Is Heat Exchange Equal to Enthalpy Change in an Isobaric Process?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Carcul
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Change
AI Thread Summary
In a closed thermodynamic system that exchanges energy only as PV work, an isobaric process shows that the heat exchanged equals the change in enthalpy. However, if heat exchange equals the change in enthalpy, it does not necessarily mean that pressure remains constant. The relationship between enthalpy and work is clarified through the equation dH = dU + PdV + VdP, where the condition ∂W = PdV leads to isobaric conditions only if VdP equals zero. The discussion emphasizes that heat and work are not true differentials, and their values should be treated as actual quantities rather than infinitesimal changes. Ultimately, the conclusion is that while heat exchanged can equal enthalpy change, it does not imply constant pressure without further conditions.
Carcul
Messages
8
Reaction score
0
Consider a closed thermodynamic system capable of exchanging energy in the form of work only as PV work. Under these conditions, for an isobaric process we find that the heat exchanged equals the enthalpy change. Now what about the reverse? For such a system, if for some process the heat exchange equals the change in enthalpy can we conclude that the pressure has remained constant? If not can you find a counter example?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Carcul said:
Consider a closed thermodynamic system capable of exchanging energy in the form of work only as PV work. Under these conditions, for an isobaric process we find that the heat exchanged equals the enthalpy change. Now what about the reverse? For such a system, if for some process the heat exchange equals the change in enthalpy can we conclude that the pressure has remained constant? If not can you find a counter example?
Yes, but only if ∂W = PdV. You can prove this from the definition of enthalpy:

H = U + PV
dH = dU + PdV + VdP

If dH = ∂Q = dU + ∂W then ∂W = PdV + VdP

If ∂W = PdV then VdP = 0 which implies that dP = 0 (isobaric)

AM
 
Thank you very much. But why does ΔH = Q implies dH = δQ?
 
Last edited:
It doesn't.

Neither the heat nor the work exchanged are true differentials, they are actual values so it is wrong talk of delta (of any sort) q or w. Some people prefer capitals, some prefer lower case some use the (as Andrew has done) Greek delta to show this.

But the bottom line is that the heat exchanged is the heat exchanged it is not a small change in the heat exchanged.
 
Hello! Let's say I have a cavity resonant at 10 GHz with a Q factor of 1000. Given the Lorentzian shape of the cavity, I can also drive the cavity at, say 100 MHz. Of course the response will be very very weak, but non-zero given that the Loretzian shape never really reaches zero. I am trying to understand how are the magnetic and electric field distributions of the field at 100 MHz relative to the ones at 10 GHz? In particular, if inside the cavity I have some structure, such as 2 plates...

Similar threads

Back
Top