Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-gbm5v Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-27T14:17:44.908Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Jet and vortex flows in a shock/ hemispherical-bubble-on-wall configuration

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  03 March 2004

GAOZHU PENG
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
SHUANG ZHANG
Affiliation:
Laboratory for Visiometrics and Modeling, Department of Mechanical and Aerospace Engineering, Rutgers University, Piscataway, New Jersey

Abstract

We suggest an easily obtained laboratory configuration to observe jet and vortex flows for the Richtmyer–Meshkov (accelerated inhomogeneous flow) environment. A hemispherical bubble in air with density ratio of 5 is placed against an ideally reflecting wall and struck by a planar shock. This also models a spherical bubble struck symmetrically by two identical approaching shocks, that is, a “reshock” configuration. For all Mach numbers (M = 1.2, 1.5, and 2.0), our axisymmetric simulations show that the heavy hemispherical bubble expands axially away from the wall as a jet, and a weaker vortex ring moves radially along the wall. In addition, when M = 1.5, a ringlike vortex projectile (VP) of small diameter follows closely behind the reflected shock and is associated with its moving triple point. This VP contains an entrained shocklet and quadrupole structure of dilatation. Various methods are applied to quantify the emerging coherent structures.

Type
Research Article
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

Brouillette, M. (2002). The Richtmyer–Meshkov instability. Annu. Rev. Fluid Mech. 34, 445468.Google Scholar
Colella, P. & Woodward, P.R. (1984). The piecewise parabolic method (PPM) for gas-dynamical simulations. J. Comput. Phys. 54, 174201.Google Scholar
Hornung, H. (1986). Regular and Mach reflection of shock waves. Annu. Rev. Fluid Mech. 18, 3358.Google Scholar
Meshkov, E.E. (1969). Interface of two gases accelerated by a shock wave. Sov. Fluid Dyn. 4, 101108.Google Scholar
Peng, G., Zabusky, N.J. & Zhang, S. (2002). Vortex-accelerated secondary baroclinic vorticity deposition and late-intermediate time dynamics of a two-dimensional Richtmyer–Meshkov interface. Phys. Fluids. (Accepted).
Richtmyer, R.D. (1960). Taylor instability in shock acceleration of compressible fluids. Comm. Pure Appl. Math. 8, 297319.Google Scholar
Samtaney, R. & Zabusky, N.J. (1994). Circulation deposition on shock-accelerated planar and curved density-stratified interfaces: Models and scalings laws. J. Fluid Mech. 269, 4578.Google Scholar
Zabusky, N.J. (1999). Vortex paradigm for accelerated inhomogeneous flows: Visiometrics for the Rayleigh–Taylor and Richtmyer–Meshkov environments. Annu. Rev. Fluid Mech. 31, 495536.Google Scholar
Zabusky, N.J. & Zeng, S.-M. (1998). Shock cavity implosion morphologies and vortical projectile generation in axisymmetric shock-spherical fast/slow bubble interactions. J. Fluid Mech. 362, 327346.Google Scholar