Hostname: page-component-5b777bbd6c-w6wnr Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-06-23T04:35:43.125Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

A study on the expansion wave diffraction over bodies

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  12 June 2025

Vishnu Prasad S.
Affiliation:
Department of Aerospace Engineering, Indian Institute of Technology Madras, Chennai 600036, India
Anbu Serene Raj C.
Affiliation:
Department of Aerospace Engineering, Indian Institute of Technology Madras, Chennai 600036, India
Vinoth Paramanantham
Affiliation:
Department of Aerospace Engineering, Indian Institute of Technology Madras, Chennai 600036, India
Athira C.M.
Affiliation:
Department of Aerospace Engineering, Indian Institute of Technology Madras, Chennai 600036, India
Rajesh G.*
Affiliation:
Department of Aerospace Engineering, Indian Institute of Technology Madras, Chennai 600036, India
*
Corresponding author: Rajesh G., rajesh@ae.iitm.ac.in

Abstract

The investigation of shock/blast wave diffraction over various objects has garnered significant attention in recent decades on account of the catastrophic changes that these waves inflict on the environment. Equally important flow phenomena can occur when the moving expansion waves diffract over bodies, which has been hardly investigated. To investigate the effect of expansion wave diffraction over different bodies, we conducted shock tube experiments and numerical simulations to visualise the intricate wave interactions that occur during this process. The current investigation focuses on the phenomenon of expansion wave diffraction across three distinct diffracting configurations, namely the bluff, wedge and ogive bodies. The diffraction phenomenon is subsequently investigated under varying expansion wave strengths through the control of the initial diaphragm rupture pressure ratios. The shock waves generated by the expansion wave diffraction in the driver side of the shock tube, which was initially identified in numerical simulations by Mahomed & Skews (2014 J. Fluid Mech., vol. 757, pp. 649–664), have been visualised in the experiments. Interesting flow features, such as unsteady shock generation, transition, and symmetric/asymmetric vortex breakdown, have been observed in these expansion flows. An in-depth analysis of such intricate flow features resulting from expansion wave diffraction is performed and characterised in the current study.

Type
JFM Papers
Copyright
© The Author(s), 2025. Published by 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.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

Footnotes

Article updated 13 June 2025.

References

Bazhenova, T.V., Gvozdeva, L.G. & Zhilin, Y.V. 1980 Change in the shape of the diffracting shock wave at a convex corner. In Gasdynamics of Explosions and Reactive Systems (ed. A.K. Oppenheim), pp. 401412. Elsevier.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fu, L. 2019 A low-dissipation finite-volume method based on a new TENO shock-capturing scheme. Comput. Phys. Commun. 235, 2539.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Glass, I.I. 1967 Research frontiers at hypervelocities. II. Can. Aeronaut. Space J. 13, 401425.Google Scholar
Gnani, F., Lo, K., Zare-Behtash, H. & Kontis, K. 2015 Shock wave diffraction phenomena around slotted splitters. Aerospace 2 (1), 116,CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hillier, R. & Graham, J.M.R. 1986 Numerical prediction of shock wave diffraction. In Proceedings of the 15th International Symposium on Shock Waves and Shock Tubes (SWST), pp. 391397.Google Scholar
Hong, Z., Pang, G.A., Vasu, S.S., Davidson, D.F. & Hanson, R.K. 2009 The use of driver inserts to reduce non-ideal pressure variations behind reflected shock waves. Shock Waves 19 (2), 113123.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mahomed, I. & Skews, B.W. 2014 Expansion wave diffraction over a 90 degree corner. J. Fluid Mech. 757, 649664.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Paramanantham, V., Janakiram, S. & Gopalapillai, R. 2022 Prediction of Mach stem height in compressible open jets. Part 1. Overexpanded jets. J. Fluid Mech. 942, A48.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Petersen, E.L. & Hanson, R.K. 2001 Nonideal effects behind reflected shock waves in a high-pressure shock tube. Shock Waves 10 (6), 405420.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Quirk, J. 1994 A contribution to the great Riemann solver debate. Intl J. Numer. Meth. Fluids 18 (6), 555574.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Quirk, J. 1998 AMRITA: a computational facility (for CFD modelling). In 29th Computational Fluid Dynamics VKI Lecture Series (ed. H. Deconinck). von Karman Institute. ISSN0337-8312.Google Scholar
Skews, B.W. 1967 The perturbed region behind a diffracting shock wave. J. Fluid Mech. 29 (4), 705719.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Skews, B.K. & Paton, R.T. 2017 Shock wave development within expansive flows. In International Conference on RailNewcastle Talks, pp. 221230. Springer International Publishing.Google Scholar
Sun, M. & Takayama, K. 2003 Vorticity production in shock diffraction. J. Fluid Mech. 478, 237256.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Thara Reshma, I.V., Vinoth, P., Rajesh, G. & Ben-Dor, G. 2021 Propagation of a planar shock wave along a convex–concave ramp. J. Fluid Mech. 924, A37.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Toro, E.F. 2019 The HLLC Riemann solver. Shock Waves 29 (8), 10651082.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tugazakov, R.Y. 2007 Theory of unsteady separation in supersonic flow around a convex corner. Fluid Dyn. 42 (3), 485494.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Whalley, M. & Skews, B.W. 2018 Expansion wave propagation into a cavity. J. Appl. Fluid Mech. 11 (2), 507517.Google Scholar
Whitham, G.B. 1959 A new approach to problems of shock dynamics. Part 2. Three-dimensional problems. J. Fluid Mech. 5 (3), 369386.CrossRefGoogle Scholar