Thermal dilation formula discrepancy?

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion centers on the linear thermal dilation formula ΔL=Li*a*ΔT, which calculates length change based on initial length, thermal dilation coefficient, and temperature change. A user questions the formula's applicability in reverse, noting discrepancies when applying negative temperature changes. Participants clarify that the formula is an approximation valid only over small temperature ranges and that it does not account for high precision. They suggest that integral calculus is necessary for a more accurate understanding of thermal dilation, referencing the need for integration when conditions are not met.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of linear thermal dilation formula (ΔL=Li*a*ΔT)
  • Basic knowledge of thermal expansion coefficients
  • Familiarity with approximation methods in physics
  • Introductory calculus concepts, particularly integration
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the complete thermal dilation formula and its derivation
  • Learn about the conditions under which the linear thermal dilation formula is valid
  • Explore integral calculus applications in physics, focusing on thermal expansion
  • Review the "Linear Expansion" section on the Wikipedia page for thermal expansion
USEFUL FOR

Students in physics, engineers working with materials affected by temperature changes, and anyone interested in the mathematical principles behind thermal expansion and contraction.

lookez
Messages
3
Reaction score
1
Considering the linear thermal dilation formula ΔL=Li*a*ΔT (length change equals initial length times thermal dilation coefficient times temperature change), I was wondering why does it not work backwards? am I using it wrong or is there something missing?

For instance if we assume a=5*10^-5 , ΔT=100 and Li=20 then ΔL will be = 20*0.00005*100 = 0.1 which gives us a new length of 20.1, now if we do ΔT=(-100) we get ΔL = 20.1*0.00005*(-100) = -0.1005 instead of -0.1!

The way I see it this implies that if you repeatedly raise and lower the temperature of an object it will get smaller and smaller until the length reaches zero or negative. And obviously that's impossible. What's going on? I do realize this formula seems to be only used for thermal expansion, when ΔT > 0, but isn't it supposed to work backwards too?
 
Science news on Phys.org
hello lookez, :welcome:

Good deduction! But that's why they make a reservation that this expression is valid over a small temperature range anyway. It's not high precision stuff, just an approximation -- good one.

And even though your expansion coefficient is pretty big, it still gives an accuracy of five microns on 20 cm for a hefty temperature change. Not bad at all.
 
This has nothing to do with thermal expansion per se. It's algebra - just that 1/(1+x) is not 1-x (but for small x it's close).
 
Well is there another more complete formula for this? I remember my teacher saying something about the "real" thermal dilation formula that comes from a theorem, but I can't find anything in my notes.
 
lookez said:
Well is there another more complete formula for this?
See the note at the end of the "Linear Expansion" section of this Wikipedia page:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thermal_expansion#Linear_expansion
If either of these conditions does not hold, the equation must be integrated.
Do you know any integral calculus? The way a physics textbook would proceed is to make the changes infinitesimal, and then integrate over matching ranges in L and T: $$ \int_{L_1}^{L_2} \frac {dL} L = \alpha_L \int_{T_1}^{T_2} dT$$ (assuming that ##\alpha_L## is constant)
 
I see, my teacher did mention that we would need Calculus to understand, I'm not there yet. Thank you all for the answers!
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: BvU

Similar threads

  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
16K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
3K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
Replies
6
Views
4K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 152 ·
6
Replies
152
Views
11K
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
2K
  • · Replies 37 ·
2
Replies
37
Views
5K