Derivations in adiabatic process for ideal gas with C_V and C_P

  • Context: Chemistry 
  • Thread starter Thread starter zenterix
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Thermodynamics first law
Click For Summary
SUMMARY

This discussion focuses on the derivations of the first law of thermodynamics as applied to an ideal gas undergoing an adiabatic process. It establishes that for an ideal gas, the internal energy change can be expressed as dU = C_V dT = -PdV and dU = C_P dT = -PdV, leading to the conclusion that P_1V_1^{\gamma} = P_2V_2^{\gamma} = k where k is a constant. The discussion highlights the crucial distinction between C_V and C_P, clarifying that C_P should be defined as (∂H/∂T)_P rather than (∂U/∂T)_P, which is a common misconception.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of the first law of thermodynamics
  • Familiarity with ideal gas laws
  • Knowledge of heat capacities C_V and C_P
  • Basic calculus for integration and differentiation
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the derivation of the first law of thermodynamics for adiabatic processes
  • Explore the relationship between internal energy and enthalpy in thermodynamics
  • Investigate the implications of constant heat capacities in ideal gas behavior
  • Learn about the significance of the adiabatic process in real-world applications
USEFUL FOR

This discussion is beneficial for physics students, thermodynamics researchers, and engineers working with heat transfer and energy systems, particularly those focusing on ideal gas behavior in adiabatic processes.

zenterix
Messages
774
Reaction score
84
Homework Statement
I am quite confused by the calculations involving an adiabatic process for an ideal gas.
Relevant Equations
Below I show the calculations.
Consider an ideal gas undergoing an adiabatic process.

The first law says that

$$dU=\delta Q+\delta w=\delta w=-PdV$$

since ##\delta Q=0## for an adiabatic process.

##U## is a function of any two of ##P,V##, and ##T##.

Consider ##U_1=U_1(T,V)## and ##U_2=U_2(T,P)##.

For an ideal gas we have

$$dU_1=\left (\frac{\partial U_1}{\partial T}\right )_VdT=C_VdT=-PdV=\frac{nRT}{V}dV\tag{1}$$

$$dU_2=\left (\frac{\partial U_2}{\partial T}\right )_PdT=C_PdT=-PdV=-\frac{nRT}{V}dV\tag{2}$$

Are these equations both correct?
For (1) we have

$$C_VdT=-\frac{nRT}{V}dV$$

and after integrating we reach

$$P_1V_1^{\gamma}=P_2V_2^{\gamma}=k$$

where ##k## is a constant and ##\gamma=1+\frac{R}{C_V}##.

Note the implicit assumption that ##C_V## is constant.

Can we do the same thing for (2) to reach
$$P_1V_1^{\gamma}=P_2V_2^{\gamma}=k$$

where ##k## is a constant and ##\gamma=1+\frac{R}{C_P}##?

Something is fishy here since ##C_V\neq C_P##.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
I think the mistake is that I assumed that

$$C_P=\left (\frac{\partial U}{\partial T}\right )_P\tag{Incorrect}$$

but actually

$$C_P=\left (\frac{\partial H}{\partial T}\right )_P$$

The calculations for (2) in the OP would be

$$\left (\frac{\partial U_2}{\partial T}\right )_PdT=-\frac{nRT}{V}dV$$

$$\frac{1}{T}\left (\frac{\partial U_2}{\partial T}\right )_PdT=-\frac{nR}{V}dV$$
 

Similar threads

Replies
1
Views
2K
Replies
9
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
Replies
5
Views
4K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
Replies
4
Views
2K