Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-s2hrs Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-14T05:52:51.778Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Shock–planar curtain interactions: Strong secondary baroclinic deposition and emergence of vortex projectiles and late-time inhomogeneous turbulence

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  03 March 2004

SHUANG ZHANG  and
NORMAN J. ZABUSKY
SHUANG ZHANG
Affiliation:
Laboratory for Visiometrics and Modeling, Department of Mechanical and Aerospace Engineering, Rutgers University, Piscataway, New Jersey
NORMAN J. ZABUSKY
Affiliation:
Laboratory for Visiometrics and Modeling, Department of Mechanical and Aerospace Engineering, Rutgers University, Piscataway, New Jersey
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

We continue our previous investigations (Yang, Zabusky, & Chern, 1990; Zabusky & Zhang, 2002) of the interaction of a shock with a planar, inclined curtain (slow/fast/slow) to a wider Mach number range (M = 1.5, 2.0, and 5.0) and longer times. In all cases, the generic features may be explained in terms of the opposite-signed vortex layers (deposited by the shock wave), which approach and collide to form a complex vortex bilayer (VBL). At M ≤ 2.0, the VBL traverses the shock tube and eventually collides with the opposite horizontal boundary and evolves into upstream and downstream moving inhomogeneous vortex projectiles (VPs) (Zabusky & Zeng, 1998). This is manifested as early-time “breakthrough” (Yang, Zabusky, & Chern, 1990). During the traversal, we observe and scale a strong secondary baroclinic circulation enhancement. We track and quantify the VPs and show that their velocities compare well to that from a simple vortex model. We also display turbulent domains and a new rapid early time turbulization at M = 5, when the VBL is narrower.

Keywords

Accelerated inhomogeneous flowsBaroclinic circulationRapid turbulizationVortex bilayersVortex projectiles
Type
Research Article
Information
Laser and Particle Beams , Volume 21 , Issue 3 , July 2003 , pp. 463 - 470
Copyright
© 2003 Cambridge University Press

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

Bonazza, R., Brouillette, M., Goldstein, D., Haas, J.-F., Winckelmans, G. & Sturtevant, B. (1985). Rayleigh–Taylor instability of oblique interfaces. Bull. Am. Phys. Soc. 30, 1742.Google Scholar
Colella, P. & Woodward, P.R. (1984). The piecewise parabolic method (PPM) for gas-dynamical simulations. J. of Computational Phys. 54, 174–201.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Edgar, B. Kevin & Woodward, Paul R. (1993). Diffraction of a shock wave by a wedge: Comparison of PPM simulations with experiments. Int. Video J. Eng. Res. 3, 25–33.Google Scholar
Hawley, J.F. & Zabusky, N.J. (1989). Vortex paradigm for shock-accelerated density-stratified interfaces. Phys. Rev. Letters 63, 1241–1244.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Inogamov, N.A. (1999). The role of Rayleigh–Taylor and Richtmyer–Meshkov instabilities in astrophysics: An introduction. Astrophys. Space Phys. 10, 1–335.Google Scholar
Mikaelian, K.O. (1994). Freeze-out and the effect of compressibility in the Richtmyer–Meshkov instability. Phys. Fluids 6, 356–368.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Prasad, J.K., Rasheed, A., Kumar, S. & Sturtevant, B. (2000). The late-time development of the Richtmyer–Meshkov instability. Phys. Fluids 12, 2108–2115.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Samtaney, R. & Pullin, D.I. (1996). On initial-value and self-similar solutions of the compressible Euler equations. Phys. Fluids 8, 2650–2655.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Samtaney, R., Ray, J. & Zabusky, N.J. (1998). Baroclinic circulation generation on shock accelerated slow/fast interfaces. Phys. Fluids 10, 1217–1230.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Samtaney, R. & Zabusky, N.J. (1994). Circulation deposition on shock accelerated planar and curved density-stratified interface: Models and scaling laws. J. of Fluid Mechanics 269, 45–78.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sturtevant, B. (1987). In Shock Tubes and Waves. (Gronig, H., Ed.). Berlin: VCH.
Yang, X., Zabusky, N.J. & Chern, I-L. (1990). Breakthrough via dipolar-vortex/jet formation in shock-accelerated density-stratified layers. Phys. Fluids A 2, 892–895.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Yang, Y., Zhang, Q. & Sharp, D.H. (1994). Small amplitude theory of Richtmyer–Meshkov instability. Phys. Fluids A 1856–1873.CrossRef
Zabusky, N.J. (1999). Vortex paradigm for accelerated inhomogeneous flows: Visiometrics for the Rayleigh–Taylor and Richtmyer–Meshkov environments. Annu. Rev. Fluid Mechanics 31, 495–535.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zabusky, N.J. & Zeng, S.-M. (1998). Shock cavity implosion morphologies and vortical projectile generation in axisymmetric shock-spherical F/S bubble interactions. J. Fluid Mech. 362, 327–346.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zabusky, N.J. & Zhang, S. (2002). Shock–planar curtain interactions in 2D: Emergence of vortex double layers, vortex projectiles and decaying stratified turbulence. Phys. Fluids 14, 419–422.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zhang, Q. & Sohn, S.I. (1997). Nonlinear theory of unstable fluid mixing driven by shock wave. Phys. Fluids 4, 1106–1124.CrossRefGoogle Scholar