Efficiency, Stirling heat engine

Click For Summary
The discussion focuses on calculating the efficiency of a Stirling heat engine, with various equations provided for heat transfers (Q) and the relationship between specific heats (κ). The user presents their derived efficiency formula, which involves logarithmic terms and temperature variables, seeking confirmation of its correctness. Another participant suggests starting from the basic efficiency equation, emphasizing the relationship between work done and heat input. The conversation highlights the importance of clearly defining input and output heat to accurately derive the efficiency formula.
dave84
Messages
4
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement



AhKqy.png


We have a Stirling heat engine. I'm calculating the efficiency \eta.

Homework Equations



Q_{12} = \frac{m R T_2}{M} \ln(\frac{V_2}{V_1}) > 0

Q_{23} = m c_v (T_1 - T_2) < 0

Q_{34} = \frac{m R T_1}{M} \ln(\frac{V_1}{V_2}) < 0

Q_{41} = m c_v (T_2 - T_1) > 0

\kappa = \frac{c_p}{c_v}

\frac{R}{c_v M} = \kappa - 1

The Attempt at a Solution



My result is \eta = \frac{|(\kappa-1)T_1 \ln(\frac{V_1}{V_2})+(\kappa-1)T_2 \ln(\frac{V_2}{V_1})|}{(T_2 - T_1) + (\kappa - 1)T_2 \ln(\frac{V_2}{V_1})}.

Can anyone confirm this? I'm sorry if this is too trivial.
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
dave84 said:

Homework Statement



AhKqy.png


We have a Stirling heat engine. I'm calculating the efficiency \eta.

Homework Equations



Q_{12} = \frac{m R T_2}{M} \ln(\frac{V_2}{V_1}) > 0

Q_{23} = m c_v (T_1 - T_2) < 0

Q_{34} = \frac{m R T_1}{M} \ln(\frac{V_1}{V_2}) < 0

Q_{41} = m c_v (T_2 - T_1) > 0

\kappa = \frac{c_p}{c_v}

\frac{R}{c_v M} = \kappa - 1

The Attempt at a Solution



My result is \eta = \frac{(\kappa-1)T_1 \ln(\frac{V_1}{V_2})+(\kappa-1)T_2 \ln(\frac{V_2}{V_1})}{(T_2 - T_1) + (\kappa - 1)T_2 \ln(\frac{V_2}{V_1})}.

Can anyone confirm this? I'm sorry if this is too trivial.
You will have show your reasoning to explain how you arrived at this. You could start by showing us your expression for η in terms of Q41, Q12, Q23, and Q34.

AM
 
So \eta = \frac{|A|}{Q_{in}} =\frac{|Q_{12}+Q_{34}|}{Q_{41} + Q_{12}}, where A is total work done and Q is the input heat. The final result is simplified with \kappa.

Q_{in} = Q_{41} + Q_{12}
Q_{out} = Q_{23} + Q_{34} = Q_{in} - A

Q_{out} is the amount of heat that is released from the heat engine.
 
Last edited:
dave84 said:
So \eta = \frac{|A|}{Q_{in}} =\frac{Q_{12}+Q_{34}}{Q_{41} + Q_{12}}, where A is total work done and Q is the input heat. The final result is simplified with \kappa.

Q_{in} = Q_{41} + Q_{12}
Q_{out} = Q_{23} + Q_{34} = Q_{in} - A

Q_{out} is the amount of heat that is released from the heat engine.
I am not sure how you got your equation for efficiency. Start with \eta = \frac{|W|}{Q_{in}}.
You can rewrite this as:

\eta = W/Q_{in} = (Q_{in}-Q_{out})/Q_{in} = 1 - Q_{out}/Q_{in} = 1 - (Q_{23} + Q_{34})/(Q_{41} + Q_{12})

Can you show us what this reduces to?

AM
 
Last edited:
Thread 'Correct statement about size of wire to produce larger extension'
The answer is (B) but I don't really understand why. Based on formula of Young Modulus: $$x=\frac{FL}{AE}$$ The second wire made of the same material so it means they have same Young Modulus. Larger extension means larger value of ##x## so to get larger value of ##x## we can increase ##F## and ##L## and decrease ##A## I am not sure whether there is change in ##F## for first and second wire so I will just assume ##F## does not change. It leaves (B) and (C) as possible options so why is (C)...

Similar threads

  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
1K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
890
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
1K
Replies
3
Views
2K
Replies
14
Views
2K
  • · Replies 22 ·
Replies
22
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
801
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K