Thermodynamics in finite time

SEP 01, 1984

Asking how well systems can perform if they are to deliver power, not just energy, leads to investigations both in abstract, fundamental thermodynamics and in almost‐applicable physics, such as determining the optimal motion of a piston.

DOI: 10.1063/1.2916405

Bjarne Andresen

Peter Salamon

R. Stephen Berry

Until the 19th century, technology was essentially the domain of skilled artisans and constructors who relied on practical experience to design and build their machines. One of the first efforts to use physical theory to study the functioning of machines was undertaken by the French engineer Sadi Carnot. Motivated by the concern of the French about the superiority of British steam engines, he undertook a systematic study of the physical processes governing steam engines, resulting in his remarkable paper Reflexions sur la puissance motrice du feu (On the Motive Power of Heat) published in 1826. Among the earliest successes of this new science, thermodynamics, was the formulation of criteria describing how well real processes perform in comparison with an ideal model. Carnot showed that any engine, using heat from a hot reservoir at temperature $T_{h}$ to do work, has to transfer some heat to a reservoir at lower temperature $T_{1},$ and that no engine could convert into work more of the heat taken in at $T_{h}$ than the fraction $η_{C} {= 1−(T}_{1} {/T}_{h})$ known as the Carnot efficiency.

References

1. M. Mozurkewich, R. S. Berry, Proc. Nat. Acad. Sci. 78, 1986 (1981);
M. Mozurkewich, R. S. Berry, J. Appl. Phys. 53, 34 (1982).https://doi.org/JAPIAU
2. J. Wheatley, T. Hofler, G. W. Swift, A. Migliori, Phys. Rev. Lett. 50, 499 (1983).https://doi.org/PRLTAO
3. For a more theoretical review of many of the topics covered in this article, see B. Andresen, R. S. Berry, M. J. Ondrechen, P. Salamon, “Thermodynamics for Processes in Finite Time,” Acc. Chem. Res., in press.
4. P. Salamon, A. Nitzan, B. Andresen, R. S. Berry, Phys. Rev. A 21, 2115 (1980).https://doi.org/PLRAAN
5. P. Salamon, B. Andresen, R. S. Berry, Phys. Rev. A 15, 2094 (1977).https://doi.org/PLRAAN
6. J. Geusic, E. O. Schulz‐DuBois, H. E. D. Scovil, Phys. Rev. 156, 343 (1967).
7. F. Schlögl, Z. Phys. 191, 81 (1966); https://doi.org/ZEPYAA
F. Schlögl, Z. Phys. 198, 559 (1967). https://doi.org/ZEPYAA
I. Procaccia, R. D. Levine, J. Chem. Phys. 65, 3357 (1976).https://doi.org/JCPSA6
8. B. Andresen, P. Salamon, R. S. Berry, J. Chem. Phys. 66, 1571 (1977).https://doi.org/JCPSA6
9. F. L. Curzon, B. Ahlborn, Am. J. Phys. 43, 22 (1975).https://doi.org/AJPIAS
10. P. Salamon, A. Nitzan, J. Chem. Phys. 74, 3546 (1981).https://doi.org/JCPSA6
11. P. Salamon, Y. B. Band, O. Kafri, J. Appl. Phys. 53, 197 (1982).https://doi.org/JAPIAU
12. B. Andresen, M. H. Rubin, R. S. Berry, J. Phys. Chem. 82, 2704 (1983).https://doi.org/JPCHAX
13. P. Salamon, R. S. Berry, Phys. Rev. Lett. 51, 1127 (1983).https://doi.org/PRLTAO
14. F. Weinhold, J. Chem. Phys. 63, 2479 (1975); https://doi.org/JCPSA6
F. Weinhold, J. Chem. Phys. 65, 559 (1976).https://doi.org/JCPSA6
15. M. H. Rubin, Phys. Rev. A 19, 1272, 1277 (1979).https://doi.org/PLRAAN
16. M. H. Rubin, Phys. Rev. A 22, 1741 (1980).
17. M. J. Ondrechen, B. Andresen, M. Mozurkewich, R. S. Berry, Am. J. Phys. 49, 681 (1981).https://doi.org/AJPIAS
18. Y. B. Band, O. Kafri, and P. Salamon, J. Appl. Phys. 52, 3745 (1981).https://doi.org/JAPIAU
19. M. J. Ondrechen, R. S. Berry, B. Andresen, J. Chem. Phys. 72, 5118 (1980); https://doi.org/JCPSA6
M. J. Ondrechen, B. Andresen, R. S. Berry, J. Chem. Phys. 73, 5838 (1980).https://doi.org/JCPSA6

More about the Authors

Bjarne Andresen. University of Copenhagen, Denmark.

Peter Salamon. San Diego State University.

R. Stephen Berry. University of Chicago.