Talk:Carnot cycle: Difference between revisions
No edit summary |
|||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
{{engineering|class=B|importance=Mid}} |
{{engineering|class=B|importance=Mid}} |
||
{{physics|class=B|importance=Mid}} |
{{physics|class=B|importance=Mid}} |
||
== Agreement of State Labels in the Diagrams == |
|||
If possible, it would be nice if the P-V diagram and T-S diagram had consistent state labels. Brvman 07:04, 3 April 2014 (UTC) |
|||
== Delete redirect suggested == |
== Delete redirect suggested == |
||
Revision as of 07:04, 3 April 2014
 | Engineering B‑class Mid‑importance | |||||||||
| ||||||||||
.jpg){kind=small} | Physics B‑class Mid‑importance | |||||||||
| ||||||||||
Agreement of State Labels in the Diagrams
If possible, it would be nice if the P-V diagram and T-S diagram had consistent state labels. Brvman 07:04, 3 April 2014 (UTC)
Delete redirect suggested
The term Carnot efficiency redirects here, to Carnot Cycle.
Carnot efficiency, however, should have its own page, since the Carnot efficiency is a limit that cannot be exceeded by an method of converting heat to electricity, not merely by carnot engines. Geoffrey.landis (talk) 21:49, 28 May 2008 (UTC)
- Before deleting, or taking to WP:RfD, do you think there is enough for an article on Carnot efficiency (if so, just start to write that article), or could it be redirected elsewhere? Energy conversion or Energy efficiency for example? There are also possibilities in the page history. It once used to redirect to Carnot heat engine, and it also once redirected to Exergy efficiency (which I'd never heard of). Are those possiblities any good? Carcharoth (talk) 00:51, 29 May 2008 (UTC)
- The most appropriate redirect would be to the efficiency section of the article on Heat engines, here. Geoffrey.landis (talk) 01:37, 30 May 2008 (UTC)
- Done. Anyone can do that, not just admins. Would you be able to check the links and see if they are all being used correctly? Carcharoth (talk) 13:26, 31 May 2008 (UTC)
id appreciate an english translation
this reads like a textbook. it is not very clear and expects people to understand calculus notation. i do not think it is necessary to be so technical, this aint rocket science. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.240.189.9 (talk) 23:37, 28 July 2008 (UTC)
--Yep, a little bit of introductory info about this, more basic would be in the interest of this article and for others. The technical part, though is just as important. AkshayGenius (talk) 21:38, 15 November 2008 (UTC)
I looked at this article on 12 April 2012, and the equations are not properly displaying in my IE 7 broswer. For instance, instead of getting math integral symbols, I see markup tags. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 192.35.35.34 (talk) 19:07, 12 April 2012 (UTC)
P-V diagram
We need the P-V diagram back. Bring back the P-V diagram 220.227.165.210 (talk) 08:51, 15 September 2008 (UTC)
- Did it 220.227.165.210 (talk) 08:57, 15 September 2008 (UTC)
- Added references to the P-V diagram in the explanation of the Carnot cycle. Doesn't it look prettier now? :) 220.227.165.210 (talk) 09:21, 15 September 2008 (UTC)
The absence of a P-V diagram in this article renders it useless, the temperature entropy diagram it has gives no indication of how heat is converted into work by change of volume (the word volume does not appear in the text), which is the principle to be illustrated by any explanation of the Carnot (or any other heat engine) cycle. There isn't even a mathematical explanation of just how heat is converted to work. --Damorbel (talk) 07:20, 1 October 2009 (UTC)
LaTex Not Rendering
Equations not rendering — Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.193.49.58 (talk) 12:54, 13 April 2012 (UTC)