Energy Change in Reversible Adiabatic Expansion of a van der Waals gas

whizsix
Messages
1
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement


Suppose the equation of state of a gas is
Beta p=rho/(1-b rho) - beta a rho^2
where beta=1/kb T, b is a constant and rho is the molecular density, N/V. The internal energy of this gas is given by
U=(5/2)N kb T - N a rho

Determine the final internal energy of the gas, initially at temperature T0, if it is expanded from a volume V0 to 1.1V0. Answer the question for the following three cases expressing your answer in terms of T0,V0, and N

A. adiabatically with zero external pressure
B. adiabatic while maximizing work done by the system
C. isothermally

Homework Equations



lots, mainly dU=dq+dw
dw=-pdV

The Attempt at a Solution


A. is fine: no change in internal energy (free adiabatic expansion)
B. I can't seem to get this. Maximizing work means making the process reversible, I believe. Lots of stuff talks about solving this this for an ideal gas, but trying in the same manner (dU=-pdV, substituting dU/dt dt=Cv dt for dU and an expression for p then integrating) does not seem possible because with the vdW equations, I can't seem to separate T from V to integrate. If someone has some insight, I would greatly appreciate it.
C. I haven't gotten here yet from working on B. but I'm fairly certain this should be fairly simple.
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
I would assume dU=dq, which would be 0 because it is isothermal. Then just pdV=0, so no change in internal energy either.
 
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