Dereive an expression for an isobaric/isothermal change in entropy

trelek2
Messages
86
Reaction score
0
I already dereived the following expressions for the Van der Waals gas:
molar energy:
U=3RT - \frac{aP}{RT}
and the expression for the PV, where V is the molar volume:
PV= RT +(b - \frac {a}{RT})P
Using these and the central equation,
TdS = dU + PdV

i am to dereive an expression for dS in two cases:
1) as the substance undergoes an isobaric change from temperature T_{i} to T_{f} at pressure P.
2) as the substance undergoes an isothermal change from pressure P_{i} to P_{f} at temperature T.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
trelek2 said:
Using these and the central equation,
TdS = dU + PdV

i am to dereive an expression for dS in two cases:
1) as the substance undergoes an isobaric change from temperature T_{i} to T_{f} at pressure P.
2) as the substance undergoes an isothermal change from pressure P_{i} to P_{f} at temperature T.

Okay; and your attempt at a solution is...?
 
On the example of the isobaric:
dS = \frac {dU}{T}+\frac{P}{T}dV
using the expression for the molar internal energy:
dU = 3RdT+ \frac {aP}{RT^{2}}dT - \frac {a}{RT}dP
and using the expression for the PV product:
V= \frac {RT}{P} +b - \frac{a}{RT}
then dV=\frac {R}{P}dT+ \frac{a}{RT^{2}}dT- \frac{RT}{P^{2}}dP
Substituting into dS (taking dP=0):
dS= 4R \frac{dT}{T}+\frac {2aPdT}{RT^{3}}
and integrating:
dS=4Rln( \frac{T_{f}}{T_{i}})+ \frac {aP}{R(T_{i}-T_{f})}
I have no idea whether this is correct though...
 
trelek2 said:
On the example of the isobaric:
dS = \frac {dU}{T}+\frac{P}{T}dV
using the expression for the molar internal energy:
dU = 3RdT+ \frac {aP}{RT^{2}}dT - \frac {a}{RT}dP
and using the expression for the PV product:
V= \frac {RT}{P} +b - \frac{a}{RT}
then dV=\frac {R}{P}dT+ \frac{a}{RT^{2}}dT- \frac{RT}{P^{2}}dP
Substituting into dS (taking dP=0):
dS= 4R \frac{dT}{T}+\frac {2aPdT}{RT^{3}}

Looks good so far!:approve:

and integrating:
dS=4Rln( \frac{T_{f}}{T_{i}})+ \frac {aP}{R(T_{i}-T_{f})}
I have no idea whether this is correct though...

When you integrate dS from the initial state to the final state, you get \Delta S\equiv S_f-S_i, not dS.
 
Last edited:
I found slightly a different equation for the van-der-Waals gas. Also in many places you seem to introduce the ideal gas law for a moment. That's where little differences come from, but maybe the difference isn't big though.

The van-der-Waals equation as I found it is
<br /> \left(p+\frac{a}{V^2}\right)(V-b)=RT<br />
In any case for a van-der-Waals gas the energy is
<br /> U=f(T)-\frac{a}{V}<br />
You have assumed that f(T)=3RT, which is strictly speaking an addition to the van-der-Waals equation, but probably justified.

Now
<br /> T\mathrm{d}S=\mathrm{d}U+p\mathdm{d}V<br /> =f&#039;\mathrm{d}T+\frac{a}{V^2}\mathrm{d}V+p\mathrm{d}V<br /> =f&#039;\mathrm{d}T+\frac{RT}{V-b}\mathrm{d}V<br />
so
<br /> \mathrm{d}S=f&#039;\frac{\mathrm{d}T}{T}+\frac{R\mathrm{d}V}{V-b}<br />
<br /> \Delta S=\int \frac{\mathrm{d}f}{T}+R\ln\left|\frac{V_1-b}{V_0-b}\right|<br />
With your assumption f(T)=3RT this gives
<br /> \Delta S=3R\ln\frac{T_1}{T_0}+R\ln\left(\frac{V_1-b}{V_0-b}\right)<br />
Anyone agrees if that is OK? This derivation has not made the ideal gas law substitutions pV=RT that seem to be in your calculation.
 
Last edited:
http://theory.phy.umist.ac.uk/~judith/stat_therm/node51.html
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Thread 'Need help understanding this figure on energy levels'
This figure is from "Introduction to Quantum Mechanics" by Griffiths (3rd edition). It is available to download. It is from page 142. I am hoping the usual people on this site will give me a hand understanding what is going on in the figure. After the equation (4.50) it says "It is customary to introduce the principal quantum number, ##n##, which simply orders the allowed energies, starting with 1 for the ground state. (see the figure)" I still don't understand the figure :( Here is...
Thread 'Understanding how to "tack on" the time wiggle factor'
The last problem I posted on QM made it into advanced homework help, that is why I am putting it here. I am sorry for any hassle imposed on the moderators by myself. Part (a) is quite easy. We get $$\sigma_1 = 2\lambda, \mathbf{v}_1 = \begin{pmatrix} 0 \\ 0 \\ 1 \end{pmatrix} \sigma_2 = \lambda, \mathbf{v}_2 = \begin{pmatrix} 1/\sqrt{2} \\ 1/\sqrt{2} \\ 0 \end{pmatrix} \sigma_3 = -\lambda, \mathbf{v}_3 = \begin{pmatrix} 1/\sqrt{2} \\ -1/\sqrt{2} \\ 0 \end{pmatrix} $$ There are two ways...
Back
Top