Does the shape of a container affect the heat required to melt ice inside it?

AI Thread Summary
The shape of a container does affect the heat required to melt ice inside it, despite the mass of ice being the same. While the primary formula for heat involves mass and latent heat of melting, the difference in container height leads to variations in potential energy. This potential energy difference must be considered, as it contributes to the overall heat required, albeit minimally. The effect is small, approximately 1J/kg compared to the significant latent heat of 330 kJ/kg, making it negligible for practical purposes. Ultimately, the conclusion is that while the heat required differs, the impact is minimal.
RingNebula57
Messages
56
Reaction score
2
Hello everyone! I recently saw a problem about some ice in 2 containers. So:
We have 2 vertical cylindrical containers, which have perfect insulating walls, one with surface of the base S and the other one 2S , filled with the same mass of ice. The question is if there is any diffrence between the heat required to melt the ice in the 2 containers.
I would've probably said no , because Heat=(mass ice)*(latent heat of melting), and how the mass is the same then the heat does not differ. But the solution says that the heat required is diffrent , because if we melt all the ice , than it will turn completely into water , and because we have diffrent cross sections of the containters than the heat will differ. They arrived to that conclusion after saying that the diffrence in height between the initial center of mass and final center of mass for both systems differ.Then the diffrences of the potential energies is the 2 systems will differ also. And converting potential energy into heat we have diffrent heats.
And that seem alright too.
So why is my first guess incorrect?

Thank you!
 
Physics news on Phys.org
RingNebula57 said:
Heat=(mass ice)*(latent heat of melting)
minus potential energy released in the process. Which is completely negligible for all practical purposes, but yes, it differs between the two containers. 10 centimeters (approximate difference if the ice is 1 or 2 meters high respectively) would give 1J/kg, compared to 330 kJ/kg the effect is 3 parts in a million.
 
  • Like
Likes Chestermiller and RingNebula57
mfb said:
minus potential energy released in the process. Which is completely negligible for all practical purposes, but yes, it differs between the two containers. 10 centimeters (approximate difference if the ice is 1 or 2 meters high respectively) would give 1J/kg, compared to 330 kJ/kg the effect is 3 parts in a million.
Thank you!
 
Consider an extremely long and perfectly calibrated scale. A car with a mass of 1000 kg is placed on it, and the scale registers this weight accurately. Now, suppose the car begins to move, reaching very high speeds. Neglecting air resistance and rolling friction, if the car attains, for example, a velocity of 500 km/h, will the scale still indicate a weight corresponding to 1000 kg, or will the measured value decrease as a result of the motion? In a second scenario, imagine a person with a...
Dear all, in an encounter of an infamous claim by Gerlich and Tscheuschner that the Greenhouse effect is inconsistent with the 2nd law of thermodynamics I came to a simple thought experiment which I wanted to share with you to check my understanding and brush up my knowledge. The thought experiment I tried to calculate through is as follows. I have a sphere (1) with radius ##r##, acting like a black body at a temperature of exactly ##T_1 = 500 K##. With Stefan-Boltzmann you can calculate...
Thread 'Griffith, Electrodynamics, 4th Edition, Example 4.8. (First part)'
I am reading the Griffith, Electrodynamics book, 4th edition, Example 4.8 and stuck at some statements. It's little bit confused. > Example 4.8. Suppose the entire region below the plane ##z=0## in Fig. 4.28 is filled with uniform linear dielectric material of susceptibility ##\chi_e##. Calculate the force on a point charge ##q## situated a distance ##d## above the origin. Solution : The surface bound charge on the ##xy## plane is of opposite sign to ##q##, so the force will be...
Back
Top