MHB How to compute the energy needed to compress the water isothermally?

  • Thread starter Thread starter WMDhamnekar
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Energy Water
AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on calculating the energy required to compress water isothermally, with an initial answer of 29.4 Joules being questioned. The expert's calculations suggest that the energy needed is significantly higher, around 506 Joules, based on constant pressure assumptions. However, it is noted that pressure builds from 1 to 100 atmospheres, indicating the actual energy requirement would be approximately half of that estimate, around 229 Joules. The temperature of the water at 20°C is relevant, as the isothermal compressibility coefficient is acknowledged to align with the calculations. Ultimately, the initial answer of 29.4 Joules appears to be incorrect based on the provided analysis.
WMDhamnekar
MHB
Messages
376
Reaction score
28
Hi,
Answer given is $E_n=29.4 Joules$ Here is the question.

1602942344841.png


Answer provided by the Chemistry math expert/Professor is as follows but it is different from the answer given. How is that?

Compressibility is the fractional change in volume per unit increase in pressure. For each atmosphere increase in pressure, the volume of water would decrease 46.4 parts per million.
I'll pick a shape for the device, calculate distance traveled and force required, and use $work = force \times distance.$
with 100 atm, volume would decrease by 4640 PPM or by a factor of 0.00464

10 kg of water is about 10 liters or $0.01 m^3$

$100 atm = 1.013e7 Pa$ or $1.013e7 N/m^2$
assume a cube shape, height is $\sqrt[3]{0.01 m^3} = 0.2154435 m$ and base area is$ 0.0464159 m^2$ (coincidence that "464" appears as two different values)
force on piston is $1.013e7 N/m^2 \times 0.0464 m^2 = 470000 N$
that change in volume causes what change in height

new volume $= 0.01 m^3 – 0.01 m^3(0.00464) = 0.00995 m^3$

which has a height of $\frac{0.00995 m^3}{0.0464159 m^2} = 0.2143663 ,$

change is 0.2154435 – 0.2143663 = 0.00108 m
energy = Fd = (470000 N)(0.00108 m) = 506 JIs temperature of water $20^\circ C$ to be considered?
 
Last edited:
Mathematics news on Phys.org
Dhamnekar Winod said:
Answer given is $E_n=29.4 Joules$ Here is the question.

Answer provided by the Chemistry math expert/Professor is as follows but it is different from the answer given. How is that?
(snip)
force on piston is $1.013e7 N/m^2 \times 0.0464 m^2 = 470000 N$
that change in volume causes what change in height
new volume $= 0.01 m^3 – 0.01 m^3(0.00464) = 0.00995 m^3$
which has a height of $\frac{0.00995 m^3}{0.0464159 m^2} = 0.2143663 ,$
change is 0.2154435 – 0.2143663 = 0.00108 m

energy = Fd = (470000 N)(0.00108 m) = 506 J
Your expert's answer assumes that the force/pressure is constant at 100 atmosphere, but that is not the case.
Instead it will build up from 1 atmosphere up to 100 atmosphere.
So we can expect the actual answer to be about half of that $506\,J$, which is really an upper estimate.

I found $229\,J$ myself while taking the changing pressure into account with Calculus, which is indeed in the neighborhood of half of that $506\,J$.
Either way, it looks as if the answer of $29.4\,J$ is not correct.

Is temperature of water $20^\circ C$ to be considered?

We take the coefficient of isothermal compressibility of water at $20^\circ C$.
Wikipedia mentions that it is $4.4$ to $5.1×10^{-10}\, Pa^{-1}$ in ordinary conditions.
Close enough to that 46.4 parts per million that you mentioned.
 
Seemingly by some mathematical coincidence, a hexagon of sides 2,2,7,7, 11, and 11 can be inscribed in a circle of radius 7. The other day I saw a math problem on line, which they said came from a Polish Olympiad, where you compute the length x of the 3rd side which is the same as the radius, so that the sides of length 2,x, and 11 are inscribed on the arc of a semi-circle. The law of cosines applied twice gives the answer for x of exactly 7, but the arithmetic is so complex that the...
Thread 'Video on imaginary numbers and some queries'
Hi, I was watching the following video. I found some points confusing. Could you please help me to understand the gaps? Thanks, in advance! Question 1: Around 4:22, the video says the following. So for those mathematicians, negative numbers didn't exist. You could subtract, that is find the difference between two positive quantities, but you couldn't have a negative answer or negative coefficients. Mathematicians were so averse to negative numbers that there was no single quadratic...
Thread 'Unit Circle Double Angle Derivations'
Here I made a terrible mistake of assuming this to be an equilateral triangle and set 2sinx=1 => x=pi/6. Although this did derive the double angle formulas it also led into a terrible mess trying to find all the combinations of sides. I must have been tired and just assumed 6x=180 and 2sinx=1. By that time, I was so mindset that I nearly scolded a person for even saying 90-x. I wonder if this is a case of biased observation that seeks to dis credit me like Jesus of Nazareth since in reality...
Back
Top