graph Work
AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on calculating the work done on an ideal gas during a quasi-static expansion from 1.00 m³ to 2.00 m³, where pressure is defined as P = αV² with α = 5.00 atm/m⁶. The work is derived from the integral of pressure with respect to volume, leading to the expression w = -α(v³/3) evaluated between the initial and final volumes. The confusion arises regarding the division by 3 in the calculation, which is necessary due to the integration of V² resulting in a V³ term divided by 3. The correct setup for the work calculation is confirmed to include the factor of 1/3, ensuring accurate results. The discussion emphasizes the importance of understanding the integration process in deriving the work done in such processes.
trah22
Messages
44
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement



a sample of ideal gas is expanded to twice its original volume of 1.00m^3 in a quasi-static process for which P=alphaV^2, with alpha=5.00 atm/m^6. How much work is done on the expanding gas.

Homework Equations



w=-intergral sign Pdv from intial to final volume( i don't know how to type this out)

The Attempt at a Solution



w=-aplha(v^3/3) from 2m^3 to 1m^3
=(-5.065 x10^5/3)(2^3-1^3)=-1.2x10^6

this actually the correct answer, however i don't understand why -5.065x10^5 is being divided by3 i thought it would be : -5.065x10^5((2^3/3)-(1^3/3)=w/e could someone explain why your suppose to set it up like that...
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Hint:

What is

\int\alpha x^2 dx
 
alpha)(x^3/3)... did i forget something
 
Last edited:
What is the work done in a reversible quasistatic process? It is given by

W = \int P dV

Thats how the factor of 1/3 comes about. Maybe the answer is wrong?

(PS--Which book is this?)
 
the text is principles of physics serway and jewett 4th edition, is the correct setup to the anser then -5.065x10^5(2^3/3-1^3/3) or the way they put it? Should the 1/3 still be factored out?
 
Last edited:
Kindly see the attached pdf. My attempt to solve it, is in it. I'm wondering if my solution is right. My idea is this: At any point of time, the ball may be assumed to be at an incline which is at an angle of θ(kindly see both the pics in the pdf file). The value of θ will continuously change and so will the value of friction. I'm not able to figure out, why my solution is wrong, if it is wrong .
TL;DR Summary: I came across this question from a Sri Lankan A-level textbook. Question - An ice cube with a length of 10 cm is immersed in water at 0 °C. An observer observes the ice cube from the water, and it seems to be 7.75 cm long. If the refractive index of water is 4/3, find the height of the ice cube immersed in the water. I could not understand how the apparent height of the ice cube in the water depends on the height of the ice cube immersed in the water. Does anyone have an...
Back
Top