0
TECHNICAL PAPERS

Experimental and Numerical Study of Shock Wave Interaction with Perforated Plates

[+] Author and Article Information
A. Britan, A. V. Karpov

Department of Computational Mechanics, Volgograd University, Volgograd, Russia

E. I. Vasilev

Department of Computational Mechanics, Volgograd University, Volgograd, Russia 400062, Volgograd, str. 2nd Prodolnaja, 30

O. Igra, G. Ben-Dor, E. Shapiro

The Pearlstone Center for Aeronautical Engineering Studies, Department of Mechanical Engineering, Ben-Gurion University of the Negev, Beer Sheva, Israel

J. Fluids Eng 126(3), 399-409 (Jul 12, 2004) (11 pages) doi:10.1115/1.1758264 History: Received December 06, 2002; Revised October 31, 2003; Online July 12, 2004
Copyright © 2004 by ASME
Your Session has timed out. Please sign back in to continue.

References

Lind, C., Cybyk, B. Z., and Boris, J. P., 1999, “Attenuation of shocks: High Reynolds number porous flows,” In Proc. 22nd Int. Symp. On Shock Waves Eds. G. J. Ball, R. Hiller and G. T. Roberts, pp. 1138–1140. Imperial College, London UK.
Franks,  W. J., 1957, “Interaction of a shock wave with a wire screen,” UTIA Tech. Note No. 13.
Britan,  A.Vasiliev,  E. I., 1985, “The peculiarity of the starting flow in the profiling nozzle of shock tube,” Dokladi Akademii Nauk SSSR, 281, No. 2, pp. 295–299 (in Russian).
Igra,  O., Falcovitz,  J., Reichenbach,  H., and Heilig,  W., 1996, “Experimental and numerical study of the interaction between a planar shock wave and square cavity,” J. Fluid Mech., 313, pp. 105–130.
Igra,  O., Wu,  X., Falcovitz,  J., Meguro,  T., Takayama,  K., and Heilig,  W., 2001, “Experimental and Numerical Study of Shock Wave Propagation Through Double-Bend Duct,” J. Fluid Mech., 437, pp. 255–282.
Launder, B. E., and Spalding, B., 1972, “Mathematical Models of Turbulence,” New York: Academic Press.
Baldwin, B. S., Lomax, H., 1978, “Thin Layer Approximation and Algebraic Model for Separated Turbulent Flows,” AIAA paper 78–257, Huntsville, Alabama, USA.
Cebeci, T., Smith, A. M. O., 1974, “Analysis of Turbulent Boundary Layers,” New York: Academic Press.
Vasiliev,  E. I., 1996, “A W-modification of Godunov’s method and its application to two-dimensional non-stationary flows of a dusty gas,” Comp. Math. Phys., 36, pp. 101–112.1996Translation from Zh. Vychisl. Mat. Mat. Fiz., 36, pp. 122–135.
Britan,  A., Ben-Dor,  G., Igra,  O., and Shapiro,  H., 2001, “Shock waves attenuation by granular filters,” Int. J. Multiphase Flow, 27, pp. 617–634.
Honkan,  A., and Andreopoulos,  J., 1992, “Rapid compression of grid-generated turbulence by a moving shock wave,” Phys. Fluids A, 4, pp. 2562–2572.
Losev, S. A. 1976 “On convolution of information obtained in the shock tube researches” Scientific report of Institute of Mechanics MSU, No. 43, pp. 3–21.

Figures

Grahic Jump Location
Schematic description of the investigated 2-D conduit
Grahic Jump Location
Geometry of perforated barriers used in the shock tube experiments (all have the same porosity ε=0.4)
Grahic Jump Location
Effect of the mesh size on the resulted flow field
Grahic Jump Location
Computed isopycnics plots showing the initial stage of the flow generated by the transmitted shock wave
Grahic Jump Location
Computed isopycnics plots showing the intermediate stage of the flow generated by the transmitted shock wave
Grahic Jump Location
Computed isopycnics plots showing the final stage of the flow generated by the transmitted shock wave
Grahic Jump Location
Computed wall pressure histories for bottom (a) and top (b) of the conduit shown in Fig. 1
Grahic Jump Location
Computed wall pressure signals for bottom (a) and top (b) of the conduit shown in Fig. 1. Computed pressures are based on the Euler equations.
Grahic Jump Location
Computed isobars plots showing the intermediate stage of the flow generated by the transmitted shock wave. Computations are based on the Euler equations.
Grahic Jump Location
Comparison between measured (b) and computed (a) wall pressure at the conduit’s bottom wall. Computations are based on the Navier-Stokes equations.
Grahic Jump Location
Comparison between computed (a) and measured (b) wall pressure at the conduit’s upper wall. Computations are based on the Navier-Stokes equations.
Grahic Jump Location
Pressure signals recorded at different distances downstream of the barrier
Grahic Jump Location
Attenuation coefficient k vs the non-dimensional distance from the barrier x/Dh. Close points Ms=1.46±0.01, open points Ms=1.58±0.01. Error Bar shows the measured uncertainty at the 95% confidence level 12.

Tables

Errata

Discussions

Some tools below are only available to our subscribers or users with an online account.

Related Content

Customize your page view by dragging and repositioning the boxes below.

Related Journal Articles
Related eBook Content
Topic Collections

Sorry! You do not have access to this content. For assistance or to subscribe, please contact us:

  • TELEPHONE: 1-800-843-2763 (Toll-free in the USA)
  • EMAIL: asmedigitalcollection@asme.org
Sign In