Definition of efficiency of a thermodynamic cycle

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion centers on the definition of efficiency in thermodynamic cycles, particularly in heat engines. The standard efficiency formula is defined as η = |W| / Q_in, where W represents net work and Q_in is the heat input. An alternative formula proposed is η = |W_out| / (Q_in + W_in), which considers only the work done by the system divided by all energy input. However, this alternative is deemed less applicable to heat engines, as it may misrepresent their efficiency in converting heat into work.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of thermodynamic cycles
  • Familiarity with heat engine principles
  • Knowledge of work and energy transfer concepts
  • Ability to interpret PV diagrams
NEXT STEPS
  • Research the Carnot efficiency and its implications in thermodynamics
  • Study the first and second laws of thermodynamics
  • Learn about the PV diagram and its significance in thermodynamic processes
  • Explore real-world applications of heat engines and their efficiency calculations
USEFUL FOR

Students and professionals in mechanical engineering, thermodynamics researchers, and anyone involved in the design or analysis of heat engines will benefit from this discussion.

greypilgrim
Messages
581
Reaction score
44
Hi.

Sorting the exchanges of heat and mechanical work in a thermodynamic cycle by the signs and summarizing, I get
##Q_{in}>0##: heat transferred into the system
##Q_{out}<0##: heat transferred to the cold reservoir
##W_{out}<0##: work done by the system
##W_{in}>0##: work done on the system (e.g. by moving back a piston)

The net work is ##W=W_{out}+W_{in}<0## (if it's a heat engine).
Normally, the efficiency is defined by
$$\eta=\frac{|W|}{Q_{in}}=\frac{|W_{out}+W_{in}|}{Q_{in}}\enspace .$$

But wouldn't it be more reasonable to use
$$\eta=\frac{|W_{out}|}{Q_{in}+W_{in}}\enspace ,$$
i.e. only the work actually done by the system divided by all energy put into the system?
 
Science news on Phys.org
usually when we talk about heat engine, it gets all the energy needed in the form of heat, so the formula η= W/Qin is used, but in your case i think that the formula that you gave should be used.(i'm not sure)
 
Last edited by a moderator:
mehul mahajan said:
but in your case i think that the formula that you gave should be used.(i'm not sure)
That's not correct. The numerator is always taken as net work.

greypilgrim said:
But wouldn't it be more reasonable to use
η=|Wout|Qin+Win,​
\eta=\frac{|W_{out}|}{Q_{in}+W_{in}}\enspace ,
i.e. only the work actually done by the system divided by all energy put into the system?
While this makes sense in the overall concept of efficiency, it doesn't work very well when applied to heat engines, where one is mostly concerned by their ability to convert heat into work. Using your definition, a transmission belt could be seen as a heat engine with an efficiency of almost unity. Taking net work divided by input heat allows to concentrate on the conversion process.
 
Last edited:
DrClaude said:
Indeed, most often Win=0W_\mathrm{in} = 0, so both forms would be equivalent.
I'm not sure if we are talking about different things, but I can't think of a single case where this is true. Every compression of a gas (which is present in virtually any thermodynamic cycle) is work done on the gas.

Only because ##W=W_{out}+W_{in}## has a negative part ##W_{out}<0## and a positive part ##W_{in}>0##, its absolute value ##|W|## corresponds to the area enclosed by the cycle in the PV diagram.
 
greypilgrim said:
I'm not sure if we are talking about different things, but I can't think of a single case where this is true. Every compression of a gas (which is present in virtually any thermodynamic cycle) is work done on the gas.
I completely misspoke. I have corrected my post.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
Replies
5
Views
672
  • · Replies 18 ·
Replies
18
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
Replies
13
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
2K