Please help, proof based on second law

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion centers on proving that if the total work done by a heat engine operating between two temperatures is zero, then the total heat absorbed by the system must be greater than zero. The user seeks to establish this relationship using the second law of thermodynamics in the context of comparing a Carnot heat engine with another heat engine. They present a mathematical proof involving the work and heat absorbed by both engines, ultimately concluding that the efficiency of the Carnot engine surpasses that of the tested engine.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of the second law of thermodynamics
  • Familiarity with Carnot heat engines and their efficiency
  • Basic knowledge of thermodynamic cycles and work-energy principles
  • Ability to manipulate thermodynamic equations and inequalities
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the principles of Carnot cycles and their implications on efficiency
  • Explore the mathematical formulations of the first and second laws of thermodynamics
  • Learn about heat engines and heat pumps in thermodynamic systems
  • Investigate real-world applications of thermodynamic efficiency comparisons
USEFUL FOR

Students and professionals in thermodynamics, mechanical engineers, and anyone interested in understanding the efficiency of heat engines and the implications of the second law of thermodynamics.

hristogrigorov
Messages
2
Reaction score
0
Hello to everyone!

This is my first time that I use forums and I hope you will help me!

Here is my question/problem:

Is it possible using the second thermodynamic law to proove that:
If the total work done by heat engine operated between two temperatures is zero,
than it follows that the total heat absorbed by the system is greater than zero.

I am sure I saw this somewhere but unfortunately I cannot found it :(

Thank you in advance!
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Maybe I really should be more detailed in my question. So here is the whole story... Originaly I am trying to proove that the carnott heat engine is the most efficient one. To do so I take two heat engines - one carnott and the second to be anyone I wish. The carnot engine is used as heat pump.

All the proofs I've seen are choosing the heat absorbed by the heat engine to be equal the heat pumped by the carnot engine and then using the second thermodynamic law they proove that the efficency of the carnott engine is the best.

Till now everything is fine. But I decieded in order to proove it to choose that the work done by the heat engine is equal the work needed for the operation of the carnot heat pump.

Now I need to use the same statement I am asking help for:
"If W_total=0 then Q_in_total>0"

In order to remove any doubt I present you my proof:
"
The combined heat engine consists of:
#Carnot heat pump operated N cycles - W (work input), Q_2 (absobed heat from T_L), Q_1 (emitted heat to T_H)
Q_1 = Q_2 + W

#tested heat engine operated N' cycles - Q_in' (absorbed heat from T_H), W' (work done by the engine), Q_out (heat emitted to T_L)
Q_in' = W' + Q_out'


now using first summation I get:
Q_in_total = Q_in'*N' - Q_1*N
W_total = W'*N' - W*N

at this point I decide to operate the two engines (N,N') cycles so that I get:
W_total = 0

=> W'*N' - W*N = 0 => W'*N' = W*N (*)

-----------------------------------------------------
NOW I USE THE SECOND LAW IN ORDED TO SAY THAT:
if W_total = 0 that Q_in_total > 0
(my question is how exactly?)
-----------------------------------------------------

and from here it goes:
Q_in_total = Q_in'*N' - Q_1*N > 0 => Q_in'*N' > Q_1*N (**)

the last thing to do is compare efficiency:

eta = (efficiency) = W/Q_in

eta_carnot = (-W)/(-Q_1) = W/Q_1 = (N*W)/(N*Q_1) = {using (*)} = (N'*W')/(N*Q_1) > {using (**)} > (N'*W')/(N'*Q_in') = W'/Q_in' = eta_test

therefore we get eta_carnot > eta_test
"

Thank you one more time!
 
Apply the first law and use the fact that the Carnot cycle is reversible. Reversible means that when the Carnot cycle is operated in the forward direction and then reversed, the initial conditions are restored. In order for that to occur, the heat delivered to the hot reservoir on the reverse cycle is the same as the heat removed in the forward cycle. The reversal of the cycle necessarily means that the work output in the forward cycle is stored and used to drive the reverse cycle.

If there is a more efficient cycle, more heat would be delivered to the hot reservoir, but that would violate the first law.

Now see if you can state the above mathematically.

AM
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 20 ·
Replies
20
Views
3K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
Replies
16
Views
4K
Replies
44
Views
4K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 26 ·
Replies
26
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K