Thermodynamics Problem - Adiabatic Reversible Process....

AI Thread Summary
The discussion revolves around a thermodynamics problem involving an ideal gas undergoing a reversible adiabatic process. The specific heat capacity at constant pressure is given as a function of temperature, leading to confusion over the coefficient 876 in the equation cp=0.5+876T. Despite correct methodology in integrating the relevant equations, participants express skepticism about the validity of the coefficient, suggesting it may be incorrectly stated. The calculations yield an undefined result for pressure, prompting further scrutiny of the initial conditions and constants used. The consensus indicates that there may be an error in the provided value for cp, necessitating clarification for accurate problem-solving.
Allison Barry
Messages
3
Reaction score
0
Homework Statement
A specific type of ideal gas has a specific heat capacity at constant pressure (cp=cv+R) that is a function of temperature T, such that cp=0.5+876T, where cp has units of J/kg/K and T has units of K. The gas, which is initially at T1 = 294 K and P1 = 1x105 Pa, undergoes a reversible adiabatic process such that its final temperature is T2 = 778 K. Calculate the pressure of the gas (in Pa) in this final state. Assume the following ideal gas constant: R = 287 J/kg/K. Recall that ds = cpdT/T – RdP/P.

Relevant equations
Reversible Adiabatic process:
Entropy is 0 because this is adiabatic and reversible.
Constituitive relation for entropy of such a process is:
S2 - S1 = ∫12dS = 0
dS = cp(dT/T) - R(dP/P) = 0
Attempt:
Integrating I got:
T1T2(0.5 + 876T).(dT/T) - 287∫P1P2(dP/P)
876(778 - 294) + (0.5) ln (778/294) = 287ln(P2 / 100,000Pa)
Getting 1488.810788 = lnP2

But e1488.810788 is undefinable? I am confused? Did I integrate this wrong?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
That 876 looks very, very, very suspicious. Are you sure it's not 0.0876 or 0.00876 or, more likely, 0.000876? There's definitely something wrong here.

Your methodology and arithmetic are correct, however.

Chet
 
Chestermiller said:
That 876 looks very, very, very suspicious. Are you sure it's not 0.0876 or 0.00876 or, more likely, 0.000876? There's definitely something wrong here.

Your methodology and arithmetic are correct, however.

Chet
876 is part of "a +bt", the linear relationship between temperature and Cp, it's 0.5 + 876T
 
Allison Barry said:
876 is part of "a +bt", the linear relationship between temperature and Cp, it's 0.5 + 876T
What I'm saying is that there is something wrong with that value. It can't be correct.
 
Back
Top