Can the work in a isochoric process be non zero?

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion clarifies that in an isochoric process, it is incorrect to assume that the work done (W) is always zero. Specifically, when a fan does work on a gas in a thermally isolated tank, the work done by the fan increases the internal energy (ΔU) of the gas, leading to a temperature change. The process can be both isochoric and adiabatic, as the tank's insulation prevents heat exchange (Q=0). Therefore, the relationship W_fan = ΔU holds true, demonstrating that isochoric does not imply W=0.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of thermodynamic processes, particularly isochoric and adiabatic processes.
  • Familiarity with the first law of thermodynamics (ΔU = Q + W).
  • Knowledge of kinetic energy and viscous dissipation in gases.
  • Basic principles of heat transfer and thermal insulation.
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the implications of the first law of thermodynamics in various thermodynamic processes.
  • Learn about viscous dissipation and its effects on internal energy in gases.
  • Explore the differences between isochoric and adiabatic processes in detail.
  • Investigate Joule's experiment and its significance in establishing the relationship between work and internal energy.
USEFUL FOR

Students and professionals in thermodynamics, mechanical engineers, and anyone interested in the principles of energy transfer in closed systems.

Soren4
Messages
127
Reaction score
2
I came up with a doubt regarding isochoric irreversible processes. Is it always true that, for any isochoric process, reversible or not, the work exchanged by the system is zero and the heat exchanged is ##Q=\Delta U##?

I'm asking this because, in a exercise on thermodynamics trasformations of a gas, there was to be considered an "isochoric irreversible transformation in which the tank containing the gas is thermically isolated and work is done on the gas with a fan of negligible thermal capacity, the gas goes from ##T_a## to ##T_b##".

Now if the tank is isolated ##Q## should be ##0## but that cannot be, since the gas changes its temperature and the process is isochoric. Furthermore it is said that work is done on the system, but the process is isochoric, how can that be?

Nothing else is specified on the trasformation so in my view it can be a case where it does not matter at all how the process is done, as long as ##V_{final}=V_{initial}## the process is isochoric and the total work done on the gas will be zero (maybe some positive and some negative), but still I don't see how the gas can exchange heat in this case.

So do I have to care about it or, in any isochoric trasformation I can be sure that ##W=0## and ##Q=\Delta U##?
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Delta2
Physics news on Phys.org
P-V work is not the only kind of work that can be done on the contents of your system. In the case of your fan example, the fan is doing work on the gas within the container by exerting force on it through a displacement (of the fan blade). The kinetic energy imparted to the gas by the fan is then converted to internal energy by viscous dissipation (a damping effect). So the net effect is that the work done by the fan increases the internal energy of the gas.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Soren4 and Delta2
Chestermiller said:
P-V work is not the only kind of work that can be done on the contents of your system. In the case of your fan example, the fan is doing work on the gas within the container by exerting force on it through a displacement (of the fan blade). The kinetic energy imparted to the gas by the fan is then converted to internal energy by viscous dissipation (a damping effect). So the net effect is that the work done by the fan increases the internal energy of the gas.

Thanks for the reply! So in this case, ##Q=0## and ##W_{fan}=\Delta U##? (Or equivalently ##-W_{gas}=\Delta U##, since ##W_{fan}=-W_{gas}##)

But that's look more like an adiabatic process.. Effectly the tank is isolated so the process is also adiabatic, beside isochoric..

In conclusion, if I got that right, it is wrong to say: isochoric ##\implies W=0##
 
Soren4 said:
Thanks for the reply! So in this case, ##Q=0## and ##W_{fan}=\Delta U##? (Or equivalently ##-W_{gas}=\Delta U##, since ##W_{fan}=-W_{gas}##)
Yes.
But that's look more like an adiabatic process.. Effectly the tank is isolated so the process is also adiabatic, beside isochoric..
Yes. If the tank is insulated, then the process is adiabatic.
In conclusion, if I got that right, it is wrong to say: isochoric ##\implies W=0##
Yes. Isochoric means no P-V work.

In Joule's famous experiment, he ran a paddle wheel inside an insulated container of water, by attaching the paddle wheel to a rope and pulley arrangement, driven by a descending weight. The change in potential energy of the weight was equal to the work that the paddle wheel did on the water (and the change in internal energy of the water). He measured the rise in the water temperature as a result of the viscous dissipation of the mechanical energy. By doing this, he was able to establish the equivalence between the work done in N-m (Joules) and the change in internal energy of the water. And he was thereby able to determine the relationship between the change in internal energy and the temperature rise.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
1K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
Replies
10
Views
3K
  • · Replies 33 ·
2
Replies
33
Views
5K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
3K
  • · Replies 27 ·
Replies
27
Views
9K
  • · Replies 60 ·
3
Replies
60
Views
10K