Don't have point B (cycle process)

  • Thread starter Thread starter ~christina~
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Point Process
Click For Summary
The discussion revolves around calculating thermodynamic properties for a cycle involving one mole of helium gas in a cylinder with a movable piston. Participants are attempting to determine the internal energy change, heat transferred, and work performed for each segment of the cycle, specifically focusing on the unknown state at point B. Key equations such as the ideal gas law and relationships for isothermal, isobaric, and adiabatic processes are referenced. The conversation includes attempts to derive values for pressure and volume at point B using equations relating to the cycle's segments. Ultimately, the participants are guided to use their established equations to solve for the unknowns and calculate the necessary thermodynamic quantities.
  • #31
Since , P and V are not independent variables. We chose to evaluate using the variable But we could easily have changed variables and wrote it in term of P, in which case we would have used Pi & Pf.

I forgot AB for isothermal process

For the part AB It is isothermic

T= constant
T_A= T_B

\Delta U= nR\Delta T= 0 internal Energy which is = 0

Q=-W

P_A= 8.00x10^4 Pa
P_A= 2.00 m^3

W= nRT ( \frac{V_A} {V_B})

thanks
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #32
~christina~ said:
W= nRT ( \frac{V_A} {V_B})
Almost. You're missing a natural log.
 
  • #33
Doc Al said:
Since PV^\gamma = C, P and V are not independent variables. We chose to evaluate \int Pdv using the variable V. But we could easily have changed variables and wrote it in term of P, in which case we would have used Pi & Pf.

Okay I think I get it.

Doc Al said:
Almost. You're missing a natural log.

W= nRT ln ( \frac{V_A} {V_B})


W= -\int p dV= C \int \frac{dV} {V^{\gamma}}

I think I get how it gets to this W= \frac{C(V_f^{1-\gamma}- V_i^{1-\gamma})} {1-\gamma}

is it negative because you are taking the integral of \frac{1} {V^{\gamma}} so it is actually V^{-\gamma} ?

if it is then why did you put a negative in the integral at the begining?

I know it's like the neverending thread, so I promise that that was my last question. :biggrin:

Thank You Doc Al.
 
Last edited:
  • #34
~christina~ said:
W= -\int p dV
If you're asking about the negative sign in this equation, it's there because you want the work done on the gas. \int p dV by itself is the work done by the gas.
 
  • #35
Doc Al said:
If you're asking about the negative sign in this equation, it's there because you want the work done on the gas. \int p dV by itself is the work done by the gas.

but if there is work that is done by the gas (vol increasing) then it should be + then ? (in this case)

I understand it as if the vol increases then there is work doen by the gas.

If the volume decreases then there is work on the gas.

Thanks.
 
Last edited:
  • #36
\int p dv is the work done by the gas. When the volume increases, it's positive.

-\int p dv is the work done on the gas. When the volume increases, it's negative.

Either one is fine, depending upon the sign convention used in your course. In your first post you wrote:
\Delta U= Q + W

That tells me you want the second version, the work done on the gas.
 
  • #37
Doc Al said:
\int p dv is the work done by the gas. When the volume increases, it's positive.

-\int p dv is the work done on the gas. When the volume increases, it's negative.

Either one is fine, depending upon the sign convention used in your course. In your first post you wrote:

\Delta U= Q + W


That tells me you want the second version, the work done on the gas.

:rolleyes: I've gotten myself confused...I looked up this equation online and my teacher gave the class another equation and my book has the same one that I first posted.

so the only difference would be that it would be +/- in the end so if I made the calculations with in on the gas then the result would be (-).

but if the volume decreases then the work would be possitive

sooo, I've decided to use the one done on the gas.

Thanks very much for your explanation.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
787
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
1K
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
1K
Replies
23
Views
2K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
2K
  • · Replies 18 ·
Replies
18
Views
1K
Replies
4
Views
1K