Model Processes:

When we extend the engineering analysis to discrete engineering devices working under steady
flow conditions such as turbines, compressors, nozzles, we examine the degree of degradation of
energy in these devices as a result of irreversibilities. But first we need to define some process
close to an ideal process, which will serve as a model for the actual processes. Let us first
examine the ideal adiabatic and isothermal processes in which output work is obtained through a
numerical.

Turbines and piston engines convert kinetic energy or enthalpy of flowing fluid, or the heat
added to the fluid, into work. The control surface around the device is usually chosen so that
there is no change in potential energy and the flow is SSSF If Δz is negligible the analysis yields
(ǭ) cv + ₥ ( h i + pe i + ke i) = ₥ ( h e + pe e + ke e) + (ẅ) cv
The power can be divided by the mass flow rate to obtain the work per unit mass of fluid
flowing.
(ẅ) cv Ci2 –Ce2
= w cv = h i - h e + + qcv
₥ 2
Example 1: Determine the work obtained per unit mass of air flowing in SSSF of air through a
turbine where the inlet conditions are P1 = 1 MPa and T1 = 500 K and the discharge pressure is
0.1 MPa. First conduct the computation for a reversible adiabatic process, then for reversible
isothermal process, assuming a negligible change in ke in both cases.
1. Reversible adiabatic process
w cv = h i - h e + (Ci2 –Ce2)/2 + qcv
= Cp ( T i - T e) …………………………………..1

TL TL )(γ 1)
=(
TH TH
= 0.10.4/ 1.4
Thus TL = 0.5179 (500) =258.9 K
Eq 1 gives w cv = 1.004 (500 – 258.9) = 242.1 kJ/kg.
2. Reversible isothermal process
w cv = h i - h e + (Ci2 –Ce2)/2 + qcv
= Cp ( T i - T e) + qcv

= qcv
= ∫Tds = ∫ (dh –vdp) = ∫ -vdp =RT ∫ (-dp/p) = -RT ln (PL / PH) = RT ln (PH /PL)
= 0.287 (500) ln 10 = 330.4 kJ/kg
There are two points that merit comment in this example. First, the reversible isothermal work is
observed to be greater than the reversible adiabatic work for the expansion of an ideal gas (air)
between fixed pressures. This is true in general. If the process had been a compression process
between fixed pressures, the isothermal process would involve less work input than the
reversible adiabatic process. Thus, in both cases the reversible isothermal process would be
preferable over the reversible adiabatic process. However, in practice the isothermal process is
difficult, if not impossible, to achieve because of the high rate of heat transfer.
The second point is that here we have a process (reversible isothermal process) where all heat
added to the control volume at 500 K has been converted to work. This is not a violation of the
second law since this is a process, not a cycle. This process required air at 1 MPa and 500 K. If
there happened to be infinite supply of such air, this process would have tremendous practical
significance, but such an energy source does not exist. In practice, the air would have to be
compressed to the high pressure and the compression process would require a work input,
reducing significantly the net work output. Note that in a process there is no prohibition against
converting all the heat supplied into work. In fact, the reversible adiabatic process had zero heat
supplied, yet work was produced.

Although, some heat transfer between these devices and the surrounding medium is unavoidable
in actual practice, most steady state devices are intended to operate under adiabatic conditions.
Therefore the model process for these devices should be an adiabatic one, and units are usually
provided with insulation even if the processes of work transfer happen so rapidly that there is no
time available for heat transfer to occur. Furthermore, an ideal process should involve no
irreversibilities since the effect of these irreversibilities is always to downgrade the performance
of engineering devices. Thus the ideal process that can serve as model for most steady flow
devices is the isentropic process.
What is the difference between an adiabatic process and an isentropic process? or else state one
set of condition when
I. An adiabatic operation is not isentropic, and
II. An isentropic operation is not adiabatic.
In adiabatic process the system does not exchange any heat with the surroundings, i. e. no heat
enters or leaves the working fluid externally or pass across the system boundaries.
But, if during an adiabatic process heat is generated internally by friction, there will be gain in
entropy, e.g. during adiabatic compression in a rotary compressor or during an adiabatic
expansion in a nozzle as there is friction between the molecules of fluid , between the fluid and
passages when fluid pass through these units.
These factors cause internal generation of heat and consequently at any point of time the
properties like temperature, specific enthalpy could be more than that for ideal adiabatic process.
This results in a progressive increase in entropy along fluid flow. Such a process though
adiabatic is not isentropic.
On the other hand, an isentropic process is one during which there is no change of entropy. For
any process involving friction, if heat generated by friction be removed continuously at a rate so
as to offset the extent of heat generated, net result would be no entropy change. The process then
would be still isentropic but non-adiabatic as heat transfer occurs at the system boundary
required for removing extra heat generated.
An ideal reversible adiabatic process, of course is also an isentropic, because in ideal process
irreversibilities such as friction, eddies formation etc would be absent and in this process entropy
remains constant.
In our consideration of the I Law, we initially stated the law in terms of a cycle, but then defined
a property internal energy, which enabled us to use I law quantitatively for processes.
Similarly, we stated the II Law for a cycle, and we found that the II law leads to a property,
entropy, which enabled us to treat the second law qualitatively for processes. To determine
the efficiency of a devices (e.g. turbine or compressor) in which processes take place, we
compare the actual performance of the device under given conditions and the performance it
would have in ideal conditions. It is the definition of this ideal process that the second law
becomes major consideration.

REVERSED CYCLES:
Reversible processes are the ideal prototypes (models, samples) that actual processes approach;
or ones that we wish they would closely approach. Now since reversible engine (- constituting of
reversible processes) is reversible, it can be reversed in the thermodynamic as well as the
mechanical sense. That is the same engine can be operated as a heat pump, a refrigerator or an air
conditioner with no changes in magnitudes of energies flowing across the boundaries in the
following manner.

The backward-running heat engine appears to ‘pump’ heat from low temperature region to a high
temperature region. However, since heat is really a thermal energy transfer phenomena and not a
fluid, it is somewhat misleading to refer to it as being ‘pumped’. Yet it is common practice in
HVAC industry to refer to these devices as heat pumps when they are used to provide transfer of
thermal energy from a cold a environment to rooms that are maintained at higher temperatures
than the surrounding

If we imagine a cycle performed in a direction opposite to that of an engine, the outcome would
be absorption of some heat at low temperature, the rejection of a larger amount at a higher
temperature, the net amount of work done on the working substance. In order to express the
relative performance of these reversed cycle equipment, some criterion comparable to efficiency
used for engines is desirable. The index of performance is characterized by COP № and the
effectiveness of the system is expressed as the ratio of desired result to the energy required to
achieve that result.

W
Heat Removed
Coefficient of Performance = =
Work input QH

Looking at the magnitudes of energy entering and leaving the device, it is obvious numerator is
always greater than the denominator for such devices. Consequently efficiency is always greater
than 100 %. No basic laws are violated here; the intent of the heat engine cycle is conversion of
low grade heat energy to high grade mechanical energy, where as the intent of refrigeration or
reversed cycle is only transfer of energy. Yes, conversion of energy take place in units such as
mechanical-compression refrigeration machines, but the compressors used act energizers which
convert high-grade mechanical work input into low grade thermal energy. Such conversion is
almost perfect.
It is true that in case of a heat pump you get more thermal energy out of it than energy put into it.
This makes a heat pump much more attractive for domestic heating than, say, a purely resistive
electric heater. Electric heaters convert all their electrical energy into thermal energy and
therefore have energy conversion efficiencies of 100 %; whereas most heat pumps have energy
conversion efficiencies far in excess of 100 % for the same electrical input energizing units.
To do away with the laymen’s confusion that would arise by quoting efficiencies in excess of 100
%, the less suggestive phrase coefficient of performance, COP, is used to express the-is concept.
Another favored criterion that expresses the approach of the cycle to that of an ideal reversed
refrigeration cycle is called figure of merit (COP/COPrev; Carnot cycle serves the ideal reversible
cycle). The COP is simply the pure efficiency number that is not converted into a percentage.
The COP of a heat pump with an energy conversion efficiency of 400 % is 4.5. The energy
conversion efficiency of a refrigerator or air conditioner are also greater than 100 % and they too
are commonly represented with a pure number of COP.

When the purpose of machine is to cool some space to a lower temperature than its surrounding,
the m/c is called as a refrigerator where food is stored in the cooled space and is called an air-
conditioner when people occupy the cooled spaces. The heat pump is applied to a m/c whose
objective is to heat medium which may already be warmer than its surrounding.

Although the Carnot (reversed) cycle is the most

efficient between the fixed temperature limits
and therefore useful as a criterion of perfection,
it possesses undesirable characteristics,
particularly with gaseous refrigerant such as air
which renders it objectionable from the practical
viewpoint.

It would be highly desirable, however, to approximate the constant temperature Heat transfer
processes, in order to achieve the higher COP possible, this is accomplished in a large degree by
operating a refrigerating device only on a vapor compression cycle. As may be seen later, the
Carnot cycle may be applied to vapors with comparatively few drawbacks, but the use of a
permanent gas as the working fluid produces both extreme pressures and extreme volumes and
would thus require a very large machine per unit of refrigeration capacity. For a gas, certain
portions of the cycle, notably the isothermals, would be difficult to accomplish. Isothermal heat
transfer processes require that the specific heat of the air should approach infinity and or the
machine operating at excessively low speed. Some type of air-refrigeration plants operate by the
principle of adiabatic expansion of air, so that the temperature of the air decreases and it can
serve as a source of cold. Such air-cycle systems in the form of an open cycle are employed for
the purpose of aircraft cooling, since it has a definite weight advantage over vapor-compression
systems. Such cycles operate on reversed Bryton cycle and the Joule Thomson Coefficient is a
valuable coefficient for determining whether or not the gaseous-fluid can be used for cooling
processes by dropping the pressure under adiabatic conditions in the expander (controlled
expansion).
Reversed Carnot with condensable refrigerant:

Carnot cycle on T-s diagram is a rectangle. On p-v

diagram the isothermal processes have different nature depending upon the refrigerant, i.e.
whether condensable or non-condensable refrigerant is used. The criterion, in its conventional
form, presupposes 2-constant temperature levels of heat exchange and 2-reversible adiabatic
processes, none of which is completely possible of realization. Nevertheless, the criterion will be
presented because of its importance as a measure of maximum performance.

Qo To ( S1 – S4) To
COP = = =
Qk - Qo (Tk – To) ( S1 – S4) Tk - To

1
= Tk
-1
To
As To → Tk , COP→∞, thus to improve COP, the limits of the temperature must be as close as
possible. Although reversed Carnot vapor cycle is a standard with which all cycles may be
compared, it is not a practical device for refrigeration purpose. Practical refrigerators, however,
use different form of cycle, dispensing with an expansion machine (controlled expansion) and
using a simple throttle valve (irreversible isenthalpic expansion), which although having lower
ideal COP, has other features to commend it.
For refrigeration machines which use air (non-condensable) expansion engines are included as a
part of the system, but for more common vapor-compression system this is rarely used. The
expander handles the liquid, and such, the expansion work realized is too small. In air
refrigeration machines gaseous fluid can produce significant work, so that work obtained is
returned to the compressor shaft.

The work obtained by expanding saturated liquid behind the piston of an expansion engine is too
small, and the isentropic expansion is not effective. Together with this, the inherent difficulties
like that of expanding fluid initially in the liquid phase, to a low quality liquid- vapor refrigerant
mixture are encountered.
A major simplification in the plant is that light & simple throttle valve takes the place of an
expander, and the flow process that undergoes an adiabatic expansion without work production is
called a throttling process. But the throttling process is essentially irreversible. It is a means of
reducing pressure of a flowing fluid by intentionally introducing friction into the flow. The effect
of modification can be seen on the T-s diagram. The net work required is now equal to
compressor work, heat extracted in the evaporator is diminished by a little amount, the COP is
therefore reduced and the rate of flow of working fluid for a given duty (heat extracted per unit
time) is increased than for a Carnot cycle. Although heat transfer processes still take place at
constant upper and lower temperature of the cycle, the throttling process which introduce
irreversibility and therefore makes the cycle irreversible as a whole. The COP, then, is no longer
independent of the working fluid, as it is for Carnot cycle. The heat extracted per unit mass is
different for different fluids (NH3, Fluorine compounds etc.).
Example 2: A Carnot cycle operates between temperatures of 4.4 ºC and 32.2 ºC. Investigate the
effectiveness of this cycle when its purpose is
a. To provide refrigeration
b. To serve as a heat pump or warming machine
c. To deliver power
A] Refrigerator is a cooling machine that
removes heat and produces cold conditions:
Desired result is Refrigerating Effect Qo.

(273 + 4.4)
COP = = 10
(273 + 32.2) – (273 + 4.4)

This cycle operating for the purpose of

refrigeration removes 10 times as much energy
as is required for shaft work.

B] The purpose of heat pump is to deliver heat:

Desired result is supplying heat Qk to the
room.

273 + 32.2
COP = = 11
32.2 - 4.4

Heat rejected at high

COPHP = temperature
Win

Heat extracted at low temperature + Win

=
Win

Heat extracted at low temperature Win

= +
Win Win
= COPRefrigerator + 1

Compressor in both the devices act as energizer, however, in the heat pump the energy supplied
to a compressor also appear in the desired outcome of a machine.

η = (32.2 -4.4) / (273 + 32.2) = 0.091

The intent of this cycle is to convert low grade thermal energy to high grade mechanical energy;
where as the objective of the reversed cycles is to only transportation of energy without
changing its quality.
Example 3: An engine is supplied with 1130 kJ/min of het. The heat source and sink being
maintained at 565 K and 315 K respectively. If heat rejected is 945 kJ/min the process will be:
1. Reversible 2. Irreversible
3. Hypothetical 4. Impossible

δQ1 1130 δQ2 945

= =2 ; = =3
T1 565 T2 315

δQ
∫cycle = -1, irrev.
T

Example 4:
An inventor claims that heat engine has the following features: Power developed = 50 kW, fuel
burned/h = 3 kg, heating value of fuel = 75 MJ/ kg, Temperature limits as 627 and 27 ºC. His
engine is
1. Reality 2. Very costly
3. Hypothetical 4. Impossible

ηCarnot = (TH – TC)/TH = 67 %

ηActual = (50 x 1000 x 60 x 60) / (3 x 75 000 x 1000)

= 80 %. (Impossible)

Carnot Vapor Power Cycle:

Although Carnot cycle offers the greatest thermal efficiency possible between any two given
limits of temperature, some difficulties arise for its practical application for steam power plant.
Rankine modified the Carnot cycle and presented a technically feasible cycle characterized by
constant pressure heating and the condensation of spent steam is allowed to proceed to
completion. The cycle is acknowledged as Rankine cycle. The Rankine cycle overcomes many of
the operational difficulties encountered with the Carnot cycle when the working fluid is vapor.
The comparison and the analysis of these cycle will be done during the study of vapor cycle in
the next unit.
Suppose there exists a Carnot engine that operates using steam as the working fluid in a steady flow cycle. Let the
boiler pressure be 8.0 MPa and the condenser pressure is 0.2 MPa. Let the water enter the boiler as saturated
liquid and steam leave the boiler as dry saturated vapor. Determine for unit mass flow heat received by the boiler
water, net work output, thermal efficiency.
At 80 bar: TH=295.06+ 273.15 = 568.21K
At 2 bar: TL = 120.23 + 273.15 = 393.38K
η = (TH-TL)/ TH = 30.77 % ….(1)
80 th=ts h3=hf=1316.61 h4=hg=2757.90
bar 295.06 s3=sf =3.2067 (= s2) s4=sg= 5.7431(=s1)
tl=ts hf=504.68, hfg =2202
2 120.23 sf= 1.53 sfg= 5.597
bar
x1 = (s1-sf)/sfg = (5.7431- 1.53)/ 5.597 = .753
h1 = hf + xhfg = 504.68 + .753 (2202) = 2162.22
x2 = (s2-sf)/ sfg = (3.2067 - 1.53)/ 5.597 = .30
h2 = hf + xhfg = 504.68 + .3 (2202) = 1164.33
Turbine work h4 –h1= 2757.90 – 2162.22 = 595.68
Pump work h3-h2 = 1316.61 - 1164.33 = 152.28
Net work (595.68 - 152.28) = 443.4
Heat supply h4 - h3 = 2757.90 - 1316.61 = 1441.29
η = 443.4/1441.29= 30.76 % …………………………….(2)