(Series On Advances in Mathematics For Applied Sciences, V. 49) Shugaev F.V., Shtemenko L.S. - Propagation and Reflection of Shock Waves-World Scientific (1997)

PROPAGATION
AND REFLECTION
OF SHOCK WAVES
This page is intentionally left blank
Series on Advances in Mathematics for Applied Sciences - Vol. 49
PROPAGATION
AND REFLECTION
OF SHOCK WAVES
F V Shugaev
L S Shtemenko
Department of Physics
M V Lomonosov Moscow State University
Russia
V f e World Scientific
wh Singapore New Jersey London
L Hong Kong
Published by
World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd.
P O Box 128, Farrer Road, Singapore 912805
USA office: Suite IB, 1060 Main Street, River Edge, NJ 07661
UK office: 57 Shelton Street, Covent Garden, London WC2H 9HE
Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data

Shugaev, F. V. (Fedor Vasilevich)
Propagation and reflection of shock waves / by F. V. Shugaev & L. S. Shtemenko.
p. cm. ~ (Series on advances in mathematics for applied sciences - vol. 49)
Includes bibliographical references and index.
ISBN 9810230109 (alk. paper)
1. Shockwaves. 2. Wave-motion, Theory of. I. Shtemenko, L. S.
II. Title. III. Series.
QA927.S49 1997
532'.0593-dc21 97-3964
CIP
British Library Cataloguing-in-Publication Data

A catalogue record for this book is available from the British Library.
Copyright 1998 by World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd.

All rights reserved. This book, or parts thereof, may not be reproduced in any form or by any means,
electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording or any information storage and retrieval
system now known or to be invented, without written permission from the Publisher.
For photocopying of material in this volume, please pay a copying fee through the Copyright
Clearance Center, Inc., 222 Rosewood Drive, Danvers, MA 01923, USA. In this case permission to
photocopy is not required from the publisher.
This book is printed on acid-free paper.
Printed in Singapore by Uto-Print

PREFACE
We
vve discuss
discuss the
me propagation
propagation of 01 three-dimensional
three-dimensional shock
shock waves
waves and
and their
their
reflection from
reflection from curved
curved walls.
walls.
A ray method is set forth in the first part. It is based on the expansion of
fluid properties in m power series at an arbitrary point on the shock wave front.
Continued fractions are used. Results for shock propagation in non-uniform
fluids are presented.
The second part deals with shock reflection from a concave body. The
i m p o r t a n t shock focusing problem is included. The work is supported by both
numerical and experimental results. Many interesting features such as forma-
tion 01
tion of aa jet,jet, vortices and the
vortices and the appearance
appearance of of disturbances
disturbances on
on the
the shock
shock front
front
are discussed.
are discussed.
The
The authors
authors would
would like
like to
to expess
expess their
their gratitude
gratitude to
to Dr.
Dr. S.A.Bystrov
S.A.Bystrov and
and
to
to Dr. O.A.Serov for the discussion of the results and also for the
Dr. O.A.Serov for the discussion of the results and also for the assistance
assistance in
in
conducting experiments.
conducting experiments.
vV
LIST OF SYMBOLS
a1 - Lagrangian variables
bap - components of the second fundamental surface tensor
at the wave front
c - velocity of sound
/ - frequency
gij - covariant components of the metric tensor in the space
ala2a?
gap - covariant components of the metric surface tensor on
the wave front
G - velocity of wave propagation
H - mean curvature of the wave front
K - Gaussian curvature of the wave front
\_dali-dalk J
M - Mach number
rii n% - components of the external unit normal to the wave
front in a Cartesian coordinate system
p - pressure
q - 2jM2 - 7 + I
S - entropy; area
s - distance along the ray
T - temperature
t - time
ul,v? - surface variables
vl - components of a particle velocity in a Cartesian coordi
nate system
2
w= ( 7 - l ) M + 2
xl - Cartesian coordinates
xl (a1, a2, a3, t) - Eulerian variables
a - angle of incidence of a shock wave
/3 - angle of reflection of a shock wave
vn
Vlll Propagation and reflection of shock waves
Tjj - Christoffel's symbols
Vi - covariant components of the external unit normal to the

wave front in the space a1 a2a3
p - density
T=l/p
UJ - cyclic frequency; vorticity
The notation, a denotes covariant surface differentiation. Lower indices 1,2

refer to the state ahead of and behind the front, respectively. Greek indices
are used for components of tensors on the surface. Latin indices are used for
components of tensors in the space.
Brackets [ ] denote the jump of any quantity across the wave front: [(f)]
02~01-
An index which occurs twice in a term is to be summed.
CONTENTS
Preface v
List o f s y m b o l s vii
Chapter 1. S t r u c t u r e a n d b a s i c p r o p e r t i e s o f s h o c k w a v e s i n g a s e s 1
1. General remarks 1
2. Interaction of shock waves 7
3. Shock tube as an apparatus for obtaining shock waves in
the laboratory 20
Chapter 2. S h o c k w a v e p r o p a g a t i o n t h r o u g h a g a s 41
4. Basic notions 41
5. Compatibility conditions 44
6. Ray method for calculation of unsteady shock waves 55
7. Path of a particle behind a shock wave 74
8. Distribution of flow parameters behind an unsteady curvi
linear shock wave 76
Chapter 3. I n t e r a c t i o n o f a p l a n e s h o c k w a v e w i t h d i s t u r b a n c e s
and stability of shock waves 79
9. Linear interaction of shock waves with disturbances 79
10. Propagation of a plane shock wave through a region of non-
uniform density (nonlinear case) 84
11. Nonlinear one-dimensional interaction of a weak disturb
ance with a shock wave 90
12. Instability of shock waves 96
Chapter 4. R e f l e c t i o n o f a s h o c k w a v e f r o m a c o n v e x b o d y 105
13. Reflection of a plane wave from a body of arbitrary shape 105
14. Transition from regular to Mach reflection 117
15. Development of flow over a blunt body behind an incident
shock wave 120
IX
x Propagation and reflection of shock waves
Chapter 5. Reflection of a shock wave from a concave body and

shock focusing 141
16. Reflection of a shock wave from a body with rectangular
cavity 141
17. Oscillations of the shock wave reflected from a body with
cavity 151
18. Shock focusing 154
19. Resonant excitation of vortices behind the reflected shock
wave 164
Chapter 6. Propagation of a shock wave through a turbulent gas
flow 177
Chapter 7. Propagation of a shock wave through a gas-particle
mixture 191
Chapter 8. Laser-driven shock waves 197
Chapter 9. Shock waves in a low-temperature plasma 213
Appendix A 225
References 233
Subject index 243
C H A P T E R 1.
STRUCTURE A N D BASIC PROPERTIES
OF SHOCK WAVES IN GASES
1. G e n e r a l r e m a r k s
Shock waves belong to one of interesting phenomena that occur in nature.

They arise at explosions, at electrical discharges, at supersonic flight in the
atmosphere, in the space (e.g. explosion of supernova). The evolution of a
nonlinear compression wave into a shock wave was investigated by Riemann
(Riemann 1876) who gave an analytic solution in the case of one-dimensional
flow. Earlier the propagation of waves with a velocity higher than that of sound
was considered by Stokes, Airy and Earnshaw. Further investigations were
made by French engineer, former officer of artillery H.Hugoniot (Hugoniot 1889)
and by English scientist Rankine (Rankine 1879). Hugoniot showed that the
law of energy conservation is incompatible with the constancy of entropy while
considering the flow across a shock wave. Shock waves in air were observed
for the first time by famous scientist and philosopher E.Mach (Mach 1878). He
also discovered the so-called irregular (Mach) reflection which has no analogies
in acoustics and optics. Various cases of shock interactions were made possible
to investigate after N.E.Kotchine (Kotchine 1926) had solved the i m p o r t a n t
problem of break-up of an arbitrary discontinuity.
Modern developments in this field were stimulated by the needs of aircraft
and spacecraft. It is worth mentioning the works devoted to strong shocks, the
shock structure, the use of shock waves for cumulation of energy, shock waves
in the space. New experimental techniques with high temporal resolution and
numerical methods allowed to investigate very complicated problems.
The structure of shock waves can be studied, using kinetic equations. The
Boltzmann equation is used widely. The term shock wave has two meanings.
Sometimes it denotes a disturbance propagating in a medium at a supersonic
velocity. However, this term usually signifies only a comparatively narrow zone
where a transition takes place between an undisturbed medium and disturbed
1
2 Propagation and reflection of shock waves
one. The thickness of a shock wave against Mach number is shown in Fig. 1.
Fig. 1. Inverse shock thickness against Mach number (Fisco et al.

1988). Argon data were obtained by Alsmeyer (Alsmeyer 1976).
Let us consider in detail the evolution of a nonlinear wave in one-dimen

sional case. The equations of continuity and of momentum can be written in
Lagrangian variables in the following way
dx d2x 1 dp
= PolP, 2 0,
da dt po da
x(a,t), p p(a,t), p = p(a,t), po = Po(a). (1)
Here p is the pressure, p is the density, po is the density distribution at an
initial instant. Below we assume that po is constant. We differentiate the first
Eq. (1) with respect to t. Multiplying it by cp/ po, and then adding to the
second Eq. (1), and subtracting from it, we have
dr cp dr 3s cp ds
0, ^7- 0, = ,+ / * . = , - / * (2)
dt po da dt Po da J pc J pc
Here c is the velocity of sound. The quantities r and s are called the Riemann
invariants. Eqs. (2) have the solutions in the form of waves (the so-called simple
waves):
1) r = -Fi()> a ~~ cPt/Po, s = const (the wave propagating from left to
right); the quantity cp/po is constant along the line = const;
2) s F2(r]), rj = a -f cpt/po, r const (the wave propagating from right
to left); the quantity cp/po is constant along the line rj = const.
Structure and basic properties... 3
Let us investigate the first case. The derivative of r with respect to a is

equal to
dL=2_dp
da pc da'
Hence
(3)
^=''<4+^kt(!4<}'
wn 9^^:Û^ '='"
1
/p> w + l r= 1
where S is the entropy. It follows from (3)

1 fi
I dp Jc~d-aM d_p0d
Pcda -~
pc0alf)
^ ~~ t (d22~P~\~dp~~'
7& P\ dPl ' da'" Jdi-
da'-Jdx'-
(( 4
4 ))
1 -I
p6 - \OT2 J ~ da (a. fn
2p0c6
If we have a compression wave, it must be F'() < 0 (i.e. dp/da < 0) within
some neighborhood near the wave front. One can see from (4) that dp/dx
becomes infinite if F'{) < 0, (d2p/dr2)s > 0, at * = tc where
^C7 \0T J s)
Gas is called normal from the point of view of thermodynamics if the function
p = p(r, S) satisfies the following inequalities
()<.,
law
( g ) >., V^9y
' l^V
(&)>.
At t* > t<cc the continuous flow is impossible. It is assumed that a shock wave
arises
CfcllOV^ at
CU the
ULL\^ Iinstant
llOUtHW *l< = ttc-.
C
TThe
h e state5 of of the medium behind
the medium behind the
the shock
shock wave
wave is
isdescribed
described by bythe
by the Ranki-
Ranki-
ne-Hugoniot equations.
ne-Hugoniot equations. They involve the the laws of
of mass, m o m e n t u m and energy
conservation, and and have the following form (in the reference frame bound u p
with
with the shork^l
shock)
tlOCK)
PlVln
Pl^ln =
= P2V2n,
/?2^2n,
Pi+ />!? = P2 + P2vln,
+< l 2?L
h "In _ "2n
hi + ^2- == hft/+ +
C.
5i
Si ^
< CL
5522. (5)
Here p is
Here p is the
ine density, v is
density, v is the flow velocity,
ine now velocity, p
p is
is the
me ppressure, h h(S,p)
is the enthalpy. Subscripts 1 and 2 refer to the states ahea of and behind the
is the enthalpy. Subscripts 1 and 2 refer t o e
the states ahead the
shock wave, respectively. Subscript n denotes the component normal to the

shock wave. For media with normal thermodynamical properties, only shock
waves that lead to compression are possible. The velocity of the shock wave is
supersonic relative to the medium ahead of the shock front and subsonic relative
to the medium behind it.
Eliminating the quantities v\, v2 from the third Eq. (5) with the aid of the
first two equations, we get
h{r2jp2) - A(ri,pi) - - ( p 2 ~ P i ) ( n + r 2 ) = 0. (6)
The function
#(r,p;n,pi) = h{r,p)-h(T1,p1) - ^(p-Pi^r + n)

is called the Hugoniot function, the equation H(r,p; 7i,pi) = 0 defines the
Hugoniot adiabatic. It gives all the possible states behind the shock wave that
propagates in a gas whose unperturbed parameters are p = pi, p = p\.
As stated above, only compression shock waves are possible for the normal
gas. In particular, it follows from Eq. (6) that for weak shock waves we have
AS
(Ap)3/52r\
= S>~Si = \ ^ , AP = P2-P1.
Here T is the temperature. Thus if AS > 0 then it must be Ap > 0 for

( f ^ r ) > 0. Expansion shocks are to exist if (d2p/dr2)s < 0. Apparently it
may take place for some substances near their critical point.
An inequality takes place along the Hugoniot adiabatic, namely ^~ > 0
(p z/z px). We shall prove it. We use the following fact valid for normal gas. If
we draw a straight line in the plane r, p (see Fig. 2) then there is one and only
one point where dS/dp 0 for the case of the negative slope of that line (i.e.
for dp/dr < 0). The entropy has its maximum at that point. Differentiating
the Hugoniot function, we have
dH = TdS+ i ( r - n)dp- (p-Pl)dr. (7)
We draw a line p pi = k(r n ) , k = const < 0. Eq. (7) takes the form
dH = TdS (8)
along the line. Let dS/dp = 0,p = p 2 ^ pi along the Hugoniot be adia
batic. The straight line is tangent to the Hugoniot curve at the point p = p 2 .
Structure and basic properties... P2
Fig. 2.
Consequently dS/dp = 0,p = p2 along the straight line, too. The function H
is equal to zero at the points (ri,pi), (r 2 ,p2)- Therefore there is a point p = p3
such that pi < p3 < p2, dH(p3) = 0. It follows from (8) that dS(p3) = 0 along
the straight line. So we have two points along the straight line where dS = 0.
This fact contradicts the aforementioned property of the normal gas. Thus
dS/dp > 0 everywhere along the Hugoniot adiabatic.
Now we prove that the velocity of a shock wave is supersonic relative to
the gas ahead of it and subsonic relative to the gas behind it. The equation of
state can be rewritten in the form p p(r, S). The derivative dp/dr along the
straight line p pi k(r ri), k < 0 is
dp dp dp 35
k<0.
~aW dr
The straight line intersects the Hugoniot curve at the point P2, T%. AS mentioned
above, the entropy has its maximum along the straight line. Therefore we get
ds_( r i , p i ) < 0 , ds (r2,p2) >0.

Or
6 Pmnaaat.inn
Propagation and
and rpfiprtion
reflection of
of shock
shock wave*
waves
Thus
(),<*>().<>-
()
\^Z K 1,P1)^K^ I I to,*)-
(n,Pi)>k>()
(&),<*>(), T
<*>
\r ,P2 2
Or
lUaj7s J( r, i( ,rPi 'l )P>l ) >^^- ^n: >>

Pi-Pi ^ fdP\:(r2 P2) i \ (9)
l^ J<f(T2
U^Js ' P2)-' (9)
(9)
lj
The derivative
ive (dp/dr)s is
( ^ ) = - p V . (10)
1UJ
\ar JS
The quantity (v>.

(p2 -pi)/(r
Pi )/(Vo
2 - n)
T\) is
Pz Pi _ v
22 _ 2 V2 I/ I%1 -i) )
=~Pl
Pli U-i =~P2
P n V2-
n.
' Z ' I
r 2 ri
Substit
îtutingg Eqs. (10)
10) aand (11) into Eq. (9), we have
Substituting Eqs. (10) and (11) into Eq. (9), we have
2 ^^ 2
J2 .,2 ^^ 2
^2 < C 2, V
l > C
l-
Or
Vl >
Vi > Ci, t>
V22 < c 22 .
< C
The following topics connected with shock waves are of current interest:
their reflection, refraction, propagation in a relaxing gas, in turbulent flow etc.
(Griffith 1981; Henderson 1995). The relaxation behind shock waves was taken
into account for the first time apparently by Zeldovich (Zeldovich 1946). Later
on this problem was investigated in detail (see for example Stupochenko et al.
1967). The propagation of waves in a relaxing gas has some distinctive features.
Denote as r the relaxation time for small perturbations of thermodynamic equi-
llibrium.
iKrnim If +the
If n o rrelaxation time
^lavQiinn + imo Tr is
I C much
m n r l i greater
f f r o a f o r tthan the rcharacteristic
l n o n tVick time
liai'oôriotip + i m / a for
frw
change of flow properties during the wave motion then the wave propagates at
frozen velocity of sound cô (high-frequency velocity of sound). If the relaxa-
tion time is much less than the characteristic time for change of flow properties
then the wave propagates at equilibrium velocity of sound CQ (low-frequency
velocity of sound). Weak shock waves propagate through a relaxing gas in the
following way. The front of a weak shock wave propagates at a velocity close
to Coo, the strength of the wave decaying exponentially. Later on the jump
disappears, and a disturbance with a smooth front propagates through a gas,
its
its velocity
velocity being
being equal
equal to
to Co.
Co.
If
If the
the velocity G of
velocity G of aa shock
shock wave
wave is
is within
within the
the range cô
range Coo
cô >
> G
G > CQ,
> Co,
CQ, then
Co, then
the wave
t.hp> wav<= is
i s non-stationary,
n n n - s t . a t . i n n a T v and
a.nH the
t h p sharp
sVia.rr* front
f r o n t , disappears
the wave is non-stationary, and the sharp front disappears (Stupochenko et al. r l i s a n n p a r s (Stupochenko
(S>t,nr>nrVipnkn et
pfc al.
al
Structure and basic properties,.. 7
1957). Such a wave is fully dispersed. Weak shock waves in carbon dioxide
become fully or partially dispersed due to vibrational relaxation. Usually shock
structure is determined by two processes: by nonlinear effects that steepen the
front and by dissipation that tends to smooth the front. Vibrational nonequi-
librium has the principal influence on the structure of a dispersed shock wave.
Fig. 3 shows the reflection of a fully dispersed shock wave from a wedge (Honma
et al. 1989). The flow pattern is not self-similar, in contrast with usual case.
Fig. 3. Reflection of fully dispersed wave, 0 = 20, M = 1.037

(Honma et al. 1989).
2. I n t e r a c t i o n of shock waves
2.L Head-on interaction of shock waves
The interaction of shock waves is reduced to the problem of break-up of

an arbitrary discontinuity (Riemann problem). This problem was solved by
Kotchine (Kotchine 1926) for a perfect gas (7 = const). The problem is treated
by Rozhdestvensky et al. (Rozhdestvensky and Yanenko 1969). The notion of
an arbitrary discontinuity is introduced as follows. Let there be a plane which
divides a space filled with gas into two parts. The gas properties are constant
throughout each part of gas, but different in each part. If the values of gas
properties ahead of and behind the plane are arbitrary then the discontinuity is
arbitrary. An arbitrary discontinuity is generally unstable and splits into two
disturbances that propagate in opposite directions. The disturbances are either

two shock waves or a shock wave and a rarefaction wave, or two rarefaction
waves. The case of two shock waves that propagate in the same direction is
impossible. In fact, there is no characteristic length in the problem, therefore
the solution must be self-similar, i.e. it depends only on the ratio xjt. Disturb
ances must propagate from the same point on the plane x,t. The velocity of
propagation must be constant. Two shock waves cannot propagate from the
same point in the same direction as the velocity of the first wave is less than that
of sound behind its front, the velocity of the second wave being greater than
that of sound ahead of it. The encounter of waves contradicts the condition of
self-similarity.
In a similar manner, a shock wave and a rarefaction wave that propagate
in the same direction cannot arise as well as two rarefaction waves of the same
family.
We assume that p p i , v\ = 0, v^ ^ 0. Here subscripts 1 and 2 refer to
the gas on the right and left from the discontinuity, respectively. If a planar
shock wave propagates in the direction of positive values of x then the gas
velocity behind its front is equal to
v = c1^-7=Jk===1 p>Pl. (12)

A /(7+l)-+7-l
V PI
If a simple wave propagates in the direction of positive values of x then the gas
velocity behind its front is equal to
"=^ T i h r ~1?' P<PI- (13)

Let us consider a plane p, v, mark the point p p\ on the axis of abscissa
(Fig. 4) and draw the curves of Eq. (12) and Eq. (13). Then we mark the point
P P2 on the axis of abscissa and draw the straight line which is parallel to
the axis of ordinates.
The line intersects the curve AB at the point whose ordinate is
Va = C i i / -
7
\M
// , 1X P2
Pi
, -
We fix the value pi and change the value of velocity V2 in the range oo < V2 <
+00.
Structure and baste properties... 9
Fig. 4.
The curve AB gives all the possible values of gas properties behind the
wave (i.e. behind the front of a shock wave or a rarefaction wave) that propa-
gates from left to right, the state 1 being taken as an unperturbed one. Let
us
us consider
consider all the possible
all the possible values
values ofof gas
gas properties
properties behind
behind the
the wave that pro-
wave that pro-
pagates
pagates from right to left, the state 2 being taken as an unperturbed one. We
from right to left, the state 2 being taken as an unperturbed one. We
must
must draw
draw the
the curves
curves similar
similar to
to those
those that
that satisfy
satisfy Eqs.
Eqs. (12)
(12) and
and (13).
(13). These
These
curves
curves pass
pass through
through the
the point
point (p2,
(p2, ^2)-
^2)- The
The point
point ofof intersection
intersection gives
gives the
the solu-
solu-
tion
tion to the problem of the break-up of an arbitrary discontinuity. In fact, aa
to the problem of the break-up of an arbitrary discontinuity. In fact,
contact discontinuity arises behind two waves that propagate in opposite dir-
ections. The pressure and normal component of velocity must be the same on
both sides of the contact discontinuity. Our solution satisfies that condition.
If 2 > vaa then two shock waves arise that propagate in opposite directions.
In fact, pNN > p2, PN pN > Pi- If V2 = va then there is no break-up, and the
disturbance propagates as a shock wave. Let v2 > be in the range
fpiY'yl
2c2 f\(pi\& A
Vb
Vf> << V2
V2 << VVa,a, Vb=
Vb= ~ << - - 11 >> . .
7 - 1 [\P2j J
In
In this
this case
case Pl < pN < P2, i-e. a shock wave moves from left to right and
Pl < pNll < p2, i-e. a shock wave moves from left to right and
aa rarefaction
rarefaction wave
wave moves
moves from
from right
right to
to left.
left. If
If v2
v2 =
= vvbb then
then nhe eiscontinuity
nhe eiscontinuity
propagates as a rarefaction wave, and no break-up takes place. If v2 < Vb then

two rarefaction waves arise, and they move in opposite directions.
These results are applied to the analysis of shock interaction.
a) The interaction of shock waves that move towards one another. Let p2
be the pressure behind the shock wave that moves from left to right and p%
be the pressure behind the shock wave moving in the opposite direction. We
assume that p2 > p%. Two shock waves arise after the waves have encountered.
Consequently, we must prove that
^ * > Jl . %~l v2 >0,v3< 0. (14)
Eq. (14) is evident if p 2 = Ps- Let us prove it if p2 > p3. It follows from Eq. (5)
_ 2 ( M | - 1) _ 2 ( M | - 1) n _ 27M| - 7 + 1
V2 C1 V3 Cl
~ (7+l)M2 ' ~ (7+l)M3 ' p3"27M32-7+l' l j
The velocity of sound behind the shock wave is as follows
C3 = C l = C 1
\/ff ( 7 ^ ' - 3 = (M3), q3 = q(M3). (16)
Taking into account Eqs. (15) and (16), we get instead of Eq. (14)
Ml-\ Mj-l >2/m_ Ml - Ml
l ;
M2 M3 M3 ^ / ( 7 - 1 ) M | + ( 7 + 1 ) M | - ( 7 - 1)'
Taking the second power of Eq. (17), we obtain
(Ml - 1)(M| - 1){2M| + 2( 7 - 1)M 2 M 3 - (7 - 1)} > 0. (18)
As one can see, Eq. (18) is always valid if M 2 > M 3 > 1. Thus the statement
is proved.
b) Confluence of two shock waves that propagate in the same direction.
If two shock waves move in the same direction they catch up with one
another in some period of time. In fact, the first shock moves at a subsonic
velocity relative to the gas behind it and the subsequent shock wave moves at a
supersonic velocity relative to the same gas. Thus a confluence of waves takes
place at a definite instant. An arbitrary discontinuity arises as a result. The
solution to the problem depends on the sign of the quantity S
P3
x 2 M?-l , 2 M?2-l [2 ^" _ 1
(7+l)- + 7"l
Pi
Pl<P2<P3- (19)
Subscripts 2 and 3 refer to the state behind the first shock wave and the second
one, respectively.
If S > 0 then two shock waves arise that move in opposite directions. If
S < 0 then a shock wave appears that moves from left to right, and, in addition,
a rarefaction wave that moves from right to left. If 8 0 then a disturbance
propagates as a shock wave. We introduce a new quantity
'(7 + l ) g + 7 " l
M = y ^ . (20)
By making use of Eq. (20), Eq. (19) takes the form
6
= -J^P^W ~ MjMiMl^ + l)M2 + (7 - l)Ml - (7 - 1)}
X { 2 M 2 - 2 ( 7 - 1)MM1 - (7 - 1)} ( M 2 - 1 ) ( M 2 - 1).
As M > Mi, the sign of the quantity S depends only on the sign of the following
quantity
A(M) = 2 M 2 - 2(7 - l)MMi - (7 - 1). (21)
If A(M) > 0 then a rarefaction wave moves from right to left. If A(M) < 0
then so does a shock wave. A shock wave moves from left to right in any case.
The value M2 can be expressed as a function of M. The condition M% > 1
involves the inequality M > Mi.
T h e polynomial on the right side of Eq. (21) has two roots, one of them is
positive, the other being negative. We denote the positive root as M * .
T h e following inequalities are valid:
M* > Mi if Mi < M(7) = A/ 2 (2-7)'
M* < M i if M i > M ( 7 ) .
If 7 > 5/3 then M ( 7 ) > 1. Let 7 < 5 / 3 . Then M ( 7 ) < 1, M i > M ( 7 ) ,

M i > M * , A(M) > 0. Thus a rarefaction wave moves from right to left if
7 < 5/3.
Let 2 > 7 > 5 / 3 . In this case M ( 7 ) > 1. We consider two cases: M i <
M ( 7 ) and M i > M(j).
(a) If M i < M ( 7 ) then M * > Mx. Let M * > M > Mx. A shock wave
moves from right to left in this case. The above-mentioned disturbance is a
rarefaction wave if M > M* > Mi.
(b) If M i > M ( 7 ) then M* > Mi. The following condition is valid:

M > M*. A rarefaction wave moves from right to left. If
M = \{Mx(i - 1) + y/fr - 1)M2 + 2 ( 7 - 1)}, 7>5/3
then no disturbance moves from right to left.

If 7 > 2 then M * > M\. The flow pattern is the same as in the case (a).
c) Refraction of a shock wave at an interface.
Let a shock wave fall on a contact discontinuity that separates two uniform
regions of a gas at rest, the velocity of sound being different in two regions. A
contact discontinuity appears as a result of interaction of the shock wave. In
experiments a thin film that separates two different gases is generally used. The
thickness of the film is chosen in such a manner that its influence is negligible.
The film is destroyed after the passage of the shock wave.
As the shock wave arrives at the interface then an arbitrary discontinuity
appears. A shock wave propagates forward in all cases. The reflected wave is
either a shock or a rarefaction wave. We assume that the adiabatic exponent has
the same value on both sides of the contact surface, for the sake of simplicity.
Let c\ > C2- In this case the velocity of gas in region 1 is greater than that
one in region 2 behind the shock wave that corresponds to the prescribed
value of pressure ratio. Consequently, a shock wave reflects from the contact
discontinuity. If ci < c2 then the flow velocity in region 1 is less than that in
region 2 (for the prescribed value of pressure ratio). The reflected disturbance
is a centered rarefaction wave. In other words, if the shock wave comes from a
heavy gas to a light one then a rarefaction wave reflects.
These results have a clear physical meaning. The contact surface can be
treated as a piston that pulls out of region 1. If c\ < c2 then the velocity of the
piston is greater than the velocity of the flow in region 1 before the interaction.
A reflected rarefaction wave arises. If c\ > c2 then the velocity of the piston is
less than that of the flow in region 1, and a reflected shock wave appears.
Now we proceed to the case 71 ^ 7 2 - The flow pattern depends on the
mutual position of the following curves
2
c Pi
v = fi(p) = i
7l
7 ( 7 i + l)pT + 7 i - l '
v = f2{p) = c2
T fc-l
72
\Z(72+1)^+72_1
If hip) > hip) then a shock wave reflects; if / i ( p ) < hip) then a rarefac
tion wave reflects. At hip) hip) there is no reflected disturbance.
Let us consider the ratio
/ i ( p ) V _ 7 2 f C l \ 2 (72 + l)+72-l
c
hip)) 7i V 2 / (7i + l ) + 7 i - l
The quantity
P , x (72 + 1)^ + 7 2 - 1 ,
F = z
W 1TTT1 7' = PM
(7i + l)z + 7i - 1
is a monotonously increasing (for 71 > 72) or decreasing (for 71 < 72) function
of z.
The following cases can take place.
W % > 72-' I > ^ 7 2 ( 7 2 + 1)- T h e i n e < l u a l i t y / i ( P ) > /(P) is valid for
all values of p > pi. A shock wave reflects.
(b) % < 7 ? . % < ^ j ^ + l j - T h e inequality h{p) < f2(p) is valid for

all values of p > p\. The reflected disturbance is a rarefaction wave.
(c) % > % . < y ^ + l j - (7i < 72, ex < c 2 ). If w < p*, a shock
wave reflects. Otherwise, a rarefaction wave reflects. The value p* is as follows
P* = Pi{71 - 1 ~ (ci/c 2 ) 2 72(72 - l ) / 7 i } / { ( c 2 / c i ) 2 7 2 ( 7 2 + l ) / 7 i - 7i ~ 1}.
If p2 = p* then there is no reflected disturbance.

These results enable us to solve some problems connected with the break-up
of an arbitrary discontinuity (one-dimensional case).
a) T h e operation of a shock tube. The shock tube is used for obtaining and
studying shock waves in the laboratory and for studying high-temperature kin
etics. The very rapid heating to high temperatures, the wide temperature and
pressure ranges, the diffusion-free reaction conditions are the main advantages
for investigating rate coefficients at high temperature.
A shock tube is a cylindrical tube which is divided by a diaphragm into
two parts: a low-pressure section and a high-pressure one. The diaphragm
bursts at some instant, and the driving gas flows into the low-pressure section.
A shock wave appears as a result. We assume the bursting of the diaphragm to
be instantaneous and the flow to be one-dimensional. So we have a break-up of
an arbitrary discontinuity. The gas is at rest at the initial instant. So a shock
wave propagates in a low-pressure section and a rarefaction wave moves in the
high-pressure section. Denote as p\ and p the values of the pressure in the
driver section and in the driven one, respectively, as p2 and p3 the corresponding
values behind the shock wave and rarefaction wave. We use the conditions on
the contact surface that separates the cold gas from that one heated by the
shock wave, namely
Pi = P 3 , ^2 = ^3-
Or
2 C 1 (M'-1)_ 2c4 J^fpA2^, (22)
(71 + 1 ) M 74-1 I VP4,
We can write
2
El - ElEL - 7 i ^ 2 - 71 + l p i (23)
P4 Pi P4 7i + l pA'
By substituting Eq. (23) into Eq. (22), we have
771 +
4
" 11 Ccl4 (M M
) = 1 - ^\2 7 i ^7i
1 2 +l
- 7 i + ^ /^ r VF4
(Pi^~^r
Or
2T4
P4 7i + l f 74 1 Cl / 1\1 ^4-1
2 1 M
pi ~ 27iM - 71 +T I " 71 + 1^1 V ~ M J J ' ^
Eq. (24) enables us t o determine the Mach number of the shock wave as a
function of the pressure ratio over the diaphragm. The m a x i m u m value of the
Mach number (at p^/pi > 00) is equal t o
M m a x = i21il| 1+ f 1 + 4 ^ - l c ^c 2 X l / 2
2 74 - 1 Ci I I \7l + 1 4 / I I
b) The interaction of the shock waves of the same family. If 1 < 7 < 5 / 3
then a shock wave and a rarefaction wave arise as a result of the interaction.
A contact discontinuity occurs, too. Let us introduce the following notations.
Subscript 0 refers t o the undisturbed state, subscript 1 - t o the state behind
the first wave, subscript 2 - t o the state behind the second wave, subscript 3 -
to the state behind the rarefaction wave, subscript 4 - to the state behind the
shock wave that appears after the interaction.
We have
l
P4=P3, V4=V3, Vl =* / - - ^ ~&
7
V^V(7-l)6+7 + l'
Cl - - Q L . /(7 + l K i + 7 - l ^ - 0
h
V^V(7-lKi+7 +l' - P i -
inally we get
/(7-i)6i+7 + l 6-66 -6)

V(7 + i)6i + 7 - i v f T - 1)66 + (7 +1)6 (7 +1)6 + 7 - 1
Y-l
1 1-6 , A/27 / ( 7 + l ) 6 + 7 ^j(i-6 2y \
' ( 7 - 1 ) 6 + 7 + 1 'T^TY ( 7 - l ) ^ + 7 \ )
6 = Pl/P2, 6=P3/P2- (25)
The quantities i, 2 are known. Thus we have an equation with one unknown
quantity, 3.
c) The interaction of two shock waves of opposite families. If two shock
waves propagating in opposite directions catch up with one another, two new
shocks arise after the interaction. A contact discontinuity separates the flow
between them. The values of the pressure are equal on both sides of the contact
discontinuity and so do the values of the velocity. Let subscript 0 refer to the
undisturbed gas, subscripts 1 and 2 - to the flows behind the first and second
shock waves before the interaction, subscripts 3 and 4 - to the shocks after the
interaction. We obtain the following equation
'(7-1)6+7 +
(7-1)6+7 +
\ {(1-6)^^-^(6-66)
4^j^} + q-^-(i-6)
(7 + 1)6 + 7 - 1 - o
(7-1)6 +7 + 1 " '
t - 0 p _ Po xr0-2
a
~~ Pi ' ^ 2 ~ P2 ' ^3 P3 '
The value P4 can be determined, if we know 3. Namely, p p i 6 / ( 6 6 ) -
2.2. Oblique interaction of shock waves
a) Regular interaction of two plane shock waves of opposite families. Let

two plane shocks propagate through a gas. The angle between shock fronts
is equal to (j) and the flow properties behind the shocks are uniform (Fig. 5).
The undisturbed flow is known and so are the velocities of the shocks. The
flow downstream the point of intersection is to be determined. The problem
is a generalization of the reflection of a shock wave from a rigid wall. The
reference frame is placed at the point of intersection of the shock fronts. The
flow behind two shocks may be considered as that behind two wedges. The
planes of symmetry of the wedges are parallel to the velocity of the undisturbed
flow ahead of the shock waves.
Fig. 5. Regular interaction of shock waves of opposite families
The values of the pressure must be the same on both sides of the contact
discontinuity, and so do the directions of the flow velocity. Consequently, we
can write
{ Si + 83 = 82 + $4,
q' i 2jMfi (7 1), M'i = Mi sinwf (i is not to be summed) ,
8{ = arctan < [ ( -*-n ** 1 1 tan LJ;
Mj = M 2 , /, = 2 + (7 - l)M-2. (26)
The numerical solution to the problem was given by Ter-Minassiants (Ter-
Minassiants 1962). It is interesting to note that if the angle between the shocks
is close to the limiting angle of the regular interaction, the pressure behind the
refracted waves exceeds that one at the head-on collision of the waves.
b) Regular interaction of shock waves of the same family. The problem of
the interaction of shock waves of the same family was analyzed by Roslyakov
(Roslyakov 1965). T h e flow patterns are shown in Figs. 6 a and 6. The angle
of flow deflection behind the shock wave is defined by Eq. 26. In the case of
the rarefaction wave (Fig. 6, a) we have
S3 = a r c t a n ( M 2 - l ) " 1 / 2 + h arctan((M 3 2 - l)1/2/h)

- a r c t a n ( M | - l ) " 1 / 2 - h arctan((M 2 2 - l)1/2/h),
M3=^{^(/2-l)}, />=((7 + l)/(7-l))1/2,

Pi
& - pt , i = l ; 2; 3; U=Po/P4-
Fig. 6. Regular interaction of shock waves of the same family.
By using the boundary condition across the contact discontinuity, we have
6 6 ^ 3 = 4,
S1+6263 = 64. (27)
The upper sign in Eq. (27) corresponds to the reflected rarefaction wave, the
lower sign corresponds to the reflected shock wave. By eliminating 3 from
Eq. (27), we get an equation which contains 4
81{Z1,M) + S2(Z2,M1(Z1,M))63(J^
On having determined the unknown quantity 4, we find 3 by using Eq. (27)

and then we solve the whole problem concerning the interaction of shocks.
The results of calculations are as follows (Roslyakov 1965). There appears
a stronger shock at the point of intersection of shocks, a contact discontinuity
and a reflected wave which m a y either be a rarefaction wave or a shock wave.
The flow pattern depends on the Mach number M . If M < 1.245, 7 = 1.4 then
the reflected wave is a rarefaction one. At M > 1.245, 7 = 1.4 the reflected
wave m a y either be a rarefaction wave or a shock wave. At high Mach numbers
(M > 3, 7 = 1.4), the reflected wave is a rarefaction wave as a general rule.
At M > 1.305, 7 = 1.4 there is a range of quantities 1, 2 where regular
interaction does not occur.
c) Refraction of a plane shock wave at an interface. Let there be a plane
interface between two different gases. A plane incident shock wave meets the
interface at an angle of incidence a,- measured with respect to the interface.
The shock wave begins to pass from the first gas into the second one where it
becomes the transmitted shock. We consider a regular refraction (Fig. 7). In
this case all of the waves move at the same velocity along the interface, and we
can write the fundamental law of refraction (Henderson et al. 1991)
mi = mi = itfri
sin a?- sin at sin a2
With a continuous increase in the parameter a2- the law m a y be violated, the
regular wave system may break u p . In this case the transmitted shock travels
ahead of the incident and reflected waves, and an irregular refraction with
precursor waves appears, so that
Ut Ui = U2
sin at sin a,- sin a2
Let us introduce wave impedance
z _ Pi -Po
(ui UQ) COS (3i '
where /?, is the wave angle measured with respect to the disturbed gas interface.
The transmitted and reflected wave inpedances are defined in a similar way.
Fig. 7. Refraction of a plane shock wave at an interface, i - incident

wave; r - reflected wave; t - transmitted wave; MW - Mach wave.
The pressure reflection and transmission coefficients are as follows (Henderson

1988)
V2 -Pi _ Z2{Zt - Zj)

R =
PI-PO " Zi{z2-zty
Pt-po _ Zt(Zi - Z2)
Pl-po Zi{Zt-Z2)'
The refraction law m a y also be written as
| Ui | sin ai _ pt Z\ cos /%
(28)
\Ut\ sinat po Zt cos j3t'
It follows from Eq. (28)
cos at (1 n~2 sin 2 cti)1'2.
The quantity cos at becomes imaginary if a 4 > ac,
sm ac n
Ut
It is obvious that ac only exists for slow-fast refraction, n < 1. If a = ac then

at = 7r/2. In this case the gas interface is not deflected.
In order to solve a problem of regular refraction, we must take into account
the boundary conditions along the interface behind the incident and refracted
waves:
50 + &i =8t, p2 =Pt-
Each regular or irregular system of waves occurs for definite ranges of values of
the parameters (7*, 7*, //,, /i*, &, ctj), /i being molecular weight. In particular,
the range of & versus a,- was defined for the CO2/CH4 interface (Abd-El-Fattah
and Henderson 1978).
3. Shock tube as an apparatus for obtaining shock waves in the

laboratory
A shock tube is a conventional facility for studying shock waves. Shock tube
was invented by Paul Vieille. In 1899 he wrote the famous paper on discon
tinuities produced by sudden expansion of compressed gas (Vieille 1899). The
simplest shock tube consists of two sections: a driver (high-pressure) section
and driven (low-pressure) section filled with test gas. The sections are separ
ated by a diaphragm. The driver gas flows into the low-pressure section after
the burst of the diaphragm and the plane shock wave propagates through the
test gas. A contact discontinuity separates the driven gas and the driver one.
There are double-diaphragm shock tubes with two driver sections (Tsukahara
et al. 1996), diaphragmless shock tubes with a fast action bellows valve, deton
ation driven shock tubes in which hydrogen-oxygen mixture is used (H-R. Yu
et al. 1995). Shock tubes are convenient for study of gas kinetics because the
flow is nearly one-dimensional with practically instantaneous heating of the test
gas. Other investigations that use shock tubes are connected with propagation
and reflection of shock waves.
A simple one-dimensional ideal theory of the shock tube assumes the burst
of the diaphragm to be instantaneous. Thus the problem is reduced to the
break-up of an arbitrary discontinuity. The shock wave is considered to be plane
and its velocity constant. The rarefaction wave is assigned to be a centered
one. Dissipation and mixing in the region of contact discontinuity are neglected.
The shock Mach number M depends on the pressure ratio across the diaphragm
(see Eq. (24)).
Experiments show that the aforecited formula gives correct values of ve
locity for weak shock waves (M < 1.7). However, the calculated values are
higher than the measured ones at M > 1.7 by approximately 10%, and they lie
below measured values for stronger waves ( M > 5). These discrepancies are
caused by the fact that the d i a p h r a g m has finite opening time. When the dia
p h r a g m opens, a complex three-dimensional flow is developed. This flow was
studied experimentally by many authors (Glass et al. 1953; Henshall 1957).
After the burst of the diaphragm, a jet of the driver gas appears and compres
sion waves arise in the driven gas. They catch u p with one another and form
a shock wave whose strength increases. There is a shock-formation distance
where the velocity of the shock wave reaches its m a x i m u m value. The formation
distance increases with the increase of the pressure ratio across the d i a p h r a g m
and depends on its opening time. At first the shock front is curvilinear, then it
becomes plane due to multiple reflections from the walls of the shock tube.
There are theoretical papers that treat the formation of a shock wave in a
shock tube. White (1958) assumed that at first a compression wave propagates
through a driven gas. Then the compression wave becomes a shock wave at
some distance from the d i a p h r a g m . T h e calculated values of shock velocity
coincide with the measured ones at M < 5.
Ikui (Ikui 1969) proposed a one-dimensional multigraded model of shock
formation which is a modification of White's model. In accordance with this
model, compression waves coalesce with the shock wave. A break-up of an
arbitrary discontinuity takes place each time. The number of interactions is
infinitely high. The computations were fulfilled u p to the value of the pressure
ratio *p equal to 10 7 . The results obtained by Ikui coincide with White's data
and that ones calculated by Eq. (24) at the pressure ratio ^ < 10 3 .
Kireev (Kireev 1962) and Duntsova (Duntsova et al. 1969) took into ac
count the process of diaphragm opening. They assumed the flow to be quasi-
stationary near the diaphragm. Two shock waves separated by a contact discon
tinuity arise in accordance with this model. One of the shock waves propagates
through a driven gas while the other through a driver one. The latter degen
erates into a sonic wave at a later time. The values of the shock velocity were
calculated at various points along the shock tube. The velocity of the gas and
its pressure are assumed to be constant between the shock wave and contact
discontinuity.
The flow is assumed to be one-dimensional in all of these papers. Petrie
et al. (1995) considered axisymmetric flow in the shock tube. The diaphragm
was modelled as an opening iris. The rate of the opening was such that the flow
area at the diaphragm station was proportional to time until fully open. The
contact discontinuity initially has a convex shape but at a later time it becomes
concave. The final velocity of the shock wave is higher than that estimated by
simple one-dimensional theory.

Experimental studies devoted to the operation of shock tubes can be divided
into three groups. The first group includes investigations that are related to
shock velocity along the shock tube. As shown by numerous experiments, there
are three areas, namely, (1) the region along which the shock velocity increases;
(2) the region within which the shock velocity is constant; (3) the region of
deceleration along which the shock velocity decreases. The rate of velocity
acceleration and the length of each region depend on the nature of the driver
gas, the pressure ratio across the diaphragm, the initial pressure in the driven
section and so on.
The second group contains investigations devoted to the process of the
diaphragm opening and its effect on the motion of the shock wave. The full
opening time to is equal to 10 1000 /is. Its value depends on the size of the
diaphragm, its material and initial pressure of the driver gas.
Spence (Spence et al. 1964) obtained the following formula for the full
opening time of a square diaphragm
Here p is the density of the diaphragm material, 6 is the thickness of the

diaphragm, d is the size of a side of the square, k is a proportionality constant.
The values of A? are found to be 0.91-0.93 (Rothkopf et al. 1974, 1976; Simpson
et al. 1967).
Kireev (Kireev 1962) obtained the following expression for the opening
time, by using the theory of elasticity
^'(^-"))'-is)'
Here <p is the angle of turn for the leaf of the diaphragm, J is the inertia
of the leaf about the axis of its turn, N^ is the twisting moment, Nc is the
resistant moment, Ni = N^ at (p = 0, i\T2 = N<p at <p 7r/2. If Nc = 0 and
7 = 1.4 then
<0 = 0
-95(^)1'
The values of to and the rate of diaphragm opening are in good agreement
with experiment. The flow area at the diaphragm station varies slowly at initial
instants and then reaches its maximum value very rapidly. The diaphragm
opening process influences the shock formation in the shock tube. The formation
distance is proportional to the product of the maximum velocity of the shock

by the opening time of the diaphragm.
The third group of experimental studies is devoted to the distribution of
flow parameters behind the shock wave. Considerable violation of the uniform
ity of the flow is observed within the distance of shock formation due to the
growth of shock velocity. The gas is influenced by longitudinal compression
waves as well as transverse shock waves arising as a result of the reflection of
the main shock from the walls of the shock tube. It is found that the density
increases in the direction from the shock wave to the contact discontinuity.
Faizullov (Faizullov 1962) measured the temperature distribution behind
the shock wave in the shock tube when the shock velocity is constant. It was
found that the temperature is practically constant. But there is a decrease
of temperature by 12% in the region close to the contact discontinuity (N2
as the test gas; p0 = 1.3kPa, M = 9). Dam et al. (1995 a, 1995 b) studied
perturbations superimposed to the pressure plateau following the incident shock
wave. The origin of perturbations is as follows. The Mach reflection appears
at initial instants after the burst of the diaphragm. A transverse shock wave
is created which moves towards the axis of the shock tube, the main shock
wave becoming plane in a short time. The transverse wave converges at the
centre of the tube, giving rise to a reflected wave which is a spherical wave
expanding towards the wall of the tube. A periodic process arises and this
configuration moves approximately at the gas velocity. There is a substantial
reduction of the perturbations if the velocity of sound of the heated gas is
greater than that of the expanded driver gas. A number of papers are devoted
to the distribution of flow parameters behind the shock wave when its velocity
decreases. In this region the variation of flow parameters is defined mainly by
the influence of the boundary layer. The shock and the contact discontinuity
travel at the same velocity because the amount of driven gas between them
remains the same. The mass flow across the shock is equal to the mass of gas
that flows into the boundary layer at the contact discontinuity. The formation
of the boundary layer behind the incident shock wave was investigated by many
authors (Demyanov 1957; Mirels 1957; Duff 1959). Their results agree well with
experimental data.
Below we consider the effect that the diaphragm opening process has on the
shock formation. It was investigated experimentally by Shtemenko (1967, 1968,
1972, 1974, 1982). Experiments were fulfilled in a shock tube of a rectangular
cross-section of 34 x 72 mm 2 area. Brass, aluminium and copper foil diaphragms
0.1 mm thick were used. The diaphragm was made to open in a definite manner
by weakening it by means of a special wire stamp. Two types of diaphragms
were used. The diaphragms of the first type opened in the shape of triangular
leaves (diaphragm 1). The diaphragms of the second type opened in the shape
of two rectangular folds (diaphragm 2). In the first case the flow had two planes
of symmetry. In the second case the flow was close to a two-dimensional one.
The shock Mach number was equal to 2.1-2.7. Air was chosen as a test gas.
The driver gas was a helium-air mixture. Shadowgraphs and streak-camera
records were taken. The velocity of waves was measured from streak-camera
records and with the aid of pressure transducers. Measurements were made at
various distances / from the diaphragm, 0 < / < 22), D = 46 m m , where D
is the reduced tube diameter, D ^p^, S\ being the area of the cross-section
of the tube and P being its perimeter. The opening time of the diaphragm
was determined from the motion of the leaf of d i a p h r a g m while bursting. This
motion was fixed at the streak-camera record.
Fig. 8 presents the ratio S/So against time, S being the flow area at the
d i a p h r a g m station and So is the area of fully opened diaphragm. Left curve
relates to the diaphragm , right one to the diaphragm 1.
Fig. 8. Ratio S/So against time, S is the flow area at the d i a p h r a g m

station, So is the area of fully opened diaphragm.
As one may suppose, the time opening rate influences the test flow. A
distribution was measured of the shock velocity along the shock tube at vari
ous time dependants of the flow area at the d i a p h r a g m station. The various
time dependencies were obtained by artificially slowing the movement of the
diaphragm leaves either at the initial stage (diaphragm la) or at the final
stage (diaphragm lb). Fig. 9 presents the shock velocity along the shock tube.
Curves 1-3 relate to the pressure ratio p^/pi 45 and the velocity of sound
c4 = 565 m/s. Curves 1^-6 relate to the pressure ratio pjp\ = 115 and the
velocity of sound C4 = 735 m/s. Curves 1, 4 correspond to the diaphragm 1,
curve 2 corresponds to the diaphragm lb, curves 3, 5, 6 correspond to the
diaphragm la. The opening time is equal to 420//s (curve 1), 680/is (curves 2
and 5), 750/is (curves 3 and 6), 540/zs (curve 4)- As one can see from Fig. 9,
the maximum value of shock velocity depends on the rate of diaphragm opening
at initial instants, the less the rate of opening the less is the maximum value of
shock velocity and the greater is the formation distance. This effect depends on
the shock strength. The decrease of the rate of diaphragm opening at the final
stage of the process has small influence on the maximum value of shock velo
city, only increasing the formation distance. Streak-camera records are shown
in Figs. 10, 11. Flow patterns are presented near diaphragm 1 and la, initial
conditions being the same.
Fig. 9. The distribution of shock velocity along the shock tube.

Fig. 10. Streak-camera record of the flow near the diaphragm,

diaphragm 1.
As one can see from streak-camera records, the rate of the flow area at
the diaphragm station at the initial stage of the process influences to a great
extent the flow. Namely, the velocity of disturbances decreases and the dis
tance between the successive disturbances increases as the rate of the flow area
decreases at the diaphragm station. The disturbances coalesce and form a
shock wave. If the rate of the flow area at the diaphragm station decreases
then the maximum velocity of the shock wave also decreases. The greater the
interval between two successive disturbances the greater is the shock formation
distance.
The flow of the driver gas was studied experimentally near the diaphragm.
Figs. 12 and 13 demonstrate streak-camera records of this flow. A jet appears
after the burst of the diaphragm (Fig. 12). Successive disturbances are seen
that arise inside the jet. They reflect from the walls of the shock tube. The
Structure cmd basic properties... 27
Fig. 11. Streak-camera record of the flow near the diaphragm,

diaphragm 2.
jet and the main shock ahead of it are presented in Fig. 13. An additional
bell-shaped shock wave appears due to the fact that the velocity of the jet is
supersonic. It propagates in the opposite direction as compared with the main
shock wave. Fig. 14 shows a streak-camera record of the flow. A trace is seen
of the second shock moving through the driver gas. At first its velocity grows
and then decreases in the laboratory frame. Afterwards the second shock stops
at a distance lm from the diaphragm, the value of lm being equal to
lm = kd(p4/Pl)i., k = 0.55 (He); 0.65 (N 2 ).
Here d is the reduced diameter for the area of fully opened diaphragm. The
value of lm is less than the corresponding value in the case of a stationary jet.
The second shock reflects from the walls of the shock tube (Fig. 15, dia
phragm 2). A complex wave configuration arises and several shocks appear as
a result. One of them coalesces with the second shock giving rise to two new
Fig. 12. Schlieren pictures of the low of the drier gas, a - dia
phragm 1, b - diaphragm 2; p\ = 105 Pa, time interal between the
frames is 8 jus.
shocks that propagate in opposite sides. The second shock appears anew after
its break-up due to the fact that the pressure ratio across the diaphragm area
exceeds its critical Yalue.
Fig. 16 shows the path 1(f) of the second shock against time. The greater
the pressure ratio .across the diaphragm the greater is the velocity of the second
shock. Its velocity increases .as the velocity of sound of the driver gas and the
rate of the diaphragm opening time increase. Experimental values of l(t) can
be approximated by the formula (air as a driver gas)
'-'()')
to being the opening time of the diaphragm.
We measured the Mach number ahead of the second shock wave (N2 as
a driver gas). For this purpose a slender cylindrical body was placed inside
the shock tube at a distance of 0.29cf and 0.54(1 from the diaphragm. Fig. 17
demonstrates the second shock and a bow shock past the slender body. We
determined the Mach number of the jet from the shape of the bow shock. The
Structure and basic properties.., 29
Fig. 13. The second shock wave near the diaphragm l,pi = 6.7 kPa,
the time interval between the frames is 8 j*s.
values of the Mach number of the flow against time are presented in Fig. 18.
Curves 1, 2, and 5 relate to the values of initial pressure equal to 35 kPa,
12kPa, and 7kPa 5 respectively; / = 0.29d; curve 4 relates to the pressure equal
t o 7 k P a ( f = 0.54cf).
The Mach number of the jet increases against time till the instant when its
boundary meets the walls of the shock tube. In the sequel the Mach number of
the jet is described by the following empirical formula
i.
\I=(lA + ZxlO-3?\(^Y (LY. / > 100/is. (29)
We measured the velocity of disturbances ahead of and behind the second

shock wave with the aid of streak-camera records. Then we calculated the sum
(112+^2) behind the second shock by using Eq. (29). We compared the measured
values of (V2 + C2) with the calculated ones. The data are given in Table 1.
The values of the pressure ratio across the diaphragm are also presented and
so are the positions that relate to measured values and calculated ones. The
calculated values of (2 + C2) agree well with the measured ones. Fig. 19 shows
the flow parameters inside the jet against time ahead of the second shock and
behind it. The pressure increases as the diaphragm opens. The time-derivative
~ increases by 6-8%. Compression waves arise as a result. They appear
behind the second shock. One can see them at shadowgraphs. If the pressure
ratio across the diaphragm is less than the critical value the second shock does
VI Propagation and reflection of shock waves
Fig. 14. Streak-camera record of the flow, the second shock wae
is seen, pi = 8.7 kPa.
not appear.
Table 2 gies alues of the velocity of disturbances (V), in successive se
quence as the diaphragm bursts, for arious initial conditions. Within the
dotted frames are gien the alues of the shock wae velocity U if one of the
disturbances is assumed to be the shock wave and also calculated alues of
the velocity of acoustic disturbances behind the shock wae (tf2 + 2)- As is
eident from Table 2, the velocity of the disturbances emerging into the driven
gas directly behind the presumed shock wae is in good agreement with the cal
culated velocity of acoustic disturbances behind the shock wave. Hence, some
of the disturbances are weak shock waves (M = 1.03-1.4) and the others are
acoustic waves propagating behind the shock wave. Analysis of the data shows
that after the diaphragm has burst, the strength and frequency with which the
shock waves appear increase as the bursting time and initial pressure in the
Fig. 15. The reflection of the second shock waYe from the walls of
the shock tube (diaphragm 2).
Table 1.
1 mm PA/PI (V2 + Co) calc (v2 + c2) exp
46 40 370 340 30 \
52 65 380 380 40
57 90 400 400 40
61 110 400 410 40
driYen section decrease and as velocity of sound in the driver section increases.
Note that the wave system adopted was constructed under the assumption
that the change in flow parameters due to the weak disturbances is sufficiently
small, and may be neglected. Within the limits of measurement error, this
condition was satisfied: the velocity of each disturbance did not change at a
distance of 0.5D-2D.
How the disturbances observed in the experiment could have arisen will
now be considered. As shown by analyzing shadowgraphs of the flow, a set of
weak disturbances exists ahead of the second shock wave. These are formed
when the jet of driver gas flows past the sharp edges of the leaves of the bursting
diaphragm. As is known, weak disturbances propagating counter to the shock
front are amplified after interaction with it. The intensity of the acoustic waves
that have passed it may be increased a few times. In the driven gas, they must
propagate at the local velocity of sound, as observed experimentally.
The appearance of shock waves may be represented as follows. As shown
by several authors (see e.g. Shtemenko 1972), directly behind the front of the
t, PS Propagation and reflection of shock waves
Fig. 16. The position of the second shock wave against time (dia
phragm 1); t0 = 440/is; 1 - p4/Pl = 230; 2 - 110; 3 - 40; ^ -
20.
second shock the values of all the flow parameters of the driver gas increase
a few times at the instant of diaphragm bursting; i.e., in the jet of driver
gas, there exists a region of large gradients of density, velocity and pressure,
increasing over time. At any instant, the density or pressure gradient may
become infinite, with the appearance of a shock wave. The large-gradient region
moves in the jet of driver gas. Thus, the problem is analogous to the problem
of the formation of a shock wave from compression waves of finite amplitude
when they propagate. The time for such a formation process to occur will now
be calculated in one-dimensional flow. Since the compression wave propagates
in a non-uniform driver gas, the estimate is performed using a relation between
change in density gradient in the compression wave j^{p2x) and the density
gradients ahead of (plx) and behind (p2x) the shock wave. This expression is
obtained from the compatibility conditions (Shugaev 1983)
l_d_ P2x 7+ 1 2 1-1 Plx , PlxPlx

c\ dt 2f)2 P2x~
Pi~ +
Pi A
3 /pix Pix \ i cit
cu v\x \ Ii da f gig
"2 \pi Pi ) V l c
ci ) d dt V Pi
Here clt is the time derivative of the velocity of sound; vlx is the velocity
gradient ahead of wave front.
Integration of this expression gives the following value for p2x/pi
Fig. 17. Flow past a slender cylindrical body at a distance of 0.29d

from the diaphragm 1, Pl = 3.3 kPa. The time interval between the
frames is 12/is.
^ =^ + }? \ (30)
Pl
Pl J i12+11 exp (j ( M i - - ^ _ s c u g , , ^ dt\ dt + ao
where
1
a0 = ' ' .
(P3*/Pl)t=0 ~ (Pl*/Pl)t=0
When all the gradients in front of the compression wave are zero, Eq. (30)
coincides with the formula proposed by Thomas (1957), which gives the value
of p2x in a compression wave propagating in a uniform gas.
The compression wave transforms into a shock wave at the instant when
p2x - oo, that is
/^-(/(^?-!?-W*)-
[^r^'-r-iir-^*
-^-^-P
i
dt dt
=-. .. . . (
( }
(P2,/Pl)t = 0-(P1*/Pl)t=0'
Thee time t will now be evaluated
raluated from this expression.
express To this end, the
dependence
ence of the flow parameters
ters of the gas on the time and distance is linearly
Fig. 18. The Mach number of the jet against time; a - diaphragm 1,
1-P! = 34kPa; 2- 12kPa; 5, ^ - 6 . 7 k P a ; 1, 2, 3- l/d = Q.29\ 4~
0.54; b - diaphragm %l,2-pi = 20 kPa; 5 - 6 . 7 kPa; 4 - 3.7 kPa;
Z/d = 0.29.
approximated:
d = fc(x)t + cio(ar), c,-t = k(x),

vi = a(s)t 4- vio(a), fft = a(^)>
vi = (t)x + A 0 (t), cix = (*)
Then, taking the obvious relations p\xjp\ = -vit/cj, and pix/pi =

w v n
V2t/c2 2t/cl i ^ account, Eq. (31) takes the form
~ (2t/cl)*=0-(vlt/Ci)t=o"
In the conditions of the given experiment, f depends very weakly on t;

assuming 0 =const, the integrand is written in dimensionless coordinates:
2T-1 a 1
400 t,, 2 F 2
(7+!)**
J?v^ e x p ( | t,UfSo ^ ) r f ( ^
J \to kt0
L
10
---.J
(V2t)t=0 ~ (Vlt)t=0
Fig. 19. Flow parameters of the jet (nitrogen) ahead of (a) and
behind (6) the second shock wave, 1 - p; 2 - p\ 3 v\ 4 ~ c; 5 -
dp/dt.
where to = d/cio, cio is the initial velocity of sound in the driven section.
The integrand is expanded in Taylor series, retaining only the first term.
Integration yields
2(kt0)
t\ (32)
2
(7 + l)c 10 ({V2t)t=0 ~ (Vlt)t=0)
In our experiments, kt0 70m/s 2 ; a/k 1; the mean value v2t 4

10 6 m/s 2 ; vu 10 6 m/s 2 , cio lies in the range 100-150 m/s. The value of the
time t obtained from Eq. (32) lies in the range 20-50 ps.
The time interval AT between the departure of one shock wave directly from
the front of the second shock and the arrival of the subsequent shock wave in the
driven gas from the driver gas was determined, using a linear approximation of
the shock-wave path in the driver gas. As shown by analyzing shadowgraphs of
the flow, on which waves moving both in the driven and in the driver gas are
seen, this approximation changes the time interval by no more than 10%.
It is obvious that AT is the maximum time during which shock waves may
be formed in the region of large density and pressure gradients between the
front of the second shock discontinuity and the contact surface, i.e., t < AT.
Table 3 shows the relation between the shock-wave velocity and the time
interval AT. AS is evident from Table 3, AT is always larger than the value
of t calculated from Eq. (24). Note that, in calculating t, the value vit ~ the
00
Table 2.
Initial conditions Disturbance velocity V
V20
c4 = 350 m/s
330 330330 360 370 360 370 360 350 370 360 370 3*50 390 390 390 400400 390 420420 410
po = 1.01 x 105 Pa
1 1
h = 470/zs
I U = 360 U = 390 j
|wae = 378j ac = 402
K20 V25 V30
C4 = 735 m/s
Po = 3.47 x 104 Pa
340 350 340 340 390 430 420 480 480 470 510 490 560 530 560 535 540 580 600 600 630 650 I
1 1 | I I
<i =500/xs
| U = 390 l | U = 470 | \U = 530 1 \U = 580 C/ = 650 | 3'
; Vae = 434 jj Vac = 5031 ! Vac = 555 { |Vac = 603]
V10 V15 ^20
as
c4 = 350 m/s
350 370400400 420425 470 470 480 500515 530 550 610
p 0 = 3.47 x 105 Pa 3*
1 1 1 1 1
ti = 425 ps
j U = 375 | U = 435 j \U = 480 j j u = 530 j (7 = 610 j
CO
jac = 407| |Uac = 4K > 1 ; \vac = 498] jVac = 059j o

Co
Table 2 (continued). *8
Initial conditions Disturbance velocity V

3
V20 ^25 V30
c4 = 350 m/s r~
360 370 380 400 425 430 410 470460480470 490 495 490 530 550
Po = 3.47 x 105 Pa
1 1 l l
<i=580^s
[/ = 370
Vac = 398
U = 415 | 17 = 460 |
Vac = 4321 I'vac = 485;
| 17 = 460
boc = 485
1
V10 V15 V20
c4 = 350 m/s
350 400 410 450 520 520 520 540 550 540 630
p 0 = 1.33 x 104 Pa
1 1 1 1 1
<I=420AS
U == 360 \U = 400 \U = 450 | / = 505 | 17 = 630
Vac z = 378 \Vac = 421 Vac = 476 ):
V10 V15 K20 7 25
c4 = 350 m/s
405 455 475 570 620 640 655 660 620
po = 8 x 103 Pa 1 1 I
ii = 390//s
U == 405 tf = 560 7 = 810
Vac : = 460 Vac == bi.9
Vac = V2+C2
The values of V, U, vac are given in m/s
GO
38 Propagation and reflection of shock wanes
U. m/s 390 415 460 530 435 480 530 610 630 810
AT. fis 60 120 80 90 120 120 110 100 170 140
acceleration of the driver gas directly behind the front of the second shock - was
obtained by graphical differentiation of the curve of V2{t). For each shock wave,
the value (v2t)t=o corresponds to the instant immediately after the departure
of the preceding shock wave from the front of the second shock wave. A linear
approximation of vi(t) was used to determine t'n.
Fig. 20. Streak-camera record of the flow at a distance of 7D from

the diaphragm.
Thus, it may be concluded that the hypothesis regarding the mechanism of

the appearance of shock waves in the region of large unsteady pressure gradients
behind the front of the second shock in the jet of driver gas is correct. Shock
waves arise there analogously to the shock wave from compression waves of
finite amplitude.
The discreteness of the process by which shock waves appear in the shock
tube may be explained as follows. After a shock wave is formed, a rarefaction
wave propagates in the opposite direction, thus reducing the pressure gradient
in the flow behind the shock wave. It takes some time to form a new compression
wave in the flow.
Thus the process of shock formation in a shock tube is as follows. A non-
stationary supersonic jet of driver gas flows into a driven section. A second
shock appears inside the jet. This shock propagates upstream the jet. Initially
Structure and basic properties... -1 D-5
Fig. 21. Velocity of flow and velocity of sound against distance, 1

- P! = 12kPa; 2- 18kPa; 3- 35kPa; ^ - 6 . 7 k P a ; 5 - 8 k P a ; 6-
8kPa; 7- 6.7 kPa; 1-5 - c4 = 735 m/s; 6, 7 - c4 = 350 m/s.
the strength of the second shock exceeds that one of the main shock, and it
increases up to the instant when the second shock reflects from the walls of
the shock tube. The pressure increases behind the second shock, so that com
pression waves arise. These turn into weak shock waves which catch up with
one another and form the main shock wave. The strength of the second shock
depends on the pressure ratio across the diaphragm and the rate of flow area
at the diaphragm station at the initial stage. In this way the initial stage of the
flow at the diaphragm station influences the formation of the shock wave, i.e.,
the change of the shock velocity along the shock tube, shock formation distance
and the maximum value of velocity of the shock wave.
Non-uniformities of the flow behind the shock wave arise due to the process
of its formation. Weak shock waves catch up with the main shock wave along the
formation distance. The Mach number of the shock waves is equal to 1.01-1.5.
Contact discontinuities appear as a result of the interaction of weak shocks
with the main shock. Fig. 20 shows a streak-camera of the flow (/ = ID).
Contact discontinuities are seen. They enable us to determine the velocity of the
gas flow. This value increases in the direction towards the contact discontinuity
that separates the driven gas from the driver one. We measured the velocity of
propagation of weak disturbances. Thus we determined the distribution of the
velocity of sound behind the shock wave. This quantity decreases slowly in the
direction towards the contact discontinuity. Fig. 21 presents the velocity of the
flow and the local velocity of sound against distance.

Below we consider the propagation of shock waves of an arbitrary shape
through a homogeneous and inhomogeneous gas and their reflection from rigid
boundaries.
C H A P T E R 2.
SHOCK WAVE PROPAGATION
THROUGH A GAS
4. B a s i c n o t i o n s
A shock wave is a nonlinear disturbance propagating through a medium

and having a sharp front (discontinuity surface). The velocity of propagation
of the shock depends on its strength. Flow parameters (the pressure, density,
entropy and particle velocity) are all discontinuous over the front. The motion
of a shock wave can be described by nonlinear equations of gas dynamics.
Generally there are no analytical solutions. T h a t is why numerical methods
are used widely. They are based on difference approximations of the equations
of gas dynamics. Nevertheless, we can obtain some qualitative information
without numerical solution. Compatibility conditions m a y be an i m p o r t a n t
tool for this goal.
The compatibility conditions are discussed by many authors (Hadamard
1903; Kotchine 1926; Predvoditelev 1959; T h o m a s 1961; Chen et al. 1971;
Nunziato et al. 1972). Their physical meaning is as follows. Let there be a
discontinuity surface in a medium. If the j u m p s of physical quantities across the
discontinuity surface are arbitrary then the discontinuity breaks u p (Kotchine
1926; Rozhdestvensky et al. 1969). Two waves arise that propagate in opposite
directions. Let the fluid parameters have some spatial distribution in front of
and behind the singular surface. If the functions which give the distribution of
physical quantities ahead of and behind the discontinuity surface are connected
with one another in a definite manner then the discontinuity propagates without
break-up. The connection between the distributions of the flow parameters is
given by the compatibility conditions. As will be shown below, the variation of
the shock velocity in a single manner depends on the state of the medium ahead
of the wave front at a given instant of time, on the geometry of the front and
on the distribution for one of the parameters behind the front. The distribution
of the other quantities behind the front can be derived from the values for this
41
parameter provided that all the quantities ahead of the wave front and behind
it are continuous and differentiable.
The compatibility conditions are deduced from the fact that the discon
tinuity front remains a single one during some interval of time. There are
three kinds of compatibility conditions, namely, geometrical ones, kinematical
and dynamical. The first two of them are derived by using geometrical and
kinematical considerations only, without taking into account the equations of
motion. Dynamical compatibility conditions make use of the momentum and
continuity equations together with geometrical and kinematical considerations.
The geometrical compatibility conditions and the kinematical ones are de
rived below. We use the Lagrangian variables a1, a2, a3. These variables were
used by Hadamard (1903). He obtained the compatibility conditions up to the
third order supposing the function itself to be continuous and its derivatives to
be discontinuous across the wave front, i.e. [$] = 0, [d$/dal] ^ 0, [d$/dt] ^ 0.
Here [ ] denotes the difference in the values of the quantity across the wave
front: [<] = $2 $ 1 , $ being a flow parameter. The indices 1,2 refer to the
values ahead of and behind the wave front, respectively. We proceed from the
considerations used by Thomas (1961), but in contrast with him a dependence
on time of the metric tensor is taken into account in the space a1 a2a3. The
wave front is a singular surface which propagates through a medium. Besides,
there are discontinuity surfaces that are at rest relative to the medium (contact
discontinuities).
We denote as v\ contravariant components of the external unit normal to
the wave front in the space a1 a2a3 ahead of the front (the subscript 1 will be
omitted in the sequel).
We define as compatibility conditions of the rath order the relations which
connect the jumps of the derivatives of the 772th order.
The motion of the wave front may be represented in the following manner
a
\ =a',(u 1 ,u 2 ,*)-
Here u a , a 1,2 are the curvilinear coordinates on the wave front.
We determine the velocity of propagation G as follows. We take the state of
the medium at the instant t a s a reference point. Otherwise, x[(al,a2,a3,t) =
a1. We denote two positions of the wave front in the space a1 a2a3: one at the
instant t and another at the instant t + At. The latter coincides with the posi
tion at the instant t of the particles which are on the wave front at the instant
t + At. We take the point N on the wave front whose position refers to the in
stant t and we draw the external normal. This normal intersects at the point N'
the wave front which refers to the instant t + At. The limit Al/At at At -> 0 is
Shock wave propagation through a gas 43
equal to G, A/ being the length of the segment NN'. The segment NN' is that
one of a ray. The equation of the ray is as follows
= <*
The
The derivative of aa fluid
derivative of fluid parameter
parameter on the wave
on the wave front
front along
along the ray is
the ray is equal
equal
to
dd+
A
+{N',t ++ At)-4>(N,t)
HN',t M)-+{N,t) d
0+ ,j*
Gv>*-{
dt
dt At->o
At->o A*
A* dt
dt da4''
da
The symbol d/dt denotes the time-derivative as apparent to an observer
moving with the velocity G relative to the medium.
.ving
The velocity of displacement U of the wave is defined in an analogous
manner
U = lim ^ ,
where Am is a distance along the segment of the normal between the two
positions of the wave front: one refers to the instant t and the other to the
positions of me wave froui: one refers 10 me instant i and une ouner to the
instant t + At in the space x11x22x33, x{{ being the Cartesian coordinates (the
instant t + At in the space x x x , x being the Cartesian coordinates (the
Eulerian coordinates of a particle). There is a simple relation between G and
Eulerian coordinates of a particle). There is a simple relation between G and
U. At the instant t the wave front intersects the particle whose coordinates
U. At the instant t the wave front intersects the particle whose coordinates
are x\{alll,a222, a33,t)
,i) the At it intersects with
are x[{a
x\{a ,a , a 1,i) and and1l at
at 2the2 instant
instant tt 3+
+ At it intersects the
the particle
particle with the
the
coordinates xâ 1 +GvlAt,
At,a At, a33 + Gv33At,t + At). The distance Am
a2 + Gv22At,a
coordinates x\ (a +Gv At. a + Gv At. a + Gv At.t + At\. The distance Am
is equal to
is equal to
(dx\ dx[ \ A
Am = + UjG niAt
Ur da- ) > x 2 3
m
m being
being the
the components
components of
of the
the external
external unit
unit normal
normal in
in the
the space
space xx1xx2xx3..
As
then
9
rr r,
~ dx\
xl
V = Cr -+- -^-
U = G+ Hi Hi = +
= u G+Vi vln,
n,
i being the normal component of the particle velocity ahead of the
t>i t wave
front.
The vector ^ - is not orthogonal to the wave front. In fact, we have
dx\
ax\ dx[
ox\ (33)
Let ga/3 denote the covariant components of the surface metric tensor on the
wave front
dxl dx1
Multiplying Eq. (33) by the vector
1 dx1
which is tangent to the wave front, we obtain
1 dx\ dx{ _ 1 dxj dx{

via, Qf is not summed.
dt dua x/q~ dt dua
This quantity is the velocity component tangent to the wave front ahead of it.
Generally it is not equal to zero.
If the velocity of propagation is a continuous and differentiable function
of time then fluid parameters and their derivatives ahead of and behind the
wave front must satisfy the so-called compatibility conditions. Geometrical
compatibility conditions follow from the existence of a smooth discontinuity
front. Kinematical compatibility conditions are derived from the fact that there
is no break-up of discontinuity front. The compatibility conditions may be
violated only at different instants of time. If the compatibility conditions are
violated then the discontinuity front transforms into two fronts.
We proceed to the derivation of the compatibility conditions.
5. Compatibility conditions
To begin with, we consider geometrical compatibility conditions.

The derivative of a fluid parameter (j> has the following values on both sides
of a wave front
d<f>i _ d<j>i da1 d(j)2 _ dfo 9al
Subtracting the former equation from the latter, we have
d<t>i da1
a
du .da
Let us multiply this relation by the term <7a/3ff?-:
d(j)
9 m
dua duP da{ du dur
We use the following identity (Thomas 1966)
af3 da1 dai - .

9 (35)
to?w=9 -"*
Here gij are the components of the metric tensor in the space a1a2a3. Substi
tuting Eq. (35) into Eq. (34), we have
n%3 -vj
3
du<* du? [da\ _dai\
Multiplying by gjki we get
d<j> d<f>
= L^k + gjkg^dM^,L^ = (36)
dak a
du duP' dai
Eq. (36) is the geometrical compatibility condition of the first order in a n

arbitrary reference frame. It is the same as that obtained by T h o m a s (1961).
One can get the compatibility conditions of a higher order from Eq. (36)
by substituting -^ instead of <f>. In the particular case x\ a\ it is convenient
to use the following relation which is derived by induction
1
L(*)=JL('+ )1/,
dL^-^ da1
+ (s m)\
i/?i
-Û-^
dm
1
da --dak
r(0 i/J v m = 0, 1, , s. (37)

da{dai -dak
Here 6a/g are the components of the second fundamental surface tensor on the
discontinuity front.
Let us deduce the compatibility conditions of the second order. Substituting
<f> -> r into Eq. (36), we get
d2<f> d d<f)
Oaidak
= -W, Ly*k+gjkg'dua dai w- <38
In order to find the quantity L[aJ, let us multiply Eq. (38) by i / \ We get
d dai d<f>
i<J> = i">. + W(i<'>)&-wf (39)
da1' du? dua'
The quantity J ^ can be determined from the formula of the covariant deriv
ative (Thomas 1966)
dv r jda da1
^ =^
duc + ^ du ^ = - ^ < w du*'
T%lrn being Christoffel's symbols which relate to the space a1 a2a3. The notation
v%a indicates covariant surface differentiation. Consequently,
dai
^ _ J>*h idamTi (40)
du du dua
Then
8<f>
da{ du^--g K
? d ^ - L
^-du^T1
d[<f>] dak dal-ni
n
9ik9
*** vT Lml (41)
' du- dui du" -
Taking into account Eqs. (35), (36), (41), we have instead of (39)
4 ? - ^-*Vr<, <",, + *,?*<; Vk
+ vJ-ri
l ( i ) , , . + g g. A 3 M tor
T\k [L^Vi ri
dux du
a/3 9L^ , Xo. d[fi]\ dai
+ 9jk9 +g (42)
~ * 6 < * A ^ TuJ-
Substituting Eq. (42) into Eq. (38) and using the change of indices, we get
d2<f>
= U ( 3 > - * V l t , [LWVk+grkff Xa<m<w_ v\vs
daldas
dux du
ap 3lJ^_daP_ ,xh d[+]da?\
b
+ 9jig
du<* du?+ 9 <*\ ^du-x r duP)
^77T
+ i(Vi{+^ |^),
du" du x
j
d<f> da
+ (43)
"*"'*? da1 dvfi'
The quantity ^ da1 which is on the right-hand side of Eq. (43) can be
written as follows
d d<f> dLW d2i<t>] dam
= Vf + L{1)-^z a + 9mlg
dua da1 du a
du du(dua du"
in M d2m , dg*" 9[<t>] da

9mig 9ml
dut dudu*> du dut du*
in d9mi d[<j>] da"
+ 9' dua dut du7* ' (44)
The derivative with respect to ua for the covariant component of the unit
external normal can be determined from the following relation
{
dvi d> t( f.i\x dv
"is idgu
oua dua v ' oua oua

As (Kotchine 1965)
Q^=(9ikTls+glkTis) ,
then, with Eq. (40) substituted,

dv\ dar l3a da1
9il9 bvap
at
du-"=K*lr"krt 8u ll
du
Let us examine the fourth term on the right-hand side of Eq. (44). Using the
expression of the covariant derivative
nm _ L m
we obtain
d2an da" das dak
Y a
duadu^ " a.+
" r du " du* du sk
da _ flo^do*
bVaVm + (45)
du " dvP du<* sk'
Therefore the fourth term on the right-hand side of Eq. (44) is equal to
9
V "a dvf l + 9ml
V erf du "a du<> du dutl sk
The derivative - ^ r on the right-hand side of Eq. (44) can be expressed by

Christoffel's symbols on the front of the discontinuity (Kotchine 1965). There
fore
d 9[<t>] (dL(l) M+9
(h d
^ \
dua da1 = {-^r ^^rh
d^_ ( a 2 M d\4>]
+ gmigt"
du$ \dundu<* dvF "a
+ 9m39 (46)
du* dw> du '"'
Finally we get, taking into account Eq. (46),
d2<))
daldas
= (L^-^nJ(L^k + 9r^^n^
+ \L V}+gt,g duaduP)hs
a0 (dL^ t L 0[<j>]\ ( da'' dai
Let us proceed to the geometrical compatibility condition of the third order.

We use a rectangular reference frame for the sake of simplicity, i.e. x\ = a \
Besides, we assume [</>] to be equal to zero. First of all we must find the second
derivative for the unit normal along the front (see Eq. (39))
d2vj d_
duadua ~ du ")
= w ( ^ ^ -9'n S?) - ^ ^ - (47)
Substituting d<j)/dal instead of <f> into Eq. (65) and taking into account Eq. (47),
we get
d34>
da*daidak
(da'' dai aj Qak \
- \L^9^9"Tbaa + L^{1H9aP9irbai - Kg^)
9 ^9
duadu" )}
dai dak dak da* da'' da*
X V{ + vk
duT du&
3LW
_gPgTginh
<9u
da*' dai Qak 6W da*_da?_ da' da1' dai \
T r Vj T +
dun du duP du du? du du^dvF HuP )
da* dai Qak
(VVW, dun duT du? '
49
,baia a ==^^2 1 _
, Q^?CT - baxT
baX V\a _-
^ T\ 6
-6 b
?A T
iX rA ^xraa,^,, 2ff gaHgaaP
2H== gf>b ..
naP
OU"
Here H# is the mean curvature of the shock front, K is its Gaussian curvature.
This is the geometrical compatibility condition of the third order.
TVT .~ \A i~~ u : ~ ~ ~ ~ + ;
Now we consider the kinematicall compatibility
~~ i : u ; i u
comnatibilitv i:*.:
conditions. T?: r n i_x
First of all let
us deduce the expression for the time-derivative of the the external unit normal to
the wave front.
As is denned, we have
9< ^ ^W =
fti"V = 1.
We differentiate this identity with respect to t:
-^
!îi /i V
/ V+ 2+i 2i/,~
/ , - ^
2i/,- - = ==00.
. (48)
(48)
dt
dt 3 dt
3 dt v ;
Let us write a scalar product of two vectors: the unit normal to the wave rfront
A.
and the tangent vector to that one
da'
dai j, n
Trhe
h e derivative of this expression
pression along a ray is equal to
da;; <%.'" d ( ha1 \ Da* diyj

a J a
(49)
dt du -" dt\du J "' dua dt " '
Multiplying Eq. (49) by the gaP f ^ r and taking into account Eq. (48), we have
dvk 1 dg
dgtj
tj { kk dgij
dgtj ik
ik
dakk d
da (da%1 \\
d (da
{ ((5
50(50)
0))
~dT == 2^rvvv
-dT=2^tT
~dT 2^T
vvv
vvv
~1T999
-^r
-^f
v
v
v -Vi9ai3
Ui9al3
Vi9 d^Jt{d^)-
d^Tt\d^)-
- ^du^JtVd^)- >
The derivative ^ p is equal to
%*-
-$-
+ , +9i
. T . A
^ ^ + G+ zGl// {9jrTi
dan dv? OxT dv? dxT ,{gjrT (51)
^ r__^-M
-lf ^^ +
l*T^ > + '9iJ
^l)
(51)
(51)
Making use of Eq. (33), we have
da I/ 0UU>
a * " \\ it UKjr
dG (I
^y _ rLi
or da{
U
l,da
UU>
m
,
rii \\ ,co\
6 ,52)
Jt\-d^)
dt V r)it
=U
a G 9 a
I d^- f)n
\ \ ^ + i / 9f}ii.
- r)n T
^ ar " "rnJ i' ,5.
Substituting
u n g Eq.
JC/q. (51)
(5i.) and
and Eq.
r>q. (52)
(52) into
into Eq.
t/q. (50),
(50), we
we have
have
k 1 kk
dv
dv*
a ((
ntt dG
dG
8G dvf\
dv" daK
dv? \ da
dv\ da ,,,
, fc.
M
i/W
= 9 +nm
nm GVV TV
~dT = -
-df - {d^
{d^ ^)w-
^)d^- + Gvv
i>
dvm ik
dv? dxf
dx
9 kii- (53)
-~dV
-^r9' ~w (53)
It is the expression for the time derivative of the contravariant component of

the unit external normal.
The time-derivative for the covariant component of the normal is equal to
k
dUrn
v k dgmk . +9mkdv
dt ^r ^r
or k
dv-n ap 3G da dv[
(54)
= -9mk9 + ni + GI/.I/T'
dt *""** dua duP ' "' dam
In an analogous manner, the time-derivative for the component of the normal
in the frame xlx2x3 is equal to
dr>P___ af3 ( dG_ &4 dx{

g (55)
dt ~ \du<*+Uidu<* dup'
In contrast to Thomas (1961) formula, Eqs. (53), (54) and (55) contain
derivatives for the gas velocity ahead of the shock front. The reason is as
follows. Thomas uses the velocity of the wave displacement, and we use the
velocity of the wave propagation relative to the gas ahead of the wave front.
Let us write the time-derivative for a flow parameter on both sides of the
wave front
#i ctyi . id<f>i d<t>2 d<j>2 , id<f>2
dt = dt h Gl/ -r,
da* ' 77- dt + Gv da1 '
dt = -^7-
Subtracting the former expression from the latter one, we get
30 = -GL^ + (56)
dt dt
Eq. (56) is the kinematical compatibility condition of the first order. It
differs from the analogous expression written in the Eulerian variables in that
it contains the velocity of the wave propagation instead of that of the wave
displacement.
The kinematical compatibility condition of a higher order can be obtained
by substituting <j) > -^. If the medium is uniform and at rest ahead of the
wave front then it is convenient to make use of the following expression
dLW Jfe!
L\(*) - GI<*+1) + 9
(XmPr, h
<*it b n - l n
dt (fe - m)\
dL{k-m) QG
1 m= 1,2,- I M
duP duP
'(k) _ (57)
dtdai-.da*
This expression can be easily deduced by induction. Let us obtain the kin-
ematical compatibility conditions of the second order. Substituting <f> > ^
into Eq. (36), we obtain
d2<t> d<f> da,j

k
da dt
= L^k+9jk9eJL dt
\ (58)
dL
The derivative dt is given by
d<f> dvl
dt da* dt
or dv%'
dL(l) d<j>
r(D - -L&G- (59)
Lt da* ~dT
~~dT
Taking into account Eqs. (36) and (53), we obtain the following expression for
the third term on the right-hand side of Eq. (59)
d<j>
9 m
da*' dt ~ du<* \8uP "*" du?
k r
dv x dxk da i k
jl
-L& nm + GviV** T $ , ) (60)

dv
In view of Eqs. (56), (59), and (60), Eq. (58) is reduced to
d2$
dakdt H - i ( 2 ) G +dt? + i ( 1 ) fdv? + G ^
.aafid[4>] (6G dv? 8V? dx?
dua \duP du? dv duP
, ap 9 (d[<f>] (1) \ da>

+9 9 (61)
* i^\ir+L G
) d&'
Substituting <f> - into Eq. (56), we have
~d2f\ 'df\
dt 2 = -GLP + dt dt
(62)
The second term on the right-hand side of Eq. (62) is equal to
i(1>
d_ 8$
H dt H(-^f)=4( )+ d2[<t>]
dt2
(63)
In consequence of Eq. (63), Eq. (62) yields:
dLW
av
2 L^G2 - 2G
dt
dt
^(f + GgÔWVli)
r a 0 d[<t>] i zdG
_z_ dv\ dv\ dxi
dv,P dv,P ' dv duP
s-i d^ k zw d2[<j>]
(64)
+ dt2 '
Eqs. (61), (64) are the kinematical compatibility conditions of the second
order. They contain the derivatives for the gas velocity ahead of the wave front
just as Eqs. (53)-(55) do.
Now we consider the kinematical compatibility conditions of the third order.
We assume that [<] 0. In addition, we hold x\ = a% (dx\/dt ^ 0) while
deriving the first two equations. We substitute d<f)/dt instead of <j> into Eq. (65).
The right-hand side contains the quantities Lj. ', Lrt \ The derivative for L^
along the ray is as follows
dL^ d2<f> d2<f> tJdi/_
dt dt dtfdai
+ 2 dtfdai dt
2 .(\)di/
GL^ + Ll(2)) . + 2L{\ (65)
dt
The quantities LrJ are defined by Eq. (37). The quantities Ly can be found
fromEq. (57).
Taking into account Eqs. (51) and (65), we have
dz<j>
da dasdt
l {- L^G+dJ^
at
+ 2 L i ^
an
, . a0dLW f dG dv[ dv[ dxi\\
+2g
d^{d^ d^ ^d^)rii/s
+ ni+
+a L(2)G+ dL&\ dL^ dv?

iM- dua dn
( 1 ) G da1 das
- ^ O^c ^ >
dua V dn du" W' + W*
L
9 9 \\ adu
^na ..*
du% S~^ a
du"
w da1 das
^(-*4^ S)}
d_
dLM
du7* uP
dn .A (66)
By making the substitution <f> > d<p/dt into Eq. (59), one can find
d3<s>
dakdt2
^-2GdJ^-L^ddt4+d2L{1) dt dt2
+ (-^yi
dvl_ d (dvl
+ L&1 dn + dt dn
+ L&G
2
d v? a/3 i 3 G
aw weG
-9
dndn dua du<*
dG dvj dv\ dxj \ \
Vk
du? + duf*ni+ dn duPJ)
,<*/?
da" d (2rdLW (1)dG
du<*duP V dt dt
(67)
dn )
In order to obtain the last kinematical compatibility condition, we make

use of Eq. (62), by substituting d<j>/dt instead of <j>. We suppose as in the
previous cases that [<fi] = 0 but x\ a1. We have
d3<t> .d2L^ dG
(SL^G-L^h)
dt 3
at 2
dt + dt
Ln2.. + 3 G8LM
dLW (dG
2
dt ^ ( f + ) ^
f dG dv\ dv1? dxk da1
uu, k ,_. \ _ m
\duP du? dv du@

^ aB dG f dG ^dv\ fit;* dxk e .da1 _k
l
dua \duP du? dv duP ji
^*^^lt)+?!*-I<0{j^,
^"(i^ + ^ ^ l ^ ?7 r
A = ^ + GvVi*r*,. (68)
Eqs. (66)-(68) are the kinematical compatibility conditions of the third order
in Lagrangian variables in the general case when there is velocity distribution
in the medium ahead of the shock wave.
The compatibility conditions enable us to find the derivatives for the flow
parameters behind the wave front. But that is not all. We have deduced
them from the fact that there is no break-up of the wave front. As will be
shown below, the compatibility conditions yield the connection between the
distribution for the flow parameters in the neighbourhood of the wave front.
If there is no connection between the distributions of different flow parameters
then the wave front must transform into two fronts.
In conclusion, let us evaluate the vorticity of a gas flow behind a curvilinear
unsteady shock wave. Generally, there is a jump of the vorticity across the
shock front. In other words, a potential flow ahead of a shock wave becomes
a rotational one behind the shock wave. We shall compute the values of the
components of vorticity behind the shock wave. Such an evaluation is of interest
if one investigates the interaction of a vortex with a shock wave. We make use
of Eq. (61).
Let the axis x3 be normal to the shock front at the instant in question.
Denote as /i and 12 the arcs of the curves defined by the intersections of the
shock front with the planes xxx3 and x2x3, respectively. Using the equations
of motion and Eq. (53), we get
r i1 = (i-g)2flQ , (i-g) (H dv\\

L J
2e 8l2 1e \8a2 da3)
, (1-g)
2piG \s do? da2)
r 2] {1-efdG (1-e) ( H , H \
1 J
2s dh 2e V^1 #3/
d
_ (l-) (}_dPi__C2 Pi\
2PlG \e da1 da1]'
[u, 3 ] = 0, x\ = a\
^ # 0, of = \rotlf, e = ^ . (69)
at i p2
It is interesting to note that the j u m p of the normal component of the
vorticity is equal to zero. The j u m p of the component ut1 and that of OJ2
depend not only on the Mach number of the shock wave and the distribution of
Mach number along the shock front but also on the flow parameters ahead of
the shock front. The expressions for [a;1] and [u;2] contain the components of
the tensor Sij | (-fc -f -^ J and, in addition, the derivatives of the pressure
and density ahead of the shock wave. Eqs. (69) are valid for any gas which is in
thermodynamical equilibrium. They coincide with the analogous expressions
obtained earlier ( R a m et al. 1966) if the gas is uniform ahead of the shock
wave.
6. R a y m e t h o d for c a l c u l a t i o n o f u n s t e a d y s h o c k w a v e s
The notion of rays is used in optics and acoustics for constructing a wave
front. If the position of the wave front is known at an initial instant of time then
its positions at subsequent times may be found from geometrical considerations.
The matter is more complicated in the case of shocks. For the motion of a shock
is determined by the distribution of gas parameters not only ahead of the wave
front but also behind the wave front. Nevertheless, geometrical considerations
allow to construct various methods of the calculation of shock propagation.
A well-known ray method for the calculation of shocks was proposed by
Chester, Chisnell and W h i t h a m ( W h i t h a m 1974). It gives excellent results in
some cases. This method takes into consideration the shock curvature and neg
lects the dependence of the shock velocity on the distribution of flow parameters
behind the shock front. There are modifications of that method (see e.g. Best
1991).
The method proposed below takes into account the influence of the flow
behind the shock on its propagation at the expense of loss of simplicity.
Let us introduce new variables u 1 , w 2 , u3. Here u1, u2 are curvilinear co
ordinates of the shock front, u3 s, s being the distance along the ray between
the point in question and the position of the shock front at a given instant. Thus
the coordinate u3 is orthogonal to the shock front. The kinematical compatib-
56
56 Propagation
rropagauon and reflection oj
ana reflection of SHOCK
shock waves
waves
ility condition follo\ s while using new variables: [[f]

ndition is as follows [ $ ] - G [].
f f l = W\ [|f].
[f].
The covariant
The( variant components
component i of
of the
the metric
metric tensor
tensor ^
gjk fc have
have the
the values
values ahead
ahead of
of the
the
front
front: g jjjk
o.- =g
kt=
jk p,
oâ0
a0
a fl,. j7 = 1,1,2;; k = 1,2; #</aaa33 = 0, ##3/3
= 1,2; 33/33 =
# = 0, #33
a = = 1. Here gg p are
ae,
a/3
a/3
a
aj3 are
tthe
h e ccovariant components
component! of of the surface tensor. In an an analogous way,
( k=g a 3a 3 3
gi =g"P,
P, J = 1,2;
1 2; A =1,2; g3a=gP
g = /3 = 0,
= /g33 = 1.
We have behind the front: fro:t: gjk = #<*,?,

gal}, Jj =
= 1,2; k = 1,2; 5gaa33 =
= 0,
0, gg3333 =
=
22 k a 3
a3 33
33
0,733 =
0,<733 = ee ;; g
gi =
jk =<< P,
al3
, jj =
= 1,2;
1,2; * =
= 1,2;
1,2; </"
g =< gW^ =
= 0, g = = ..
Rankine- lugoniot relations across the shock front
We use the Rankine-Hugoniot
[^|=G(l-e)n<. (70)
(70)
Thus
i
r[ _^
_ !l =
- =((-l)n
(C={(-l)n\
r- _ * \\
l )lnW
/rite Eq. (35) in

We write in the
he rectangular
ctangular reference frame
.- _ ae
a0
a g dx*
dx' dx<
dx* BX'
dx{
dij-ninj_g _____.
iplring it by th<
Multiplring the quantity
ity [ ^^-11 , we get
_. - _ I ^^ J
ravi = / r a v i i\ i ,.++ af" /afr a v i a*A a_

[1*1
[d^\= = U
[1*1 UI a
a^ nVjnnn + ** *U"aP"J
^ JJ ""V "([l\w
("aP"J ^5_?J
J a^'
So
.ting [^]
oting
Denoting [*V1 nn,j 1as <
[ ^ ] ] n,-
2
< 2 \\ [fe]l &
* ] |& _ i 2 \ we have
B\
B\
as have
= 4 2 ) 8 '+^Bi 2ouP
)
I I
|4-
In ourLr case the compatibility
com]
compatibilityy conditions can be
be written as follows
[ml =vy{~
[f]=^(^-5(1))'
=1 B B 2 ds(1-+
[w]=
[w\
\d2<j>] {1 f{o(2) "rfT +2^p-)
o^r ^p-J
d2
+
+
[<t>}\ 2-di{-
2^V B + d
idy { m^r)>
[<A
,^ = W
5d) ra<*i
|"a_l) _,- ra5<i.i
/-2 2 ^ds ^d.s\
R(l)
BBCD = r ^ l .
=[ds-\>
R(2) r ^ l
(2)=[-^l
B y==G'
)==[ a[ ?0J1' ' y,-rJ 1
' dj
dTt_dJ
=Ll_
^G-
It is easy to show that the kinematical compatibility conditions can be

presented in the symbolic form
\dm<j>] ^d ( nd ( d / ^dN\\ \
[m^l - ^dl {^dl \yyjl ' V^'oT)) '")'
<fN
-AT - t ^Mud) -t *M-idBli~l) , ^.--a *'("-2) d 2 ^ ' " 2 )
s v y
' ' dl ' 1-2 d/2
As one can see, the kinematical compatibility conditions contain the quantities
('). Let us compute the quantities B> = r ^ 1 l n5. These quantities will be
used in the sequel. To do this, we use
usethe
theequation
equation of
of continuity
continuity which
which may
may be
be
written in the form
// \ 2
x 2
=(*)'... (7!)
g being the determinant of
of the metric tensor. We differentiate this relation with
respect to s and use the identity (Kotchine 1965)
dg kidgik
^-=99 -z
as as
We get the following expressions for the quantities 2 #
2 22
5CT = -
-2e(l 2)(2 / / 2 - tf)
2 e ( l - 2)(2#2 tf) + + I (5i
(BW) )) + 2HeBW
2HeBW
-n 4c(l. - c )\Afi - i\. ) + ~ I J-ffi J T 4ii cJ^ '
4yz dua duP dua "
^, g 022PlPl ^
g 3Vi
0 ^ ee (( 22(d
^ (d(dp\
PP2V2\2 2 _ (dl_Y\
2V fd
(d
fd PA
(dPl
222
\Ay\
PPi \
+
+
+ pP~ -dsT
1~ds^
-1-ds^ +
7i
71 \V \~dTJ ~\d7J )J''
+ ^~dsT
2) 3)
rf \ \~dT 33 22
-{^7 '
2#>
B>
~n
= J 4
-B^B>
n n
4 -
- 4eff(l
-4eff(l
4eH(l\
-
~*
- )(4ff
)(4tf
e*)(W
~ /\ -3K)-1
~m-y
- 3K) - ~
/ 2 -22 \
(Bl[B^
\B%>)
J ,b
U222B^
+ 6e 2
2
(2H*
B^(2H - -K)K)
++2eHB& -_ *
2eHB&
2eHB^ _{1~J
*!ZjW
^LflK9g9ap9^
W l>
-^%Ljj$?^ pj
p-
3* ( ) a?
D(2)
2 ap y
dy y
dy 3(1 --)g) c<0
*v _a0 dyy R( 3(3>
)
~4etf~nn"
~4etf~ "
9
d^duJ~~^y~~9
Ba
d^Ba
T y y
" 7 dua " 1y y y
^ dua du
n 5 + n 9
e 5 " ey du du?
Se g g baaB?a + 2y2 9 9 <W duP ^
+ la"? 5 (3) + May/ ^La _^_ _ A a^_^La W_

* du<* " V du duP 2y du du?
+
4y 2 5
du<* 9w^ + 9 a
8uP
g a0
\Pi ds3 Pl ds Os2 +
p\ ds Os2
e d3p2 2_(dPi\3 2e3 (dp2
pi ds3 p\ \ ds ) p\ \ d,
dkxfl 9* ,
BV Ti, k > 2,
n
Osk du<* - '
B<> = sHBM - (1 - * ) y - HflW(BW + y W) + 3 (j#> + y(3)f
- 3e(y n ( 3 )) 2 + 6e(A" - 2H2)(B^)2 + 12e{8# 2 ( A - # 2 ) - K2}
- 96e(l - e4){7H2{K - H2) - 2K2} + ^ ( 4 2 ) ) 4
+ 96e3HBW(4H2 - 3K) - p(fl( 2 )) 2 (( 3 ) + y]'))

- 1 4 e ( 2 # 2 - A')y n ( 3 )
- -e9af}(BW + yW)(flW + y ) + 4e<^YJ 2 )Yf - e ^ <
+^ ' " W + YîBf + ^(3)) + ^ r W
- f ^y2) ( ^ + y i 4 ) + 3 ^ ( 2 ) n ( 2 - ^ v i 3 ) )
+ 4SsK(s2g^B^ - (1 - e2)ga^2})
(2)
+ 4 8 3 / ^ ^ L ^ L _ ^ ^n r (-1 ) J 3 )
+ 3 {l(5(3) + Y n (3) ) _i! (j B( 2 ) )2+ ^J
x ^ ^ + y ^ j ^ + yj2))
+ 12 /^YJ5 + ^{ 5 ^(5i 2 ) + î2))}2 + lSe{g^Y^Y^}2
- 6eHg^g^bp<r(B^ + Y^)(B^ +yf)

7
+ 6 5 ( W ^ 7 ( B S + YJ5)
- ^ - V ^ g + y W)(^3 + y,(3) - &, V ' y $ y $
+ 24(4jff - | l t f V V ' t o r W r W - 18 ^^/"6yi 2 )y^)
- 7s2gal3g^ba<7qav + Ueg^g^b^Y^ - %s3Hg^g^baaBi,P
{2
}
+ 96e(l - e2)Hg^g^baaY^ - m3Hga^g^ba d d

du@ dui
+ 24eg^g^^r^ - ^(B + Y^)
x ^ + ^V'r}1^
- 24eHg^g^baaY^
As (dpi d3pi _ 2dp2 d3p2

p\ \ ds ds3 ds ds3
3e J /'aVi V 2 ( f ^ V l _ 6 / ( 2 a V _ e4 / ^
Pi 1 V ^s2 / V s2 / J Pi 1 V ^s J ^ \ ds
+
12 f fdpA2 5V
P\ \ \ ds) ds2
3
m
/a^V
yds ) ds2
5^2
oua
r<2) = fl(4> + y(4) + 3S<2' " +e " + "
r<?> = B + yj3> + e f ^ + 25<2) ^ - e / " ^ ) + Y^),

^ = 5S + < + yi3 + yg
+ 2 ( & ^ - B))baP - 2e>Kgae + 2 ^ * ,
_ B(3) , o(3) , y(3) y(3)
- Zeg^{baaB^ + bopBW) + QeB^(2Hba/} - KgaP),
Ay2y duadu0'
8y3yy du^duP 4yiy dua du? Ay29 9

' du<* du^
y(5) _ 1 1 ^ _,<*/? _%__%_ _ 9 y , < ? ^ dV
Ay2 9 dua du? Ay39 dua duP
_ 329 /W_
a
J? _ 29a0Wdy_
a
Ay du duP y du du?
16*/4 V duduP) ^y2\Ay ) 9 9

in du fat
y(2) = _J^_
2y du<*'
9 ai
2y \2ydu<* du<* du") '
y\ Sy2 du
61
iy' dy'
iy ay 1
i dy"
ay Zy'
iy ( dy i
ay 1f dy'
ay
( (
-T^^Sr"^"^^'
dd22V
y dy
dy _
_
a
ou aui
o^(M au "' , .>
*(*) ^ o(*W / dy <Py (721
B = r y = (72)
^ ~d^-B ^' y
=Tv ~d
B{k) will be given later.
The expression for B'
Now we consider the mean curvature of the shock front.
fron The time-deriva
time-deriva-
tive
ive for this nnantitv
quantity is
I rtft
2dH__ dg^_b g0lp dba[S_ ^
ITT 11
(73)
dt dt dt
In view of Eq. (45),), we write
dba0aP _dm
db dm i,. ^, djapap _
dx> aV \
d ( d'x* d fdx'\
(dx'\ rra
a
x +ni = ni ni T
-^ = ^ ^ ^r Jt\a^b^)- Jt\d-^) ^
Taking into account Eqs. (33), (40), we get
dbaP d2G dG ra _ ^
^ d22v\
(( d v\ dvl
dv\ ra \\ ^ n h
-dT == d^d^-d^
-dT d^d^~d^
r +nk
^ T^+nk \fr^-a^ T
{d^d^-d^ T G{2HKp
p)-G{2Hbap--K9ap)
"P)-
R9a )
e --
(74)
(741
We used me
ve usea the laenmiy
identity ^nomas
(Thomas 1966)
iyoo;
g^b^bp,, = 2Hbal3-Kga0.
The time-derivative for gaaaP is
^ = V (( W
=g-g* W -_**_ M
** ^ -duM
T |f*V
|f* V (75)
(75)
y
y y u duT duT dudu) '
dt V d J
Substituting Eqs. (74V
t.ino- Ens (74), 1751
(75) iinto Eq.
nto E (73), we
n (731. we have
2 ^ = 2 J g, -baV
Î(Gbp^
G 6 ^ -j00-)
ap iV
2 = 2g
+ QP (
d2
fp ( d2 G __^dG_ ( dH\ _M
r % nk (-^
++ nk rO
+ H r>\
+ gaP K K
\duduP du e {duû? du ?)
-G(2Hbaa0
-G{2Hb - a0
ap-Kg
p-Kg Kg
a0)\aP)\.
)].
Or
2
f= 2 G < 2 * 2 - *> -2rt^ dS fe+AG+nkAv*'
As (76)
^(s^?-^)-
Formulae given above enable us to deduce a system of equations that de
scribe the propagation of a curvilinear shock wave in a non-uniform gas. First
of all, we compute the equation that contains the first time-derivative of the
Mach number.
T h e equation of motion has the form
5V _ _ 1 jkdxi dp
(77)
dt2 p9 dui duk'
Multiplying this equation by n,- and subtracting the quantities ahead of and
behind the shock, we have
[0V Tli =
1_ fdp2 d]h_
pi \ dv dv
dp dp dp _ dp t
(78)
dn dx{
We took into account that v\ v[/e. The left-hand side of Eq. (78) can
be written with the aid of the kinematical compatibility condition of the second
order in the form
>U) dp2 _ dlh
B(2)G2 _2QdBn _ fl(i)GVVl/fcr? _ B ^ G ^ n m = - -
J
at ov pi dv dv
Substituting the values of B^\ B] from Eq. (72), we obtain
(dpi__ dp2\ de dG 1 dp2 dpi

E .2He{l-e)G*-2G-+(\-e) = -
Pi \dv dv) dt dt dv dv
(79)
The derivative of the density is
dp: ds_ (80)

dv " cl\dv \ds)i dv
Here S is entropy. If there is no dissipation ( ^ = 0) ahead of and behind

the shock then
dS2 _ 1 d[S] + dth (81)
dv G dt dv '
We assume the gas to be perfect. From Eqs. (79), (80) and (81), we get
i dM _ i dP2 I dPl I dPl I dPl

c\ at pi Of p\ ov pi ov p\c\ at
+ A5-ni + A6H,
C\ ov
-{M2 (M*-\)
Ai = kl = Jl^M* 27
k2 =
27
2 7-1
k3 = 1 M 9 Ar4 = qM, k5 = -Mq, k6 = 2q-
2 ,.-, - - - ..0-.,(^+1),
4 2 2
F = 2(2 7 - 1) 4- M + (7 + 5)M - 7 + 1, q = 2 7 M - 7 + 1,
w = ( 7 - l ) M 2 + 2. (82)
Eq. (82) has a clear physical meaning. It is seen from it that a plane shock
which propagates through a uniform gas decreases if dp2/dn > 0 and increases
ifdp2/dn<0.
A converging (H > 0) shock intensifies if dpildn = 0, and a diverging
(H < 0) shock decays. We can take a derivative along the normal for any
quantity behind the shock as the first term on the right-hand side of Eq. (82).
Eq. (82) coincides with that one obtained by Sedov (Sedov 1959) on the
assumption that the flow is one-dimensional, the gas ahead of the wave is uni
form and at rest. It was derived by Shugaev (Shugaev 1976) for the case of
a three-dimensional flow ahead of the shock wave. An analogous formula was
obtained by Wright (Wright 1976) for the gas with an arbitrary equation of
state.
We can continue the procedure. Differentiating Eq. (77) with respect to
time and taking jumps, we obtain
r^3
<9V l(igjkdxidp_
(83)
dt3 dt \p dui duk
Taking into account the kinematical compatibility conditions of the first

and third orders as well as Eq. (76), making use of Eq. (83) and differentiating
Eq. (82) along the ray, we get a system of two equations with two unknowns
*Jlf/itt and ( ) ( ( ) ) .
Those equations are given below (Shugaev 1983). The gas is assumed to
be uniform ahead of the shock wave, for the sake of simplicity.
p\C\ at \ ov J
pi dvdv * \p\ ov J
d
+ 4\VM)> + 4^ H,
a d2M dM dM dM
gn P
AM =
duaduP dvF ap (v^) 2 = ^ ^ E j -
AP = (M2-I)N^/E,
E = 2(7 - 1)(2 - 7 ) M 6 - (7 - 1)(13 + 37)M 4 + 2( 7 2 - 7 - 4)M 2
2
- 7 - 2 7 - 5,
7+ 1
m (1 4
WJ M(M2- 1),
_ ^ / p (M 2 - 1) (F 7 (M 2 - 1) + F 5 F 8 )
N? _
4M V F22 +
(2F 2 )
2
N.( i + (7+l)M
2w
^_2F6^lzJfc Fu
+
((7 + l ) F | ) ' ((7+1)^2)
(i 2w 2 F 12 3 ... F
13
K -2 N,( i )
((7+l)M)' m (7+1)' ((7+l)M)'
AT)( i Fl4
ilvF^*-6 1) Fl5
(7 + l ) M V 2 + F2 2F 2
7+ 1
N-(2 M(M2 - 1)F2,
2
w
jvi : (F1F2 + ( 7 + 1 ) ( M 2 - 1 ) 2 ^ - ( M 2
- 1 ) ^ )
2M
4(M2-1)
N? F21 + 2W(M2-1)^ + ^
(7 + l ) M r2 r2
f
23 (2) _ 2F,24 (2) 2F2F13
N? 2
4(M - 1)
( ( 7 + l ) M ) ' iVs 6
=
- (7+l): (7 + l)Mw 2 '
MW
r(2 1 f F 2 Fi4 . (M2-l)
M V(7+l) F22
1
+WF220
0
^-^ _MJ11- )'
(( +l)MF
7 2) F 2
2
F1 = 2 ( 7 - l ) M + 3-7,
F 2 = 3(7 - 1)M 4 + (3 - 7)M
2
+ 2(7 + 2),
2
F3 = ( 3 7 - l ) M + 3- 7 ) F4 = jM2 + l, F5 = (3 - 7 ) M 2 - 7 - 5,
F 6 = 32F3 - 4 7 (7 2 - 1)(M 2 - l ) 3 + 4(7 - 1)(M 2 - 1)F 4 F 5 ,

F7 = (7 - 1)(7 7 - 3)M 4 - 4(7 - 1)(4 7 + 3)M 2 + 4(2 7 2 - 3 7 - 8),
F 8 = (7 - 1)M 4 + 2, F 9 = (7 + 3)M 4 - (7 - 7)M
2
+ 6,
6 4
F 1 0 = (7 - 1)(37 + 1)M - 3(7 - 1)(5 - ~f)M
+ 12(37-4)M2+4(10-7),
F u = 2wF 5 F 8 - (7 + 1)(M 2 - 1)F 10 , Fl2 = 7 M 4 + 1,
F 1 3 = 2(7 - 1)(7 2 + 7 - 6)M 6 + 2 ( - 2 7 3 + 3 7 2 + 67 - 19)M 4
+ (7 3 ~ 7 2 + 117 + 2
1)M2 + 4(7 + 3),
F 1 4 = ( - 7 + IO7 - 5)M + 2(9 - 7 7 ) M 2 - 2(7 - 7),
2 4
Fis = 4wF 5 F 8 + (M 2 - 1){WF7 - (7 + l)Fio),

4
F 1 6 = - ( 7 - 1)(3 - 7)M + 4(7 - 1)(7 + 3)M 2 + 3(7 + 2)(3 - 7),
F17 = M 2 + 5, F 1 8 = - ( 7 i ) ( 7 + 3)M 4 + 4(7 - 1)( 7 + 2)M 2 + 4(7 + 2),
F 1 9 = 2F 2 F 1 6 - wFl7F18, F20 = F2F7 + 2(7 + l)wF8F17,
6 2 4
F 2 i = (7 - 1)(17 - 7)M + ( - 5 7 - 26 7 + 39)M
+ 4 ( 2 7 - l ) M 2 - 1 2 ( 7 + 2),
F22 = F2F10 2w F5F17,
F 2 3 = - ( 7 + 1)(7 + 4)M 6 + ( 3 7 2 + 4 7 - 9)M 4
- ( 7 + 2 ) ( 7 - l ) M 2 + 2( 7 + 2),
F2A = 2(7 - 1)(2 7 - 1)M 6 - 5(7 - 1) 2 M 4 + 2(7 - 1)(3 7 + 2)M 2
-72 + 67+H. (84)
Eqs. (84) describe the variation of density distribution behind the shock
(2) (2) (2) (1)
wave. The coefficients A\ , A 3 , A\ , and A\ } are equal to zero at M 1.
It is interesting to note that the coefficients AJ ,A\ ' change the sign at
M = M*, M* being a root of an algebraic equation of the third degree
2(7 - 1)(2 - <y)x3 - (7 ~ 1)(13 + 3 7 )* 2 + 2( 7 2 - 7 - 4)x - <y2 - 2 7 - 5 = 0,
M* = y/x.
As 7 > 1 and 7 > 2, the value of M* increases unboundedly
M* ** V2(7 ~ 1)"*, 7 - 1 ; M* ^ V^5(2 - 7 ) " * , 7 - 2 .
Thus we obtain a connection between the first and second derivatives along
the normal for the density behind an unsteady shock wave at the point of the
front where M = M*.
Let us consider one-dimensional motion. We suppose the gas ahead of the

shock to be uniform and at rest. The second relation of Eqs. (84) takes the
form
1
d2P2 r ( x / 1 dp2
x 2
a 2 =il(7) i *
For l < 7 < 2 , L i i s always positive. Therefore, so is the second derivative

along the normal for the density behind the wave. The value of the density in
the neighborhood of the front (x = 0) can be expressed as
P2(x,t) = f>2(Q,t) + + \LX? + ...,

Pi Pi 2
pi OX
Now we proceed to the general case. We differentiate Eq. (77) m times with
respect to t and then multiply it by n,- (or by dx*/dua, in order to determine
Bla). We use the kinematical compatibility conditions up to the (ra + 2)th
order. The quantities Bn , = 2,..., m + 2, are determined from the continuity
equation while differentiating it with respect to s (see Eqs. (71)).
We get the following unclosed system
dxi
Ci eft pi 5s
1 d
LCI dt
PlCi (ft \ as J pi cte2 \ p i as J
ci ci ci as
W+1
1 d /5>2_\ 1 (m+l)^ >P2
Pici ctt V dsm J pi x
5( m + 1 ) '
(m+l) / 1 9^2^ f 1 s V A f 1 <9'p2
t = 2,3,---,m + 2,
j + Ar + ..- + Z = m + l ,
j < m, & < ra, , / < ra. (85)
Dots on the right-hand sides mean the derivatives for the pressure along
the shock front as well as for other flow parameters along the ray ahead of the
front and geometrical properties of the front. The system contains the unknown
functions xls, nit G, ^ , ^ dm#.
The number of equations is one unit less than the number of unknown func
tions. The value of derivative of (m + l ) t h order m a y be determined from the
boundary condition of the problem. It is interesting to note that the coefficients
Ay, i = 1, 2 , tend to zero as M -> 1. Therefore Eqs. (85) are convenient
for studying problems connected with the propagation of weak shocks.
For the first time, an analogous system of equations was written by Maslov.
He considered a set of differential equations in the case of weak shocks and
found that this set m a y be continued to infinity (Maslov 1977). Piskareva and
Shugaev discussed the set of equations for one-dimensional propagation of a
shock wave which involved the functions M , -^ I ^ ) , ^ ( %ffi) etc. (Piskar
eva et al. 1978). Later on analogous systems were the object of study by several
authors (Grinfeld 1978; Prasad 1982; Anile et al. 1986 a and b, 1988; Sharma
et al. 1995). Grinfeld investigated the wave propagation in nonlinear elastic
materials. Other authors considered shock waves in gas. Numerical results
were obtained by Shugaev (Shugaev 1983).
Let a curvilinear shock wave propagate through a non-uniform gas which
is at rest (pi = const). Then the unclosed system is as follows (m = 3)
dxi _ 2- dnl _ 1 ap dy dxl
y n ly
* dl^ 2 dl e'
d 1 l d d
vBn
yti W _ 2v
Zy ^L +V
+ vil- - JJA ++ .?El
dl *n Bm+ + JJL
dp n BW- - -l e d s pi ds 2 dl 2 dl dl
+9 B
8uP Ay9 duduP+Pl9 du["*> +
^ h
yBn 2y +V + n + n
dl dP " e ds* 2 dl 2 dl dl
+9 **a du? Aydl9 a

du?^2y n 9
du du?
( 2 )
-2Qf><flfi
9 9 hp ^ - - , * ^ ^ 9 + a 9V ^m B a
^dup 9 dl du?^ du*
_ V ^ W > + ^(2)) + yf^T + ^

dBP d2B^ 18 3 Q
yBW-2y^- +y
dl "dP s ds3
-f { (4 2) - ~Pj B^ + AHBP + y())}
$ = ( 7 + lyû-tfgVyu = M2,
dM _ dM
/(u) = ( 7 - l ) + 2, p() = 2 7 t i - 7 + l ,
ds ~ dr
(1) _ J_dp2 (2) la^nW _ I ^
1
^ ^ -^/^2x
^ W fPi\lh+ ^L^flW
9p2 + yP)),
1/7
_ ]_dp2 de_
(1) 1f 5p2 _ 9 _ / l . / ' p i ^2.
" ~ Pl ds du + Pl9 ai
du ds\pi \p
^ = 2 ( 5 ^ 6 ^ ) - ^ ^ )
j_5p2 f ^ , ,( 5 ( 2 > + y( 2 ))l
3
Pl dvf V n'a W dW> du 2yA"ay) ' (86)
Eqs. (86) can be simplified for M ~ 1, px = const
dZi 1 ,
dZ2
= -\yZz + e 2 ,
dl
dZ3
= e3,
dl
2
y= M -l,
ei =-^Zf + HZlt
- 2eim2 - jHBW - -HZ\ - IgÂ^Zt + m3,

7 I
.^ z
e 3 = -^(AZ.Zs
Zl 3 + ZZ\) zzl)^zlz
+ + ^Z?Z2 - f2U-^zt^
> 4 + ^-(Z2el + Zxe2)
- i^Zle, + \m2 - ^(Zim3 + e\) - HZ,B^ - ^ m 2

jz Z 7 7
Of*
- jHB^ - 1 2 7 m i ^ 3 ) - -zHZ\ + AHZÛK - 1SH2) + Hm3
7
9HZ!Z2 - 2He2 + 4e : I HZX - ZH2 + K
7
7 2 oua ouP
+ 9
j du^duJ+2Zig A H 2g
^ ~ 9 h
*d^
- Âaf3Z2 - 7g^g^bÂaaZu
9 ACi
mi = 2H K, m2 EZ\, m^ eim 2 + Z\m\,
7
m 4 = 3r-îei - (Zie2 + Z2e1) + (î + ^ m 3 + - m 5 - e1m1
2j2 2j 7 2
3) 4 8
- 7rai(, + 2He1m2 + # e 2 Z?mi EZxex + m 3 #
7 7
+ 2HZ1{3H2 - 2K) + im 2 flf a/? A tt/ jZi + ^Zl9aPAapH
g
1 duduP g duduP'
m 5 = - e? + m 2 m 3 + 2eimi + 2HZ1{AH2 - 3K),
7
2J(3> = 1 ^ - 2 / 0 - ^ 2 ,
7 7 7
K
BW = --Z3 + ^Z,Z2 - -\Z\ - -m1Z1 + 2HB&
+ l-gÂapZl + M ,
7 72
Kl = 7 + 1,
fc+i = fe(7(fc + l) + 1), k> 1. (87)
The quantities ^ in Eqs. (72) can be determined from Eq. (77). That
equation may be written as
d2xi dxi 1 dp
(88)
dt2 dua p dua
We assume that the gas is at rest ahead of the shock wave. Using the identity
[AB] = [A][B] + [A]B1 + [B]AX, (89)
we have
d21i
x dxl 1 dp
2 (90)
dt du" p dua
Taking into account the kinematical compatibility condition, we obtain from
Eq. (90)
1 - e dy e dp2
B& =
y dua ypi dua
Differentiating Eq. (88) with respect to s, we have with the aid of Eqs. (64),
(89)
R(3) _ _ i A ( l dp
A + y1 n<2) i ^dB"] + l d dy
a
yds \p2 du<*J 2y ^ dl "*" y dl &ua
l-edy' _ {2)(l_dy_ +9e_]+2 ds de (1 - e)y' de
n
2y dua \ydu<* du<* ) dldua 2y dua
(1 dy
+ (2 + e^'b^B - ~^1 + 2)
/"^
dip'
The quantities B&*(*) , k > 3 can be found similarly.

Eqs. (87) may be useful in studying the decay of weak shock waves: M
1 - f J M , S M <C 1. We consider one-dimensional flow. We assume the gas
obt
ahead of the shock wave to be at rest. We obtain
obtain from the thirc
third and fourth
equations
dy = _7+1 ~ y ,
yV
dl ~ 47 1
4VPl1'
dl 2 2 V 4 7 + 1) ) * 4(1+i)
2255 7 ,/22
i o i 7 n y mm ,
16(7TT)
~
i
7 11 &P2
d p2
' - 1Êl
Pl Pl
- 1_^l
2
Pl~
~ Plpi ds'ds' Pl ~~ Plpi ds
ds1 ''
22
y=M
y= M -..-.. (91)
The wave decays if Zi > (7/(7 + l))p[. The two equations (91) include
three
rnree unknown
unicnown functions:
funct,ions: y,y, Z
Au\ , and Z2. In
and ZJ2. In order
order to
to obtam
obtain aa closed
closed set,
set, we
we
assume Z to have the same form as in the limiting
assume Z222 to have the same form as in the limiting case y =case y = 0.
y=0.
0.
The
The solution
solution of
of the
the first equation (91)
first equation (91) is
is as
as follows
follows under
under the
the above-mentioned
above-mentioned
assumption
assuniption
assumption
-.
Zi(l) = Z!(l
. . _ / . . 7+1..,.,} X1
0)A(l)
Zi(io)A(J) ^Y^-ZiHo)
1(1) I( 1 + ^lz
^Y^Zi{l 00)) f{l/A(s))ds\
f(l/A(s))ds\
f(l/A(s))ds
l(lo)J(l/A{s))dsj
1YZI(1 j ,
4
M(l) = (M 0 - 1) ((f$-\
- 1 + (Mo - A ) * exp [ _- 2 1i /j ZlZ(s)ds
l{s)ds\ ,,
\Pi(h)J \ 47 J J
^=eXP(-5(l-^)). \ \ r J- V u
/ / /
' ()
(92
tn a similar manner, we have for spherical shock waves

In
1 1
Z1(0=(l + /oZ1(/o))/iA(^)'1Z1(/)^>
. f i \1/4 / -v + 1 r' .. \
M(J) =
M{l) = 1+
+ (Mo-l)A(l)lj-j
(Mo - l)A(l) (p\ expf-^-^
exp(-2i / S i f oZ^dj,),
)*,),
A(/) = (pi(/)/ {lo)11/\/\

(pi(/)/pPl1{lo) Mo = M(/0). (93)
Let
Let the
the shock
shock wave
wave have
have an
an arbitrary
arbitrary shape.
shape. In
In the
the case
case of
of aa weak
weak shock
shock
we can put (Thomas 1966)

H0 - K0l
H(l)
1 - 2H0l + K0l2 '
Consequently,
I
/ u dl = - 1 , ,. _ , . .,. . ,2l
/ H dl = - ^ log |1 - 2H0{1 - /o) + KQ(l - l0)
lo
The quantities Z i ( / ) , y ( / ) are as follows
Z 1 (/) = Z i ( 0 ) ( l + ^ i ( 0 ) ^ / F2(S)^)~1F1
y = y0exp( / Z^dsjFf,
F i = |1 - 2 F 0 ( / - /o) + # o ( / - Z 0 ) 2 |,
F2(s) = - 7 = log , A 0 > 0, H0 < 0,

VA0 V-Ho - OL + V-#o -
F2{s) = - 7 = log
#o \Affo + a - A 0 s + y/H0 - a - K0s'
HQ- a
Ko>0,Ho>0,s< ,
AO
^2() = ^ - a r c s m , A 0 < 0 , a = Wflg - A 0 .

-A0 a v
Eqs. (92) and (93) describe the decay of a weak shock wave in a non-
uniform gas and the variation of the pressure derivative (Z\ > 0) behind its
front. In order to obtain the pressure distribution behind the shock wave we
need more equations.
Let us consider the set of three equations. T h e gas is assumed to be uniform
and at rest ahead of the shock wave. Those are as follows
d
y 7 + 1 rr
dl ~ 4 7 < / ^ i ,
dZy 7 + 1 72
~~dT
-2z2
27
2
dZ2 7 - 3(7 + 1 ) ^ ,
472 (94)
dl 27
We can rewrite the last two of Eqs. (94) in the form
dZi _ 2 7 Z2 2Zi
dy 7+ izl + ,
y
f. = .nl?l + î. (95)

dy 7 y y
Differentiating the second of Eqs. (95) with respect to y and taking into account
the first one, we have
2
29/ d w 1 0 y dw+ ( 2 4 + / ? y ) w = 0
V~ ^ '
w = Zl / ? = ( 7 - l ) / ( 7 + l). (96)
Eq. (96) has the solution
Z21=yn/2{C1Mrj)+C2Y5(V)},
rj = A{(3y)1'2. (97)
J5, Y5 are Bessel functions. Arbitrary constants C\, C2 can be defined from
initial values of the functions Z\, Z2. Eq. (97) has physical meaning only if
y <^ 1. Thus we can simplify the expression for Z\. We have
Z^y) ^ ZM ( ^) . (98)
,2/0/
Substituting Eq. (98) into Eq. (94), we obtain
Z1(Z) = Z 1 (Z 0 )ft- 1 ,
y(l) = t/(/ 0 )/>- 2/3 ,
A = l ?lrtI)z1(/o)(/-/o).
+
87
These expressions seem to be more accurate than the previous ones as we used
three equations instead of two while seeking the solution.
If we take four equations then we obtain for Z\
+ I / Z ? ^ ( 1 5 6 + 18aiy) - Z?(140 + 42a l2 / + 2a 22 / 2 ) = 0,

dy
7+ 1 (7-l)(37-l)
7-1 (7 + l ) 2
We seek the solution in the form
Z1=aky+k.
The exponents a have the values
o-i = 1.2583, <r2 = 4.2875 + 0.40064i, a3 = 4.2875 - 0.40064i.
In this case the quantity y is given by y yo(H- 2 ^ i 0.33146Zi(0)(/-/o))"- 7 9 4 7 -

Eqs. (86) were used for calculation of pressure distribution behind weak
shocks propagating through a uniform and non-uniform gas. The flow was
assumed to be one-dimensional. Six equations were used. An example of
calculation is given in Fig. 22. The set of equations (m = 6) for weak shock
waves is given in the Appendix.
Fig. 22. Pressure distribution behind a weak shock wave at different

instants.
7. Path of a particle behind a shock wave
Let the shock wave intersect a particle at the instant t, ul,u2 being the
curvilinear coordinates of the particle on the shock front. At the instant t + At
the position of the particle is as follows
dxi
x\{v}, u2, s,t + At) = x[{ul, u2, s, t + At) + A*
~dt~
At2 d2i 2x At3 d3)3i

X
(99)
+ dt2 + Ot3
The value \^- is defined by Eq. (70). The j u m p s of the derivatives of a

higher order can be found from Eq. (77) and the compatibility conditions
82i lgjkdp^dxi 1*(> dP2 dx

%
= 9
dt2 p dui du k
du<* du~P
P2
1
1 dp2 dx2 1 a/3 dpi dx% 1 dpi dx\
2
Pi en ds ds pi dua duP ^ pi ds ds
Or
d22i
X i
a0 dx
2
dt = 9 duP pi dua p\ dua
]_dpi 1 dp2
+ n,- (100)
Pi ds Pi ds
Similarly,
[d3xi 1 jk dp dx{ d_ 1 jk dp dx{

3 = -y/y
dt p9 dui duk ds IP dui duk
Or
ra 3 x ! ' dp J _ djh_ dpi_ l_d_ dp

dt3
= Vv P\ ds~ y/y dt ds pi dl Js
1 d2p 2 9P2 dP2 9P2
+ ds2
+ ffh p^ 4. a"?
a
Pi pi os ypi ou OuP
^"t^)-H7>>""^
_1_ dv$ dxk dv^ dxk\\ ( dp2_ dxl
du duT duT duJJ \ du<* dua duP
i dp a/3 dy dvki dx1
n
lypi ITs 9 du a + V -
duâ r * !hft
.2
dp2 dpi \ dx g ' dp2 aP dp2 dx1
9aa9l(3bai
Pi dua du duP p\ ds dua
duP
1 d
Pi ad Pi d dxi j_dpi dpi
p\ ds * du duP P\ VV dt + ds
dp2 dpi dx1 1 dp2 dpi dv{
aaP
dua dua du? piyfy dua dua duP
_ 1 9 /fe JL(!!Pi\-JL(!!zi\\ ^ + a9p

PI \ dva\ds) dua\ds))dup ^Pl
du V dl ) + 2y dl dua) du? py
a p ( d ( 1 dpi , dpi\ , 1 [ I dpi t dpi\ dy
X9 a + + +
\8u \^/y 8t ds ) 2y \y/y dt ds J dua
dxi 1 ds a0 dp2 dx{
X +
dvfi pi dl9 dua du?
Jo
Eqs. (70), (99)-(101) enable us to determine the path of a particle behind

an unsteady curvilinear shock wave up to the third order of accuracy. It is
clear that the path is fully determined if we know the distribution of the flow
parameters ahead of the shock, the shape of the shock wave and the distribution
of the pressure behind the shock. The terms which are proportional to At2
determine the curvature of the path and those proportional to At 3 determine
its torsion.
8. Distribution of flow parameters behind an unsteady curvilinear

shock wave
Let an unsteady shock wave propagate through gas. The gas is assumed
to be uniform ahead of the shock wave, for the sake of simplicity. Let the gas
particle intersect the shock front at the instant t. We shall determine the gas
pressure in the neighborhood of the shock front at the instant t + At. We can
write
p2(u\ u2, s, t + At) = p2(u\u2, 0, t + At) + s^-{u\u2, 0, t + A*)
+ \s2^(u\u2,0,t + At)
+ ^ 3 ~ ( u \ t / 2 , 0 , t + A*) + . . . ,
pAt
s= - G(r) dr. (102)
Here p2(u1,u2, s,t + At) refers to the particle in question, p2(u1, u2, Q,t +
At) is the pressure directly behind the shock wave. We use the expansion of
the flow properties in power series with respect to A*. We obtain up to the
terms of the fourth order
p2{u\ u2, 8, t + At) = p2(u1, u2, 0, t + A*) + Ax At + A2At2

+ A3At3 + A4At4,
A _ dp2 ndp2
at os
1 fd2P2 dGdp2 , ^2d2P2\ dp2
M
2 V dt2 dt ds +
ds2 ) ~ds '
1
A = (d3P2 d2
G9p2 r3d
3
P2\ 1 fdG d fdP2
3
6 V dt3 dt1 ds ds* ) 2 1 dt dt V ds
+G*L
2
fÊl)
2
_ G^ÊI 2 _ G2 f92P2
dt I ds J dt ds dt V ds )}
4
M = (&
4 -^?P
3 1 + G ^)
4 + - ()2 d2p2
24 V dt dt ds ds J 8 \ dt J ds2
i (fGd_ fdpA _ fdpA d2Gd2P2
6{dt2 dt\ds J 3
dt \ds J dt2 ds2
,3_d {Pp\ l _ i r do f_ fdpA _ 2f_ fd2P2
3 2 2
dt\ds J J 4 1 dt dt \ds J dt \ Os2
2dGd*p2\ 1 dGd (d2p2\
+G
1t-d?r] + 2GltJt \J^) (103)
All the quantities on the right-hand side of Eq. (103) refer to instant t. Similar
formulae can be written for the gas density. Eqs. (99)- (103) allow us to
determine the distribution of flow properties behind an unsteady shock wave at
the instant t + At if we know these parameters at the instant t. Unfortunately,
power series in gas dynamics have poor convergence. In order to improve the
convergence, we used continued fractions (Jones and Thron 1980; Ditto et al.
1988)
aQ axAt a2At2 a3At3 aAAtA
T + ^~~ + ~ ^ + 1 + 1 +""
While solving the problem of the shock reflection from a smooth body, we know
the coefficients of the power series at the point TV on the body surface, namely,
at the point of the intersection of the incident shock with the body surface. We
must determine the distribution of the flow properties at the instant t. The
time is counted from the instant when the shock wave hits the body. Let the
gas particle intersect the reflected shock wave at the instant t, 0 <ti < t. We
introduce the following nomenclature
At = it<--t^f^/r /GG
Af = Goo~oo.,, Ah
A*<i i==t h1t -i --V /^/Goo
A G00== CAt,
CA <, 0 < CC < 1.
Here
lere zrg
x% =
zg -${xl,xl)
- # i ? , a : g ) is the body equation, the axis ix%
= -ip(xl,x%) g coincides with the
velocity
elocity of the incident shock wave and has the opposite direction. We have
(cf. with Eq. (102))
fAt
pAt
/.At
s = - G(T) dr.
JAt
JAUl
In tthis
Tn h i s rcase weP m
asp W must
u s t fulfill
fill the
thfi following
followino- substitutions
s u b s t i t u t i o n s into
i n t o Eq.
E n . (10
(103)
(10.^
2
c^
^
+U.
(w)G
c (1 oc-
0 ,
.
C f->(i-C)
f^(i-0'f.
f - d - t f ff.
d2 2 22
/i,. .^d2G
^d G d2G /..
n ^.*d
3d G
C H A P T E R 3.
I N T E R A C T I O N OF A P L A N E SHOCK WAVE
W I T H D I S T U R B A N C E S A N D STABILITY OF S H O C K WAVES
9. L i n e a r i n t e r a c t i o n o f s h o c k w a v e s w i t h d i s t u r b a n c e s
The interaction of a shock wave with disturbances having the form of plane
waves was studied by many authors (Blokhintsev 1945; Kontorovich 1959).
The results were surveyed and some new data were given by McKenzie and
Westphal (McKenzie et al. 1968). Here we present a solution in fuller form
than McKenzie et al. did.
Any weak disturbance may be presented as superposition of three disturb
ances: acoustic wave, entropy disturbance and vortical disturbance. It is of
interest to solve the problem of the interaction of a shock wave with these dis
turbances. The problem is of practical value due to the fact that there are
usually disturbances in the gas through which a shock wave propagates.
When a shock wave interacts with disturbances of various kinds, its front
and strength (Mach number) alter, the disturbances being amplified on passage
through the front. An additional disturbance arises in the gas due to the change
of Mach number, namely, an entropy disturbance.
We introduce the Eulerian coordinates x1, x2. It is assumed that the shock
front is parallel to x2 axis, while the velocity of the shock wave is directed along
the x1 axis. We have for the undisturbed gas
x\{a}, a 2 , i ) = a1, x\{a}, a2,t) = 6Q a2, 6Q = .

P20
Here a* are the Lagrangian coordinates, subscript 0 refers to the undisturbed

value.
We get for the gas behind the shock wave
x\ (1 - so) Got -f So a 1 , x\ = e0 a 2 .
79
T h e linear wave equation has the following form in the Lagrangian variables
d2p2 2
40 (/ d)2
p2 , d2p
i2
2
\
2
dt
P20 = const. Let an acoustic wave fall on the shock front from the side of a
compressed gas. There are no disturbances ahead of the shock as the velocity
of shock propagation is supersonic. A reflected wave appears as a result of
interaction. We take the equations for the incident and reflected acoustic waves
in the form
S
JS1 = v U%* - k0Got) , ^ = i, (nj2V - k0Got) ,
Pi \ ' Pi \ /
n\1] = cos (9, n 1} = sin0 > 0, n[2) < 0, k0 = J.
Here 0 is the angle of incidence of the disturbance on the shock front, n\ is

the projection of unit normal t o the front of the acoustic wave in the xlx2
coordinate system, superscripts 1 and 2 relate to the incident wave and reflected
one, respectively.
We locate the origin of the reference frame a t the point of intersection
between the incident acoustic wave and the shock wave. T h e flow is station
ary in the new coordinate system. I n the previous system, this corresponds
to disturbances along the shock front from the incident and reflected waves
propagating with the same velocity. This implies proportionality between the
arguments of the functions (p and \j) a t the shock front, i.e.,
{n^ -kQ)al + n[l)a2

7-: w. = const.
(n^-JfcoK+nâ2
Or
(2) j ~ (2) '
;
n\ ko n\}
that is,
n2l\n^ - k0) = nPinP - k0). (104)
Eq. (104) has two roots: n 2) = <ru (TX = - ( a i n ' / ' - 2k0)/(a1 - 2Ar0n(11)), on =
1 + k2, and n[ } = n\* but only the first root has physical significance. For
I > n[} > 2k0/a1, there are incident and reflected waves. For n p < 2k0/ki,
we have n\ > 0. T h e solution in the case can be constructed, if we take two
incident waves which are not independent. For n^ = l/k0, these waves are
Interaction of a plane shock wave... 81
such that the overall disturbance is zero. In that case, the velocity of gas behind
the shock wave is equal to the velocity of sound in the coordinate system related
to the point of intersection of the wave fronts.
To find ip, we use the expression for d2M/dt2. By substituting into the
right-hand side of Eq. (84) the expressions
l - S P 2 = (p + A SM^l^-iv + i,)
ai^MoCit
we get
(Mi - \Ywl(F^ - F6)(F5n^ - F7) h

Fx = (2 7 - 1)M04 + 2M02 + 1,
_ FSy/wET (7 + 1)(7 ~ 1)^M 0 (M 0 2 - l ) 2
"2'Z - 2Fl^qE
F45 = M(7M2 + i M0y/(y-l)wQ),

w0
F 6 , 7 = ( 7 - 1)(Mf 22 - I K " y/j^lMoau
F8 = (57 - 1)M 4 + 4M02 - 7 + 1,
_ (QI - 2fc0n(11))(nf } a' - G0k0t)
s i
a
(2) 2 ;2 i
(ax - 2*0n(i1))
There is no reflected wave for cos 6 F 2 and cos 0 = F3. At those angles
of incidence, the shock front distorts and an entropy disturbance arises in the
gas but an acoustic wave does not propagate through the compressed gas.
At normal incidence of an acoustic wave on the shock front from the side
of the compressed gas, the resulting disturbance has the form
Sp2(a,t) = (p(a - Gok0t) + k<p ( (a + G0k0t) ) ,

Pi Vi + ô /
( M 0 2 - l ) 2 ( 2 ( 2 - 7 ) M 0 2 - 7 + l)
* = -
jfao
io = l + M 2 ( l + l
As one can see, the frequency of the reflected wave changes due to the Doppler
effect. The reflection coefficient k is negative for 7 < 5/3, i.e., a rarefaction
wave reflects as a compression wave, and vice versa. For the case 2 > 7 >
5/3, the reflection coefficient is zero at M 0 = M* = ^ ( 7 l)/(2(2 7)) (no
reflected wave), k > 0 at M 0 < M*, & < 0 at M 0 > M*. For 7 > 2, the
reflection coefficient is always positive.
Consider a three-dimensional problem of the interaction of a plane shock
wave with a disturbance propagating from the side of the compressed gas. Let
the shock wave propagate along the axis x3. Let the disturbance take the form
^Sp(2l) = j dX j <t>(Zo,X,Q)dO,
0 0
0 = a1 sin 0 cos x + a 2 sin 0 cos \ + a3 cos 0 G^k^t
}=e0a\ xl = e0a2, x\ = a3, xlêoa1, xl = e0a2,
2k0
x2 = (1 Q) Got + e0a , /? = arccos
We assume <j) to be a known function. Then the pressure distribution in the

reflected acoustic wave is
1 Jp(2) _ 4 9 0 ^
27T /?
/" , /* (cos0-F2)(cos<9-F3) ,/A ^ f/l
X
0
o-ia3 + cr 2 (a 1 cosx + a 2 sinx) + G o M

5 = ( a i 2&OCOS0) .
2
The resulting disturbance is the sum Sp2 + Sp2 '.

Let us consider a one-dimensional head-on interaction of a plane shock
wave with an acoustic wave. The equation of the incident acoustic wave has
the form
Spi - <p(a + Coot). (105)
Poo
A transmitted acoustic wave arises as a result of the interaction:
Sp2 = ip(a + koM0Coot), kQ = \/q0/w0. (106)

Poo
Substituting Eqs. (105) and (106) into Eq. (82), we get
t o - 7TTY~ ( 2 M o + 2 ( ^ + ^ ^ o + (37 " 1)M02 - 7 + 1)

Poo ( 7 + 1)J0
(M0 + l)(a + koMoCoot)

M 0 (l + fc0)
xi = a, z 2 = e0a + (1 - o)M0c00t.
In conclusion, we consider the incidence of a plane shock wave on a non-

uniform region of a gas at rest. We represent the gas density in the non-uniform
region as
pi(x1,x2) />0(1 + h(a)), a = nf'x\

h= -, h < 1, po const.
Po
A reflected wave arises behind the shock front
= $ (nâ1 - MClk0t)
Pi
The condition for proportionality between the arguments of h and $ implies

that
?> = - ( r f ) ) ' - (a3ni1])2) (konP+l) ( ( n ^ ) 2 + (>)) " '
x (n^+ito/)-1,
1 /
/ = ((r4 1} ) 2 - a 2 ( e 4 1 } ) 2 ) , <*3 - ek0. (107)
For 1 > n[* > fa = a 3 (l + af) , we have ny < 0; for ny = fii, we have
n\ } 0, i.e., the front of the reflected acoustic wave becomes perpendicular to
the shock wave front. For fa > n\ ' > /?i = e ( a 2 / ( 1 + <*22)) , the quantity
n\ ' is positive. For n\ < pi, the expression in the root in Eq. (107) becomes
negative, and no solution exists in the linear treatment (this means that the
flow in an arbitrary small region around the point of intersection between the
wave fronts cannot be considered as a locally uniform for such values of n[ ,
see e.g. Pekurovsky et al. 1974; Dyakov 1957). In that case, the gas velocity
behind the shock wave is subsonic in the coordinate system bound up with the
point of wave-front intersection. The function ip is
_ 21W(Mj -1) M 2 ) + * 0 y
f
(7+l)4M04F9 ^ n (D )
3 6
x(((7+l) M0 + ^)(n(l))2_U)3^(7?)!
(2)
F9 = 2Fi(n?))2 + 2F8^-Fio,
k0
84
8 4 Propagation and reflection of shock waves
4 22 2
Fww10 =
F = 3(7
3(7 ++ 1)M1)M 004 +
+ 2(7
2 (7+
2(7 + 3)M
3)M
3)M00 0- 7-77 + 1,,
++ 11,
a
)) (nfW
_ _ a(1) ( fn
,< j V -M
l fV -M C1M)
llk 00t)
-Moc.kpt)
00C
0C (2) >> 0Q
(2)
(2) >> Q
l n^;+&o
{2)
"~ ' ni 2 ) +
nn^ + k&o
00 ''
For
For v MO.
1l 22
// 3
3
3 \\\ !l// 2
P = ((7 + l)3M06 + u; 3J
"i^
n
P = U + ipij + uJ
/
and
and
and
^
/1
1
/ 1
v>2
\\\ l/
1/2
^
M
M oo<<
Mo
Mo ^ --2( (777722222
< (( Y
+ 6
677 -- 3
3 + (7 + 1)((7
1) ((7 + 1)(7
)(7 +
+ 9)))
9)))
9))) )j
)J ,,,, 11
1/22
1/
Mo <
< (^
( (( 7 + 67 - 3 + (7 + 1) ((7 + 1)(7 + 9))) ) J
+
+ 6677 -- 3 + (7 + 1) ((7 + 1)(7 + 9))) ) J
(j-(7 67 (7 1) ((7 1)(7 9 ) ) ) 1/) )
,
there
there is no
is n
no reflected
id wave.
o reflected wave.
there is no reflected wave.
10. P r o p a g a t i o>n n o f a pplai s h o c k w a v e t htrough

l a n e sho* rough a region of non-
u n i f o r m d e n s i t yf (((nnnooonnnllliiinnneeeaaarr ccaassee))
he motion
We consider the n of
of a shock wave through gh an inhomogeneous
inhomogeneous
inhomogene region
in one-dimensionali\ case. Suppose
Suppose pi(a)
Supp fn(a) = po = = const
onst for a< and Pl
a < 0, an , (a) =
Po +
+ Pl
Po+S P6pi{a)
Sfn{a)
i{a)
(a) for a > here SPl < 0,5
> 0, where
where 0,SPl {0) =
Pl{0) 0. Here, a is a LLagrangian
= 0. ag
coordinate and thee subscript
pt 1 refers to the state ini front of the wave.
wave We\ shall
thomogeneity,
assume a weak inhomogeneity,neity, \Spi\/
inhomogeneity |\S/n\/p{0)
f y i |PM
(0)0 ) < 1. We
We represent the
the den
density p2
and the pressure p p22 behind
id the
t h wave, as well as the the Mach number
number M M of the
wave in the form
22
poo(a.t)
p2(a,t)=p
2{a,t) =
= por,n+8oo(a.ti
20+Sp
p20+S
20+S
2(a,t)
P2P(a,t)
2(a,t) +
+ 6S62oo(a.t)
+ p2(a,t)
P2 + ...,
(a,t) + ....
...,
2
pP2(aJ)
(a,t)=P20+Sp
2(a,t) =
= P20 (a,t)+S
P202++Sp p2(a,t)++S62p2p2(a,t)
Sp2(a,t)
2(a,t) 2(aJ) ++...,
...,
...,
2
M(a0) =
= M0
M0 +
+ SM{a0)
SM(ao) + S M{a0) + ...,
P20 =
P20 p2(0,0),p
= /> 20 2 0 =
2 (0,0),p = p22(0,0),Mo
( 0 , 0 ) , Mo = M ( 0 ) . (108)
(108
Here
J.J.CH3 a 0 is
U.Q l O thei coordinate
U11C oordinate of
ÛU1U.11CLLC U l the
W.1C shock
O l l U ^ A . 1front.
1U1IL.
Using Eq. (108), we obtain

08), we ob from Eq. (1 (77) nonlinear wave equation
Using Eq. (108), we obtain from Eq. (77) the (77) the n
nonlinear wave equation
dd222SS8p
d SP2
P22 fp,(P*\
22
2\d2 8p2_
22fp2\d
2 5p2d15p2
( \d 8P2_i +l
2
-7 +
_ 7
fdSP2\ + l11 /(Q
+ p 2 \2\22
^ fdSp
P2 2
22 P2
~M _C2
-_ {7o)~da^~^P~7
2 \7o)~da^~~ ~4PV\\~dT)
-W-_ {7o)~da2-^7 \~dT)
_ cC WP2 (109)
~ HS/
\Po.
L / Po^~^-
" KS/ Po^r~ir-
4C 2
Po~da~~da-
da {i m
Here, cc22 is the velocity

^locity of sound behind wav i.e in the1 region a < an
id the wave
T h e solution must
The satis
st satisfy boundary conditi,
the boundary conditions on the contact
ontact surface.
suri
Inn addition, it is necessary
essary to take into aaccount
c:count
c Eq.
Eq. (84). We make
lake the substi-
sub
tution t - *
ution t-Kioo a 0 o
Up to the quadratic terms, f3 = (^2(^5 o) p2o)/po is given by

/3{a, a0) = A!h{a) + A2h2{a) + A3h{X) + A 4 /i(a)M0 + A 5 /i 2 ()
a a t,
+A6 I h{a)ti(T))da + A7 f h{a)ti()da + A8 f h{a)ti{()da,

0 0 0
Sp2 ao) 2
^ = Nihix) + N2h {Q + N3 P h(a)h'(9)da
+ N4 [ h(a)h'(C)d<*,
Jo
x2(a, a0) = e0a + bia0 + 62 / A(a)da + 63 / /i(a)da,
X = ( + m i ( a 0 - a) A(0 + 2 0/ ft(a)da + m 3 0/ ft(a)da,

_ a + apfco _ 2a + a(k0 1) _ 2a + a0Ar0 - a
?7
^ ~ 1 + &0 ' ~ FT&o" ' " 1 + *^ '
. _ 2(l + Aro)a + (a + afeo)(Ar 0 -l)
^" (l + *o) 2
f,.KT-W-ifW
V wogojo JI
_ 2(72-l)(M2-l)3
A2 2 :
V Jo V iVqowoJ V2 JO y
+ ^ T ^ ( ( 3 M 0 2 + l)w0q0 - 2M02(M02 - 1)(( 7 - l)q0 + 21Wo))) ,
2wo?oJo /
2
_2(7+l)M0^(M -l) _
A3 : , A4 60^1^3,
qojowo
, 4 3 f l + 3M 2 3 2(7-l)M02(M02-l)
A5 = ^ 2- f\ jo 2 g0Jo
Jo \ qoy/mqo ) )
4(7-l)M (M2-l)3 2
0^3
^6 = . ,., +, ni)ni
qoWojo(l : Ai, ' A7 = 2(1 + Ar0)'
. 2(M02 - 1) &
Mh-1) .
&
2Wo(M02 - l)fc2
l = 7 , . M 2 I 2 = 7TTT77?> 3=
( 7 +l)M 0 ' " (7+l)M 0 2 ' (7 + l)Jo?o '
(7 + l ) M 2 ( M 2 - l ) ;
mi =
JOA/90Wo(l + fco)2
1 / 2(7-l)(M2-l)3\ _ jo + 1 - M 2
+
" " " 2(1 + to) V qowjo ) ' "" 2jo(l + to) '
io = l + M 2 (l + A
Ma) = ^ , *'(,) = ,
po dr)
F 1 = (3-7)M 0 + 2 ( 7 - l ) M 0 2 + 7 + l ,
4
F2 - 2( 7 - 1)M04 + ( 7 2 - 2 7 + 5)M02 + 2( 7 - 1),

2(M02 - 1 ) ô , 2(l + fc0)2ô(M2-l)
( 7 + l)M 2 U T ( 7 + 1 ) M 0 2 T (7+l)gojo
a0
X 7h{a)da _ 2 (/- 1 )( M -;) 3 Jh{a)da. (110)

y (7 + l)goJoM02 7 v ;
If MQ ~ 1 then we have
vi
(7+I)2
7(7 ~ 1)
^ = -::;+1y2(M0 -1)3,
2(7
(M,
A3 S A, 2
7+
1 2 - L947 +169
297
n^wfr*-*
+ ^ J7^ HF (Mo -l) 2 }
4( 7 + 1)
^ (MQ-1) f 2(2- 7), , 27 7 2 -507+19, a , 2\
A5 1+ (Mo 1)+ 2 (Mo 1}
--%ny\ "7Tr " 4 (7+ i) ~ }>
(Mo_1)3
^--(7TF '
^ MQ-1f 5-37,,, .. 3572-947 + 5 5 . ^ ^1
2
^ - ^ ( M o - l ^ l + ^ M o - l H ^ ^ M o - l ) } ,
^2 = - ^ T T T ( M o - 1) ( l + (Mo - 1) - -(M 0 - l) 2
^ = 4 ( ^ ) ^ 0 - 1) { l + (Mo - 1) - i(M 0 - I) 2 } ,
r ^ 7(5-37) , , , n s
o = ! _ _ l _ ( M o _l) + _ l _ ( M o _ 1)2 _ Jl_{Mo _ 1)8>

61
= 7^1 I 1 - I( M - !) + 3 ( M - ^
= 4(7-1)(MQ-1)3
62
(7 + I ) 2
4 2
/w ,x l\ 3,,, ,. 357
7 - 1387 - 45, , l X ,l
63 = ( M 0 - 1) ( l - -(M 0 - 1) + 4 ( 7 + 1]2 (Mo - I) 2 } ,
- = !<* -') I1 - $ >

1
(M
"1} + ^ T I ) ^ ( M o - 1 ) 2 } '
f, 1, ^ . 5-3 ,,
2 = 4 - ( l - 2 ( M o - l ) + 4 T ^7( M o - l ) 2
37
+" l! 5 8 r 6 7 (M 0 -i)3},
8(7+1) 2
m3 = 7 \ 1 - v(Mo - 1) + J,1 ~ I,v(Mo - l) 2

4[ ' 4(7 +1)
As one can see, there are two waves behind the shock, one of them propagating
downstream, the other being a reflected wave.
The change in the Mach number is as follows
M ( a ) _Mo=(M02-l)M0 (M02 1)MQ
M Fl M
l-A (1 + )+ ll
H V 2y/qQW0J jo
(r + iMMzi) (I - Mill) _ I) *<)
k0(k0 + l)jg J d
o
_ 2a + a(A?o-l) , >
< _
l + *o * ^ ^
The first two terms in Eq. ( I l l ) correspond to the break-up of the wave at
the weak inhomogeneity Sp(a) = const and are dependent only on the difference
p(a) po. The third term gives the dependence of the change in M on the profile
of the non-uniformity.
If the density change is fixed, it follows from Eq. ( I l l ) for a quadratic
distribution of the density within the inhomogeneity Spi/po = k\a + /?22 that
Mo M(ao) has its minimum for k\ = 0 in our approximation.
It follows from Eq. (110) that the ratio of the density gradients over a shock
front is equal to
2
ff/lh^M^+^^W!))- }- (112)
Eq. (112) was verified experimentally (Shugaev 1983). A single diaphragm
shock tube of square cross-section of 28.5 x 28.5 mm 2 area was used. Density
gradient was created with the aid of a heater. Density distribution was close to
a two-dimensional one. Gas density was measured with the aid of Fabry-Perot
interferometer. Typical interferograms are shown in Fig. 23. The heater is on
the left. The first interferogram shows the pattern of the inhomogeneity in the
absence of a shock wave. The subsequent photographs show the incident shock.
The interval of time between the second and third photographs is 24 ps, and
between the third and the fourth 9 ps. Outside the inhomogeneous region, the
shock wave is planar, the density behind it being constant. Near the heater,
a strong density gradient arises behind the shock front, this gradient being
several times greater than the density gradient ahead of the shock wave. The
initial density gradient ahead of the shock wave was about 3 x 10~ 4 g/cm 4 .
In Fig. 24, we have plotted the experimental values (dots) of the ratio a
{dp2/dn)/(dpi/dn) of the density gradients over the shock front. Each of
the dots is the mean value of several experiments. Solid line is the result of
calculation in accordance with Eq. (112). It can be seen that experiment and
calculation agree well.
Fig. 23. Interferograms of the shock wave propagating through a

non-uniform region.
Fig. 24. Ratio a = (d p2 / dn) / {d p\ / dn) against Mach number.
11. Nonlinear one-dimensional interaction of a weak disturbance

with a shock wave
We assume that small disturbances are imposed on the uniform flow. We

start from Eq. (109). We make the substitution t -> ao, ao being the coordinate
of the shock front. Let us introduce the characteristic variables , rj
/a 0
a+ = / j/(a+(a,f),a)da, a" = / y(a~(a,),a)da,
C2(a,a 0 )p2(a,a 0 )
y{a ao)
' - c1(a0)p0(a)M(aoy
Eq. (109) may be written in the form
1 d2P2
Pi ddri *(t,v),
K
*'V) 2\da0da0 da daj { p\ d p 2 dn
1 dM 1 dci dp2 drj
ElL+
pi \M dao c\ dao d da0 drj dao,
y2 dp0 fdp2 d dp2 dr?"

pipo da \ d da drj da
7 + 1 fdp2_d_ dp^drj^ 2
c
\v\Pi V d 9a0 drj da0,
2 ^ d2 i AT 2d
2
r) d2r]
oaz oaQ da1 oa^
Let us consider the reflection of a weak disturbance from a shock front. We
take the solution of the linear problem as the first approximation. Then the
second approximation may be written as
= <!>{) +Hn) + I ^ I *(,/?) da. (113)

Pi Jo Jo
The function $ on the right-hand side of Eq. (113) is
*(, n) = cW((0V(Ci) + Qit'iCiWfa) + <?3^ ( V(C 2 ),

(y-l){T+l)*{M-l)h (7+l)(M02-l)fc
V l _
8 7 M 0 2 ( g o ô) 3 / 2 ' V 2
~ w0k\
27ôA?2VWô
() = a 0 _ a /& 0 ) TJ(0) = (a + k0aQ)/k2, h = 1 +fc,fc2= l + &o,
2
* 3 = 1 - l/* 0> <? = 2 7 M - 7 + 1, = (7 - 1)M 2 + 2,
g0 = ?(M 0 ), w0 = w(Mo), &0 = v W o ,
2 2 2
X: = (M - 1) {2(2 - 7 ) M - 7 + l}/(g 0 j 0 2 ),
io = l + M02(l + 2/* 0 ). (114)
Substituting Eq. (114) into Eq. (113) and taking into account Eq. (82), we
have
-Sp2(a, a0) = HO + W ) + A1(f>2(C2) + A2^(Ci)^(C2)

Pi
+ A 3 f\(a)^(Cs)da + A4 f %(<*)<%) da,

Jo Jo
C (o)
z 2 (a, ao) = <*o + o(l - o) + 6 1 / <f>(a) da

K2 rCi
+ b2 <j)(a)da + b3 / <f)(a)da,
SM(a0) = ^ M & ) + W(A.) + {At + A2- | i ( l + k)2)<j,2(k3a0)
+ / <t>(a)(A3<f>f((3) + JM'(C4)) da},

Jo
= ^(o) + ()) + m 2 / 2 0(a) da
mia^(f
JCe
yd Ks
+ m 3 / 0(a) d a + 7724 / 0(a) da,
JO JCr
A = M + W 0 ) <(C 2 ) + L2 (* 0(a) da
Jo
+ L3 / <^(a)c?a + L 4 / 0(a) da,
Jo JO
?7 = ?7(0) + cn(a 5 - (*)</>(&) + ^2 / 0(a) da

JC2
/Ci /*Cs
+ <x3 / 0(a) da + <r4 / 0(a) da,
Jc 2 JC2
s = f (a 5 Oo) |a=a 0 5 ^5 ^ ( a > a o ) |a=a 0 5
Ci = * 3 a, C2 = W \ Cs = ^(* 2 a - *o*!i/ 0 ) ),
C4 = 5 { * 2 a + ( l - * o K ( 0 ) L
Cs = * 3 ao, Ce = k0k3^/k2, (7 = * 3 (),
(0) 0)
C8 = *o*|? /*2, C9 = *l/ , ^ = Ar4/(27iogo),
, , ,,. x . _ (72-l)(M02-l)2P^2
^ - ^3/(2*0), 4, S^M!^ '
A4 = -A3/k0, k4 = M02k2h/k0 - k 6 - k7/(M^ - 1),
f2 2 !x *1*2
* 5 = (7-l)(M0 -l) M^k
0
- ( 7 + l ) { ( 7 + l)(l + * / 2 ^
2 2k%q0y/q0wo
k7 = *i{(7 + 1)(2M02 - l)V5u^(l - * + *i/*o) + i 2 w 0 /(2M 0 2 )}
- ( 7 + l)M 2 u, 2 fc 2 (l + kk2/2)/q0, mi = ( ^ t ^ ,
_ (j+l)kk22w0 (7+l)(M02-l)M2
m2 m z
-4iqo(Mi-iy - 2-fMZqo
m
kik2^/qoWo LT
(7+I)2
4 = -T-7757T75
4 7 M 0 2 ( M 0 2 - 177'
)' l ~
27Mo '
_ k2 ((j+l)kk2w0 ( 7 - 1)(M 0 2 - l)A?i fciy/gowp
2 2
" 2 7 I 2g 0 (M - 1) + 2
M g0 +
2 M 2 ( M 2 - 1) }
_ (7 + l)fefc|w 0 _ fclfoygOWp _ (7 + l) 2 fc
3 _
47<7o(M 0 2 -l)' 4
-47M2(M2-l)' ^ ~ 2 7 fc 2 V?oW
*o!i (7-l)(M02-l)fc1 hqo
""2 ^1
2k2w0' , <?3 = , ,n ^=Z
2tM$^wE ', 04 "
47M2(M2-1)'
1 , AJW0&2
ft
l = , 2 ) , 02 =
7 feoM ' 7(7 + 1)M 2 (M 2 - 1)*'
_ (7-l)(M2-l)fc1fe2
6 3 ( U 5 )
" 7(7 + l ) M 0 %
In this case, the shock Mach number depends on the prehistory of the
process.
At Mo ~ 1 we have
^(7-l)(5-37)r 4
2
^ - 27(7+1)2 {Mo 1)
~ '
A ~ (7~l)(5-37) UA A * A
3 _ M - J
(
7 7 + l)2 ( ) ' ^ 4 - ~A3'
7+1 (5-37)(M0-l)
k3^M0- 1, mi i f - , m2 - i ^ ^ i,
27 87
m ~ 2(7-1), . 7+ 1 , ^ 7 + 1
47(M0-1)' 327(7+l)v " 47(M0-1)'

2
""1 = ^(M 0 -l) , **, .3.^(Mo-l),
-^-STTÎ)' ^4T<*>-I>. >24

1
~ 5 " 3 7 -(Mo - 1), 64 4
S 7 ~ ^ ( M o - 1), Ci = (M 0 - 1),
"5-27(7+l)V " 7(7 + 1)
C2 S i/()(M0 - 1), Cs = {1 + i ( M 0 - l)}a - i { l + 3(M 0 - 1 ) } ^ \
U = {1 + | ( M 0 - l)}a - \{M0 - 1)^), Cs S a0(M0 - 1),
C6 2 | ( M 0 - 1K<\ <r*(M0-l)&\ Cs S ^(Mo - 1 ) V 0 ) ,
C9-(M0-1)V0), *<> = o - /Mo, ,(0 = f +î. ( n 6 )

Mo -r 1
One can see from Eqs. (115), (116) that the reflection coefficient is propor
tional to (Mo l ) 2 in linear case and to (Mo 1) in nonlinear case.
Let us consider the nonlinear interaction of a shock wave and an acous
tic wave in the case of head-on collision of waves that propagate in opposite
directions.
The pressure distribution behind the wave front which propagates toward
the shock is as follows
2y
L = l + if,\a + tCoo ( M I 0 < L
Here subscript oo refers to the undisturbed flow. The solution of Eq. (109) up
to the second order is given by
^ = V>fo) + p dp j *(a,/3)da.
Poo Jo Jo
Using the solution of the linear problem, we have
POO Jo i+m-gfcwm
+ A3<j>2{el)+A4<t>(0i){e2)+As [ ' <t>{a)<f>'{0A)da
+ Ae f1 4>'(a){65) da + A7 f * <t>{a)<j>'(07) da,

JO J6
( = v + r,(l + (1+l)<f>(r])/(2y))/M0
~ 2 7 (A^+1) {7 + l ~ (Mo " ^Fl^ J ' *(<*) <*">
e, = mVW, 92 = ^m{,( i + l/fc0),() - ()/* 0 }, (0) = o - a/k0,
63 = rn(l - *o)i7 (0) /(l + *o), #4 = | { ( 1 + l/*o)a - m(l/k0 - 1)*7(0)},
(?5 = | ( 1 + l/*o)a, 06=mtW/(l + k0),

07 = | { ( 1 + l/ko)a - m^/k0}, Ax = F0/(j0(l + 7)),

A2 = -2M 0 (M 0 2 - l)/(io(l + 7)),
= F0Fs F0 (7-1)(MQ + 1)2(MQ-1)3 -
2
(7+l)?oio (7+l)io 2 7 (7 + l) g o 2 J ,> 0 1 3
(7+l)F4 f F32 / 2g0

f n r (
2 2
ilJho l(7+l) Jo V ( 7 + 1)5
3 4
+ ( 7 + l8)7JMo 02 V(M 0 - l)
^(l + lAo)3
+
ui%q%{q*F2m2 ~1)+2Mo(M2"1)F5h
A = (7-l)(M0 + l)2FiF3(Mo-l)3
27(7 + l)g0MWo
Af02(l + l / * o ) {
(Mo + l ) 2
2 22
Afi = (7 - l)(Mp + l))2 Fif F 1 F3 (M
3 (M
2
0 - 1)F!F 3 f F 3 ( M - l )
fqowojo I (7 + i)io?o
2
M
M 0
2
M0 22 - 1n
M
+jott>(l + l/*o) 7+1
A (7 - l)(Mp + 1) 2 (1 + l/feo)FiF 3 (M 0 - l ) 3 m = 1 + M0
M
47(7 + l)tfoWoj"o ' o
F 0 = 2(2 7 - 1)M04 + (7 + 5)M02 - 7 + 1 ,
Pi = 2(7 - 1)M0 + (7 + 1 ) ^ ^ + 7 - 3 ,
JF2 = 2(7-l)Mo + 7 - 3 ,
F3 = 2M04 + 2(7 + 1)M03 + ( 3 7 - 1)M02 - 7 + 1 ,
F 4 = 4 ( 2 7 - l ) M 0 2 + 7 + 5,
F5 = 67(7 - 1)M02 - 2 7 (3 - 7 )Mo - (7 - I) 2 - (H7)
At M 0 ~ 1 we have
5-37,M ^ (9 +l)(7-7)
AiSl, A 2 S - f (Mo - n1), AA 3 S - 7
7+1
A ~32(7-l)a( 1)3 < (7-I)2
AA A
~ ^ +1 ) 2 ^ - ^ ' - 47(7 + 1 ) 2 '
2(-,-l)2 % - l ) 2
3
wiofwuMfcMMwiinnnm lIlliiniiL..-JmMBB8L^t*MiSI!S^
The expression for the pressure in Eq. (117) can be separated into two
parts. . One of them refers to the break-up of an arbitrary discontinuity, the
other depending on the pressure distribution behind the front of the acoustic
wave.
12. Instability of shock waves
Experiments fulfilled in shock tubes in the seventies showed interesting

features of shock waves at high Mach numbers. A distortion of the shock
front was observed. It was found that density distribution as well as electron
number density became non-monotonous within the relaxation zone (Griffiths
et al. 1978; Glass et al. 1978; Ryazin 1980). Those phenomena reveal a
threshold character, the threshold depending on the shock velocity and the
initial pressure. Small impurities of hydrogen influence the flow in a stabilizing
manner. Fig. 25 shows interferograms of unstable shock waves (Ryazin 1980).
Thus the problem of shock stability arises.
Fig. 25. Interferometric streak-camera records of unstable shock

waves in xenon, a - po = 1.3kPa, M 15.8; b - po = 1.3kPa,
M = 1 7 . 8 (Ryazin 1980).
Theoretically the stability of a plane shock wave was studied in the fifties
(Dyakov 1954; Kontorovich 1959; Yordansky 1960). The aforementioned au
thors investigated the interaction of a plane shock wave with small perturbations
Interaction of a plane shock wave...
wave. 97
inn the flow behind the shock

Lock front.
The problem under consideration
consi is as ffollows. There
re is an initially plan
plane
hock wave. The flow upstream
shock upstre
ipstream and down
downstream is uniform.
niform. Let the small
sma
disturbances
isturbances behind the shock
shod wave be
shnrV WRVP b p
P2 =
= P20
P20 + Sp2, P20 = const, Sp2 = Sp>
2020exp{kr-u;t).
p(jfer-arf). (118)
If the amplitude of the disturbances increases es as the ttme [me grows then an in-
stability occurs. If the amplitude diminishes as the time>grows the
grows thenthen the
the shock
shock
wave
ave is stable. In the case when hen the amplitude
amplitude
ude does not
ot grow and
ai does not
diminish
iminish we have IdVC the nl C U L l d l OtClUllltJ'.
t l l C lneutral stability.
It was found m d that fr two phenomena riomena m a y take ke place:
p (1)
.) corrugation
corrugat instabil-
instabil-
ity of shock waves; aves; (2) sspontaneous Leous emission of ofsound
sound
so by the shock ffront. In the
by
latter sr case, the le reflection
reflec coefficientient of an acoustic
ficient acooustic wave
acoust avei from >m the shock wave wave
takes s an infinite large
i t e larg value but
ut the perturbations
perturbat tions
perturbation do not grow
t ow in 1time. Those
TThose
authors lors stated1 the he conditions
the conditions for
co
con :or corrugation
for iinst
corrugation instability ty as well ell as ffor spoi
spontan-
spontan-
eouss emissioni of>f sound. sou
soun An infinite large value ilue of the
value ction ccoefficient
le reflection
reflecti coeffick is
aa defect of linear theory. The reflection coefficient
defect 01 linear theory. The renection coemcient has a fniie value 11 we use has aa finite
finite val-
value if we use
nonlinear
nonlinear equations. equations.
Let us
Let us consider
consider the the reflection
reflection of of small
small disturbances
disturbances from from an a initially
an initially plane
plane
shock front in a gas with arbitrary equation
shock front in a gas with arbitrary equation of state. We make use of the of state. We r
make use of the
f n l l n w i n c r P m n ttion
inn
following equation
l E
i~^f, ( 1 + 2n*,r2 ..IdG , _ , 1 dp

Mi-a=-(i-Mj)-^% I +^
2 *(. i( -
M . 2 2 0 rr M
m,
1-., , + G
(119)
>ng the Hugoniot

Here: subscript H denotes that the derivative is taken along Hugoniot adia-
:, M2 is the Mach number of the shock wave referred to
batic, to the gas downst:
downstream.
Eq. (119) is similar to Eq. (82). Differentiating Eq. (119)I) along the ray, ttaking
into account Eq. (118), and retaining the members onlyf of of the
the first
first order,
first orde we
order, we
have
1 _^ 1 A^Xn 1 A / >An\ AAtf
(120)
From the Hugoniot adiabatic we obtain
Sp2 ==
2Pl G(l-g) rfG
2piG(l~g)
dp? = : -0U. (121)
F
F 1+j
1+j
The variation of the mean curvature of the shock front is equal to
dSH _ 1+j d2Sp 2 _ 2 ,

2 a
~dT- 2^(1-e)e*da*da*' ~Xv [
'
The acoustic disturbance is taken in the form

Sp2 4 (<!>< _ ^ ) + ^ ( n j V - ^ )
Pi
The flow is steady in the reference frame which is fixed at the point of inter
section of the wave fronts. Consequently, we have
r4 2) = {(1 + Af|) cos 0 - 2M 2 } /{Ml - 2M 2 cos $ + 1),

4 2 ) = (1 - M | ) sin0/(M 2 2 - 2M 2 cos 0 + 1).
Taking into account Eqs. (120), (121), (122), we define the function V>
C
V> ( n p V - j-t) = Wt), k = Ni/N2,
= (M22 - 2M 2 cos 9 + 1) (nj2)a*" - <) / ( l - JW|),

JVi = e(l - M 2 cos 0)(1 + 2 M | - 3M 2 cos 0 + j ( l - M 2 cos 0))
-M2(l+j)sin20,
N2 = e(l - M 2 cos 0)(j(l - M 2 cos 0) + 2 M | - 1 - M 2 cos 0)
+ M2(l+j)sin20, j = ^{Â\.
The reflection coefficient becomes infinite for j in the range
e(l - Ml) - Ml
< j < l + 2M 2 . (123)
e(l - Ml) + Ml
Eq. (123) is also the condition for neutral stability of the shock wave. The
instability occurs if
i < - l o r j > l + 2M 2 . (124)
The instability cannot arise in an ideal gas with a constant adiabatic index
7. According to Dyakov-Kontorovich-Yordansky criteria, the instability can
arise only due to non-monotonous form of shock adiabatic. It is interesting to
note that Anile and Russo (Anile et al. 1986 a) obtained just the same criteria
in nonlinear case, using the ray method.
In fact, on assumption the gas ahead of the shock wave is uniform and at
rest, Eq. (82) may be written as follows
+ 2Ge(l + j)(l-e)H.
At the initial instant the shock propagation velocity is assumed to be constant

and the first member on the right-hand side to be zero. The last assumption
means that the perturbations propagate through the shocked gas from the shock
front and not towards it initially. Consequently, the corrugation instability
takes place if
j < - 1 or j > 1 + 2M 2 .
In those cases ^2 > o at H < 0 (convex shock front), ^ < 0 at H > 0
(concave shock front).
The inequality j > 1 + 2M2 is a condition for instability against break
up (Gardner 1963). Namely, if this condition is satisfied for a state 2 behind
a shock then the states 1 and 2 can be connected not only by the shock but
also by a weaker shock followed by a rarefaction wave which propagates in the
direction opposite to the direction of motion of the shock wave. Let the shock
wave propagate from left to right. We have: vs v\ = {(p P\){ri r ) } 1 / 2 ,
r = 1/p. Here v$ is the velocity of gas behind the shock wave. If vi = 0 then
vs = {(p-pi)(n-r)}^. (125)
We have behind a rarefaction wave
vr = v2+ I' C(T,S2) , *2 = { ( P 2 - P i ) ( r i - 7 * ) } 1 / 2 . (126)
Let us consider the curves vs(p), vr(p) in the plane p, v. The curve vs(p) is
obtained by eliminating r from Eq. (125) and the Hugoniot adiabatic
A(r,p)-A(Ti,pi) - -^(p-pîr + n) = 0,
where h is enthalpy.
The curve vr(p) is obtained by eliminating r from (126) and the equation
of state p = p(r, S). It follows from Eqs. (125), (126)
dvs _ J_( _ -x _J2 d^r _ _J2_ _ n _ V2_

dp ~~ 2m c2' dp ~ c2' n r2'
The curves vvss{p)

The curves {p) and
and vvrr(p)
{p) intersect
intersect at at vv =
vvrr,, pp =
= pP2-
2-. There
nere ii
ii snother
snotner ppinn
another ppinn
of
of intersection. If p decreases, vs finally decreases and becomes equal
intersection. If p decreases, v s finally decreases and becomes equal to
to zero
zero
at = Plpi.
at pp = . On
pi. the contrary,
On the
the contrary,
contrary, vvvrr(p)
{p) increases
(p) increases as
r
as pp decreases
as decreases because
decreases because
because
d2vr/dp2 = (r5/2c5)(52p/5r2)s >
>0
for normal gas. Houwing uwing et al. (Houwing et al. 1983) pointed out that the
condition of spontaneous emission of sound can be identified as the condition
where a normal shock can split into a stronger oblique shock and an oblique
rarefaction wave. The region j < - 1 was identified by Fowles (Fowles 1981)
as that one where a shock wave splits into two shocks propagating in the same
direction.
For shocks in carbon dioxide, it was found that there is a reasonable agree-
ment
nent between the observed instability and the lower boundary of the region of
spontaneous
pontaneous emission of sound (Houwing et al. 1983). However, the instability
region
egion is predicted to occur at somewhat higher velocities.
The instability of a shock wave in monatomic gases was the object of in-
vestigations
vestigations by many authors. Baryshnikov and Skvortsov (Baryshnikov et al.
980) proposed that intermediate stage of ionization is exothermic and is able
1980)
too destabilize the flow. Mishin et al. (Mishin et al. 1981) assumed that the
exothermic stage occurs as follows. First of all atom-atom collisions lead to
the population of metastable states at excitation temperatures which are higher
than the translational temperature of the atoms. Thus the excess of energy
is stored
stored and and later later onon released
released through
through superelastic
superelastic collisions. Yushchenkova Yushchenkova
(Yushchenkova
(Yushchenkova 1980) 1980) predicted
predicted that
that maximum
maximum populations
populations are are achieved
achieved behind
behind
the shock
the shock front.front. However, experiments fulfilled
However, experiments by Houwing
fulfilled by Houwing et et al.
al. (Houwing
(Houwing
et al.
et al. 1986)
1986) did did not confirm this
not confirm this hypothesis.
hypothesis.
It was suggested that the instability appears as a result of precursor ra-
diation from the gas behind the shock wave (Egorushkin et al. 1990). There
are
a r A two
t-air, stages
c t a f f e c of the
n f A c process.
n m ^
C O First
F of all,
i r c t r,f all aa neutral stability
nci.fral o i a k i l H , , of
^ f the
t k shock
0 o V i ^ U wave
,a0
appears
appears (Egorushkin
(Egorushkin and and Uspensky
Uspensky 1W2) 1992) andand then
then the
the shockshock wave wave becomes
becomes
unstable
unstable due to precursor radiation. Shock waves in argon were considered.
due to precursor radiation. Shock waves in argon were considered.
The conditions
The conditions for for neutral
neutral stability
stability of of aa plane
plane shock
shock
Lock wave wave may may bebe written
written
as follows (Teshukov kov 1986)
(-()J(I)((!)-)
dp\ c2
= (127)
Ws -^ ^ ^
We can write Eq. (127) in the form
*('(*),-')/('-&,
We use the Saha equation
a2 _ 2Dj fmekT\3/2 J T
e- /* ,
l - a ~ {ni+na)Da \ lira2 )
Ni
D
J = I > j exp(-4/ArT), j = a; i,
f
where a is the degree of ionization, </' and El- are the degeneracy and the value
of the /th electronic energy level of the atom, Dj is the partition function, Ni is
the number of the excited levels that we take into account. Subscripts a, i refer
to atoms and ions, respectively.
The inequality (127) may be rewritten as
,dAa dAi / rrida\ /3 1
+ (! + <*) ( f
A
; = ^:Eci^4exp(-4/T)' i = a ; *> (128)
where Cj are weight coefficients. If 7 = 5/3 then Eq. (128) transforms into
A = (l-a)Aa(T)+aA,-(T).
Fig. 26 shows the function F = T ( | ^ ) a - (/ + AA)(1 + a) against Te
(p = 0.1 kg/m 3 ). The neutral stability appears at 1.01 eV< Te < 1.25 eV.
Let us find the values of the Mach numbers that correspond to the neutral
stability of shock waves. The Hugoniot adiabatic is as follows
e(T, r) - ei + \{r - n)(p + Pl) + Q(T) = 0, p = PRT(1 + a),
e(T,r) = - ^ - + a / + C i A ( T ) .
7-1
Fig. 26. Function F against T e . The region F > 0 corresponds to

the instability of a shock wave (Egorushkin et al. 1992).
Here q accounts for absorption of radiation. The value q = 0 corresponds to

the full absorption of radiation.
It was shown that the range of neutral stability m a y become a region of
instability due to the effect of precursor radiation (Egorushkin et al. 1990).
The flow is assumed to be one-dimensional. The mechanism of instability is
as follows. A r a n d o m temperature disturbance behind the shock wave causes
a local enlargement (or decrease) of the flux of precursor radiation. This fact
leads to thermal inhomogeneity in the flow ahead of the shock wave and involves
the increase (decrease) of the velocity of an appropriate section of the shock
front. Neutral stability occurs in the range of Mach numbers 17 < M < 21
(first ionization) and 30 < M < 35 (second ionization). Initial pressure is equal
to 1-5 Torr.
Mond et al. (Mond et al. 1994) pointed out the role of the kinetics of elec
trons in the occurrence of spontaneous emission of sound. In the opinion of
the authors, the existence of perturbations that do not decay in time shows
that the flow behind the shock wave is unstable. A frequency range exists for
which the perturbations in electron temperature differ from that of the heavy
particles while ionization equilibrium is maintained. The range of thermal
non-equilibrium between the electrons and heavy particles is defined by the

inequality i/ < w < 2î on , where wlon is the characteristic frequency of ion-
ization by electron impact and ve is the inverse of the relaxation time of the
temperature of the heavy particles due to their collisions with the electrons.
This results in reformulating the stability conditions. The experimental data
agree reasonably with the theoretical calculations.
C H A P T E R 4.
REFLECTION OF A SHOCK WAVE
FROM A CONVEX BODY
13. Reflection of a plane wave from a b o d y of arbitrary shape
When a plane shock wave meets a rigid wall, a reflected wave appears. The
reflection m a y be regular or irregular (Mach reflection). The irregular reflection
of shock waves was discovered by E. Mach who used two simultaneous sparks.
A wave pattern which appears when a plane shock meets a rigid wall, depends
on the shock strength and the angle of incidence. At small incidence, we have
a pair of shocks, an incident wave and a reflected one (regular reflection).
At high incidences, a three-shock system arises. It consists of the incid
ent shock, reflected shock and the Mach stem (irregular, or Mach reflection).
Different cases of shock reflection are shown in Fig. 27.
At high incident shock strength, additional patterns m a y arise, namely
complex Mach reflection and double Mach reflection. These patterns arise only
in unsteady flows (Bazhenova et al. 1977). One can imagine the appearance of
the Mach configuration in the following way (Bazhenova et al. 1977; see also
Korobeinikov 1989). Let the plane shock front be normal to the flat wall having
a small projection on its surface. The flow is assumed to be subsonic behind
the shock wave relative to the wall. A disturbance arises after the shock wave
passes by the projection. The spherical front of the disturbance intersects the
shock front. T h a t phenomenon is the limiting case of Mach reflection. The
Mach reflection has no analogies in acoustics or optics.
A theoretical analysis of shock reflection has been performed by von Neu
m a n n (Neumann 1963). He used the following assumptions: 1) shocks are
discontinuities with finite curvature; 2) two-dimensional steady-flow theory is
applicable in the neighborhood of the point of the shock intersection; 3) the flow
deflection in regular reflection is zero; 4) for three-shock reflection, downstream
pressures and flow angles behind the incident-reflected shock pair and the Mach
stem are equal. This implies the occurrence of a contact discontinuity which
105
Fig. 27. Reflection of a plane shock wave from a rigid wall, a -

regular reflection; b - Mach reflection; i - incident shock wave; r
- reflected shock wave; m - Mach stem; s - slipstream; T - triple
point; a - angle of incidence: 3 - angle of reflection.
separates flows of different velocities and densities.

The two-shock theory yields two solutions for the reflected wave, and the
three-shock theory gives multiple solutions for strong incident shocks. Exper
iment shows that the weaker of the two possible reflected shocks in regular
reflection occurs. We choose the solution that gives the weaker shock solving
the problem of irregular reflection.
When a plane shock wave reflects from a rigid wall a regular reflection
takes place at small angles of incidence. The angle of reflection f) is not equal
to the angle of incidence a. The simplest case is the reflection of a plane shock
wave from a flat wall at zero incidence. In that case, the gas is at rest behind
the reflected wave.
The quantity v 2n - Vi does not depend on the choice of reference frame, n
being the external unit normal. On the other hand, the velocity of gas behind
the shock wave in the reference frame which is at rest relative to the undisturbed
Reflection from smooth body... 107
gas is
2 = J-Ci
V 7
^(7 + 1 ) ^ + 7 - 1
Here c is the velocity of sound. We can write
V2 __ z2 Z\
1 2
C2 / , . , N /
7
(l + ^+ ^1 2 ) 1 / 2 7[(l + ^ i ) ( l + ^ ^ i ) ] 1 / 2 '
zi = (LzM, Z2 = (3^1. (129)
V ;
Pi P2
Subscript 3 refers to the reflected wave. It follows from Eq. (129)
4(1 + *i)(l + ^ s i ) = *?(1 + ^ * 2 ) .

It is a quadratic equation, its roots are
1 + "Vf *1 1 + *1
The physical meaning has only the first root. Thus the pressure behind the
reflected shock wave is
(37-1)^-(7-1)
(7-l)+7+l
The Mach number M of the reflected shock is given by
M = /27M^-7+l
( 7 - l ) M + 2'
MQO being the Mach number of the incident shock.
The value of the angle of reflection can be determined from the boundary
condition for inviscid flow. The pressure behind the reflected wave decreases as
the angle of incidence grows, reaches its minimum and then begins to increase,
exceeding its value at normal incidence.
The angle of reflection of a shock wave is as follows (Courant and Friedrichs
1948).
2 cos aA\
P =
^ ^ A2 + (A1- 4(7 + 1 ) ^ ) ^ '
A1 = (7 + 1)A3 tan 2 a - (4A23 - (7 + l) 2 ) tan a - (7 + 1)(3 - f)A3,
2
A2 = cos a ( 4 ^ 3 ( ( 7 + 1) tan a - A3) + (7 + 1) )>
(7+l)(M-l)tana
Az =
( T + l)M 2 ) + ( 2 + ( 7 - l ) M 2 D ) t a n 2 a -
Here a is the angle of incidence.

The Mach number of the reflected shock wave is
M = B + (1 + 5 2 ) 1 / 2 , B = i(7 + l)t,!-^_.
4 ci cos p
Here the subscript 1 refers to the state behind the incident shock wave. At
high angles of incidence, the Mach, or irregular, reflection arises. Besides the
reflected wave, the Mach wave and slipstream appear.
At a given strength of the shock wave, there is a range of angles of incidence
within which both regular and Mach reflection are possible.
As a plane shock wave hits a smooth convex body, the angle of incidence
increases continuously. In other words, one can observe a transition from
regular to Mach reflection. We place the coordinate origin at the point where
the incident wave is tangent to the body surface. The axis x3 is directed in the
opposite side as compared to the flow behind the incident wave.
The equation of the body surface is given by
X =
0 ~Y\X0i X
0J'
We introduce curvilinear coordinates on the reflected shock in the following

way. Let a ray intersect the reflected shock and the body surface at points
TV' and TV, respectively. We take the coordinates a?J, XQ of the point TV as
curvilinear coordinates of the point TV7. The time is measured from the instant
when the incident shock wave reaches TV. The coordinates of the reflected shock
wave are
a?*(a?o,a?o,t) = x{0 + v\At + ciMn t -At

l 2
1 A 2dMn 1 A sd Mnf
v\=v\ = 0, v3 = -Goo(l-0O) = -V) A* = ( < - V / G o o ) . ( 1 3 0 )
Here Goo is the velocity of the incident shock wave, G is the propagation velocity
of the reflected shock, M 0 is the Mach number of the reflected shock wave at
the point N.
T h e boundary condition at the body surface is as follows
x3 = -iP(x\x2), a j ^ i ' o + A**',
Ax* = x[(t) + [xi]At + \[x\tW> + l[4tt]At3 + ^[x'tm]At4 + ...
[dx'~\
x[(t) = -vAt, [x\] =
[df\
\d2xi
W] = dt2 At = t - rP/G0 (131)
The quantities [dV/d**] are defined by Eqs. (64), (99), (100). In our case
these expressions must be simplified because the gas behind the incident shock
wave is assumed to be uniform. The expressions for the derivatives [dkx%/dtk]
may be written in the form
[xit\ = X^ni,
1 m
-
Pi dut dun'
indyi dx{ ey/y n 8 fdp2\ dx{

V 2 / 39 9
Out 3W> Pl Out \dl ) dui
dp2 (v9y_dx^_,iVy en d (dpi dxi
2ply/y dl * dut dui + Pl dui \ ds dui'
%
de dx de dxi
[x\ttt] = X < 4 V + 2X^9^ 2 ( 1 _ ,y/ydp\
6 ) V ^ ^ V 7 ^
dut dvP Pi os dvP duv
{
e(l-e)dP2 r? 3y_d^_ ]_dl>_2 d fdP2 dx
Pi 9s du V ds dvV
de dx% G^ dp2 dp2 62
Zr, o1 A d
P2 9xl
p\ 9
dut du*i duG du-y 7
7f9 ^,p 2
d d x i e
r-ru .0/1 \E71 to a-yi P2 y r,dh2 dx
*
X(2)
1 dp2
X^ = {l-e)G,
Pi ds '
x(3)_Vli 9P2 6(1 - e) ^ dp2 dy tnBW dP* \ VS1,
X
- e P l { d s h 7 +
2y 9 du^ du^9 B
* du*) e ^
v(4)_ V&i, V(3) , V dp2 D(3) ^y dp2 dB{n] j/ dp2 (2)

ep\ ds ep\ ds dl 2epi ds
spi ds dl2 e epi os ou^ ovP

2ydP2 f (2)de (l-)(3-2) dp^d^
ePlds9 du"+ 2Pl 9 9 (
duiduv
+ |_(l_e)^+_ft7|^____fc^,flU_
+ (l-g)afî dy _ 2y c, (2) SAi.

Pi dut du^ p i y 5W
1 - g /rfp 2 1 dp2\ iv dy dy
2ypi \dl 2e ds J u dut dvfl
y avB(3)9p2 y r,dBW dP22y(2-e) f g5 ( 2 ) ^
_ i . - f t f l W ^ , izacv^2 ay
2p/ aw 2pi * dvtdw>'
_ dp2 dp2
1
~ dl ds'
dP dl\dsj ds2
d ( i\ a /1
cW \ P 2 / as \p2
hA=
dp V^J ~ 2S7 val w J + a^ ^
d / 1 ap 2 \ a / I ap2
5 = *
W \/>2 as / ds \p2 ds
h =*L
6
(Lî\ _ 2 - (- (Lî\\ . i l fl 5 ^
d/2 V/>2 ds ) dl \ds \P2 ds )) +
ds2 \P2 ds
Let the points TV and N' coincide. Using Eq. ( I l l ) , we obtain the following
expressions at that point
na = Vv sin(a + /?)/V^, n 3 = cos(a + /?)

dxi yi G
# -L. f A /
Reflection from smooth body...
body... I111
ll
^ = =^ *<n
9<n + (+^^- 2 " c2 o ^s cos(a
( a + /?), - )^ - ^^ ^ ) ) )M ^l ,)
9 = 9H922
9H322 A2212=
ute - 5
9 2==11 -- ^-(rPl
~(*\ +
^-(i>l + VVI)
ii)) (((2
22 cos(a
cosfa + (J)
/ ??-))---J^^L- )
ÔO \ .
- 2 - ^ - s i n ( a + /?)VY>,
Goo
a
Va = 0d^/dx
V W0, , VV = yjtl + tl,
vcos(a + (3)
/?) , I1 dG0 (f da
8a , da
da ,, \
66 = +
- = Goo ^
- G o o ^ -
- G
G ^
^ fe^
fe^ + ^
+
5H
&(*')
_G_G ,G , Gt_
,Gt_
Gt_
Q ai Vai + g,2G^^-
132)
(132)
G^ Var-V (132)
Here subscript 0 refers to the value at the point N. It follows from Eq. (132)
that at the point N the mean curvature of the reflected shock is
rr cos2 a ffsm(a + f3)\

H = - I . I cos a ((V11
((Vn ++ i ^22)
M ++ 6666))
VV sina J y
_2 d cos 3 adM 0 C3+ d t a n 2 ^ \
_2
G^"sTnV^ Gi:tan a^ri'
^ "n "Vddaa""<^33++GG 2i : lt a n * ~5T)
^ G" s^ h" si T a~dT)''
v 2
wG ^ 2
6 = 1-2 + ^- ^,
p5,
^00 ^00
- 1^^^11111 + 222^^^111^^^1221^ 21- 2- -^^2222 ,

6 ="
6 = ^1^11 2 ^ 2 ^ 1 2 + ^^^2222 ,
2^1^2^12
^ 1 1 + 2^1^^12
2ay
L - l + sm
sin a^/ V - <^^% ,. )
G^ 2 G^J,
i2v\
> \
^J,Q Q
,, _d
_d OH
d2j>
((133;
V'-dxV
V'-dxVV^Q ^
*ij ~
~ dxidxV
dx*0dxi'
OXQOXQ
From Eq.
From
from t q . (133)
{i.66) and
ana the
tne boundary condition on
Dounaary condition on the
me body
Doay surface
sui ace we
sun we get
get
m0(M02 - 1) //(c cos
wojMJ-1)
1 dM ==_ WQ(MJ-I)
WQ{M$-1) o s 222 aaa // /f( / l/_J>_\
/ _ vv \\ ,,a g) MpcA
M00cA
M cA
C0 008
0O8i H
1a PJ
7
ci
CI x~dT~
dc^~dT~
dt
(ft ILL V
Uv(7(7(77+++1+l i) v
)1 )V
V\V \V
VV
\V \U Goo) Goo/
G o cooJ// "^ GGoo)
oo/
x ( _ W l l + f e ) + 6 ( l _ 2 i + ^p))
( , ( v (v2
xxx (^f --it(yi^n+i i+f+efe)
f)e+)++, 626(^(1l--- ,22
l J) ^g --+ +
+^ G Cp^ -

3 22 5
o ci
ddci /fdMd M00\\0 \
/'rfMo^
fdM cosô.
cofa oo ss3a33^ tt tt pp tt \^
cccos
cos ^ _ (T ((77 +
(7 +
+ 11)ll)l)))22^rrrriarî //ifff2^2222cccccSooooosssssS555QQQa^:::
l
222 3 1<3 _ _ L M
~ 22G~Z
"-~ GGoo
^*VV"~da
" G ^ \~da~J
GZ V "^^^ "T" /JJ;;
\~da~) ^llsin
^â~^
â~
^ iir^^^na""~V) ^l1& ^3VV
V)J _"~
>/ ~ "~"~2w^^l*^^~^^0^~L- M c 0oC083^ s3/?
cos
cos3/?
cos3/?
(/ a.
0_
_ M
Mnci
M
M0o ci-;cos(a
c il-vcos(a
C -- c os(a +
cos(a
0CI-?;COS(Q;
0 CI-?;COS(Q; +
+ ??)))2\\\2222 . A\\
+ /l3)\
//?
3
?
xlc osp
I cos p +
p -f- cosa
cos a I ^3 3 II
x (F 2 _( 7 +l)M 0 2 M^F 3 tan 2 /?
F1 = ( 3 7 - l ) M 0 2 - 7 + 3,
F2 = 2 ( 2 7 - l ) M 0 4 + ( 7 + 5 ) M 0 2 - 7 + l ,
F3 = 2(2 7 - 1)M 2 - 7 + 5,
1 dp2 _ JWQ CI / c o s 5 a dM0 dM 1 . \ (v \*
pi dn (7 + 1) 2 L Goo \ sin a da dt Goo J \ci)
cos5 a ( M0C1 vcosia + 8)\ ^ ,*Â.
x - 3 cos/? + c o s a - ^ -i ^ 6- 134
cos- p \ Goo /
It follows from the boundary condition (Eq. 131)
Y1 At + Y2At2 + Y3At3 + Y4At4 + . . . = 0.
Or putting Y{ (i > 2) equal to zero

1 d
?2 1 ( , *\ , v7 / / , mi
u - G 0 c o s ( a + /?) ^ ( 1 )
L ai
^{cos(a + /?) + V^sin(a + /?)} * g e),l)\
P\ os Pi Goo
+ G 2 ( l - ) 2 V v 7 ^ 7 = 0>
X<3) {cos(a + /?) + V^sin(a + /?)} - f 1 - ^ - V ^ s i n ( a + /?)") y/y
+
(s(sK(s)W'*-^S
^ ^ r ipv-tip(,^gi''ef)ipfl j-
G0
( l - e ) 3 G 3 s i n 3 ( a + /?)
+ 7^M3 i>ino^nâ = 0,
(V</>)3
G 4 ( l ^4
( v ,4 sin 4 (a + P)tl>to<r<yil>zil>T,il>vri<y + 3Vfr,e[9)e(9)
+2(1 - e ) 2 ^ J s i n 2 ( a + / ? ) ^ C T ^ ^ e ( 9 )
+X( 4 )(cos(a + /3) + Vsin(a + /?)) + 2X (3 )e< ? <7r e ( 2 ^ T
dp2,
dl Pi al / Pi
g(l-g)jg3 , (4) J_5p2 * (5) .
e2
Pi Pi
(^p2odada dp2p d2a ^ d f dp2
X
I </a2 ds* dx% + da " fo^ Goo dx% \ dt , 0
2
_i^__d_ fdp2_\ ^Vv d p dp2 V>C/i (1) 1
2 CM
Goo C>4 V * A G?o ^ * Goo ^ J
- 2 e ( l - e)Vy {As + 2e(l - ) i f } / ' / ^ f T e ( ^ ,
Pi *
e = 1 - VV> sm(a + /?) + -^ ^,
^Joo ÔO
(i) _ ^ 2 0 â dp 2 (2) _ <feo d<* _ Vv de
e e
~ ~dxj ~G^~df' ~ da dx% G^ dt'
(3) _ _JL fÊl\ _ J^__^_ / d P 2 \ (4) _ dy^da_ _ tpa dy
6(7 e<7
~ dx \dl ) Goo dt V dZ y ' ~ da <9z Goo A '
o(5) _ _9_ f^P\ _ J0__^ (^P\ (6) _ ^}l_ _ ô dhl

dxaQ \ds ) Goodt \ds ) ' dx Goo dt '
(7) _ dVo_ _ J0o_^/ (8) _ 9h^ _ ipg dh2
6(7
~ dxaQ Goo dt' C<7
dx Goo dt '
(9) _ _ 1 ^ P 2 , sin(a + /?) _ ^ (1) g G ^ s i n ( a + /?) g (1)
e
- ~ P l ds** V^ p / ^ +PlGoo W 9
* *"
a arctan(V^),
41) = B a ) ( + fl + B > co S (a + /?) + flW + B<#g*Ti>.MeT
-B$gKTi>Ki;T,
G dGp 4 (3) _ GG t
^ =
G 2 ^da- ^^7 ^
' . ^ _ ^ = ^H,
G^
n (D Gt . . G \ G 1 1
s + + E V G2 \ +
- = G ^ - G ^ - (^(WF 1x da
1 <*G0 1 \ \ _
-G^^W;/^7'
R(2) = _ J L (1 + W\ D<H _ v dG0 D<ry
CT7
Goo ^ + da) Ei(VV') 2 G 2 , da EW
' 2 7 ^ ~ ^ 7 + 7^-^^7>
( 3 ) _!i+G^ ^rfGoJD^_GG,
CT7
- Q^ ^ + ^ rfa ^ ^ G3^ VW 7 ,
(4)__G_dGo f G sin(a + /?) , t>2^

_ 2
^ G , da ^ U o o i(VV) 2 Go
^ = 1+ (V^, g2= Gcos(a+ /?)-, (135)
The expressions for the derivatives of higher orders can be obtained sim
ilarly. Those derivatives together with Eqs. (132)(135) have been used for
the calculation of the unsteady reflection of a plane shock wave from various
smooth blunt bodies (a sphere; an ellipsoid; a blunt cone; a concave body). We
took into account the derivatives dM/dt, d2M/dt2, d3M/dt3, d/dt(dp2/ds),
d/dt(d2p2/ds2), dp2/ds, d2p2/ds2, d3p2/ds3. Continued fractions were ex-
So
3,
O
o
3
1*
3
o
3
o
1"
Fig. 28. Reflection of a plane shock wave from a smooth blunt body; a - reference frame; 6, c, d- pressure distribution;
b - elliptic cylinder, the ratio of semiaxes is 2 : 1, M^ = 10; / - angle of attack f3 = 0; 1 - p2/pOQ = 745; 2 - 761; 3 -
777; ^ - 791; 5 - 8 0 8 ; (5-810; 7 - 8 1 3 ; 5 - 8 1 5 ; 0 - 8 1 8 ; 10- 820; / / - f3 = 0.5arctan2; 1 - p2/Poo =746; 2 - 7 6 2 ; 3
- 7 7 7 ; ^ - 7 9 3 ; 5 - 8 0 8 ; (5-811; 7 - 8 1 3 ; 5 - 8 1 5 ; 0 - 8 1 8 ; 10-820; //1-/3 = arctan 2; 1 - p2/Poo = 736; 2 - 7 5 4 ; 5
- 772; ^ - 789; 5 - 807; 6 - 810; 7 - 813; 8 - 816; 9 - 819; i0 - 822; c - ellipsoid of revolution, the ratio of semiaxes
is 2 : B : 1, M^ = 10, (3 = arctan2; I- B = 4; 1 - p2/Poo = 732; 2 - 7 4 9 ; 3 - 7 6 6 ; ^ - 782; 5 - 799; 6 - 8 0 2 ; 7 - 8 0 5 ;
- 8 0 8 ; 0 - 8 1 0 ; 1 0 - 8 1 3 ; II-B = 2; 1 - p2/p^ = 720; 2-735; 3-750; ^ - 7 6 5 ; 5 - 7 8 0 ; - 7 8 3 ; 7 - 7 8 5 ; - 7 8 8 ;
0 - 790; 10 - 792; d - hyperboloid of revolution, semiangle of tapering is 60, (3 = 0.15, M^ = 2; 1 - p2/Poo = 14.3; I1
2 - 14.4; 3 - 14.6; ^ - 14.7; 5 - 14.9; 6 - 15. 1*

Fig. 29. Density distribution behind the shock wave reflected from
a sphere. M^ = 1.2; 1 - p/Poo = 1.669; 2 - 1.672; 3 - 1.676; 4 ~
1.682; 5- 1.690; 6- 1.712; 7 - 1.753; 8- 1.796.
Fig. 30. Pressure distribution along the axis of symmetry. M^ = 3.

a-i= 0.0108; 6 - 0.0215; c - 0.0323; i=t-cOQ/r,p = p/p2.
ploited in order to convert power series into functions that represent the solu
tion over a larger domain. In the case of a sphere, a comparison was made with
numerical results of other authors. The m a x i m u m difference does not exceed
1-2% showing the efficiency of the proposed method. Fig. 28 illustrates the dis
tribution of flow parameters behind the shock wave reflected from blunt bodies
at incidence. Figs. 29 and 30 present some results concerning the distribution
of flow properties over a sphere.
We note some characteristic features of the reflection of a plane shock
wave from a sphere. The density distribution at the initial instant and for
t ~ ts r ( l c o s a 5 ) / G o o , where as is the angle when the flow behind the
reflected shock becomes sonic, has an entirely different character. For t <^ts the
minimum value of the density is reached at the point of stagnation. As the time
increases further the density minimum moves away from the axis of symmetry
and then (for t ~ ts) it is on the shock. The point with the m i n i m u m value of
the pressure lies on the body for short times; for long times and for high Mach
numbers it is on the wave, and for long times and for small Mach numbers, on
the body. For low Mach numbers the pressure distribution is similar to that of
the density. In this case the pressure increases in the direction from the body
towards the shock.
14. T r a n s i t i o n f r o m r e g u l a r t o M a c h r e f l e c t i o n
Three types of flow can be pointed out while studying shock reflection.
First of all, it is a steady flow. Secondly, it is an unsteady flow which can
be led to a steady one by appropriate transformation of coordinates. The
reflection of a plane shock from an infinite wedge refers to this case. As there
is no characteristic length, it is possible to introduce self-similar variables. Such
a flow is referred to as a pseudostationary one. Finally, there is an unsteady
flow which is not self-similar. As an example, one can mention the reflection
of a plane shock from a curvilinear wall. The first two cases are investigated
extensively.
There are regions in a, M , 7 where both two- and three-shock pattern may
occur. Therefore transition criteria are needed. There are three alternative
criteria which determine the transition from regular reflection to Mach one,
namely, the detachment point a p , the sonic point a 5 , and the von Neumann
point a^.
The first criterion is connected with the m a x i m u m flow deflection in the
steady flow. It corresponds to the half-wedge angle at which a bow shock
wave in supersonic flow becomes detached. The corresponding shock angle

is denoted as ap. Von Neumann also proposed another criterion. Namely,
transition occurs when an infinitesimal Mach stem normal to the wall can link
the point of intersection of incident and reflected shocks to the wall. This
condition for transition gives a value for incidence angle ajsf. The criterion
a as was proposed by Hornung, Oertel and Sandeman (Hornung et al.
1979). The flow behind the reflected wave becomes sonic at a = as- There is
also the Henderson-Lozzi criterion (Henderson et al. 1975). According to it, the
transition occurs at an angle such that the pressure behind the reflected shock
wave is equal to the pressure behind a single shock wave normal to the flow
direction. As shown by numerous experiments, the angle a^ correctly predicts
transition for stationary shock system. There is an agreement between the
theory and experimental data for strong and weak regular reflections and for
strong Mach reflection. There are large discrepancies for weak Mach reflection.
For some values of shock strength and angle of incidence, the theory has no
physically acceptable solution. In experiments, a Mach reflection is observed
for this case.
For the unsteady reflection of weak shock waves, experiments show that
regular reflection persists for conditions that should make its appearance im
possible from the point of view of von Neumann theory. This phenomenon is
referred to as the von Neumann paradox (Birkhoff 1950). A hysteresis effect
was predicted in the transition from regular to Mach reflection for steady flow,
when the reflection angle is changed (Hornung et al. 1979). Later on it was
reported that this effect was observed in experiments (Chpoun et al. 1996). Nu
merical studies also show the existence of the hysteresis. Skews (Skews 1997)
calculated the limits which should be imposed on experimental tests in order
to avoid three-dimensional flow influences arising from the use of finite width
wedge. It is known that for the three-dimensional case of two axisymmetric
bodies in close proximity with their axes parallel, the intersection between the
bow shocks would change from regular reflection (more precisely, interaction)
to Mach reflection as one moves transversely from the plane containing the
axes. Thus the finite aspect ratios can influence the flow in the double wedge
geometries. If Mach reflection conditions exist on the plane of symmetry, the
flow downstream being subsonic, there m a y arise transverse influences. Exper
imental evidence of these influences leads to the conclusion that the existence
of hysteresis in strictly two-dimensional flows has not been found yet (Skews
1997).
Hornung, Ortel and Sandeman (Hornung et al. 1979) proposed that sonic
point is a criterion for the transition from regular to Mach reflection in unsteady
flows (reflection from a wedge). The reason is as follows. The signal from the
leading edge of the wedge can keep pace with the reflection point only if the
velocity relative to this point is sonic or subsonic. The Mach reflection is
unstable in the range ajy < a < ap. In fact, if due to some disturbance a
Mach reflection appears, the subsonic region behind it is limited in extent, so
that no signal can be transmitted to the reflection point. As will be shown
below, the regular reflection is impossible in unsteady case, at a > as, when a
plane shock wave reflects from a curved wall.
If a shock wave propagates in a viscous, heat-conducting gas then there is
a delay in the onset of the Mach reflection (Virgona et al. 1996).
Experimental data lead to a conclusion that existing criteria do not explain
the phenomena occurring in the case of unsteady interaction between the shock
wave and the curved wall.
Galkowski proposed that the transition from regular to Mach reflection
is the result of a break-up of the initial discontinuity and is accompanied by
the appearance of a rarefaction wave (Galkowski 1989). The ray method can
provide some information on the subject. Eq. (134) contains the quantity ^f-
which tends to infinity as a > a ^ . But in reality the derivative dM/dt and
other derivatives as well as the mean curvature of the reflected wave become
infinite at a smaller angle of incidence as because the denominator in Eq. (134)
becomes equal to zero. The value of as is defined by the equation
, R _ _1_ / ^2^0
t a n
^ - M o V ( 7 + l)(M2-l)F3-
Thus regular reflection is impossible at a > a$. The flow has a singularity
at a as. Density distribution on the surface of the sphere behind the reflected
wave confirms the fact that the transition takes place apparently at a = as
(Fig. 31).
The common theoretical approach is based on shock polar analysis. This
approach assumes the flow to be uniform near the point of intersection of the
waves. However, numerical and experimental studies suggest that the reflected
wave contains a region with high gradients of flow properties. The proposed
way of the origin of the Mach reflection is as follows (Tabak et al. 1994; Canic
et al. 1996). The incident shock wave interacts with the region where the velo
city becomes subsonic. The flow at the sonic line has a square-root singularity
which gives rise to a weak shock emerging from the singular region. The reflec
ted shock interacts with the subsonic region, and another weak shock appears.
The shock generated by the singularity catches u p with the weak shock gener
ated by the reflected wave.
Fig. 3 1 . Density profile along the sphere behind the reflected shock
wave (Moo = 2). 1 - a = 37.5, 2, 3 - a = 46; 1-3 - experiment,
solid line - calculation by the ray method, angle 0 gives the position
of the point in question on the surface of the sphere. The observed
increase of the density for a = 37.5 supports the assumption that
the transition to Mach reflection occurs at a = as.
15. D e v e l o p m e n t o f flow o v e r a b l u n t b o d y b e h i n d a n i n c i d e n t s h o c k
wave
15.1. The interaction of a plane shock wave with a body
The development of flow past a blunt body was studied both experiment
ally (Shugaev 1963; Syshchikova et al. 1967) and theoretically (Rusanov 1961;
Milthorpe 1995). Below we give the results of experimental investigation car
ried out by Shugaev. Experiments were fulfilled in a single-diaphragm shock
tube of square cross-section of 28.5 x 28.5 m m 2 area.
The shock Mach numbers Moo varied in the range 2.2 < Moo < 5, the flow
Mach numbers M i were 1.1 < M\ < 1.66. Air was chosen as the test gas. A
flat-nosed cylinder (r = 3.5 m m ; 4 m m ) was used as a model. As is known,
the flow Mach number behind the shock wave in the laboratory reference frame
is given by
2 ( M ^ - 1)
Mi = Woo = w(Moo), qoo = tf(Moo).
(woogoo) 1/2 '
A streak-camera record is shown in Fig. 32 A reflected shock is seen. A
rarefaction wave interacts with it. This wave propagates downstream from the
edges of the cylinder. The velocity of the reflected shock is at first constant
(segment 01 in Fig. 32), then it decreases due to the influence of the rarefaction
wave. We denote as i\ the instant when the rarefaction wave catches up with
the reflected shock at the axis of symmetry. The time is measured from the
instant the incident shock wave reaches the nose of the body. In experiments
the velocity of the reflected shock at t < i% coincides with the calculated values
for the shock reflected from a rigid wall. The measured values of li agree well
with the calculated ones. Fig. 33 presents the path of the reflected shock wave
against time for different flow Mach numbers. Fig. 34 shows the velocity of the
reflected shock against time.
Fig. 32, Reflection of a shock wave from a blunt-nosed cylinder

(streak-camera record).
The transition to the quasi-stationary flow may be described with the aid
of time interval r during which the velocity of the reflected shock becomes two
times less as compared with its initial value. Fig. 35 presents the ratio r/ti
against the Mach number Mi. One can see that the quantity rjt\ diminishes
linearly as the flow Mach number increases.
to
to
I
o'
3
1
4
o
<*>
sa-
cs
Fig. 33. Path of the reflected shock wave against time for a flat-nosed cylinder. 1 - M M = 1.07; 2- 1.15; 3 - 1.31; 4 9?-
- 1 . 3 5 ; 5- 1.46; 6- 1.51. Q
05
Fig. 34. Velocity of the reflected shock wave against time for a
flalnosed cylinder.
15.2. The interaction of a shock wave with a shock layer on a blunt body
Let us
Let us consider
us consider the
consider the interaction of
interaction
me interaction of aaa planar
of planar shock
planar shock wave
shock wave with
wave with aaa sshock
with shock layer
layer
over
over aa blunt
blunt axisymmetric
axisymmetric body
body and
and the
the subsequent
subsequent development
development
blunt axisymmetric body and the subsequent development of the flow. oof the flow.
Such a problem
Such a problem arises
problem arises if
arises if we
if we study
we study the
study the effect
the effect of
effect of a blast
of aa blast wave
blast wave on
wave on a body flying
on aa bbody flying
at a supersonic velocity on condition that the distance from the center of the
explosion is much higher than the dimensions of the body. The transient flow
in question is very complicated. The incident shock wave interacts with the
detached shock and and propagates through the shock layer on the body. Some
time later a steady ly supersonic flow arises over a body at a new Mach number.
UX-LXJ.V_- I C t t v l KM yj Uv^CvVJ. y O U I-/ V^JL O V / l i l v JLXVy VV CvX l O v i J v / T KsX. KM 1,/V^Vl. y tit KM XX Vy TV J.TX CJtV-'XA XX IXXXJLIL/V^X
The problem under consideration includes shock interactions, propagation of a

transmitted shock wave through a non-uniform region, shock reflection from
the body. Hereafter we denote as M\ the primary flow Mach number over the
body,
hndv as M2 Mach number of the incident shock
Mo the Marh shock.
Various types>es of facilities are used for studying the interaction of a shock
wave with a body )dy in supersonic flow. Bingham et al. (Bingham et al. 1964)
ibination of a shock tube and a wind tunnel. Some authors used a
proposed a combination
toother with a shock tube (Brown et al. 1965; Damkevalaet al.
ballistic facility together
Fig. 35. Ratio rjt\ against Mach number.
1968). In this case a model is launched into the test section of the shock tube
where a shock wave is propagating. Other authors used a double-diaphragm
shock tube (Ruetenik and Lemke 1967; Lisin and Shugaev 1969; Shugaev 1983).
Apparently the most convenient facility for studying the present problem in a
wide range of Mach numbers M\, M2 is the combination of a ballistic set-up
and of a shock tube. However, such a facility is too complex and too expensive.
Besides, it is difficult to fulfill measurements on the surface of a flying model.
The cheapest, simplest and most convenient facility is a double-diaphragm
shock tube. It consists of two high-pressure sections. A model is situated in
the test section. The double-diaphragm shock tube operates as follows. On
the burst of the first diaphragm, a shock wave appears in the low-pressure
section. At Moo > 2.07 for 7 = 1.4 (Moo being the Mach number of the first
shock), the gas flow is supersonic behind the shock relative to the model. Thus
the supersonic flow over the model occurs. In some period of time the second
d i a p h r a g m bursts, and the second shock wave arises. This shock interacts with
the model which is in supersonic flow.
T h e i m p o r t a n t advantage of the double-diaphragm shock tube is the fact
that the incident shock is planar. Thus one can easily observe different stages
of the interaction during the propagation of the shock through the shock layer
near the body. In addition, the model is at rest relative to the facility. It
simplifies the fulfilment of measurements on the surface of the model with the
aid of pressure transducers etc. The defects of the facility are as follows. It does
not enable one to study oblique interaction of a shock with a body. Besides,
the attainable range of flow Mach numbers is comparatively small.
Fig. 36 shows a scheme of flow in a double-diaphragm shock tube. Here
1, 2 are shock waves, 3, 4 a r e contact discontinuities in the flow, 5, 6 are
rarefaction waves, a and b are the positions of the first and second diaphragms,
respectively. Main requirements to be satisfied are: (1) the flows behind the
first and second shock waves must be uniform; (2) the flow duration behind the
first shock wave must be large enough, so that a steady supersonic flow past
a model occurs; the second shock wave must reach the body when a steady
supersonic flow over the body does exist.
Let us denote as At the time interval between the arrival of the first shock
and that of the second one at the test section. The value of At depends on the
length of the first high-pressure section, on the velocity of sound in the driver
gas, on the time of rupture of the second diaphragm, on the distance between
the first d i a p h r a g m and the test section, on the Mach numbers M ^ , M2.
The real flow in a double-diaphragm shock tube is very complicated. The
second shock wave moves in the gas flow behind the first shock wave. There are
disturbances in the flow downstream the contact surface. Flow non-uniformities
may arise due to the rarefaction wave reflected from the second diaphragm.
The effect of that wave depends on the time rupture of the second diaphragm,
too. As the shock-standoff distance depends on the flow Mach number, one can
evaluate the flow non-uniformity according to the variation of that distance in
time.
In our experiments a double-diaphragm of rectangular cross-section of 40 x
60 m m 2 area was used. The interval between the first shock wave and the second
one was 50-150 //s. Fig. 37 shows the shock-standoff distance against time at
the axis of symmetry. The incident shock wave was planar and moved at a
constant velocity. Curves 1 correspond to the single-diaphragm shock tube,
curves 2 correspond to the double-diaphragm one. Small oscillations are seen
after the flow became quasi-stationary.
A finite distance between the walls of the shock tube involves the reflection
of the bow wave from the walls. This fact may influence the flow past a body.
Our set-up enables one to obtain a steady flow at Mach numbers M\ > 1.15
for cylindrical models of diameter 8 m m .
Fig. 38 shows the streak-camera record of the interaction of an incident
shock wave with a shock layer on a flat-nosed cylinder. Here 1 is the shock
1l
to
1
OK
1
3
Fig. 36. Scheme of the flow in a double-diaphragm shock tube. 1,2- shock waves; 3,4- contact discontinuities; 5,
6 - rarefaction waves; a, b - positions of diaphragms.
Fig. 37. Shock-standoff distance against time, a - flat-nosed cylin

der; b- cylinder with a spherical nose; 1 - single-diaphragm shock
tube; a - M^ = 4.35; 6 - M^ = 3.05; 2 - double-diaphragm shock
tube; a - M^ = 3.36; b - M^ = 2.91.
wave ahead of the body, 2 is the incident shock, 3 is the bow shock after
the interaction, 4 is the transmitted shock, 5 is the incident shock out of the
shock layer, 6 is the reflected shock, 7 is the rarefaction wave, 8 is the contact
discontinuity. Figs. 39 and 40 present a shadowgraph and an interferogram of
the interaction.
The process under investigation is as follows. First of all, two new shocks
occur that propagate in opposite directions. A contact surface is between them.
The transmitted shock reflects from the body surface. It moves in the same
direction as the detached shock. T h e reflected shock interacts with the contact
surface. A new wave appears. It m a y either be a shock wave (if M i > M 2 )
or a rarefaction wave (if Mx < M 2 ) . T h e refracted wave catches u p with the
bow wave. A new shock wave and a rarefaction wave appear as a result. T h e
occurrence of waves changes the pressure on the body surface.
The velocities of the waves that appear after the head-on collision agree
well with calculations fulfilled for plane waves. Let us consider the motion of
the transmitted shock along the axis of symmetry (Fig. 41). We use Eq. (82).
Fig. 38. Interaction of an incident shock wave with a shock layer on

a fiat-nosed cylinder (streak-camera record); I - primary bow wave;
2 - incident wave; 8 - bow wave after interaction; 4 ~ transmitted
shock wave; 5 - incident shock wave out of the shock layer; 6 -
reflected shock wave; 7 - rarefaction wave; 8 - contact surface.
Fig. 39.
Fig. 40.
Fig. 41. Interaction of a plane incident shock wave with a shock

layer on a flat-nosed cylinder. 1 - primary bow shock wave; 2 -
incident shock wave; 8 - transmitted shock wave; 4 ~ bow shock
wave after the interaction; 5 - contact surface.
The pressure and velocity do not change across the contact surface. Thus we
get
- q'2M'2{M'l - 1 ) 1 ^ - MW2{M? - 1)^
7+ 1
9P2 = P2 gpi
4 7 _ f M^rfM| _ M1M[g2 1 dM{ _ _ ? _ , . , , 1,

2
7 + 1 \ ci rft M 2 ?! c 2 A 7 + r V *
1 <9p 2 Miq2w[l 1 SJO'J
0,
(7 + 1)M^ pi 5n (7 + l)M[M2qi Pi dn
F{M) = 2(2 7 - 1)M 4 + (7 + 5)M 5 - 7 + 1, F/ = F(M/),
ff; = g(M/), ,{ = ,(M/), l=.[^-, kt = M. (136)

V 91^1 V ^
Here primes denote initial values for quantities after the interaction. Initial
values for shock curvature after the interaction can be determined from geo
metrical considerations
r w f f w2(l + M[k2) f Wl(l + Mlh)
]
1 1 2 1
( 7 + 1)M 2 (M 1 + M 2 ) ' 7 \( + 1)M1(M1+M2)
J"
(137)
Here Hi is the primary curvature of the detached shock wave at the axis.
Using Eqs. (136), (137), we get
1 dM[ _ 2{Ml' - l)Fiffi 1 &M'2 _ 2AQ (Mj ; - l)F 3 ffi

, 5
c2 eft ~ (7 + l)(M 1 + M 2 )F 1 F 2 ^ (ft (7 + l ) F 2 i ^ '
1 (9K = 4 7 /?gF 4 giwigiM^
P2 3n (7 + l) 2 -^2gig2^ 2 (Mi + M 2 ) '
1 9P2 _ Q2W[W2 1 3pi
pi dn f3lqiwiw'2p2 dn '
/ ,
F = q iW 1^/q2W2/31F5 2qiq2M^2
1
(7+l)Af 2 ^ 2
fok2F8
Fi Fi +
F3 =
M2F6
(7 + DM.M^M, + M2) V1 + ^T*) + ( 7 + lW
^ + *'
^4 = q'2fo [(7 + l)(Af! + M2) - -jîM? - 1 ) | + (M : + M 2 )F 9 ,
F 6 = (7 - 1)M^{(7 + l)Mi(Mi + M2) + M ^ V ^ T }

- 2fe1{(7 + l)MiM 2 + 2(M2 - 1)},
, 7 . 1 + >!i+iUffi (Jfl ,_ 1)i
2(7+l)M{2 2
^8 - 1 + y, (Mi - 1),
= gMiM^Mt 2 - l ) ' / ? l 9 ' l g 2 X ^ 2

M22(Mi + M2)F[q\l2w\12 '
fo = M[ + l/k2, lh = M2- + l/ki, fo = ^fi- (138)
Fig. 42 presents the pressure and density distribution at an initial instant

for the case of the interaction of a plane shock wave with a bow wave ahead
of a sphere. We used the tables of flow properties for the steady supersonic
flow over a sphere (Lyubimov and Rusanov 1970). The equation of motion for
the transmitted shock can be solved approximately if one assumes the shock
curvature and the pressure gradient behind the shock to be constant in time
(see Eq. (138)) . Calculations were carried out for a sphere. The variation of
the Mach number for the transmitted shock does not exceed several per cent.
Therefore we can put M^ const. The time during which the wave propagates
through a shock layer is given by
1 f6 dx
'=777 / * , MSMJ(0).
Here S is the shock-standoff distance. Fig. 43 shows the positions of the trans
mitted shock for different instants. Dots are experimental data, solid line is
the calculation carried out on the assumption that the Mach number of the
transmitted shock does not vary along the ray. A good agreement can be seen
Fig. 42. Distribution of pressure and density at an initial instant

during the interaction of an incident shock wave with a bow wave
over a sphere (Mi = 1.5; M? = 1.7).
between experiment and calculation.

Let us consider the development of flow. If flow properties are constant
behind the incident shock before interaction, a steady flow arises in some period
of time. When the transmitted shock reaches the surface of the body, a reflected
shock appears. It propagates through a non-uniform flow. There is an essential
difference between the flow pattern which corresponds to a sphere and that one
for a flat-nosed cylinder. In the former case, the shock reaches the stagnation
point of the sphere and then reaches other points on its surface. In the latter
case, due to the fact that the shock front is concave, the reflection begins at the
sharp edges of the cylinder. The point of intersection of the transmitted wave
with the body surface moves to the axis of symmetry.
The reflected shock refracts at the contact discontinuity and then it catches
up with the bow wave in front of the body. This is the case of the interaction
of curvilinear shocks of the same family. The former wave propagates through
a non-stationary flow. The above-mentioned interaction results in a new shock,
a rarefaction wave and a contact discontinuity. The velocity of the reflected
wave diminishes continuously in the reference frame bound up with the body.
Fig. 43. Positions of the transmitted shock wave (Mi = 1.5; Mi

1.7). Solid lines represent the calculation; dots are experimental
data.
It is interesting to note that the Mach number of the shock reflected from a
flat-nosed cylinder increases in time. The values of the initial velocity of the
reflected shock for the flat-nosed cylinder are shown in Fig. 44 (dots are exper
imental data; solid line is the calculation). As one can see, the experimental
values are 20-50% less as compared with the calculated ones. A similar result
was reported by Bazhenova et al. (Bazhenova et al. 1968). It was concluded
that there was a loss of energy during reflection. There is some difference in
the conditions of experiments under consideration between that case and the
present one. In experiments by Bazhenova et al., the body was primarily at
rest relative to the gas while we investigated the incidence of a shock on a body
plunged in supersonic flow. The discussion of this problem is given below.
Streak-camera records show that the bow shock velocity becomes equal to
zero relative to the body when it is caught u p with a rarefaction wave which
appears during the wave interaction. It agrees with the above-mentioned result
(see section 9). Indeed, the intensity of the disturbance reflected from a shock
wave is usually small.
T h e shock-standoff distance decreases slightly after the interaction of the
Fig. 44. Velocity of the reflected shock wave against Mach number
at the initial instant. Solid line represents the calculation; dots are
experimental data.
rarefaction wave with the bow wave. Later on small oscillations of the bow shock
wave appear. They may occur due to non-uniformities in the flow upstream.
Strictly speaking, flow properties (density, entropy) on the body surface
reach steady values after the detached shock wave becomes steady. Let us
denote as 13 the instant when the entropy on the body surface reaches its steady
value, as t\ the instant when the detached shock wave becomes immovable
relative to the body, and as t2 the instant when the contact surface reaches the
body. Entropy reaches its steady value at some point, when the gas particle at
that point has intersected the steady shock wave. Thus the following inequality
is valid: ^3 > ^2 > î- The instant 2 can be determined from streak-camera
records. The contact surface moves at the velocity of the gas. By measuring
the velocity of the contact surface we determine the gas velocity at the final
stage of the transition to the steady flow. Fig. 45 demonstrates that the velocity
of the contact surface varies linearly at the axis of symmetry near the body.
It is interesting to note that the gas velocity varies linearly, too, in the case of
steady supersonic flow over a sphere (Lyubimov and Rusanov 1970). Fig. 46
presents the shape of the contact surface for different instants.
Reflection from smooth body... a
J/
Fig. 45. Velocity of the contact surface against distance. a

- cylinder with a spherical nose;l - Mi = 1.6; M 2 1.2; 2 -
Mi = 1.6; M 2 = 1.4; 3 - Mx = 1.55; M 2 = 1.5; 6 - flat-nosed cylin
der; 1 - Mi = 1.45; M 2 = 1.1; 2 - Mi = 1.25; M 2 = 1.4; 3 - M x =
1.4; M 2 = 1.4; 4 - Mx = 1.4; M 2 = 1.5; 5 - Mx = 1.45; M 2 = 1.5; 6
- M i = 1.45; M2 = 1.6.
Fig. 46. Shape of the contact surface for different instants.

Fig. 47. Values of r\ against shock Mach number.
Fig. 48. Stagnation pressure against time for the flat-nosed cylinder.
The transition to a steady flow proceeds in a different manner for different

points of the flow. The more distant the point from the axis of symmetry is,
the later the above-mentioned transition occurs. Besides, the period of the
transition is not the same for different flow properties (e.g. for pressure and for
density). The process of the transition may be characterized by the following
two quantities: (1) by the period of time Ti during which the detached shock
becomes steady; (2) by the period of time T*I during which the value of density
becomes steady on the body surface. Fig. 47 shows the values of T\ against
shock Mach number.
Fig. 49. Stagnation pressure against time for the cylinder with
spherical nose.
Fig. 48 gives the variation of the stagnation pressure for the flat-nosed cyl
inder. The segment 01 refers to the period when there is no flow, the point 1
refers to the arrival of the first shock, the point 2 refers to the arrival of second
shock. One can see that the maximum value occurs after the reflection of the in
cident shock and then the pressure decreases up to the value which corresponds
to the steady flow past the body.
Experimental data are in fair agreement with the calculated ones. Fig. 49
demonstrates the pressure history in the stagnation point for the cylinder with
spherical nose at Mi = 5.16, M2 = 4.45 (McNamara 1967). Curve 1 corres-
Fig. 50. Density history on the axis of symmetry, a - flat-nosed

cylinder; b - spherical nosed cylinder.
ponds to the experimental data, curve 2 shows the calculated values (7 = 1.4).
The time is counted from the instant the incident shock meets the bow shock.
The character of pressure variation in time is just the same as in Fig. 48. If
M 2 > Mi then an additional pressure increase occurs. It is due to the fact that
in this case an additional shock propagates toward the body after the refraction
on the contact discontinuity.
Experimental data show that the pressure at the stagnation point begins
to decrease on the arrival of the rarefaction wave which appears as a result of
the interaction between the bow wave and the reflected shock. The pressure
reaches its steady value when the rarefaction wave catches up with the detached
shock. A similar result was obtained for the sphere.
It is interesting to compare the present results with the incidence of the
plane shock on the immovable body. In the latter case the pressure at the
stagnation point reaches its steady value before the detached shock becomes at
rest relative to the body. The mechanism of the transition to the steady flow
is associated with the rarefaction wave that propagates from the edges of the
body. Later on that wave catches up with the detached shock, and the velocity
of this shock diminishes and becomes equal to zero relative to the body.
Now we proceed to the density variation. The density was determined from
Reflection from smooth body...
xrTS'
Fig. 5 1 . Density gradient behind the bow shock wave.
interferograms. The density distribution varies slightly in time in the region

between the reflected shock and the body surface. A sudden variation of density
occurs after the reflection of the transmitted shock and after its catching up
with the bow shock. Fig. (Fig. 51) demonstrates density history on the axis
of symmetry for the flat-nosed cylinder and the spherical-nosed one. Curve 1
presents the density variation behind the bow-shock, curve 2 gives that value
upstream the contact surface, curve 3 corresponds to the stagnation point.
The time t\ refers to the arrival of the incident shock at the stagnation point,
^2 refers to the catching u p of the reflected shock with the bow shock, 3 refers
to the instant as the detached shock becomes immovable relative to the body.
One can see the decrease of the density at t > ^3, and a slight variation of the
density behind the detached shock wave. It is interesting to note that the density
gradient increases monotonically behind the bow wave after the reflected shock
has caught it u p (Fig. 50). The density gradient was determined with the use of
Eq. (82). The shock Mach number was measured from streak-camera records,
the shock curvature was found from shadowgraphs.
The measured values of the density behind the shock reflected from the
flat-nosed cylinder are 1.4 times as high as the calculated ones. For instance,
the measured value of the density is equal to 1.7 x 10~ 3 g / c m 3 (Mi = 1.45,
Mi 1.4), the calculated value being 1 0 ~ 3 g / c m 3 . The measured values of the

velocity for the reflected shock lie below the calculated ones. This fact m a y be
due to cooling of the gas near the body surface.
C H A P T E R 5.
REFLECTION OF A SHOCK WAVE F R O M
A CONCAVE BODY A N D SHOCK FOCUSING
16. R e f l e c t i o n of a s h o c k w a v e f r o m a b o d y w i t h r e c t a n g u l a r c a v i t y
Bodies with cavities of various shapes are used widely in aircraft and space
craft, because the cavity reduces the heat flux to the body nose. Thus the study
of shock reflection from such bodies is of practical interest.
Many experimental data and theoretical studies indicate that the supersonic
flow past bodies with cavities can be steady or unsteady (oscillating bow shock).
Shigemi (Shigemi et al. 1976) investigated experimentally the supersonic flow
past a hollow cylinder. Pressure oscillations have been found inside the cylinder.
Johnson (Johnson 1959) studied a number of cavity shapes at M = 22 in
helium. If there was no gas injection into the stagnation region of the cavity
then the bow shock was steady. Bastianon (Bastianon 1968) calculated the
flow past a concave body. He found that there are undamped oscillations.
Bohachevsky (Bohachevsky et al. 1972) found that the oscillations are d a m p e d
and the flow eventually reaches a nonoscillatory condition. The supersonic flow
past concave bodies was also calculated by Gilinsky (Gilinsky et al. 1976). Two
cases were studied: 1) the variation of a body shape during a short interval of
time; 2) a sharp variation of the Mach number of the supersonic flow. D a m p e d
pressure oscillations are found. Huebner (Huebner et al. 1993) experimentally
investigated the flow past a conical-walled cavity with a flat base at M =
10. It was found that there are periodic oscillations of the bow shock. The
frequency of the oscillating shock is equal to the fundamental acoustic frequency,
in accordance with the theoretical result obtained earlier (Bohachevsky et al.
1972). The oscillating shock amplitude is directly proportional to Reynolds
number. Under some conditions there was an aperiodic unstable motion of the
bow shock wave. A bulge appeared on the shock. The possible explanation is
as follows. The amount of gas gradually increases within the cavity until it is
violently expelled and the bow shock is warped.
141
The flow pattern is given below for the unsteady reflection of a plane shock
wave from a body with a rectangular cavity (Serov et al. 1985).
Experiments were carried out in a single-diaphragm shock tube of a rec
tangular 34 x 72 mm 2 or 28.5 x 28.5 mm 2 cross-sectional area. The shock tube
was 2.5 m long, the high-pressure section was 0.7 m in length. Helium was used
as a driver gas. Air, carbon tetrafluoride (CF4) and dichlorodifluoromethane
(CCI2F2) were chosen .as test gases. A model (a body with a cavity) was
mounted in the test section which had glass windows.
Fig. 52. Reflection of a plane shock wave from a rectangular cavity;

air, M = 1.7, Re = 104, ifh = 0.08, a - i = 3 jus; b - 4Q/is; the
time is measured from the instant the incident shock wave reaches
the bottom of the cavity (I is its depth); two-dimensional flow.
We used models of various shapes. The models of the first kind had the
width equal to the distance between the glass windows, so the flow past the
model was close to two-dimensional. The models of the second kind had
the width equal to 10mm. In this case the flow past the model was three-
dimensional. The ratio of the depth I of the cavity to its height h was equal to
0.08, 0.4, 2.5 (two-dimensional flow). Besides, we studied the shock reflection
from, a thin-walled hollow cylinder with a sharp-edged open end. Its inner dia
meter was 6 mm, the outer diameter was 8 mm, the depth of the cavity varied
to
o
o
Fig. 53. Eeflection of a plane shock wave from a rectangular cavity; CF 4 , M = 2.6, Re = 5 x 1043 l/h = 0.08, a -
t = 20/is; 6 - 50 /is; c - 75/is; d - 110/is; the time is measured from the instant the incident shock wave reaches the
bottom of the cavity (I is its depth); two-dimensional flow.
)_4
CO
smoothly from 0 to 25 m m . The Mach number for the incident shock wave was
equal to 2.1 - 5.5. The initial pressure was 1.3 2 0 k P a .
A quasi-stationary supersonic flow occurred in the test section after the
burst of the diaphragm. Its duration was about 150 - 300 y,s. We took shad
owgraphs by means of a Q-switched pulse ruby laser which emitted a single
spatial mode. The duration of the pulse was 40 ns. We also took streak-camera
records. The pressure at the b o t t o m of the cavity was measured with a Kistler
transducer. The velocity of the shock wave was measured with pressure sensors.
The Reynolds number varied from 10 4 to 10 6 , the characteristic length being
the depth of the cavity.
Fig. 54. Values of pressure behind the reflected shock wave against
Mach number. 1 - ! / d = 1 . 6 7 ; 2 - 1; 3 - 0.556; 4-0.
Figs. 52 and 53 show the flow pattern. A plane incident shock wave (1)
is seen. Diffracted shock waves arise near the edges of the cavity, they reflect
from the walls inside the cavity. The diffracted shocks interact with the reflected
shock, the interaction being the Mach one. Transverse waves and slipstreams
appear behind the reflected shock. The slipstreams roll up into vortices due to
their instability. The vortices are carried away to the corners of the cavity, and
a large vortex arises. Vortices also arise outside the cavity near the edges.
As shown by numerous experiments, a reflected shock wave interacts with
Reflection from concave body... 145
a boundary layer on walls in a shock tube, which leads to the bifurcation of the
reflected shock. The theory (Mark 1957) predicts that such a bifurcation m a y
easily occur for gas with a low adiabatic exponent. Due to the bifurcation, a
vortex sheet appears behind the reflected shock. A secondary shock wave m a y
appear. In some cases a multiple shock system (called pseudo-shock wave)
occurs. Owing to it, the pressure behind the reflected shock wave m a y change
its value. This pressure was determined by Znamenskaya et al. (Znamenskaya
et al. 1990). The model was a hollow cylinder with a flat bottom. The thickness
of its wall was 1 m m . A movable b o t t o m enabled to change the depth of the
cavity. The diameter of the models was 6 m m , 10 m m and 18 m m . A pressure
transducer was mounted in the center of the bottom. The pressure history is
as follows. First of all, a sharp rise is observed. It corresponds to the reflection
of the shock wave. Then the pressure continues to grow. This effect may be
explained by the appearance of a secondary shock. The increase of pressure
behind the reflected shock depends on the ratio / / d , where / is the depth of
the cavity, d is its diameter. The value of the m a x i m u m pressure p m a x grows
as the ratio l/d increases and then becomes constant. The difference between
Pmax and pr (where pr is the calculated pressure behind the reflected shock) is
noticeable at M > M*, M* = 1.3 - 1.7. Fig. 54 presents the values of pressure
on the bottom of the cavity. Dots are experimental data while solid line is
the calculated values. For comparison, d a t a are given that correspond to the
shock reflection from a flat-nosed cylinder. In experiments, initial pressure was
p0 z= 0.4 - 47 k P a . Air was chosen as the test gas. It is worth mentioning the
following fact. Sharp edges of the model with a cavity lead to some distinctions
as compared with the shock reflection in a shock tube. Shock waves appear
near the edges of the model. They reach the bottom of the cavity after multiple
reflections. If the ratio l/h is small then the diffracted wave becomes divergent
and decays rapidly. Nevertheless, the second wavelet may be observed which
occurs as the first one reflects from the opposite wall. In the case of deep cavity
(at high values of l/h) there are multiple reflections of the shocks. Successive
shock waves appear in the area between the b o t t o m and the reflected shock
wave as a consequence. This phenomenon m a y also change the pressure on the
b o t t o m of the cavity.
Gas pressure and its temperature increase inside the cavity due to the
existence of the transverse waves. The value of the pressure is 1.3 times that
one which corresponds to shock reflection from a flat wall (M = 4.9, l/h 0.4,
C F 4 as the test gas), in accordance with the data by Znamenskaya et al. (1990).
T h e reflected shock wave interacts with the boundary layer and A-configu-
ration appears. It is accompanied by the separation of the b o u n d a r y layer
and its transition to a turbulent one. One can see it from Figs. 55, 56, 57
and 58. It is worth noting that the appearance of A-configuration in our case
differs from what takes place in the shock tube. Namely, the separation of the
boundary layer occurs at larger distance r from the part of the shock wave that
is normal to the wall. Besides, the triple point is more distant from the wall
as compared with the reflection in the shock tube. Fig. 59 presents r and d
against s. Here d is the length of the rectilinear part of the shock wave which
is normal to the bottom, s is the distance from the bottom, a refers to air, b
refers to CF4. For instance, the value of r increases by 25 - 30% as compared
with the value defined by the empirical formula (Bazhenova et al. 1977). This
discrepancy may be explained by the influence of the diffracted waves which
cause the instability of the boundary layer.
The part of the reflected shock wave that is normal to the wall disappears
completely in CF4 due to the growth of A-configuration (Serov et al. 1985).
The reflected shock takes a V-shape. The pressure behind the reflected shock
is reduced significantly due to this fact. For instance, the pressure is reduced
by 40% as compared with the value behind the normal shock wave (M = 2.1,
po = 1-53 x 104 Pa, Re = 10 5 ). The A-configuration arises immediately after
the shock wave reflects from the bottom of the cavity in the case of CF4. The
flow is all turbulent behind the reflected shock. It is apparently due to a high
value of Reynolds number (Re = 10 6 ).
The reflected shock interacts with the diffracted waves while leaving the
cavity. As a result, slipstreams arise near the edges (see Fig. 53). Figs. 55 and
56 show the disturbed flow ahead of the reflected shock wave and of the bow
wave. This phenomenon is due to the above-mentioned interaction of waves
with the boundary layer.
The disappearance of the part of the reflected shock wave that is normal
to the wall was also reported by Kharitonov et al. (1985). They observed
the transformation of V-shaped front into an inclined shock (air, nitrogen and
carbon dioxide as test gases; l/h = 6.4 or 17.5, M = 2 - 4 ) . This fact is
apparently due to the instability of V-shaped front.
A secondary shock wave propagates behind the reflected one in CCI2F2. It
was observed earlier by several authors (Strelow et al. 1959; Znamenskaya et
al. 1980). Its appearance may be explained as follows. If flow separation takes
place then the vortices arise behind the reflected shock. They produce a gas
flow directed to the bottom of the cavity. On the other hand, flow separation
changes the geometry of the flow. Both of these factors may act simultaneously
and a secondary shock wave appears as a result.
Fig. 55. Reflection of a plane shock wave from a rectangular cavity,

l/h = 2.5, two-dimensional flow; 1 - incident shock wave; 2 ~~ dif
fracted shock wave; 3 - reflected shock wave. The time is measured
from the instant the incident shock wave reaches the edges of the
cavity. Air, M = 2.1, Re = 105, a - t = 40/is; 6 - 60/is; c - 80 jus;
d - 110/KS; e - 150 fis; f - 220 ps.
Fig. 56. Reflection of a plane shock wave from a rectangular cavity5

l/h = 2.5, two-dimensional flow. The time is measured from the
instant the incident shock wave reaches the edges of the cavity.
CF 4 , M = 2.6, Re = 9 x 105, a - t = 30/is; 6 - 50|is; c - 90/is; d
- 120/is; e - 140 ^s; / - 200 |is.
Reflection from concave body,.. /;&"-N
Fig. 57. Eeflection of a plane shock wave from a rectangular cavity,

l/h = 2.5, two-dimensional flow. The time is measured from, the
instant the incident shock wave hits the edges of the cavity. OF4,
M = 2.9, Re = 2 x 106, a-t = 40|is; b - 60/is; c - 90/is; d -
110 fjs; e - 120 fis; f - 190 ps.
Fig. 58. Reflection of a plane shock wave from a rectangular cavity,

l/h = 2,5, two-dimensional flow; 1 - incident shock wave; 2 - dif
fracted shock wave; 3 - reflected shock wave. The time is measured
from the instant the incident shock wave reaches the edges of the
cavity. Air5 M = 1.7, Re = 2.8 x 105? a - t = 20 jus; 6 - 50 jus; c -
70/is; d ~ 80/is; e - 110 /is.
Fig. 59. Quantities r and d against s; a - air; b - CF4.
17. O s c i l l a t i o n s o f t h e s h o c k w a v e r e f l e c t e d f r o m a b o d y w i t h c a v i t y
The interaction of a shock wave with a concave body can be divided into
three stages: (1) the propagation of the incident shock wave inside the cavity;
(2) the motion of the reflected wave within the cavity; (3) its motion outside
the cavity. We studied the third stage while carrying out the experiments with
an axisymmetric model (the hollow cylinder with an open end). The Reynolds
number did not exceed 10 5 .
The process is as follows. The incident shock wave reaches the b o t t o m of
the cavity and reflects from it. Meanwhile a stationary flow m a y arise near the
edges. Attached shock waves occur whose parts interact with one another and
reflect from the walls of the cavity. It is a primary wave configuration. The
reflected wave catches up with it. If the depth of the cavity is small enough
then the flow near the edges is non-stationary. Afterwards the reflected shock
leaves the cavity and transforms into a bow wave. Experiments show that
there are d a m p e d oscillations of the bow shock wave during the transition to
the stationary flow past the concave body. The time during which the flow
becomes steady depends linearly on the depth of the cavity (see Fig. 60). The
regularity of the oscillations is violated at high values of the depth of the cav
ity (l/d > 3). The amplitude of the oscillations depends on the depth of the
cavity (see Fig. 61). Solid line corresponds to the calculated values, dots refer
to experimental data. An explicit conservative two-layer (with respect to the
time) scheme with shock tracking was used. The scheme has the second or
der of approximation. D a m p e d oscillations also occur if the flow is subsonic.
The experimental and calculated values for the damping rate (the ratio of the
amplitude of the second period of oscillations of the bow shock wave to the
amplitude of the first) increase as the depth of the cavity increases (Fig. 62).
0 tt3 0.6 0.9 1/h
Fig. 60. The value of r against the depth of the cavity, r being the
time interval during which the bow shock wave reaches its steady-
state position.
The frequency of the oscillations corresponds to the fundamental acoustic

frequency of the cavity with a wavelength that is four times the distance from
the cavity base to the mean shock-standoff distance (Bohachevsky et al. 1972),
taking into account the variation of the flow parameters within the shock layer
Here S is the mean shock-standoff distance, v is the mean gas velocity

Fig. 61. The amplitude of oscillations against the depth of the

cavity; dots are experimental data, solid line is the calculation by
Grudnitskii et al. (1984); A (<Jmax ^min)/(2/i), 6 is the shock
standoff-distance from the body.
Fig. 62. Damping rate against the depth of the cavity.

v ^ , c is the velocity of sound, c = ( Cl + C *). Subscript 1 refers to the

values behind the stationary shock wave, 0 refers to the value behind the wave
reflected from a flat wall, asterisk corresponds to the value at the stagnation
point. Maximum variation of the bow shock velocity is equal to 200 m / s during
one oscillation. The corresponding pressure variation is equal to 30%.
As mentioned above, a secondary shock wave m a y appear behind the shock
wave reflected from the b o t t o m of the cavity. Its velocity is close to that of
sound. The secondary shock meets with the reflected shock after it leaves the
cavity thus giving rise to a new shock wave. When the reflected shock goes out
of the cavity, a rarefaction wave arises and it propagates inside the cavity. The
bow shock wave begins to move towards the body after the interaction with
the reflected rarefaction wave, and it passes its mean standoff distance. The
rarefaction wave transforms into a compression one on its reflection from the
bow shock wave. The compression wave reflects from the bottom of the cavity
and then meets with the bow shock wave which begins to move away from the
body.
From the experiments carried out, it is possible to distinguish two basic
causes which lead to the appearance of oscillations and which determine the
characteristic features of the process: 1) the emergence of a rarefaction wave
as the reflected shock leaves the cavity; 2) the appearance of a secondary shock
wave which propagates behind the reflected wave, and the subsequent interac
tion of the waves.
In the general case, excitation of flow oscillations occurs when disturb
ances enter the cavity. The oscillations are d a m p e d due to the weakening of
the disturbances as a result of the repeated interactions and reflections. The
oscillations of the bow wave and the flow parameters behind it need to be taken
into account in the calculation of the effect of shock waves on various bodies
with cavities. At the initial instants after the reflection of the shock wave from
it, such a body experiences a pulsating load, which can substantially change
the effect of the wave on the body.
18. Shock focusing
When a plane shock wave reflects from a concave wall, a converging shock
arises, resulting in a locally high pressure. This phenomenon is a particu
lar case of shock focusing. Pioneer investigations in this field were made
by Meshkov (Meshkov 1970). Sturtevant (Sturtevant et al. 1976), Nishida
(Nishida et al. 1986), Milton (Milton et al. 1987) revealed many features of
shock focusing.
As shown by Sturtevant, the phenomenon is different in the case of weak
shocks and of strong shocks. If the shock wave is weak then the wave fronts are
crossed after the focus. The focus is defined as a position where a m a x i m u m
pressure p m a x is realized. For stronger shocks, the wave fronts are uncrossed.
If the wave is weak then a shear layer arises behind the triple-shock interaction
on the trailing wave front. In the case of a strong wave the shear layer arises
behind the shock at the focus. The m a x i m u m pressure is limited by nonlinear
effects.
Transverse shock waves which are accompanied by rarefaction waves pro
pagate behind the reflected shock wave. Characteristic feature of shock focusing
is a sharp pressure peak. The pressure rises near the focus and then decreases
due to the rarefaction waves. Babinsky et al. (1996) showed that modification
to the geometry of the cavity may change the m a x i m u m pressure as well as the
shape of the high-pressure region. Namely, cavities with blunt edges can in
crease the m a x i m u m pressure and they also increase the area subject to relative
large pressures. In the case of vibrational excitation, a pressure peak does not
appear (Kishige et al. 1995).
The pressure amplification K is the ratio pmax/pi. Here pi is the pressure
behind the shock wave reflected from a flat wall at normal incidence. The
gasdynamic focus is less than the geometrical one.
Flow pattern of unsteady reflection of a plane shock wave from a body
with a cavity is given below. The experimental facility was described above.
The models had the shape of a parallelepiped whose height was h = 10 m m
with a cavity in front. The width of some models was equal to the distance
between the glass windows in the test section of the shock tube. Besides, we
used a concave model with cross-section a 10 m m square. In the former case
the flow past the model was close to two-dimensional, while in the latter it was
three-dimensional. The generatrix of the cavity was an arc of circumference.
Its radius was equal to 5 m m (deep cavity) or 1 0 m m (shallow cavity).
Fig. 63 shows the pressure ratio P2/P1 and pressure amplification K against
the dimensionless value a h/4R (R is the radius of curvature at the b o t t o m
of the cavity). The value p^ is the m a x i m u m pressure measured at the b o t t o m
of the cavity. The values of K were calculated by Nishida (1990). The shape
of the cavity was expressed as y ax2. There is a good agreement between
the experimental values of the ratio pijpi and calculated ones of the pressure
amplification though the values of pressure refer to different points in the flow
and the shapes of the cavity are not the same in both cases.
It follows from Fig. 63 that at M > 2, the ratio P2/P1 does not depend
Fig. 63. Pressure amplification K and the ratio P2IP1 against geo
metrical parameter a. a h/AR, R is the radius of curvature at
the apex, h is the height of the model, K = Pmax/Pi> Pmax is the
pressure at the focus, p\ is the pressure behind the shock reflected
from the flat wall, p^ is the maximum pressure at the bottom of the
cavity.
1 - M = 2 - 4 (Nishida 1990), air, K;
2 - M = 1.35 - 3.3, air, p2/pu
3 - M = 4.2-5,CF4>P2/pi;
4 - M = 2.9,CCl2F2,P2M.
appreciably on M and 7 = cp/cv and so does the value of K (Nishida 1990).

This conclusion is valid for circular and parabolic cavities (Shugaev et al. 1990).
Fig. 64 presents the measured and calculated values of pressure against time at
the bottom of the cavity. There is a satisfactory agreement between calculation
and experiment. The ray method was used.
The flow pattern behind the reflected shock wave depends on the fact
whether the reflection is regular during the whole period of time or there is
a transition from Mach to regular reflection. In the latter, the flow pattern
reveals complicated wave interactions.
Figs. 65 and 66 show shadowgraphs taken in the experiments. Here 1 is
the incident shock wave, 2 is the reflected wave, 3 is the transverse wave, 4
is the slipstream, 5 is the line of intersection of the shock wave with the glass
window. First of all, the incident shock wave hits the edges of the cavity and
a Prandtl-Meyer flow arises. The incident shock wave reflects from the wall of
the cavity. In the case of the deep cavity the Mach reflection exists. The angle
of incidence diminishes continuously and the transition to the regular reflection
Fig. 64. Pressure at the bottom of the cavity against time, dots are
experimental data, solid line represents the calculation by the ray
method; t tvr/R, where vr is the velocity of the shock reflected
from a flat wall, R is the radius of curvature at the b o t t o m of the
cavity.
occurs. As a result, the reflected shock wave has angular points: one part of
the shock front is convex, the other (central) part being concave (see Fig. 66).
Slipstreams arise and vortices are generated as a consequence (see Fig. 666, c).
Two shock waves arise near the edges of the deep cavity as one can see
from Fig. 66 a, 6. One of them is the reflected shock. The origin of the other is
due to the fact that the Mach stem becomes curvilinear near a concave wall and
its reflection from the wall takes place (Henderson et al. 1975; Syschikova et
al. 1976). The second shock has an angular point which probably corresponds
to the transition from the Mach reflection of the first shock to the regular one.
The interaction of shock waves results in additional slipstreams and transverse
waves. The formation of the second shock has influence on the flow pattern of
the focusing process. There is no second shock in the case of the shallow cavity
when the reflection is regular throughout the time of the process. Figs. 66 c,
67 present a rhombus pattern which consists of contact discontinuities. A jet
appears just at once after focusing (see Fig. 66 c and the next). T h e jet carries
away the rhombus pattern. It is interesting to note the formation of a specific
polygonal structure containing vortices, as seen from Fig. 66 c. This structure
consists of contact discontinuities which appear as a result of the interaction
between the transverse waves and the second shock. It exists during the time
interval At = I.6//C2, c-i being the sound velocity behind the incident shock
wave, then it disappears (see Fig. QQ e) and a conventional jet flow is seen, as
oo
;rgf|?;
"8"
o
a d
a.
Fig. 65. Reflection of a plane wave from a concave body (three-dimensional flow). Air, M = 2.1, p 0 =15.3kPa,
l/h = 0.4; a-t = 6/JS; b - 9/is; c - 12/is; d - 18/is; e - 27 /is; / - 40 /is; $ - 70/is; 1 - incident shock wave; 2 -
reflected shock wave; 3 - transverse waves; 4 - slipstream; 5 - line of intersection of the shock wave with the glass O
3
window.
3,
S3-
O
Fig. 66. Two-dimensional low pattern (air), l/h = 0.5, M = 2.9,

p 0 = 5.3 kPa, Re = 3.8 x 104; I is the depth of the cavity, a ~
t = 7fiS]b-10fis;c- 30 fis; d - 45/JS; e - 5Q|is; / - 85/is; the
time is measured after the incident shock reaches the bottom of
the caYity; 1 - incident shock wave; 2 - reflected shock wave; 3 -
slipstream; 4 - transverse wave.
\*\ X Propagation and reflection of shock waves
Fig. 87. A rhombus iow pattern.

Fig. 88. Three-dimensional flow pattern inside the cavity. M = 2.75

air as the test gas; a - i = 5/is; b - 13/is; c - 15/is; d - 30//s; e -
35 /is; / - 90 /is; 1 - incident shock wave; 2 - reflected shock wave;
3 - transverse waves; 4 - slipstream; 5 - line of intersection of the
shock wave with the glass window.
shown in Fig. 66 e. Two vortices (or a vortex ring in the three-dimensional flow)
are situated at the end of the jet. The jet still exists when the flow becomes
quasi-stationary. A rhombus of a size larger than before arises once more when
the reflected shock wave leaves the cavity (see Fig. 66 d). Its origin is the result
of the interaction of the reflected shock wave with the transverse ones.
Fig. 68 shows the three-dimensional flow. One can clearly see the appear
ance of the rhombus (Fig. 68 6), the polygonal structure (Fig. 68 c) and the jet
(Fig. 68 d).
Fig. 69 shows the ratio l\/L against the Mach number M of the incident
shock, 11 being the maximum length of the jet, while L is equal to the sum of
half an arc of the generatrix of the cavity and its depth. The lower and upper
data correspond to the three-dimensional flow and to the two-dimensional one,
respectively. The data are presented for carbon tetrafluoride (circles and right
crosses) and air (triangle and inclined crosses). It is seen that the dimensionless
length of the jet increases linearly as the Mach number increases.
Fig. 69. Dimensionless length of the jet against Mach number; /i

is the maximum length of the jet; L is the sum of half an arc of the
generatrix of the cavity and its depth. 1 , 2 - air, 3 , 4 - CF 4 , 1 , 4 -
two-dimensional flow, 2 , 3 - three-dimensional flow.
Thus the reflection of a plane shock wave from a concave body is accom
panied by the formation of vortices (Ibrahim et al. 1985; Milton et al. 1987).
A jet is found to arise behind the reflected shock wave. The length of the
jet depends on the depth of the cavity and the shock wave strength. The jet
still exists when the flow becomes quasi-stationary. Two shock waves appear
near the edges of a concave body if there is a transition from Mach to regular
So
8.
Fig. 70. Unsteady flow past a concave body. CF 4 , M = 2,6, f?o=120kPa? l/h = 0.5; a - t = 30/is; b - 35/is; c -
50/JS; d -60/is, e - 100/is. 1 - reflected shock wave; 2 - transverse waves; 3 - line of intersection of the shock wave
with the glass window.
C*5
reflection. A rhombus emerges in the flow behind the reflected shock wave.
19. Resonant excitation of vortices behind the reflected shock wave
There are some peculiarities of the flow field past bodies with cavities at
high Reynolds numbers. Vortical structures may become unstable. The time
during which the flow becomes steady is twice the corresponding value relating
to the body without cavity (shallow cavity, ///i=0.15, M=2.6).
Let us consider an unsteady flow of CF 4 past a concave body at M < 4
(see Figs. 70 and 71). In this case the vortices are stable. As stated above,
the characteristic feature of the flow behind the shock reflected from a con
cave body is the formation of a jet. It is laminar at low Reynolds numbers.
Vortical structures are situated at the end of the jet. Vortices also arise near
the walls as a result of the instability of slipstreams. Fig. 72 shows success
ive shadowgraphs. The vortices move towards the reflected shock. Afterwards
they stop and turn into two cylindrical vortices (or into a vortex ring when
the flow is three-dimensional). If the Reynolds number is high enough then
the vortical structures become unstable. In the case under consideration they
become unstable at the end of the jet. Waves propagate along the vortex ring,
i.e. azimuthal instability arises. Distortion of the vortex ring takes place, as
one can see from Fig. 72. In addition, radial (axisymmetrical) waves propagate
along the vortex ring if the Reynolds number is equal t o 2 - 3 x l 0 5 and the
Mach number is equal to 4.5 - 5. Instability of vortices may cause a disturb
ance on the shock front (Figs. 72 e, 73). Fig. 74 shows the oscillations of the
vortex ring. The core of the ring becomes elliptic and disturbances emerge on
the shock front (Fig. 75). The motion of the disturbance on the shock front is
oscillatory. Two oscillations were seen at the streak-camera records. The vor
tical structures are destroyed periodically, the flow inside the cavity becomes
turbulent and the gas flows out of the cavity. Then the vortical structures ap
pear anew and the process repeats. We indicate some characteristic features of
the three-dimensional flow past a body with a rectangular cavity {l/h = 0.4).
Fig. 76 shows the quasi-stationary flow pattern inside the rectangular cavity
(M=4.9). One can see small vortices which appear during the interaction of
the reflected wave with transverse ones. The vortices are carried away to the
angles of the cavity and then to the area of flow separation. Thus the vortical
structures are situated near horizontal walls and not near the plane of sym
metry as in the former case. Later on they transform into a single large vortex
which oscillates: the diameter of the vortex core diminishes and then increases.
Reflection from concave body,.. 165
Fig. 71. Two-dimensional flow pattern inside the deep cavity; l/h =
0.5; M = 4; pQ = 1.3 kPa; a - t = 20/is: 6 - 30/is; c - 35/is; d -
50 /is; e - 80 /is; the time is measured from the instant the incident
shock reaches the bottom of the cavity (/ is its depth).
Fig. 72. Three-dimensional flow pattern inside the deep cavity;

l/h = 0.5: M = 4.5; p 0 = 6 kPa; a - i = 7 /is; b - 15 /is; c - 30 /is; cf
- 80 /is; e - 70/is; / - 90 /is.
Fig. 73. Disturbance on the shock front, M = 4.5, CF 4 as the test

gas.
Fig. 74. Three-dimensional flow pattern inside the shallow caYity;

l/h = 0.15; M = 4.9; po = 4kPa; a - i = 7/is; b - llfis; c- 80/is;
d - 90/is; c - 100 jus; / - 130/is.
Fig. 75. Disturbance on the shock front (shallow cavity).

o
s
ex
i
Fig. 76. Three-dimensional flow pattern inside the rectangular cavity; CF 4 ; llh = 0.5; (/ is the-depth of the cavity V
'
M = 4.9;Re = 10 s ; Po = 4kPa; a-t = 50 /; b - 70/is; c - 90/zs; d - 100 ^s; e - 110/is; / - 120 ps.
55"
$
S3
3
^
?
3
O
Fig. 77. Disturbance at the shock front (rectangular cavity].
i4
The pressure varies non-monotonously at the bottom of the cavity. As a con

sequence, a disturbance appears against the vortex (Fig. 77). Disturbances
appear in the two-dimensional flow at the same values of the Reynolds number
and Mach number (Shtemenko et al. 1993; Serov et al. 1995).
The amplitude of the pressure oscillations at the bottom of the cavity is
equal to 10% of the pressure mean value behind the shock wave in the case
of the deep cavity. The period of oscillations coincides with the time during
which the vortex moves from the bottom of the cavity to the vortex ring. Fig. 78
shows the pressure variation against time at the bottom of the cavity. Fig. 79
presents the pressure variation against time at the flat-nosed body under the
same conditions. Oscillations are not seen in the latter.
Fig. 78. The pressure at the bottom of the deep cavity against time.
A moving vortex is known to emit acoustic waves while changing its velo
city. The velocity of vortices is not constant inside the jet, namely, they stop
near the vortical structures. We calculated the amplitude of pressure oscilla
tions caused by the deceleration of vortices. It is equal to 12% of the value of
the pressure behind the shock.
Disturbances caused by pressure oscillations reach the bottom of the cav
ity, reflect from it, meet with the vortical structures and interact with them.
Then they reach the shock front. Disturbances on the shock front arise under
appropriate conditions, as was already mentioned. Let us consider the inter
action of acoustic waves with a vortex ring (Kopyov et al. 1987; Vlasov et al.
1978). The interaction may be resonant or not. If there is no resonance then
the vortex ring oscillates as a whole, the frequency being equal to that of the
Fig. 79. The pressure on the flat-nosed body against time.
incident acoustic waves. If the frequency of the acoustic waves is a multiple

of the natural frequency of the core of the vortex ring then the ring becomes
unstable. Radial waves propagate through the vortex ring. The ring emits
acoustic waves and their amplitude may be several times as great as the amp
litude of the incident waves. In our experiments the interaction was resonant.
In fact, the amplitude of pressure oscillations increased with time, there were
pulsations of vortical cores.
One can see an unstable vortex ring from Fig. 74 b (shallow cavity). The fre
quency of oscillations of the vortex core was measured from the streak-camera
records and it was equal to 170 - 220 kHz. We measured the size of the vortex
core from shadowgraphs. Its diameter was equal to 0.3 mm. The velocity of
the jet was equal to 160 m/s. Consequently the natural frequency of the vortex
ring was equal to 250 kHz (Lamb 1932). The frequency of pressure oscillations
was equal to 150 - 200 kHz at the bottom of the cavity. The frequency of oscil
lations was equal to 50 - 70 kHz in the case of deep cavity. In experiments we
measured the time between two successive disturbances on the shock front. We
calculated the frequency of the acoustic waves that caused these disturbances.
We used the following formula (Shugaev 1983).
( 7 + 1) (M 2 - 1) rs
w = (7 + 1) M 2 + 2, q = 2 7 M 2 - 7 + 1.
Here rp is the period of the pressure oscillations, rs is the period of oscil

lations of the bow shock. The amplitude and frequency of the acoustic waves
coincide with those recorded with the aid of the pressure transducer.
Thus the following conclusions can be made: 1) disturbances on the bow
shock wave are caused by the formation of vortical structures inside the cavity
and their instability; 2) they arise due to pressure oscillations within a small
region behind the bow shock wave.
Fig. 80 demonstrates the natural frequency of the vortex ring core and the
frequency of acoustic waves against Mach number. The values of the natural
frequency of the vortex ring core were found from its sizes and the velocity
of the jet. The frequency of acoustic waves was found from their wavelength.
A vortex which moves inside the jet stops at that instant when the successive
vortex arrives at the position near the plane of symmetry. In other words, the
wavelength is equal to the distance from the b o t t o m of the cavity to the point
where vortices stop. Index 1 relates to the shallow cavity, index 2 relates to the
deep cavity, a denotes acoustic waves, b denotes vortex ring. The size of the
shaded area denotes the uncertainty in frequency determination. One can see
that both values of frequency coincide at M = 4 - 5, i.e., in the range where
disturbances on the shock front exist.
Fig. 80. Dependence on Mach number of the natural frequency of

the vortex core and of the frequency of acoustic waves; 1 corres
ponds to shallow cavity, 2 to deep cavity, a corresponds to acoustic
waves, b to vortex ring.
An additional argument, which supports the above-mentioned mechanism,

responsible for the origin of disturbances, is as follows. Bright rings are seen
at the shadowgraphs near an unstable vortex (see Fig. 74 c, d). T h i s system
of bright rings arises as a result of light diffraction, R a m a n - N a t diffraction at
the acoustic waves propagating from a vortex ring (Bergmann 1954). Fig. 81
presents the diffraction pattern which corresponds to the low past the same
model when it was turned 90 around the axis of the shock tube. A fringe
system is seen near the model. The asymmetry of the diffraction pattern is due
to the fact that the vortex ring core emits non-planar waves (Bergmann 1954).
Acoustic radiation from a cylindrical vortex is like that from a quadrupole
(Dosanjh et al. 1965). Acoustic radiation from a vortex ring is very complex.
Probably, it is like the radiation from, octupole. A few narrow beams may arise
due to the distortion of a vortex ring.
Fig. 81. Raman-Nat diffraction; the concave body is turned 90

around its axis; a - i = 60|is; b - 100 fis.
If the vortex ring emits a few acoustic beams in the direction towards the
shock front then a few disturbances may appear on the shock front. In fact,
two disturbances are seen on the shock front (see Fig. 73). Let us find the value
of acoustic wavelength A. Light beam (Fig. 73) intersects at least two acoustic
beams. We use the following formula (Bergmann 1954)
d nK
L = T*
Here d is the distance between the maxima of light, n is the number of
acoustic waves that lie in the light path; A is light wavelength, L is the distance
between the model and the screen.
In our case n = 2,A = 6 9 4 3 4 , d = 0.212 m m . L = 150 mm. Therefore A
is equal to 1 mm. The frequency of the pressure oscillations is equal to
J/ = (^1 = 200 kHz.

A
Here c is the velocity of sound behind the shock wave, v is the gas velocity.
The frequency of pressure oscillations that is found from the pattern of
Raman-Nat diffraction coincides with the frequency of pulsations of the vortex
ring core and that one of the oscillations at the bottom of the shallow cavity.
Analysis of the flow inside the deep cavity confirms the above-mentioned con
clusions. Fig. 73 / shows the pattern of Raman-Nat diffraction near the shock
front. Four acoustic beams arrive at the shock front. Three disturbances are
clearly seen on the shock front. The vortex ring emits narrow acoustic beams.
Disturbances in the flow past various bodies (CF4 or CCI2F2 as test gases)
have been observed earlier in ballistic experiments (Hilton 1957; Bedin et al.
1981; Baryshnikov et al. 1980). It was found that disturbances on the shock
front arose at lower Mach number if the body was concave. But there was no
adequate explanation for this phenomenon. In our experiments the disturbances
arise on the shock front at low Mach numbers of the gas flow (M = 2.3 - 2.6),
so that relaxation processes cannot influence the flow.
Thus disturbances on the shock wave in front of a concave body may appear
under appropriate conditions. The origin of the disturbances is a resonant
interaction between acoustic waves and vortical structures inside the cavity.
It is worth mentioning that in our case the resonant frequency is five times
the fundamental acoustic frequency of the cavity.
CHAPTER 6.
P R O P A G A T I O N OF A SHOCK WAVE
T H R O U G H A T U R B U L E N T GAS FLOW
Propagation of a shock wave through a random medium is accompanied by

nonlinear interaction of the wave with disturbances. The shock wave influences
disturbances which in their turn can distort it or change its strength. The
passage of a shock wave can enhance turbulent mixing (Alessandri et al. 1995).
Experimental studies were fulfilled by several authors. It was found that
the energy of turbulent fluctuations increased after the passage of the shock
wave (Wintrich and Merzkirch 1995; Briassulis and Andreopoulos 1995). The
shock wave is distorted while propagating through a random medium (Hes-
selink and Sturtevant 1988). Experiments show that the amplification of tur
bulent fluctuations depends on their amplitude (Azarova et al. 1997). Exper
iments were performed in a single-diaphragm shock tube. A turbulence grid
was used. The incident shock wave reflected from a flat-nosed cylinder in the
test section. Then the wave propagated through the turbulent flow. A laser-
schlieren technique was used. In experiments, the density fluctuations Ap/p
were equal to 5% and 9%. Fig. 82 shows the values of the amplification coef
ficient against the Mach number of the shock wave (a refers to Ap/p = 5%, b
refers to Ap/p = 9%). One can see that the amplification coefficient increases
as the Mach number increases and decreases as the amplitude of the density
fluctuations increases. The turbulent length scale was equal to 0.3 mm ahead
of the shock wave and 0.2 mm behind the wave. This fact agrees with the result
of numerical simulation by Lee et al. (Lee et al. 1993) who found a decrease of
the turbulent length scale caused by the shock wave. A numerical simulation
was also performed. The Euler equations were used. The motion was assumed
to be one-dimensional. Turbulent fluctuations were modelled as a sequence of
ten pulses of gas velocity. Their amplitude was defined as a series of random
values, the standard deviation being equal to Mtc\. Here ci is the sound ve
locity, Mt is a numerical parameter. A scheme with shock tracking was used.
The amplification coefficient k is defined as follows
k = (AP2)/(APl),
177
Fig. 82. Amplification coefficients against Mach number, a

Ap/p = 5%; b - Ap/p = 9%.
Table 4.
MM< 0.05 0.1 0.3 0.5
1.1 1.09 1.05
1.2 1.22 1.20
1.5 1.30 1.38
2.0 1.62 1.70
2.5 1.76 1.95
3.0 2.23
(AP1) = W\)\l\ (A/*) = {p'lfl\

Here p\ and pf2 are the density fluctuations in the points x\ and x2 ahead of and
behind the shock wave, respectively. The angular brackets indicate ensemble
average and the upper bar refers to a time average. The values of k are given
in Table 4.
It is seen that the amplification coefficient increases as the Mach number
increases, in agreement with the experimental data. The autocorrelation func
tions of the density fluctuations are presented in Fig. 83 (M 2,Mt 0.3).
Propagation of a shock wave... 179
1.0
Fig. 83. Autocorrelation functions of the density fluctuations.
Fig. 84. Spectral functions ahead of and behind the shock wave.
Fig. 84 shows the spectral functions ahead of and behind the shock wave.
The interaction of a shock wave with a turbulent flow occurs if there is a
supersonic flow past a spiked body. Separation appears in the flow over such
a body. Below we consider an unsteady flow past a flat-nosed cylinder with
spikes. The use of spikes is known to reduce drag and heat flux at high speeds
Fig. 85. Positions of spikes and of the pressure transducer (dimen

sions are given in mm).
of flow (Chang 1970). Aerodynamic characteristics depend on the length of a

spike / and on the diameter d of the body. Under certain conditions, oscillations
may arise in the flow. They are caused by rejunction of the separated flow.
The oscillations may be essentially reduced if a small disc is installed at the
end of the spike (Belov et al. 1989). The drag is also reduced.
Separation arises due to the spike. It is usually assumed that the conical
region of separation may be replaced by an equivalent solid cone. The pressure
is proposed to be constant within the region of separation, and it is supposed
to be equal to the pressure behind the conical shock wave which is caused by
the equivalent solid cone. But these assumptions are not valid. The measured
value of the stagnation pressure at M = 1.96 is less than that one on the surface
of the cone (Chang 1970). In most of the experimental studies only laminar
separation of the boundary layer was investigated. Some investigators observed
the separation of transitional boundary layer. The drag was 30 - 40% higher
as compared with the case of laminar boundary layer. It was found that the
drag increases as the Reynolds number increases, and decreases as the Mach
number increases. There is a sharp growth of the drag if there is transition from
laminar to turbulent flow. Almost all the authors investigated only steady flow.
The transition to the steady flow past a body with spikes was studied
by Burova et al. (Burova et al. 1993). A flat-nosed cylinder with spikes was
chosen as a model. Experiments were fulfilled in a single-diaphragm shock
tube of rectangular cross-section of 34 x 72 mm 2 in area. CCI2F2 was chosen
as the test gas. The flow Mach number M was equal to 1.8 (initial pressure
po = 140 Torr) and 2.6 (po = 30 Torr). The flow duration was 600 fis in the
former case and 120 fis in the latter case. The Reynolds number was 5.3 x 105,
the diameter of the cylinder was taken as the characteristic length. Shadow
pictures were taken and the pressure on the nose of the body was measured.
The body diameter d was 12 mm (for experiments in which shadow pictures
were taken) or 17.5 mm (for experiments in which the pressure was measured).
The quantity N of spikes varied from 1 to 7. Fig. 85 shows the positions of
spikes and of the pressure transducer. The length of the spikes varied from d
to 3d. A Kistler type transducer was used.
a) Flow past models with two spikes. When a plane shock wave reaches
the model, weak conical shocks arise at the ends of the spikes. After that the
incident shock wave reflects from the flat nose of the cylinder. The separation of
the boundary layer occurs at the spikes near the reflected shock wave, the apices
of the conical shocks being situated near the points of separation. Shadow
pictures are shown in Fig. 86. The time is measured from the instant the plane
shock reaches the flat nose. The separated flow is turbulent. The points of
separation move upstream along the spikes. The regions of separation join one
another, interact, and an X-shaped configuration arises (see Fig. 86, d, e and
Fig. 87). Such a flow seems to be unstable. The points of separation begin to
oscillate. This effect may also appear due to large distance h between spikes
(h/d= 0.6).
Fig. 88 shows the flow past a cylinder with two spikes. As compared with
Fig. 86, the model is turned 90 around its axis. One can see that the region of
separation has two planes of symmetry. The conical region of separation within
one of the planes of symmetry includes the bow shock wave while within the
other plane (plane B) conical shocks join the bow wave (see Figs. 86 and 88).
Such a pattern is a result of the position of the spikes at the nose of the cylinder.
The instability of the bow shock wave may be explained as follows. The shock
front is not smooth if the wave propagates through a turbulent flow. If some
Fig. 88. Shadowgraph of the low oer the model with two spikes.
CCI2F2 as the test gas.
Fig. 87. Interaction of conical shock waves. An X-configuration is

seen. Mi = 2.8.
flow property varies considerably in the direction parallel to the shock front
ahead of it, then the splitting of the wave occurs.
When the flow becomes quasi-stationary, the separation occurs at a point
which is situated at some distance from the end of the spike.
b) Flow past a model with three spikes. Such a flow is shown in Figs. 89
(I = $d) and 90 (f = 2d). There is an essential distinction as. compared with
the model having two spikes. In the present case conical regions of separation
interact with one another in such a way that a single region occurs. That
region is bounded by one conical shock. The separation arises at the end
of the central spike (I = 2d) or at some distance from the end of that spike
(I > 2d). A similar pattern was observed in the flow over a body with one
spike having a disc or wedge at its end (Khlebnikov 1995). The flow pattern
depends on the dimensions of the model as well as on the flow Mach number and
on Reynolds number. It is interesting to note that a single separation region
occurs in the flow over a grating of pointed cylinders whose axes are parallel
to the undisturbed velocity (Watarai et al. 1997).
c) Pressure history in the case of uneven number of spikes. The position
of the pressure transducer was 4.5 mm apart from the axis of the model. Thus
Fig. 88. Shadowgraphs of the flow oer the model with two spikes
(the same conditions as in Fig. 86). The model is turned 90 as
compared with Fig. 86. a - t = 30j*s; 6 - 60 /is; c - 90 /is; d -
120/is.
Propagation of a shock wave. ilfi^v^mmmtMUMmwmM\mimmwwK?*' -
Fig. 89. Shadowgraphs of the low of the model with three spikes.
CC12F2 as the test gas. Mi = 2.8, Z = 3d. a - < = 10/is; fc - 30 fis;
c- 35/is; d - 5 0 p s ; e- 70/is; / - 90/is.
a Propagation and reflection of shock waves
Fig. 90. Shadowgraphs of the flow with three spikes. CCUF, as the
test gas. M, = 2.6, / = 2d. a - t = 80 jis; b - 100 ps; c - "l20 ps.
Fig. 91. Ratio pr/ps against shock Mach number; pr is the pres
sure behind the reflected shock wave at the initial instant, ps is the
stagnation pressure for the steady flow. Solid line represents the
calculation, dots are experimental data.
Fig. 92. Pressure history on the surface of the flat-nosed cylinder.

Mi = 2.6, / = 2d. Flow duration is 120 ps.

M i = 1.8, / = 1.5c/. Flow duration is 600/is.

M i = 1.8, / = 2d. Flow duration is 600 /is.
the measured value of the pressure was 2% less than that one in the center
of the nose (Boison et al. 1959). The sensitive part of the transducer has a
finite area. This circumstance involves further reduction of the value of the
measured pressure by 3 % . The pressure history was obtained in the following
cases: a) model without spikes; b) models with one spike, with three spikes
and with seven spikes. The ratio l/d was as follows: l/d = 1; 1.5; 2. The flow
Mach number was M = 1.8; 2; 3. Fig. 91 shows the ratio pr/ps against the
Mach number of the incident shock. Here pr is the measured pressure at the
initial instant, ps is the calculated value of the stagnation pressure which refers
to the steady flow past a body. Solid line represents the calculated values, dots
are experimental values. One can see that there is a good agreement between
experimental data and calculated ones. Fig. 92 presents the pressure history
on the body surface ( M - 2.6, Re = 7.5 x 10 5 , l/d = 2, p0 = 10 Torr). The
time is measured from the instant the shock wave reaches the body. As seen
from Fig. 92, when the flow is quasi-stationary (t = 100 - 120//s), the pressure
has the values: p = 0.45p 5 (N = 7) and p = Q.3ps (N = 1; 3). A sharp rise
of the pressure occurs at t = 50//s. Apparently, it is due to the interaction of
the conical shocks. The pressure on the body nose exceeds by 40% that value
behind the conical shock wave (JV = 3). One m a y assume that the shock wave
does not disappear in the separation region but it is reduced.
Pressure oscillations are reduced in the case of N = 7 during quasi-sta
tionary flow. This effect is clearly noticeable at low Mach numbers. Fig. 93
demonstrates pressure history for Mach number M = 1.8 (l/d 1.5, po
140 Torr). One can see that the oscillations are reduced as the number of
spikes grows. The relative amplitude of the pressure oscillations Sp/p is equal
to 0.11 for N 7, and it is equal to 0.33 for N = 3. If the model has no spikes
then there is no steady supersonic flow under the aforementioned conditions.
The stabilizing effect grows as the length of the spikes increases. This fact can
be seen from Fig. 94. The Strouhal number is equal to 1.5 and 2, respectively.
Probably, there exists an acoustical mechanism which involves the interac
tion of a mixing layer with the base of the cylinder (Zapryagaev et al. 1991).
This circumstance is confirmed by shadowgraphs. One can see small oscilla
tions of the mixing layer. The increase of the transverse size of the region of
separation weakens the aforementioned interaction and reduces the amplitude
of oscillations.
d) Pressure history for N 2. In this case the transducer was situated in
the center of the nose. Fig. 95 presents the pressure history. The flow Mach
number M was 2.6, the initial pressure was p0 30 Torr, the flow duration
was 120 /is. As one can see, pressure oscillations occur. The pressure increase

Mi = 2.6. Flow duration is 120/is.
at t 80 /is is due to the interaction of the conical shocks. There is no steady

flow.
The conclusions are as follows.
1) The shock wave weakens while propagating through a turbulent flow,
and its front loses smooth shape.
2) The ratio pSl/Ps2i where pSl is the stagnation pressure for the body
without spikes and pS2 is that for the spiked body, depends on the flow Mach
number. For instance, pSl/pS2 5 for M 1.8, pSl/pS2 = 3 for M = 2.7. The
increase in the number of spikes leads to reduction of pressure oscillations.
3) There is no reduction of pressure oscillations for a body with two spikes.
C H A P T E R 7.
P R O P A G A T I O N OF A SHOCK WAVE
THROUGH A GAS-PARTICLE MIXTURE
The motion of shock waves through particle-laden flows is of great import

ance for a number of practical problems, e.g. dust explosions and propulsion
systems. The process is accompanied by some interesting phenomena. Shock
waves decay while propagating in a gas-particle mixture. Relaxation effects
arise due to differences in the rate of change for velocity and temperature
between the phases.
Main features of the process have been studied theoretically by many in
vestigators. The following assumptions are usually made: 1) there is a dis
continuity in the gas phase, whereas the particles remain unchanged in their
velocity and temperature while crossing the shock front; 2) the particle volume
fraction is negligibly small. It is also assumed that the particles have no appre
ciable partial pressure, and they do not interact with one another.
Various forces influence the motion of a particle during shock propagation
through the mixture: drag force, added mass force, Basset history force, and
the force due to an external pressure gradient. However, only the drag force
contributes considerably to the particle acceleration and to the decay of the
shock wave at low loading ratio. T h e dependence of the drag coefficient on
the particle Reynolds number deviates from the standard drag coefficient for a
sphere in a steady flow. Namely, the drag coefficient is smaller for high particle
Reynolds numbers (Re > 200) than the standard drag coefficient (Sommerfeld
et al. 1993). Apparently this fact is a result of aerodynamic interaction between
the particles.
Experimental study of shock structure in gas-particle mixture was fulfilled
by O u t a et al. (Outa et al. 1976). The facility was a shock tube mounted
vertically. The diameter of the particles was equal to several /im. The particle
loading ratio 77 was less than two. The quantity rj is the ratio pp/pg, where
p is the mean density, subscripts p and g relate to the particles and the gas,
respectively. The gas-particle mixture was at some distance from the diaphragm
in the shock tube. It was found that the shock wave decayed while propagating
191
through the mixture. The pressure distribution was measured behind the shock
wave. If the loading ratio is small then there is a discontinuous front and behind
it the pressure increases gradually. At high values of the loading ratio the
discontinuity disappears. The discontinuity pressure rise is well-described by
the shock relations when the volume fraction of the particles is small.
The propagation of a plane shock wave through a polydispersed dust-gas
mixture has been studied numerically by Kutushev and Rodionov (Kutushev
et al. 1993). It is assumed that there is a continuous distribution of particles
in size. Collisions between particles are also taken into account. The number
of particles dn whose radius lies in the range (r,r + dr) is equal to
dn = N(r,x,t)dr.
Here N is the distribution function of particles in size. The total number of

particles is
n = N(r,x,t) dr.
The quantities rm\n and r m a x are the m i n i m u m radius of particles and the
m a x i m u m one, respectively.
The equations of continuity take the form
dN d(Nvp) dpg d(Pgvg) _

+
dt ^ dx ~ ' dt dx
The m o m e n t u m and energy equations are
d(Nvp) d(Nvl)
mp +
\~^r~ ~dx~
fd(Nep) d(Nepvp)
+
" H dt dx
(dpgVg) d(PgV2g) dp
+ + 12
dt dx dx ~ '
Qj(pgEg + Ep) + (pgEgvg + Epv) + Q^(pagvg + pav) = 0,
Pg=Pg0)ai, a i + a 2 = l, Eg = eg + -v2g, a2 - f ^Ndr,
^P = ^Pp0)r3, Ep=ep + v2p,

r
max /T'max
EP
/
nipNEpdr, E p v - \ mpEpvpNdr,
min ^rmin
dr. (139)
J 1 ^
Here p(\ a, v, e, E are true density, volumetric extent, velocity, in
ternal and total energy, respectively; Ep is the total energy of particles per
unit volume, Epv is the total energy flux of particles, p is the pressure, f^ is
the drag force on a single particle, fc is the collision force on a single particle
from the side of other particles, F12 is the force per unit volume on the whole
ensemble of particles, qi2 is the heat transfer term.
The system (139) was solved numerically (Kutushev et al. 1993). Fig. 96
shows the pressure distribution behind the shock wave propagating through
a gas-particle mixture at different values of loading ratio. Solid lines are the
experimental data (Outa et al. 1976), broken lines are the computational ones.
Fig. 97 presents the decay of a plane shock wave. Dots are the experimental
data, solid line is the numerical solution. As one can see, there is a good
agreement between experimental data and calculations.
Fig. 96. Pressure distribution behind the shock wave propagating

through a gas-particle mixture, a - r] = 1; b - TJ = 1 . 7 . Solid
lines are experimental data (Outa et al. 1976), broken lines are the
calculated values (Kutushev et al. 1993).
194 ProvaQaiion and reflection of shock WQVS
Provaoation waves
Pip- Q7 TVrav of flip nlanp ^hork

Pier qfiork wave in the ffaq-nartirle
ffa^nartirle mixture
r^Kê11httaJ 0 r19l3)':1978), soBdline represents
Fig. 98. Concentration of particles behind a plane shock "wave

wave.
Se=9189.
Fig. 99. Concentration of particles behind a plane shock wave.

Af = 1.6.
Fig. 100. Rise time At for concentration against Mach number.

The concentration of particles behind the shock was studied by Shugaev

and Shishkina (Shugaev et al. 1996). Experiments were performed in a single-
d i a p h r a g m shock tube of rectangular cross-section of 40 x 60 m m 2 area. The
length of the low-pressure section was equal to 2000 m m . There was a special
apparatus which enabled one to fill the test section with smoke. The size of
smoke particles was equal to 0.5-1 /im. Air was chosen as the test gas. The
shock Mach numbers varied in the range 1.6-2.5. The initial pressure was
equal to 100-340 Torr. Light scattering was used in order to detect smoke
concentration. A He-Ne laser b e a m was directed along the axis of the shock
tube. T h e scattered light passed through a slit of 2 m m width and was detected
by a photomultiplier. We assumed the scattering to be single. The intensity of
the scattered light was proportional to the particle concentration. The technique
enables one to exclude the influence of boundary layer effects.
Typical oscillograms are shown in Figs. 98 and 99. In contrast to the
pressure distribution, there is no area of constant smoke concentration behind
the incident shock wave. The concentration varies non-monotonously in the
region between the shock wave and the contact surface. There is a m a x i m u m
of concentration at some distance from the shock front. This result was found
theoretically for decaying shocks (Korobeinikov 1990). The rise time is equal
to 60-500 /is and diminishes as the shock strength increases (Fig. 100). Thus
the particles are mainly concentrated within a comparatively thin layer behind
the shock front. It is interesting to note that there are oscillations in particle
distribution at low Mach numbers (Fig. 99).
C H A P T E R 8.
LASER-DRIVEN SHOCK WAVES
A shock wave arises, when a breakdown occurs in a gas. Gas breakdown

at optical frequencies can take place in the focused b e a m of a laser. The
intensity of a laser beam necessary for it depends on many factors, namely, on
the wavelength of laser light, gas pressure, duration of the laser pulse and so on.
The formation of laser plasma occurs due to optical breakdown. It arises if the
intensity of the laser b e a m reaches a threshold value. This value is proportional
to Iu)2/(rpo), where / is the potential of ionization, UJ is a frequency of laser
radiation, r is the duration of the laser pulse, po is the initial gas pressure
(Ready 1971). The threshold value is equal to ~ 10 1 1 W / c m 2 in the case of
air (ruby laser; atmospheric pressure) and 10 9 W / c m 2 in the case of carbon
dioxide. For the first time the phenomenon of optical breakdown was studied
in 1963 (Maker et al. 1964). It is interesting to note that similar processes
were observed near a solid target (a low-threshold breakdown). The intensity
of the b e a m may be reduced to 10 7 W / c m 2 in the case of CO2 laser. The
phenomenon of a low-threshold breakdown was observed in 1973 (Barchukov
et al. 1973). Shock waves that are produced by a focused laser b e a m were
studied by Ramsden et al. (Ramsden and Davies 1964; Ramsden and Savic
1964). A surprising result was obtained, namely, after breakdown the spark
developed asymmetrically. The luminous front moved towards the focusing lens
at an initial velocity of 10 7 c m / s . In order to explain this effect, a mechanism
of a radiation-supported shock wave was proposed. After breakdown, a shock
wave propagates into the undisturbed gas. Further absorption of the energy of
radiation takes place in the plasma behind the shock front moving towards the
lens, in the manner of a detonation wave. Light absorption in plasma is due
to inverse Bremsstrahlung. A free electron absorbs a photon. T h e electron
passes to a state of higher energy of continuous spectrum. The process must
take place in the field of either an ion or an atom, or a molecule due to the
law of m o m e n t u m conservation. At an initial stage of the process the number
of ions is small, and the gas temperature is comparatively low. The absorption
197
coefficient kw due to inverse Bremsstrahlung has been calculated for the system,
which consists of a neutral atom and a free electron, only in particular cases
(e.g. in the case of a neutral atom of hydrogen). It has the following value for
this system
^ re2(inena{kT)1l2 tnna uc\
kw = 14.5 o/9 9 (CGS units).
Here e is the charge of electron, m is its mass, a is the cross-section of elastic

collisions, c is light velocity, k is the Boltzmann constant, T is the temperat
ure, ne is the density of electrons, na is the density of neutral atoms. The
numerical value of the absorption coefficient (T 5000 K, ruby laser) is
ku = 1 0 ~ 3 9 n e n a c m _ 1 . If the density of neutral atoms and that one of ions have
the same order then the main absorption occurs in the field of ions. The shape
of the function ku{ne) changes as the temperature increases. Nevertheless, the
absorption coefficient still increases as the electron number density increases.
This coefficient is equal to 40 c m - 1 in the case of hydrogen at T ~ 10 5 K if
the initial density is 10 1 9 c m - 3 . This means that the laser light is almost fully
absorbed by a layer of 0.025 cm in thickness.
As the frequency of plasma UJV ~ nj increases up to the value of optical
frequency the plasma reflects radiation. So the light does not penetrate into
it. This frequency corresponds to the so-called critical density of electrons nc.
This quantity is nc = 2.4 x 10 2 1 c m " 3 for ruby laser.
Each of the components of plasma (electrons, ions and neutral atoms) has
its own temperature. The temperature of ions is usually close to that of neutral
atoms. The temperature of electrons m a y be quite different as they absorb the
laser radiation. Nevertheless, the period of time during which the distribution
of the absorbed energy between electrons and ions takes place is small in the
majority of cases. For instance, this value is equal to 1 0 " n s for hydrogen
(na = 10 1 8 c m " 3 , T = 10 4 K ) . If the duration of the laser pulse exceeds this
period of time then we can put Te = T%.
Two stages can be distinguished while considering the expansion of the
spark. They correspond to the time before and after the cessation of the laser
pulse. During the first stage the plasma front moves approximately as 0.6th
power of time, decaying afterwards during the second stage to a value 0.4. The
velocity of the shock wave in the direction towards the lens is higher than in
other directions. The possible explanation is as follows. A strong shock wave
propagates from the point of optical breakdown. The gas behind the shock
wave becomes heated and ionized and therefore absorbs laser radiation. The
absorption takes place within a thin layer behind the shock front. Thus the
motion of the shock wave is supported by radiation within the laser beam.
Laser-driven shock waves 199
The radiation is fully absorbed by the thin layer of plasma. Consequently, the
transverse part of the shock front propagates at a velocity which is less than
that of the shock wave within the laser b e a m . This phenomenon is called "laser-
supported detonation". The propagation of the shock wave is supported by the
energy of laser radiation. Up-to-now we assumed that the shock front coincides
with the absorption front. But there are also other types of propagation for the
absorption wave. Among them two types are main, namely, subsonic wave (the
propagation velocity is less than the local velocity of sound) and supersonic one
(the propagation velocity exceeds the local velocity of sound). The radiation
from the plasma m a y ionize the ambient gas to such an extent that it begins
to absorb the main part of laser radiation. In this case the zone of absorption
moves together with the ionization wave.
A subsonic radiative wave appears if the gas immediately behind the shock
wave is transparent for the laser radiation. The motion of the plasma front
behind the shock wave proceeds at a velocity less than that of sound. As a
result, the absorption wave remains behind the shock wave, and the pressure
is the same for all the volume of the heated gas. A laser supported detonation
wave is replaced by a supersonic radiative wave at high intensities of laser
radiation, when the radiative mechanism becomes more effective as compared
with hydrodynamical one. In this case the velocity of the radiative wave exceeds
the local velocity of sound, and the front of the radiative wave is ahead of the
shock wave.
T h e boundaries for different regimes are as follows (for the radiation of
C 0 2 laser) (Danilychev et al. 1983)
a) F 10 6 W / c m 2 formation of plasma near the target;
b) F 10 6 - 10 7 W / c m 2 subsonic radiative wave;
c) F = 10 7 - 8 10 8 W / c m 2 laser-supported detonation;
d) F > 8 10 8 W / c m 2 supersonic radiative wave.
Here F is the flux of radiation. If the size of the focus is equal to 1 0 - 1 -
2
10 ~ cm then laser-supported detonation occurs as a general rule.
Below we give fundamentals of classical theory of detonation. This theory
was elaborated by C h a p m a n , Jouguet, Crussard, Michelson. During the process
of detonation a chemical reaction occurs that propagates from one layer of gas
to another. The velocity of detonation wave exceeds the velocity of sound in
the primary gas. The endothermic reaction is provoked by shock compression
of the gas. The width of the zone of chemical reaction is usually much less
than the characteristic length. So the front of a detonation wave is assumed
to be a discontinuity which separates the undisturbed gas from that where
reaction proceeds. Let the reference frame be bound u p with the detonation
wave. A particle of the undisturbed gas intersects the shock front, then a
chemical reaction proceeds and energy release takes place. Afterwards the
particle expands, and its pressure diminishes. The equations of continuity,
m o m e n t u m and energy can be written as follows
pivi = P2V2,
Pl+Pivl = P2+P2V\,
ftx + ^ + Q = />2 + ^ , Vl = D. (140)
Here D is the velocity of detonation, Q is the energy which is released on ac

count of chemical reaction. We can write an analogue of the Hugoniot adiabatic
*2(P, r) - fti(pi, r i ) = - ( n + r 2 ) + Q, r= 1/p. (141)
The quantity Q is assumed to be constant. We consider the gas that has normal
thermodynamical properties. The shock wave compresses the gas, and its state
becomes p r , r r . As there is energy release and the gas expands, the shock
adiabatic for the products of reaction is situated above the shock adiabatic for
the undisturbed gas in the plane r , p. We have from Eq. (140)
v2
p-Pi = -(r-ri)-i (142)
It is a Rayleigh-Michelson line. One can see from Eq. (142) that the density
increases as the pressure increases and vice versa. The process due to which
the pressure increases as compared with that ahead of the wave front is called
detonation. If the pressure decreases then the process is called slow combustion
(deflagration). We can deduce from Eq. (140)
P2-P1 nA0.
= PlVi = P2V2- (143)
vi-v2
It follows from (143) that the detonation front reduces the velocity of the gas in
the reference frame bound u p with the front. On the contrary, the combustion
accelerates the gas relative to the front.
The Hugoniot adiabatic gives the states behind the detonation front that are
consistent with the law of energy conservation. However, there is an additional
condition which the process of detonation must satisfy, namely,
^ < 0. (144)
r - n
Eq. (144) follows from Eq. (142). The detonation which is described by the
point D (see Fig. 101), where the Rayleigh-Michelson line is tangent to the
Hugoniot adiabatic, is called the Chapman-Jouguet detonation. It follows from
Eq. (141) that
Fig. 101.
TdS + - ( r - n)dp - -(p - Pl)dr = 0.
Taking into account Eq. (144), we have at the point D
dS = 0.
It is valid at the point D

fdp\ fdp\ =(dp\ dp= _c2 2
\dr)H \dr)s \dp)sdr

Using Eq. (142), we get
2 2 2 2
M = 2c. p2v2 = p2c2.
Or
Thus the velocity of the reacted gas relative to the detonation front is equal to
the local velocity of sound in the C h a p m a n - J o u g u e t processes.
The solution that corresponds to a point S above D (Fig. 101) gives the
following value v2 + c^:
V2 + c 2 > D.
Thus the shock front propagates relative to the reacted gas at a subsonic ve
locity. This means that any rarefaction wave catches up with the front and
reduces it. As a result, the final state moves towards the point D. On the
other hand, the solution that corresponds to a point W below D (Fig. 101)
gives the supersonic velocity of the front relative to the reacted gas. In this
case the energy release is carried away downstream and does not support the
shock front. The velocity of the front diminishes, and the final state also tends
to the point D.
Let us determine flow properties behind a detonation front in the case of
the C h a p m a n - J o u g u e t detonation. The velocity of sound is given by
c= y/yp/p.
We assume that the adiabatic exponent 7 does not vary across the detonation
front. We have from Eqs. (140)
Pi + p\v\ =p2 + P2V\ = p2 + P2{lP2/p2) = J>2(1 + l)
Or
P1+P1D2
V'2 (145)
7+1
If P2/P1 > 1 then
P1D2
P2 =
7+1'
From the equation
dp P2-P1
dr T2 - n
at the point D we have
P2 (7 + 1)ff-1 (146)
^2
Pi !
PI
If P2/P1 > 1 then

E l -_ 7 + 1
pi 7
203
Let us consider the energy e<

equationI (140).
(140 Taking into account Eqs. (145),
(146), we get
Df
D\ - 2{c\
>? ((77 - \)}D\
2{c? + Q(7
QQ(-1
Q(-f 1)}D{ + c?
\)}D\ + c\ 0.
4 = 0.
Hence
Q(72 -1)
D\ = c\ + Q(f - 1) ^^2(7-))Qc? Q 2 ( 7 - ll)) 2 ..
+ Q?{j-l)2.
/2(7-))Qc? + (147)
" l - i ' "evi *-j -- y -v / - v e ^ i " v / *;
We must choose the upper sign in the case of detonation. If Q/c\ 1 then
we get instead of Eq. (147)
we
D = V2(7
v/2(f>2 - 1)Q-
Only the Chapman-Jouguet processes give a steady value for the velocity
of
of detonation
of detonation wave. wave. In this case
In this case no no disturbance
disturbance can can catch
catch upup with
with the the zone
zone of
chemical
chemical reaction.
chemical reaction. There There is is a
aa good
good agreement
agreement between experimental values
between experimental values of
detonation
detonation velocity and calculated ones,
detonation velocity and calculated ones, the latter quantities being calculatethe latter quantities being calculated
on
on the the basis
basis of of the
the Chapman-Jouguet
Chapman-Jouguet hypothesis. hypothesis. Modern
Modern developments
developments in
detonation
detonation
ueLuiiciuuii are
are treated,
<rc treated,
irecitcu, e.g.
e.g. by
e.g. by
Nettleton (Nettleton
Nettleton ii>ettieioii
uy i>eitit;toii
1987).
(Nettleton 1987).
iyoi I.
Let us proceed to
to laser-supported
Let us proceed to laser-supported detonation. We
laser-supported detonation.
detonation. WeWe assume
assume the
assume the front
the front of
front ofof
absorption wave as a singular surface (discontinuity)
absorption wave as a singular surface (discontinuity) which propagates through which propagates through
the
the gas gas at at aa velocity
velocity G. G. WeWe choose
choose the the reference
reference frame
frame bound
bound upup with
with the the front.
front.
The
The cold undisturbed gas transforms into plasma behind the front. The gas
T > i ^ cold
r o l r l undisturbed
n n r W . i i r V w l gas
cr*c transforms
+ r * n o f n r T n into
i n t o plasma behind
rl*rna K ^ i n H the
tho ffront.
r r m t . The
T ^ crao
gas
velocity is equal to G ahead of the front. The
velocity is equal to G ahead of the front. The conservation laws may be written conservation laws may be written
as
as follows
follows (Raizer(Raizer 1974) 1974)
P\G
PiG
P\G = p2V2,
=
= p2v2,
22
+PlPlG
Pll+ G = p2
= p2+P2^ 2 ^ 222,
p 2 + PP2V
P2^ 22,,
ei
6ei1 +
+ T. + + .n =~ e2
e 2+ ++"*" "o"' (148)
+
^T
Pl + 2
+
2 +""^Pl
~o~ nG G 2 +"^
p77
2 ir2 - ( 14 48) )
(1
First of all, S Pl
all, we consider a limiting case p2 = px. II
II may
may take
take placc
placc en
en condition
condition
that
thai.t there
re exists
thPFP
there exists a
PYit.s a mechanism
a m p r h * n i m of
mechanism of very
of very fast
vPrv W transfer
ffast r a n c f p r of
ttransfer of ionization
rvf inni*atirm at
ionization at a
at a velocity
a v-WJ+.v
velocity
muchch greater
eater than
greater than that
that of
of sound
sound in
in the
the heated
heated gas.
gas. Under this assumption
Under this assumption the the
gas is
is at rest behind the absorption wave. In this case the radiation that
at rest behind the absorption wave. In this case the radiation that falls
falls
2
on 11 cm
cm 2 of
of the
the front
front is
is absorbed
absorbed byby the
the mass
mass of
of the
the gas
gas equal
equal to
to PlpPlxG.
G. Thus
G. Thus
:hus
PiGe
Pl Ge22 = F.
F. (149)
(149)
We assume that e2 > ex. Now let us return to Eqs. (148). We eliminate the
ei.
e^
entities G and v2 from the last equation, and we have adiabatic
quantities
/ , , \ / \ 1/2
ee22-e,
-e, = I(p
liV((ppi1++1 + );t; )t(_
) f l - l )n++I FFw _ ^ 11 /2
PP)) (L-)+F(, fI ^"f
^"f
P*-n )V / 2 . (150)
(150)
(150)
22 V' VKPi
'\pi
V Pi)
P2j
PPI l P2j
'\pi P2)
P2J \(P2-P1)P1P2J
\(P2-Pi)pi
\{P2-
\{P2-P1)P1P2J
\{P2-pi)piP2j
\(P2-Pi)pip2j
The quantity F is a parameter.

Let us consider the supersonic regime. Eq. (150) is valid in this case. We
assume that p2 > P i , e 2 > t\ and e jp/(p{j - 1)). We have
Here 7 is the effective adiabatic exponent for the plasma behind the front.
More accurate equation of energy conservation has the form (cf. with Eq. (149)).
( 7 1 ) 1
P i G e a = F/?, / ? = ( l - " ^ " ) " - (151)
Eq. (151) takes into account the motion of the gas behind the front and the
change of its density. The quantity f3 is close to unity. The quantity e m a y be
eliminated with the aid of the expression
The shock adiabatic in the case of laser-supported detonation is different from

the shock adiabatic for explosives. In the former the absorbed energy is pro
portional to the reciprocal of the wave velocity while in the latter the released
energy is constant.
The velocity of a laser-supported detonation wave is equal to the local
velocity of sound behind the front relative to the gas
V2 = C2 = ( 7 P 2 / P 2 ) 1 / 2 . (152)
As is known, the same condition is valid for the C h a p m a n - J o u g u e t detonation.

Making use of Eq. (152), we can find the velocity of a LSD wave and gas
properties behind its front
7 + 1
7 + 1
P2 = P\ ,
7
2
/ 4 y/3/.F\2/3
7
(153)
-=M^j)
In this case the quantity (3 in Eq. (151) has the value
u)
0 = 2 7 / ( 7 + 1).
Let us consider a spherical LSD wave (Ramsden and Savic 1964). We assume
that the intensity of laser radiation does not depend on time. The radiation
flux can be written as
Wo Wo
F= = a (154)
W^j ^"
Here r is the radius of the wave, S is the part of the shock front on which
the radiation falls, Q is the solid angle of the converging beam, a is a constant.
By substituting the value of F from Eq. (154) into the first of Eqs. (153) we
get
dr >,2 _ iW;r/_ 1 ! / 3
dt I Pi?2 J
Or
'5
'5\3/*f2tf-l)aW0\1/B t3'\
3) X * J
3 5
Thus r is proportional to t ' . This fact was found experimentally (Ramsden
and Savic 1964).
Eqs. (153) do not take into account the variation of effective adiabatic
exponent due to heating of gas. However, this variation may be considerable.
The velocity of an absorption wave may exceed that one of a LSD wave if
other mechanism of ionization occurs, namely, radiative mechanism and mech
anism of electron heat transfer (at temperatures higher than 100 eV). Such a
wave propagates at a supersonic velocity relative to the gas behind it, and no
hydrodynamical disturbance can catch it up. In this case the compression is
less than behind a LSD wave.
If the intensity of the laser beam decreases the temperature of the plasma
decreases and so does the degree of ionization. The thickness of the absorbing
layer increases. Let us determine the threshold value for laser intensity when
LSD is still possible. The layer of absorbing plasma expands not only in the
direction of the laser beam, but also in the transverse direction. The ratio of
energy losses, which are due to the expansion in radial direction and those due
to the expansion in transverse direction, is given by
27rr//7rr2 = I jr.
A LSD wave can exist only on condition that / -C r. If the radius of a light
channel is equal to 10~ 2 -10 - 1 cm then the free mean path of radiation becomes
comparable with r at a temperature T ~ 20000 K. The threshold value of
radiation flux is F ~ 108 W/cm 2 .
Now we consider the structure of a LSD wave in one-dimensional case. We

assume the intensity of the laser radiation to be constant. The gas ahead of
the wave is at rest. The radiation of plasma ionizes the layer of gas ahead of
the front of the LSD wave. The initial degree of ionization in the vicinity of
the front is aei < 10~ 2 . The free mean path of radiation does not exceed one
mm, and the gas is neutral at a distance of several mm from the front. The
electron temperature Tei ahead of the front is determined by the absorption of
the laser radiation and by losses of energy due to collisions. The temperature
Tei has the value T ei = 1 - 2 eV in the case of H2, He, and Ar for the regime
of LSD. The period of time from the beginning of photoionization of the gas
layer till the passage of the wave front through it is 10~ 8 s. The energy transfer
from electrons to atoms is negligibly small due to a large difference in masses
of atoms and electrons. Thus we can put ahead of the front that T\ <C T e i .
The continuity equation, the momentum and energy equations have the
following form
ldp dvk_
p dt ^ dxk " '
dvk _ _&P_ _ dpe
dt dxk dxk
de dvk dqk
3
e = nkT, p = nkT, pe nekTe.
Here k is the Boltzmann constant, e is the internal energy, n is the density

of atoms and ions, p, T are the pressure and the temperature of atoms and
ions, ne is the electron density, p e , Te are the pressure and the temperature of
electrons, E is the electric field arising due to the charge separation, j is the
density of electric current, q is the heat flux.
The numerical results on the structure of LSD wave in argon were obtained
by Fukui et al. (Fukui et al. 1995). The problem is as follows. At the initial
instant we have a hot plasma and cold argon. A shock wave is formed by
the discontinuity of pressure. The shock wave moves forward, and the high-
temperature zone begins to absorb laser radiation. The electron number density
increases. The pressure and temperature rise due to absorption of laser radi
ation, and a blast wave appears. The propagation velocity of the blast wave
increases, so that the inverse Bremsstrahlung becomes stronger. The velocity
of the blast wave becomes faster than that of the primary shock. The blast
wave catches up with the shock wave, then it propagates at a constant velocity,
and a LSD wave is formed. The ionization process is as follows
Ar -f e~ <>Ar+ + e~ + e~.
The plasma absorbs the laser radiation through inverse Bremsstrahlung and
emits radiation through Bremsstrahlung:
Ar + e~ + hv=Ar+ + e~,
+
Ar + e~zzLAr + e~ + /H>.
The variation of radiation intensity is given by
dF
where kei is the coefficient of electron-ion inverse Bremsstrahlung absorption,

kea is the coefficient of electron-atom inverse Bremsstrahlung absorption. The
energy equations are as follows
de d(e+p)v
m+ dx = $/*-*
dee d{ee+pe)v dpe ee + pe dpe
v
dt H o
dx = ~^dx r QIB -QB+QT + pe dt '
QT = 3peRo{Ta Te) 2^ ~^r ~dt~Âr'

i
Here QIB and QB are the amounts of energy absorption due to inverse Brems
strahlung and of energy losses due to Bremsstrahlung, respectively; vej is the
effective frequency of collisions between electrons and heavy particles, IAT is
the ionization potential.
Fig. 102 shows the structure of LSD wave (Fukui, Oshima and Fujiwara
1995).
The process of laser-generated shock propagation in a gas can be divided
into two stages: (1) the propagation of a LSD wave and (2) the motion of a
shock wave after the cessation of a laser pulse. During the first stage a shock
wave is a pear-shaped one. The asymmetry of a laser-generated shock wave
was studied by several authors (Galkin et al. 1989; Dumas et al. 1995). In
the first paper, shock waves were generated by a pulse ruby laser radiation
(A = 0.6943//m) which was focused on a target. The targets were of graphite,
steel and copper. The duration of the pulse was r = 20 ns, the power of
radiation was 1081011 W / c m 2 , the energy was 0.01 - 1 J. The diameter of the
Fig. 102. Structure of LSD wave
focusing spot varied in the range 100 - 500 /im. The experiments were carried
out in air for an initial pressure po = 76 - 760 Torr.
We denote as r 0 the quantity (E/po)1^3, as t the quantity tco/r0, as r\
the quantity r/ro. Here E is the effective explosion energy, CQ and po are the
sound velocity and pressure in the undisturbed gas. In the range î < 0.02
and F 1010 - 10 11 W/cm 2 the radius rj increases in time considerably more
rapidly than it derives from the point-explosion theory. The shape of the shock
wave differs greatly from the spherical one under these conditions (Fig. 103).
Evidently, the acceleration of the shock wave in the channel of the laser beam
is caused by the appearance of an absorption wave during the pulse. The
input of energy to the front of the shock wave propagating outside the channel
of the laser beam is practically absent from the instant the absorption wave
arises. The velocity of the absorption wave and the shock wave in the channel
of the beam during the laser pulse significantly exceeds the velocity of the other
sectors of the front. This allows the shock wave outside the beam channel to
be treated as cylindrical for t ~ r.
The quantity k = (ri r^jr^ characterizes the deviation of the shape of
the shock wave from a spherical one due to the effect of the absorption wave.
Here r\ is the path of the shock wave in axial direction, r-i is the path in radial
Fig. 103. Shadowgraphs of the shock wae near the target (Galkin
et al. 1989a).
direction. The dependence of k on the radiation power-flux density F is given in

Fig. 104. The measurements correspond to the time i = 0.5/xs (po = 760 Torr).
For k = 0 (F < 108 W/cm 2 ) the wave is spherical (the absorption wave is
absent). For F > 108 W/cm 2 the shock-wave front begins to stretch out
towards the laser beam, which indicates the appearance of the laser-radiation
absorption wave. However, a signiicant growth of the quantity k is observed
only for F > F* 2 1010 W/cm 2 . For F > F, the shock wave absorbs
radiation just as effectively as for optical breakdown of a gas, whose threshold
in air at a pressure p 0 = 760 Torr is equal to 2 10 11 W/cm 2 (Eaizer 1974)
for A = 0.6943 /*m. Some authors (Kohlberg et al. 1995) observed projections
called "aneurisms" at the shock front at low pressures when the laser beam
was focused on the target.
After cessation of laser pulse, the motion of a shock wave is described
well by the theory of point explosion (Sedov 1959; Korobeinikov 1991). If the
shock wave is strong then there is an analytic solution obtained by Sedov. The
propagation of a spherical shock wave (point explosion) in the case of counter-
pressure was calculated numerically by Erode (Erode 1959). Experimental
data agree well with theoretical ones (Figs. 105 and 106). If the shock wave is
Fig. 104. Ar against power-flux density, k (ri T2)/r2, ri is the

path of the shock wave in axial direction, r2 is the path in radial
direction.
Fig. 105. Path of the shock wave against time (Galkin et al. 1990).
Dots are experimental data, solid line represents the calculated val-
2.5 t,fis
not strong then good results may be obtained with the aid of Eq. (82) while
substituting on the right-hand side the derivative dp2/dr which is determined
from self-similar solution (Sedov 1959).
Fig. 106. Pressure behind the shock wave against time (Galkin et
al. 1990). Dots are experimental data, solid line represents the
calculated values.
dM _ ( 7 + l ) ( M 2 - l ) w 1 dp2 _ 2(M 2 - \)qw 1

dr 27 pi dr 7+ 1 r'
F = M{2(2 7 - 1)M 4 + (7 + 5)M 2 - 7 + 1},
w = (7 - 1)M 2 + 2, q = 27M 2 - 7 + I,
1 dp2 _ S-fE Al
Pi dr ~ 25( 7 + l)pic\r*A2'
7 (37-l)(9-27)/?
Ai = 0.6 +
(7-l)(2-7) (2-7)(7-7)
13 7 2 - 7 7 + 1 2
A2 7 - 0 . 4 + (37 " l)P /? =
27+l 7-7 ' 5(27+l)(37-l)'
'E = a(1.4) = 1.175.
Here EQ is the energy of explosion.

It is interesting to note that in the case of graphite target, a mass pulse
is created which propagates at a velocity considerably in excess of the natural
convection velocity (Galkin et al. 1989b). Free convection velocity is equal to
0.16 m/s. The process is as follows. At a time of order of 10 /zs, the expansion of
the heated region of gas has ended. The graphite evaporates under the influence
of the radiation from the hot gas.
At first the temperature of the gas above the target is much higher than
the temperature at the surface. After that, in 0.2 ms, as a result of convective
heat transfer to the cold air, the gas temperature falls below the temperature
of the target surface. This results in heat flow from the solid to the adjacent
air masses.
CHAPTER 9.
SHOCK WAVES IN
A LOW-TEMPERATURE PLASMA
A low-temperature plasma may be created by means of a glow discharge,

in processes of combustion, by means of radiation. An interesting case is that
of nonequilibrium plasma (electron temperature is not equal to that of ions
or atoms). We assume the plasma to be neutral. Nevertheless, there arises
an electric current in the presence of electric field. The processes that may
pass in plasma are as follows: ionization, excitation of atoms and molecules,
recombination, dissociation, radiation. We consider an ideal plasma (the Debye
length is much greater than the mean distance between atoms and molecules).
The propagation of a shock wave through a low-temperature plasma may be
of interest in connection with various problems: those of re-entry, processes that
occur in plasmachemical reactors and pulse gaseous lasers etc. Nishio (Nishio
1995) proposed a method for visualizing shock waves in three-dimensional flow
by means of discharge. The application of a glow discharge for visualizing shock
waves in rarefied gas is well known. That phenomenon is also connected with
the problem of observation of rockets. When ionized products of combustion
flow out of the nozzle, a Mach disc may arise in the jet thus changing the
intensity of the radiation of the jet. Furthermore, a shock wave can be a tool
for studying kinetics in a low-temperature plasma. It is also worth mentioning
that one can obtain a non-contracted discharge at high pressures while using
shock waves. It is difficult to create a discharge without arcing under stationary
conditions.
It is known that the structure of a shock wave in gas can be determined
theoretically by solving the Boltzmann equation. In an analogous way, the
structure of a shock wave in plasma may be found by solving the appropriate
kinetic equation, namely, the Vlasov equation. But it has not been done up-to-
now.
The structure of a plane shock wave in a fully ionized plasma was invest
igated theoretically (Shafranov 1957). The case of a partially ionized plasma
was considered later (Jaffrin 1965).
213
The structure of a steady plane shock wave in a partially ionized plasma was
investigated using the Navier-Stokes equations for ternary mixture of atoms,
electrons, and ions. The basic assumptions are as follows: (1) the characteristic
reaction lengths are large compared to the shock thickness, so that no ionization
or recombination reactions occur within the shock itself; (2) the Debye length
is much less than the mean free path, so that the overall charge separation is
negligible; (3) the ion-atom diffusion is small because the ion-atom mean free
path is small compared to the shock thickness. The net current is equal to zero.
Thus we have
mvi neve = c o n s t .
The continuity equation for atoms yields
nava const.
The equations of m o m e n t u m and energy for monatomic gas are as follows
dvj dpj d /4 dvj\ vs ^

mjHjVj + njej x =
-& ~te ~ Tx U ^ J " ^ ik'
5 J / n ^ d {, dTA d /4 dvA 1 dv]
2 dxx 3 3)
dx \ 3 dx J dx \ 3 3 3
dx ) 2 3 3 3
dx 333^
- ]P(jfc + VjPjk), (j is not summed),
j = i,e,a, a = e, ee = - e , ea = 0. (155)
Here Pjk characterizes the m o m e n t u m transfer between species j and k, kj is

the thermal conductivity and jk denotes the energy transfer between the k -
particles and j - particles. The equations of state are
Pj = njkTj. (156)
Eqs. (155) and (156) represent a closed system. At x > oo and at x -> + 0 0
the flow is uniform. All the species have the same velocity and temperature.
The results of calculations are as follows. There is a thermal layer of elevated
electron temperature ahead of the shock front. At low degree of ionization,
the atom gas is unaffected by the electrons. The electric field has the direction
opposite to the shock propagation.
The main results are as follows: (1) the existence of a thermal layer of
elevated electron temperature and a precursor ahead of the shock front; (2) rise
of an electric field that increases with degree of ionization. The calculated value
Shock waves in a low-temperature plasma 215
of a j u m p of potential across the shock front agrees well with the measured one
(Jaffrin 1965).
Experimental investigations that are concerned with the shock waves in a
low-temperature plasma are small in number. A special case is the existence
of an electric current ahead of and behind the shock front. An energy release
takes place due to this circumstance in a large area behind the shock front.
Shock waves were used as a tool for diagnostics of a gas discharge (Edels et al.
1957). Miyashiro (1983) investigated the intensity of radiation behind a shock
wave propagating through a longitudinal arc discharge. It was found that the
shock wave may increase or decrease the intensity of radiation according to the
value of electric field.
The propagation of shock waves through a glow discharge was investigated
by several authors (Klimov et al. 1982; Bystrov et al. 1989, 1990, 1992,
1995). Klimov used a longitudinal glow discharge. Bystrov et al. studied
shock propagation through a zone of transverse rf discharge.
Results are given below that relate to the shock propagation through a
transverse rf discharge.
The experiments were fulfilled in a single diaphragm shock tube of rectang
ular cross-section of an area 40 x 60 m m 2 . The test chamber was dielectric.
It had glass windows of 60 m m diameter. Two metal plates were mounted on
the upper and lower walls of the test chamber. The transverse discharge was
created between the plates by means of a rf generator ( / = 13.6 MHz). The
current density was 40 m A / c m 2 . The length of the discharge zone was equal
to 80 m m . Initial pressure was equal to 650 Pa. The shock Mach number was
equal to 2 - 5. Ar, CO2 and N2 were chosen as test gases. The density of the
post-shock flow was measured by a laser-schlieren technique. We used a He
- Ne laser with a b e a m diameter of 1 m m . The shock velocity was measured
with pressure transducers beyond the discharge zone and from schlieren signals
within the discharge zone. The initial translational temperature was measured
with the aid of a Fabry-Perot interferometer. The vibrational temperature of
CO2 was determined from the infrared radiation by reference intensity tech
nique. The radiation passed through a slit of 1 m m width and fell on a detector.
The initial translational temperature of the test gas was equal to 1200 K, the
initial vibrational temperature of carbon dioxide was 2000 K.
Fig. 107 shows the shock velocity in plasma against that one outside the
zone of discharge. As one can see, the shock velocity in plasma exceeds the
value corresponding to the shock that enters into a region of a heated gas. T h a t
difference may be due to energy release behind the shock.
Fig. 108 illustrates the infrared radiation behind the shock wave (CO2 as
Fig. 107. The shock velocity v in plasma against that one VQ outside
the zone of discharge, dots are the measured v a l u e s ; l , 2 , 3 - com
puted values of the velocity of the shock that enters into a region
of a heated gas; 1 - T = 700K; 2 - T = HOOK; 3 - T = 1500K.
the test gas, vo = 1 6 6 0 m / s ) . We found the vibrational temperature behind the

shock. We neglected the interaction between the asymmetric mode and deform
ation mode of CO2 molecule. We proposed the temperature of the deformation
mode to coincide with that of symmetric mode owing to the Fermi resonance
and to be equal to the translational temperature. Fig. 109 shows the value of
temperature of the asymmetric mode (1) and of the translational one (2) behind
the shock. We see that the values of the vibrational temperature exceeds those
of the translational.
The electron density in CO2 was measured by a microwave interferometer
(A = 8 m m ) . In order to investigate a shock reflection a quartz plate was
mounted in the test section. The receiver and transmitter of the microwave
interferometer were located at the end of the discharge zone or just in front of
the plate. The interferometer operated in a linear regime (A being
the phase change). The electron number density is equal to
-\n*A<p
Here / is the characteristic size of the plasma, n* = 1 0 1 3 c m - 3 . The electron

temperature was approximately equal to 1-2 eV. Fig. 110 presents the electron
number density behind the incident shock wave against time. We see a smooth
bell-shaped profile. The gradual rise of the electron density shows that there is
Fig. 108. Infrarared radiation (A = 2.7//) behind the shock wave in

plasma (arbitrary units); C 0 2 as the test gas, v0 = 1650m/s.
Fig. 109. The temperature of the asymmetric mode (1) and of the
translational one (2) behind the shock in plasma, CO2 as the test
gas.
Fig. 110. The electron density behind the incident shock wave
against time.
Fig. 111. The electron density behind the reflected shock wave,
v0 = 930 m/s, po = 700 Pa, a - incident shock, b - reflected shock.
an electron precursor ahead of the shock front.

Fig. I l l shows the electron number density behind the reflected shock wave.
At first the electron number rises slowly. Then we see a bend in the curve which
corresponds to the reflected shock. After that there is a non-monotonous change
in the electron density and finally a graduate decrease occurs.
Let neo be the initial electron density in the discharge zone, ne\ and n e 2
be the values of that quantity behind the incident shock wave and the reflected
one, respectively. It was measured that n e o = 7 1 0 1 0 c m ~ 3 , the m a x i m u m
value of n e i is equal to 2.4 x 10 1 1 c m " 3 (v0 1500 m / s ) and to 10 1 1 c m - 3 (v0 =
930 m / s ) .
In order to obtain the density distribution we had to solve a convolution-
type linear integral equation by the method of regularization developed by A.N.
Tikhonov. This equation has the form
+ CO
<$>{x) = C_ ^ - ^ / Ap(s)K(,
y/ny/a2 + zl\/A +\
A - . % , x, k = '27r/X.
2(a + ts 0 ) '
Here <j) is the schlieren signal, A/> = P2(#) Pi(#)> KGD is Gladstone-Dale
coefficient, z$ is the parameter of the Gaussian beam, a is the distance from
the laser to the shock tube, C is the scaling constant, K(x) is the response
function of our system, / is the width of the test section, A is the complex
conjugate.
It was found that the density distribution was steady inside the discharge
zone. T h e shock waves, both in inert gas (Ar) and in molecular gases (CO2,
N2), displayed a two-step structure (Fig. 112). T h i s means that the structure
of the shock waves in our experiments depends mainly upon the processes of
ionization and recombination, but not on the excitation of the internal degrees
of freedom of the molecules. A similar structure is observed when a shock
wave moves in a mixture of light gas and heavy one (Raines 1991). The shock
thickness in plasma is greater than that in gas. Fig. 113 shows that the density
distribution in the post-shock flow is non-monotonous. The density first de
creases and then increases. This phenomenon occurs due to the energy release
behind the shock front in CO2 and N 2 . The magnitude of the density j u m p
across the shock in molecular gases is less than the predicted value, if one does
not take into account the energy release.
A precursor was observed ahead of the shock front in CO2 (Fig. 114). The
precursor radiation (A = 0.4/i) falls in the direction towards the shock front,
Fig. 112. Two-step structure of the shock wave in Ar plasma; 1

M = 2.42; 2 - 3.0; 3 - 3.25; 4 - 3.4.
Fig. 113. The density distribution in the post-shock flow.

bhock waves in a low-temperature plasma 221
Fig. 114. The precursor radiation (A = 0.4/i) against time. 1 -

radiation; 2 - schlieren-signal.
in contrast to the case of strong shock waves in gases (Zeldovich and Raizer
1967). The emergence of a precursor m a y be caused by an increase in the
number of excited molecules due to the motion of surplus electron charges in
front of the shock. The intensity of the precursor radiation exceeds that one
behind the shock at high Mach numbers (Fig. 115).
The radiation from the band 0.4/i is known to arise during electrical dis
charges in carbon dioxide, the excited state being 1AU. The molecule of carbon
dioxide is considerably bent in the excited state. Transitions from vibrational
levels which correspond to the minimum of potential energy of the excited state
to very high vibrational levels of the ground state involve radiation from the
above-mentioned band (Herzberg 1966).
In our case the radiation arises probably because of the process of recom
bination. The decrease of the intensity of radiation immediately ahead of the
shock front m a y be explained as follows. It is known that there is a broad re
gion of elevated electron temperature ahead of the shock front in plasma. The
density of the plasma is almost constant in that region. At moderate Mach
numbers the electron temperature rises slowly at first, and then more and more
rapidly near the shock front. The heating of the electrons ahead of the shock
must involve the decrease of recombination and consequently the decrease of
the intensity of radiation (Derzhiev et al. 1986). This fact takes place when
the excited levels are populated during process of recombination.
The conclusions are as follows:
Fig. 115. The precursor radiation (A = 0.4/i) against the Mach

number, 1 - radiation of the precursor; 2 - radiation behind the
shock wave; CO2 as the test gas.
(1) The shock waves are steady in the gas discharge (the energy release
behind the shock wave does not exceed 1 W c m - 3 ) .
(2) Shock waves, both in inert and in molecular gases, display a two-step
structure.
(3) The shock-wave thickness is greater in plasma than in gas.
(4) The density distribution in the post-shock flow is non-monotonous.
Namely, the density has its minimum at some distance from the shock front.
(5) A precursor was observed in CO2. The intensity of its radiation
(A = 0.4fi) decreases in the direction towards the shock front. This phe
nomenon is apparently due to the fact that the radiation is a recombinational
one. The heating of electrons ahead of the shock front causes the decrease of
recombination and, as a consequence, the decrease of the intensity of radiation.
It is convenient to use electric discharge in order to create a non-uniform re
gion in the gas. Below we give some results of the experiments in which a shock
reflection was studied from a body with a cavity. The gas was heated ahead
of the body with the aid of discharge. The flow was close to a two-dimensional
one. The shock Mach number was 3.2. The discharge was generated during
one second before the arrival of the shock wave. A metal plate on the wall of
the shock tube was used as anode. The model was used as cathode. The gas
temperature was about 1100 K. It increased in the direction from the lower
surface of the model to the upper one.
Fig. 116. Unsteady supersonic flow over a concave body in the

presence of glow discharge. CC1 2 F 2 as the test gas. M=3.2, pi =
1.5 kPa; a - 1=10 ps; b - 20 ps; c - 40 ps; d - 60 ps; e - 110 ps.
The bow shock wave ahead of the model appears and it interacts with
transverse waves inside the cavity. The transverse shock waves propagate from
the edges of the cavity towards the plane of symmetry and then in the opposite
direction (Fig. 116). Due to the non-uniformities of temperature, the transverse
wave that propagates from the upper edge towards the lower one moves faster
than that one from the lower edge. As a result, only one wave interacts with
the bow shock wave. The symmetry of the flow is destroyed. A bulge occurs
near the lower edge. It should be noted that the flow becomes turbulent inside
the cavity.
APPENDIX A
A system of approximate equations for a plane weak shock wave in non-

uniform gas is given below (ra =: 6). The flow is assumed to be one-dimensional,
the gas ahead of the shock front being at rest. We use the following nomen
clature:
i = 7 + l, Kk+i = Kk{>y(k + 1) + 1}, Ar > 1,
y = M2-lf ** = - ? , *i = ,
pi oaK
a is the Lagrangian variable, s is the distance which the shock wave has passed.
The density ahead of the shock wave depends on the coordinate: pi = pi{a).
The system is as follows
d
JL = y{^Zl + Rl),
as 4 7
dZy y
7 M,
dZ2 y
7 Mr
=
-dT -2Za + e2
>
d Z z V
7 j_
dZ/i y
~di = -2Z5 + e4
>
dz
5 v7 , o
~di = -2Z6 + e5
>
dZ6 1 dpi
r ee, Ki (157)
ds pi da
We omitted the term which includes Z7 in the last equation in order to

obtain a closed system. The quantities e\ on the right-hand side of Eqs. (157)
depend on the density distribution ahead of the shock wave and on Zi. We
denote as Ri the derivative (1/ pi)(dl pi/da1), as F,- and ra; the expressions
225
depending on Ri and Z{, respectively
F1 = R2-R21, F2 = F1-R21, F3 = F2-R\,

FA = 5/?2 - Hi??, F 5 = /? 2 + /??, F6 = / ? 2 - - / ? ? ,
F7 = R3- 3i?i/? 2 + 2/??, F8 = R3- 6i?ii? 2 + 6/??,
F9 = R3- 5i?!i? 2 + 4/??, F10 = 3i? 3 - 17i?ii? 2 + URl
Fu = Rs- IRiRi + 6/??, Fu = l l i ? 3 - 57RiR2 + 46/??,
F13 = i? 3 - UR1R2 + 10/??, FXA = 5/? 3 - 27/?i/? 2 + 22/??,
Fi6 = /?4 - 8R1R3 ~ 6/?| + 36/??/?2 - 24/??,
_Fl6 RA 4iîJ?3 3-f^2 ~^~ 12-R^^2 6-^1?
F17 = RA - 6H1E 3 - 5 i ^ + 2 2 i ^ E 2 - 12iJ?,
F\s = i^4 7R1R3 6.ft2 ~l~ 27RiR2 15i?i,

-Fl9 T^4
4 SR1R3 4 ^2 + 30iî R2 TTRA2 >
F20 -R4 7R1R3 6JR2 ~fr" 30.R1i^2 18iij,
F21 = 17/?4 - 104/?i/? 3 - 87/?! + 384/??/?2 - 210/??,
F 2 2 = Ri - 10/?i/? 4 - 20/? 2 /? 3 + 60i??/?3 + 90/?i/?^ - 240/??/?2 + 120/??,
F 2 3 = /?s - 5/?i/? 4 - 10/? 2 /? 3 + 20/??/?3 + 30/?i/?^ - 60/??/?2 + 24/??,
F 2 4 = /? 5 - 7/? 1 /? 4 - 16/? 2 /? 3 + 34/??/?3 + 54/?i/?| - 114/??/?2 + 48/??,
F 2 5 = /? 5 - 8/?i/? 4 - 19/?2/?s + 44/??/? 3 + 72/?i/?l - 162/??/?2 + 72/??,
F 2 6 = 7/?5 - 51/?i/? 4 - 118/?2/?3 + 252/??/?3
+ 402/?ii?2 - 852/??/?2 + 360/??,
F 2 7 = /? 5 - 9/?i/? 4 - 20/? 2 /? 3 + 52i??i?3 + 84RiR22 - 204/??R 2 + 96/??,
F 2 8 = R6 - 6/?i/? 5 - 15/? 2 /? 4 + 30/??/?4 - 10/?! + 120/?i/? 2 /? 3 + 30i?|
- 120/??/?3 - 270/??/?2 + 360/?t/? 2 - 120/??,
F 2 9 = /? 6 - 8/?i/? 5 - 23/? 2 /? 4 + 48/??/?4 - 16/?! + 208/?i/? 2 /? 3 + 54/?f
- 504/?? i?! - 216/??/?3 + 696/??/?2 - 240/??,
F 3 0 = Re - 9/?i/? 5 - 8R2R4 + 60/??/?4 - 19/?! + 270/?!/? 2 /? 3
- 294/??/?3 + 72/?! - 702/??/?! + 1008i??/?2 - 360/??,
F31 = /? 6 - 10/?i/? 5 - 29/? 2 /? 4 + 70/??/?4 + 312/?!/?2/?3 - 360/??/?3
- 20/?! + 84/?! - 861/??/?! + 1296/??/?2 - 480/??,
F 3 2 = Re- H/?! /?s - 30/? 2 /? 4 + 80/??/?4 - 20/?! + 340/?i/? 2 /? 3
Appendix A 227
- 420R3XR3 + 90Rl + 1560B^R2 - 990i*2#2, - 600iJ?,

F33 = Re - 12^1^5 - 30^2^4 + 90RJR4 - 20Rl + SQ0R1R2R3
- 480iJ?i? 3 + 90i?| - lOSORJRl + 1 8 0 0 i J ^ 2 - 720ii?,
m m
mi = ^1^3 + 3Z|) 2 = i + Z1Z3, m 3 = m 2 H- 2ZiZ3,
1714 = 1713 + Z\, m 5 = Z1Z4 + 2Z2Z3,
m6 = 6Z1Z5 + 15Z 2 Z 4 + 10f, m 7 = Z?Z 4 + 4Z1Z2Z3 + Zf,
m 8 = ZxZe + 3Z 2 Z 5 + 5Z 3 Z 4 , m 9 = Z?Z 4 + 6ZiZ 2 Z 3 4- 3 Z | ,
2
m 10 = 3Z Z 5 + 15Zf Z 3 + 10ZiZ| + lhZlZ2ZA.
The quantities e,- in Eq. (157) are
~ ( K2 -> 3i Ki 1 2i
^ - * (^? - ^ - 4 ^ + 2* + T -i
1
5 ^ i , ,
^1 A 7 3^?V 3i
27
7 V 7 4 y 47 2 4 27
_j_ 12 _j_ -RXZ3 -f -F2Z2 + - F 8 i ,
z 7 z z z
e4 = - l ^ m 5 + ^ f 2 m2Zi - 4 3- ( 3 (5^ 2 - 4ci) - J^Z?) + 2^-/ 8
7 27 7 [ 27 J 7
6/c2 1 3i , 3 2 9
^7 + 7:^6 - h H J^-ZiU + -AR\Z
7^ 2 27 7 4
1^ f 3i . 3K 2 , __ x i
+ - i ? ! { - e 3 + i / i - -z-Z*(ei - 2^2 - m 3
4 I 7 72 7
+ 3F2Z3 + 2F&Z2 + F15Z1,
Kl , 15K2 5K3Z2 , 2j / K5
zl) + ^ i
X (/l6 + 2/17) - ^ (2/21^ + 3*22^2) + ^hsZ? - êiZ}
:i 5K 2 Zf
+ ^4 _i{.|^^^ u5 - 5jim ^ - 37 d- f 103^2 - ^ i 2 >
+ ^7mm,2 Zi
m5 H
7 5
-e4 + 2î(2/ 6 + 3e2Z2) - 6 ^ / 7 Z x + Arf?} + h10

7 T T J 2
- 2.(2/i 2 + 3/23) + 3 ^ | ( c i / 7 + /l9^l) + 2^/IB^2
+ I ^ Z s + 5F 2 Z 4 + 5 ^ 3 + ^ 1 5 ^ 2 + 1^22^1,
7i 7K 2 35K 3 , 35K 4 3 î
. _ m g + _TOl0 _ - ^ m ^ + -2^-^! - ^5
x (21K5Z2 - ^-zA + (6/40 + 15/41 + 20e 3 Z 3 ) - ^-(2eim5
+ e2m3 + Zi{eAZ! + 4e3Z2)) + 10^ Z1(3e1m2 + lA2Zx)
154
Zf{h + ^Z2) + 6êi5 Z! + \R! {z6 - ^ m 6 + ^ m 7
1^ 7 4 [ 7 72
- ^ m 4 ^ + ^-(15K4Z2 - ^Z\) -h3 + ^ i ( / 1 6 + 2/17)
- 7 ( ^ 3 + 2 ^ 3 ^ + 3e 2 Z 2 )) - ^ L / 2 3 + ^ i Z t ]
+ 2^15 - y ^ s s + 2(ft3^3 + 2e 2 e 3 + ft6Z2))

5/C2,
+ ^ ( 6 / 3 6 ^ 1 + 4Z 3 / 2 + 2Z1(h6Z1 + 4e : e 3 )
272
+ ZZ2{h1Z2 + Aele2)) - ^Z1{%e1h+Z1{hsZl+U1Z2))
7mz?(1hZi+4el)
+ ^Zf(h izi + 4e
?) +
+ 3R1Z66 +
3J2iZ ^ 2Z5 + 10F8Z4
+ -TTF
15 1
+ -^-F\hZ3 + ZF22Z2 + -F33Z1,
A ^ Z ^ - ^ + f *)+**,
fc2 = -1li2 + 5ftljRl + 3 iFi + *F7z
7 4 z 4
h
* = 3 2V e i Z i - -27^ + / 2 + 2ft2 - TT^ 2 e i + F l
^
+ ^(e 2j Ri + FiZ 2 ) + ^FgZi + i ( e i F 3 - hiiJO,
A4 = - / s + ^(Fi 6 Zi + 3eiF 7 + 3e2.Fi + / i 2 ^ i ) ,

Appendix A 229
h5 = ^ / 4 - |i/ 5 + ^ l / 3 + \hA + \{F7Z2 + 2e2F, + hsRt)
- ^-{F7Z\ + 4e1F1Zl + 3/ 2 iii) + \F\tf\ + îîo
--JR1(/iii?i + -/i2),
2 K
1, 3 3 , 3i
A6 = _ ^ l ( 2 / 8 + 3 C2 Z 2 ) + ^ :-7 3-eiî H '5
7 72 7 7
- ^ / 4 ^ - ^ / 3 + \h, - ^(F&Z, + W
72 7 2 47
K->Z2 3
+ -j-f-iFiZi + 3ei/Ji) + -(F1Z3 + e 3 fli) + 2 (7 'e i F i Z i + hRi)
+ ^ 2 0 ^ 1 + eiF 8 ) - ^(h3Ri - e2FA) + ^F9Z2,
h7 = - / 9 + 7 ( F 2 3 ^ i + 4eiFi 6 + 6A1F7 + 4/i 2 Fi + /i 4 /?i),

7 4
h8 = ^ / i o - | ^ / i i + * 9 + ^ 7 + j ( 3 e 2 F 7 + 3F!h 3 + A 5 i)
72 27 7 2 4
+ lf5Z2_^Z2 (3eiF 7 Z 1 + 3F 1 / 2 + / 3j Ri)
27
+ ^ F 2 4 ^ i + exFis + ^(3Fu/ii - F5A2 - h4Ri),

2
h9 = - ^ - ( 2 / i a + 3/is) + ^ ? ( 2 / 2 Z 2 + /14Z1) - ^ 1 5 ^
7 7' 7
+ ^ / u - ^ / i o - - / 9 + ^ 8 - ^{F7Z,Z2 + 2F1ll + /5JRi)
7 72 7 2 47
+ ^ f , {Z1(F7Z1 + 6eiFi) + 3/4} + ^(F7Z3 + 2e 3 Fi + ft^)
+ ^ ( e i F r Z ! + 2Fi/ 2 + /3-Ri) + ^{F25Zi + 2e!Fi8 + Fgfti)

1 3
- -^{h5Ri - e2F12) + -Fl7Z2 + F 6h 3,
h10 = - ^ ( / i e + 2/17) + P^{eim
2 2 + 2Zi(/ 6 + 3e 2 Z 2 )} - ^-l1&Zl
27 27
+ ^5/C4
4 ^ 4 + ?1 ( 2 / l 2 + 3/l3) _ ^ l { e i h + Zl/l9) + !/15Z2
274
3i, 32,
+ 0^9 - ' " + j r ( e i / 4 + ZMZI
) + i(FiZ4 +e4fil) + 5fll
^7
230
zou Propagation
Propagation and
ana reflection
reflection of shock waves
of snocK waves
xx ( __e + 3^lL
e 66 + ^ ih / l __ 3^êieZli Z 2 _- ^^m3 +
+ ?L {62K2
^(6K Z2z2 -- K^Zf)
-1Z\) -- hA66
{{ II TT II T
T 77
7 7 7 7
1
3 ( F99Z^ 3 + e 3 F 2 ) + 2(F 2 0 Z 2 + e 2 F 8 ) + heiF
+ 3(F ^(eiFi +
ls 5 + F27Zt),
2
Anu = --l
A ^ -/^/ /2A22 44 ++ T7(F - (F
( FF2a8 Zi sZiî ++ 55ee ii F 22 33 + 10F lOF^h
10F A! ++ 10F
16/>i
16
16 10F77A A22 +
-+ 5F
5Fih
XA44 + M
5FiA A 7?fli),
i),
77 24 4VV 2 8
Ai 2--- 2 22^7 TT2n22( 1olt l2^êA
A
fti2
A12
/12 fl1 AtA,!l 1 +
++ ////25^1
2,225B 7 ^ _ ^2^7i /^'26
55^^ll jjj
o2 64. ++4-
/'26 - ^ i7 ///*24
o2244,4 +4-
4-2g2I/ A
+ A l,nli,
lnln
2A
1 K
Kll 2 / 2Kl \
+ i^-F
F2a2444((5Z îZ^?22)) ++
5 ^Z232 - ^--Z\) + FFi
1166 5e 22 - - J --e
e ^lZl!
7 yJ
+ ^': 2 4 ( 5, ^ 2 - -7^ ^ 2 )Ns + *i ;/ 5e2 - - 7J - e ^x!
+ 1| ^F (7 5( 5^&- 2, -^2)^++^^ ((5*5-2^-/3)
+ 5^-2^3)
+ |1F 7 ^/ 3 - 2 ^ ) \ + ^1l (5^5-2^3)
+ !i R^l ! ( 5 A 8 - 2 ^ Z 9 ) + \{F
\(F 2,29Zl
-(F29Zl
Zl + F13
13A22 - A
h4Ai?
R22)
+ Ii(6
i ( e 1ii FJ F22 6f2i-6-A
A
_ /77l J7JR
R
j R11l)) + 2F
2F18
18
18 AA1)ll!,
l s/M,
A13 = - ^ -( (22Z/ 2 7 + 3Z
3*28) + ^ r((22/Z2 299ZZ 2 + 6e 2 / 2 + /l3h3000Z1x)
î)
71 7T
^-IsiZ! +
- ^x/31^1 + / 3Z32 ^ ( 1 2 e 2 A 2 +Z
2 -- ^r(12e?A!
^r(12e?A! +
+Zl/226 5Zi)
^ ) -~
225Zi)
5Zi) - ^^hA
i//2244
77
1 1 77 1 77 77
1
+ 2 A12 - -^(F16Z1Z2 + 3F7h + 3Fi/ B + /ni2i)
+ \hi2
Âi2 - ^-{FlQZiZ2 3F?h
+ 3F 3Fi/ B5 + / nhiRi)
7h + 3F!/ iii)
+ ^ {Zl{F16 Zi + 9 ee ii F 77 ) + QFxUZi + 3/iofli}
ShoRx}
+ ^
+ {Zl{Fl6l616Zi
{Z?(F Zi 9^/4^1 +
Z! + 9 eie iFF77) ) ++ 99F.UZ,
^ / 4 ^ 1 ++ 3/iofli}
3l10Ri}
+ |(F
+ |^(F
( F 1eZs
6 Z3 ( e9-(e
Z ++ A39JR11;)h+9R1^)+ 3 F 37F
+7F+F
1A
1h66))
2z V 11D6 3 2zV a ' * o;
+ ^^ - ( e i F i s Z i +
+ 3F777Z//22 +
+ 3F + 3F1Z3
3Fi/3
3F1Z3 + Zgiii)
3FiZ3 Zgiii)
hRi)
l9R x)
% 1
+ ^2 (i ^^2 s5 + F20/i
F20A.i + F 2 4 Z 2 ) + -(F30Z1
2(^30^1 + F^8A
2 2)
+ i ( ee22FF2211--A A ^ 1O) 4 +
8i? - ^ ^( F 1F4 A^3 + F3F^),
A5);
i4 = -
A-14
Ai4
hi4 ((ZJZ(Z33
3333 ++ 2/34)
2Z34)++ ^^ ff {h
{Aim
im2 22 +
{Aim + 44eieeiiZ/Z33355 ++ 2Z
2Z11(h
(h66ZZ11 ++ 3Z
3Z36
3/ )}
36)}
36
77 27^
27^
2y
- ^ Z i {3Z4^2
|3Z4Z2 + î(ZiA
{3Z4Z2 ZAZ^h,
Z 4- 6eie
x{Zxh3 3 +
Zi(Zi/3 6e i e 22)} )|
77 35
yd
endix A 231
+ f ^ 3 7 ^ + 2 ^ ( 2 / 2 7 + 3J28)
2e
- -~ {/ii/38 + i ' i 9 + Zi&sZi.+ 4 e i / 3 + 5e2/i + 2h2Z2)}
-\ s-^39-^1 + 7:^13 - ~7T~^26 + 7TT { M 4 + 2ei/ 2 o

fA 2 27 27^
+Zi{hAZ\ + 6eiA2 + 5A?)} + \{F7ZA + 2e4F1 + /I 10J RI)
+ i * {-3 + ^ 1 " ^ - 3 + f ^ - el} + ^ ) }

+ \FX {-h6 + ^h - Z-ÛZ, - 2^-(/8 + e3Zx) + ^hZ,
2 [ 7 72 7 jz
- ^ C l Z ? } + ^ { - / ^ + ^ - / n - ^ / 1 0 - ^ ( 2 / 1 2 + 3/36)
+ ^ ( 2 / 2 Z 2 + / i 4 ^ i ) - 4 ^ / 1 5 ^ ? | + 3(F 1 7 Z 3 + 2e 3 F 9 + F2h6)
+ 2(F25Z2 + 2e2F20 + F8h3) + -(F 8 Ai + F3iZi) + eiF27,
hit = - ^ ( 6 / 4 0 + 15/41 + 20e 3 Z 3 ) + ^.j.Zi(e4Zi + 2 e i Z 4 ) + 4l17Zi
+ Z2{Ae1Z3 + 3e2Z2)\ - ^-Zx {2Z1(l21 + eiZ3) + 9kZ2}
l
+ ^Z\{e2Zx + \elZ2) + ^ i ( / 3 3 + 2/34)
7 7
- -^-Ul2Z3 + 2Zi(h6Z1 + 4 ei e 3 ) + 3Z2(h1Z2 + 2e ie2 ) + 6e2/i
+ ^ ? {6/2^1^2 + Z\{h3Zx + 9eie2)} + &h3ZxZ2\

_^ Z 3 ( A i Z i + 4 c ? ) + l i9
7 z
- {2{hQZ1 + h2Z3) + Q(eih6 + es/i) + 3(Z2ft5 + 3e 2 /i 3 )}
7
+ 3 ^ | ( / 3 0 ^ i + 2/3Z2 + 6e 2 / 2 ) + 2 ^ / 3 9 Z i + ^ F i
x | - e 4 + 2 ^ ( 2 / 6 + 3e 2 Z 2 ) - 6 ^ | Z i ( / i + aZi) + 4 ^ | e i ^ ? |
+ JfliI -A 10 + 2(2/12 + 3/13) - 6^(2(/2Z2 + 2eie 2 î)

+ hzZ\) + 4^l15Z ,'K (F1Z5 + e5Rx + e 2J Pi5 + F27Z2)
+ 5 ( F 9 Z 4 + e 3 F 8 + e 4 F 2 + ^20^3) + ^(eiF22 + F32ZX),
/1 = e i ^ 2 + 62^1, ^2 = A i ^ i + ef, /3 = /*2î + 3ei/ii,

/ 4 = / 2 + el, h = h3Z\ + 2eie2 + ^1^2, /6 = eiZ3 + e 3 Z i ,
/ 7 = /1 + e i Z 2 , / 8 = e3Zx + 2 e i ^ 3 + 3 e 2 Z 2 , h = A ^ i + 4ei/i 2 + 3A?,
/ 1 0 = h2Z\ + 6eiAiZi + 2ef, / n = A 5 ^ i + 3(eiA 3 + e 2 Ai) + / i 2 ^ 2 ,
'12 h$Zi + 2 e i e 3 + h\Z3, l\3 = h3Z2 + e 2 ,
/14 = A3Z1 -j-4eie 2 , /15 = / 4 + e l 5 /i6 = 64^1 + t\Z,
/17 = e 3 Z 2 + e 2 Z 3 , *18 = ^7 + e i ^ 2 5 '19 = ^3^1 + 3eie 2 + 2h\Z2,
^20 = h + 2eihi, hi h + 1^3, /22 = Jl + 62^1,
/ 2 4 = I17Z1 + lO/ii/12 + 5ei/i4,
^25 = /i4î + Seih2 + 6/ii,
^26 = hgZt -f- 4ei/i 5 + 6A1A3 + 4e 2 /i2 + ^ 4 ^ 2 ,
^27 = h9Zi -f 3ei/i 6 + 3e 3 /*i + /i2^3, ^28 = h$Z2 + 3e 2 /i 3 ,
^29 = h 2eiAi, /30 = /i5î + 6ei/i3,
fei = / i o + 3eiftiZi +4el,
J32 = ^8^1 + 4ei/i 5 + 6A1A3 + 4e 2 /* 2 + ^ 4 ^ 2 ,
h3 = ^10^1 + 2eie 4 + /*i^4, J34 = hQZ2 + 2e2e3 + h 3Z3,
/35 = e i ^ 3 + 2 e 3 ^ i + 3 e 2 ^ 2 , ^36 = ^3^2 + e 2 , / 3 7 = / i 5 + ef,
^38 = '1 + 61^2, /39 = h2Zl H- 9eihiZi + 6ef, /40 = e5Zi + e i Z 5 ,
/41 = e 4 Z 2 + e 2 ^ 4 , ^42 = 2 e 3 Z i + 9e 2 ^2-
REFERENCES
Abd-El-Fattah and L.F.Henderson, J. Fluid Mech. 89 (1978) 79.

D. Y. Alessandri and B. M. Cetegen, in Shock Waves at Marseille IV, eds. R.
Brun, L. Z. Dumitrescu, (Springer-Verlag, Berlin, Heidelberg, New York,
1995).
H. Alsmeyer, J. Fluid Mech. 74 (1976) 497.
A. M. Anile and G. Russo, Phys. Fluids 29 (1986) 2847.
A. M. Anile and G. Russo, Wave Motion 8 (1986) 243.
A. M. Anile and G. Russo, Wave Motion 10 (1988) 3.
0 . A. Azarova, E. A. Bratinkova, L. S. Shtemenko, F. V. Shugaev and V. E.
Yanitskii, in Symp. on Shock Waves, ed. H. Honma (Tokyo, 1997).
H. Babinsky, O. Onodera, K. Takayama, T. Saito, P. Voinovich and E. Timofeev,
in Symp. on Shock Waves, ed. R. Yamane (Tokyo, 1996).
A. I. Barchukov, F. V. Bunkin, V. I. Kolov and A. M. Prokhorov, Zh. Eksp.
Teor. Fiz., Pis'ma 17, N 8 (1973) 413.
A. S. Baryshnikov, A. P. Bedin, G. I. Mishin and G. E. Skvortsov, in Studies
in Physical Gas Dynamics (Nauka, Leningrad, 1980) (in Russian).
R. A. Bastianon, AIAA Paper 68 - 946 (1968).
T. V. Bazhenova, L. G. Gvozdeva, Yu. S. Lobastov, I. M. Naboko, R. G.
Nemkov and O. A. Predvoditeleva, Shock Waves in Real Gases (Nauka,
Moscow, 1968) (in Russian).
T. V. Bazhenova and L. G. Gvozdeva, Non-stationary Interactions of Shock
Waves (Nauka, Moscow, 1977) p. 166 (in Russian).
A. P. Bedin, A. I. Klimov, A. N. Koblov and G. I. Mishin, Zhurn. Tekhn. Fiz.
51 (1981) 2119 (in Russian).
1. A. Belov, S. A. Isaev, I. M. Dementyev et al., Preprint 1353 (Physico-
Technical Institute, Leningrad, 1989) (in Russian).
L. Bergmann, Der Ultraschall und seine Anwendung in Wissenschaft und Tech-
mk (Zurich, 1954) p. 179.
J. P. Best, Shock Waves 1 (1991) 251.
G. G. Bingham and T. E. Davidson, Investigation of Simulation of Shock-Shock
233
Interaction in Hypersonic Gasdynamic Test Facility (Wright-Patterson Air

Force Base Tech. Rep. FDL-TDR-64-9, 1964).
G. Birkhoff, Hydrodynamics, a Study in Logic, Fact and Similitude (Princeton
University Press, New York, 1950) p. 28.
D. I. Blokhintsev, DokL AN SSSR 47 (1945) 22 (in Russian).
I. O. Bohachevsky and R. N. Kostoff, AIAA J. 10, 8 (1972) 1024.
J. C. Boison and H. A. Curtiss, ARS J. 29 (1959) 130.
G. Briassulis and J. Andreopoulos, in 20th Intern. Symp. on Shock Waves
(GALCIT, Pasadena, 1995).
H. L. Brode, Phys. Fluids 2 (1959) 217.
E. A. Brown, Jr. and G. J. Mullaney, A Technique for Studying the Shock-on-
Shock Problem (Boeing Sci. Lab., Flight Sci. Lab. Rep. N 99, 1965).
E. V. Burova, Yu. B. Buryak, L. S. Shtemenko and F. V. Shugaev, in Sym
posium on Shock Waves (Sendai, 1993).
S. A. Bystrov, V. I. Ivanov and F. V. Shugaev, Fizika Plazmy 15 (1989) 558
(in Russian).
S. A. Bystrov, I. S. Zaslonko, Yu. K. Mukoseev and F. V. Shugaev, DokL AN
SSSR 310 (1990) 70 (in Russian).
S. A. Bystrov, A. B. Fedotov, E. N. Fomenko, A. N. Klimov and F. V. Shugaev,
in Symposium on Shock Waves, ed. K. Takayama (Tokyo, 1992).
S. A. Bystrov, E. N. Fomenko, F. V. Shugaev and G. I. Shved, in Shock Waves
at Marseille II, eds. R. Brun, L. Z. Dumitrescu, (Springer-Verlag, Berlin,
Heidelberg, New York, 1995).
S. Canic and B. L. Keyfitz, in 20th Int. Symp. on Shock Waves, eds. B.Sturtevant,
J.E.Shepherd, H.G.Hornung (World Scientific, Singapore, New Jersey, Lon
don, Hong Kong, 1996).
P. K. Chang, Separation of Flow (Pergamon Press, London, New York, Sydney,
Paris, 1970).
P. I. Chen and M. E. Gurtin, Phys. Fluids 14 (1971) 1901.
A.Chpoun, D.Passerel, J.C.Lengrand, H.Li and G.Ben-Dor, in Proc. 20th Int.
Symp. on Shock Waves I, eds. B.Sturtevant, J.E.Shepherd, H.G.Hornung
(World Scientific, Singapore, New Jersey, London, Hong Kong, 1996).
R. Courant and K. O. Friedrichs, Supersonic Flow and Shock Waves (Wiley
Interscience, New York, 1948) p. 300.
D. J. Damkevalaand G. W. Zumwalt, Rev. Sci. Instr. 39 (1968) 1254.
V. A. Danilychev and V. D. Zvorykin, in Works of the Institute of Physics of
the Academy of Sciences of the USSR 142 (1983) 117 (in Russian).
V. Daru and J. P. Damion, in Shock Waves at Marseille I, eds. R. Brun, L. Z.
Dumitrescu, (Springer-Verlag, Berlin, Heidelberg, New York, 1995).
References 235
Yu. A. Demyanov, PMM J. Appl. Math. Mech. 21 (1957) 57 (in Russian).

V. I. Derzhiev, A. G. Zhidkov and S. I. Yakovlenko, Ion Radiation in Non-
equilibrium Dense Plasma (Energoizdat, Moscow, 1986) p. 110 (in Russian).
W. L. Ditto and T. J. Pickett, J. Math. Phys. 29 (1988) 1761.
D. S. Dosanjh and T. M. Weeks, AIAA J. 3 (1965) 216.
R. E. Duff, Phys. Fluids 2 (1959) 207.
Zh. S. Duntsova, N. V. Ershov, V. T. Kireev and E. I. Ruzavin, Fluid Dyna
micsIzv. ANSSSR, MZhG4(m9) 120.
S. P. Dyakov, Zh. Eksp. Teor. Fiz. 27 (1954) 288.
S. P. Dyakov, Zh. Eksp. Teor. Fiz. 33 (1957) 948.
H. Edels et al., Proc. Roy. Soc. A 240 (1957) 54.
S. A. Egorushkin, M.L. Pekurovsky and V. S. Uspensky, Soviet Physics
Doklady 35 (1990) 623.
S. A. Egorushkin, V.S. Uspensky, Khimicheskaya Fiz. 11 (1992) 1013 (in
Russian).
F. S. Faizullov, Works of Phys. Inst. AN SSSR 18 (1962) 105 (in Russian).
K. A. Fisco and D. R. Chapman, in Proc. 16 Int. RGD Symp., eds. E. P.
Muntz, E. A. Weaver, D. H. Campbell (1988).
G.R.Fowles, Phys. Fluids 24 (1981) 220.
T. Fukui, G. T. Oshima, and T. Fujiwara, in Shock Waves @ Marseille IV,
eds. R. Brun, L. Z. Dumitrescu, (Springer-Verlag, Berlin, Heidelberg, New
York, 1995).
A. M. Galkin, D. A. Mazalov, N. N. Sysoev and F. V. Shugaev, Moscow Uni
versity Bulletin 44 (1989) 41.
A. M. Galkin, V. P. Korobeinikov, V. I. Nagornov, N. N. Sysoev and F. V.
Shugaev, Fluid Dynamics-Izv AN SSSR MZhG 23 (1989) 380.
A. M. Galkin and F. V. Shugaev, Teplofizika Vysokikh Temperatur 28 (1990)
978 (in Russian).
A. Galkowski, Arch. Mech. Stosow. 41 (1989) 837.
C.S.Gardner, Phys. Fluids 6 (1963) 1366.
M. M. Gilinsky and M. G. Lebedev, Scientific Papers of the Institute of Mech
anics, Moscow State University 44 (1976) 82 (in Russian).
I.I.Glass and G. N. Patterson, J. Aeronaut. Sci. 22 (1953) 73.
I.I.Glass and W.S.Liu, J.Fluid Mech. 84 (1978) 55.
R. W. Griffiths, R. J. Sandeman and H. G. Hornung, J. Phys. D. Appl. Phys.
9 (1976) 1681.
W. C. Griffith, J. Fluid Mech. 106 (1981) 81.
M. A. Grinfeld, PMM J. Appl. Math, and Mech. 42 (1978) 958 (in Russian).
V. G. Grudnitskii, L A . Znamenskaya, E. M. Kudriavtsev, V. N. Podobryaev
M. A. Grinfeld, PMM J. Appl. Math, and Mech. 42 (1978) 958 (in Russian).
V. G. Grudnitskii, I. A. Znamenskaya, E. M. Kudriavtsev, V. N. Podobryaev
and F. V. Shugaev, Fluid Dynamics Izv. AN SSSR MZhG 19 (1984) 40.
J. Hadamard, Lecons sur la propagation des ondes et les equations de Uhydro-
dynamique (Hermann, Paris, 1903) p. 121.
L. F. Henderson and A. Lozzi, J. Fluid Mech. 68 (1975) 139.
L.F.Henderson, On the Refraction of Longitudinal Waves in Compressible Me
dia (Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory, UCRL - 53853, 1988).
L. F. Henderson, P. Collela, E.G. Puckett, J. Fluid Mech. 224 (1991) 1.
L. F. Henderson, in Shock Waves at Marseille IV, eds. R. Brun, L. Z. Du-
mitrescu (Springer-Verlag, Berlin, Heidelberg, New York, 1995).
B. D. Henshall, ARC Rep. and Memoranda, 3044 (1957) Techn. Rep. 17407.
G. Herzberg, Molecular Spectra and Molecular Structure. S. Electronic Spec
tra and Electronic Structure of Polyatomic Molecules (Van Nostrand, New
York, 1966) p. 241.
L. Hesselink and B. Sturtevant, J. Fluid Mech. 196 (1988) 513.
W. F. Hilton, High-Speed Aerodynamics (London, New York, Toronto, 1952)
p. 303.
H. Honma and L. F. Henderson, Phys. Fluids A l ( 3 ) (1989) 597.
H. G. Hornung, H. Oertel and R. I. Sandeman, J. Fluid Mech. 90 (1979) 541.
A. F. P. Houwing, G. R. Fowles and R. J. Sandeman, in Shock Tubes and Waves,
Proc. 14th Int. Symp.; eds. R. D. Archer and B. E. Milton (Sydney, 1983).
A. F. P. Houwing, T. J. Mclntire, P. A. Taloni and R. J. Sandeman, J. Fluid
Mech. 170 (1986) 319.
H.-R. Yu, W. Zhao, Z-F. Li, J-H. Gu and X-Y. Zhang, in 20th Symp. on Shock
Waves (GALCIT, Pasadena, 1995).
L. D. Huebner et al., J. Spacecraft and Rock. 30 (1993) 291.
H. Hugoniot, J. de Vecole polytechn. 89 (1889) 1.
M. A. Ibrahim, A. O. Serov, L. S. Shtemenko and F. V. Shugaev, Fluid Dy
namics - Izv. AN SSSR MZhG 19 (1985) 848.
T. Ikui, K. Matsuo and M. Nagai, Bull. J.S.M.E. 12 (1969) 783.
N. Y. Jaffrin, Phys. Fluids 8 (1965) 606.
H. R. Johnson, Phys. Fluids 2 (1959) 526.
W. B. Jones and W. J. Thron, Continued Fractions. Analytic Theory and Ap
plications (Addison-Wesley Publishing Co., London, Syndey, Tokyo, 1980).
A. I. Kharitonov and V. P. Fokeev, in Physical Methods for Study of Transpar
ent Non-uniform Media, ed. V. S. Sukhorukikh (MDNTP, Moscow, 1985)
(in Russian).
V. S. Khlebnikov, Fluid Dynamics - Izv. RAN 29 (1995) 152.
References 237
R. Brim, L. Z. Dumitrescu (Springer-Verlag, Berlin, Heidelberg, New York

1995).
A. I. Klimov, A. N. Koblov, G. I. Mishin, Yu. L. Serov and I. P. Yavor, Zh.
Tekhn. fiz. Pis'ma 8 (1982) 439 (in Russian).
I.Kohlberg, B.H.Ripin and J.Grun, in Shock Waves at Marseille I V , eds.
R.Brun, L.Z.Dumitrescu (Springer-Verlag, Berlin, Heidelberg, New York,
1995.
V. M. Kontorovich, Akust. Zh. 5 (1959) 314 (in Russian).
V. F . Kopyov and E. A. Leontyev, Fluid Dynamics - Izv. AN SSSR MZhG 2 2
(1987) 398.
V. P. Korobeinikov (ed.) Unsteady Interaction of Shock and Detonation Waves
in Gases (Hemisphere Publishing Corp., New York, 1989) p . 77.
V. P. Korobeinikov, in Proc. 2nd Japan - SU CFD Symp. 2, ed. Y. Yoshizawa,
(Tsukuba, 1990).
V. P. Korobeinikov, Problems of Point-Blast Theory (AIP, New York, 1991) p .
240.
N. E. Kotchine, Rendiconti Circ. Mat. di Palermo 5 0 (1926) 305.
N. E. Kotchine, Vector Calculus and Introduction to Tensor Calculus (Nauka,
Moscow, 1965) p. 389 (in Russian).
A. G. Kutushev and S. P. Rodionov, Zh. Prikladn. Mekh. i Tekhn. Fiz. N 2
(1993) 24 (in Russian).
H. Lamb, Hydrodynamics (Cambrige University Press, 1932) p . 257.
S. Lee, S.K. Lele and P. Moin, J. Fluid Mech. 2 5 1 (1993) 533.
B . Lemcke, in Proc. 5th Int. Shock Tube Symp. (New York, 1965).
Yu. G. Lisin, F. V. Shugaev, Moscow University Bulletin, ser. Phys., Astron.
2 4 (1969) 118.
A. N. Lyubimov and V. V. Rusanov, Gas Flows over Blunt Bodies (Nauka,
Moscow, 1970). P t . 2 (in Russian).
E. Mach, Sitzungsb. Akad. Wiss. in Wien 2 , 7 7 (1877) 819.
J. F . McKenzie and K. O. Westphal, Phys. Fluid. 1 1 (1968) 2350.
W . McNamara, J. Spacecraft and Rock. 4 (1967) 790.
P. D. Maker, R. W . Terhune and C. M. Savage, in 3rd Int. Congr. on Quant.
Electr., eds. P. Grivet, N. Bloembergen (Columbia University Press, New
York, 1964).
H.Mark, J. Aero. Sci. 2 4 (1957) 304.
V. P. Maslov, in Modern Problems of Mathematics, ed. R. V. Gamkrelidze
(VINITI, Moscow, 1977) (in Russian). English translation: J. Soviet Math.
1 3 (1980), p . 119.
E. E. Meshkov, Fluid Dyn. - Izv. AN SSSR MZhG 5 (1970) 554.
1 3 (1980), p . 119.
E. E. Meshkov, Fluid Dyn. - Izv. AN SSSR MZhG 5 (1970) 554.
J. F. Milthorpe, in Shock Waves at Marseille I, eds. R. Brun, L.Z. Dumitrescu
(Springer-Verlag, Berlin, Heidelberg, New York 1995).
B. E. Milton, K. T a k a y a m a and R. D. Archer, in Proc. 16th Int. Symp. on
Shock Waves, ed. H.Gronig (Aachen, 1988).
H. Mirels, NACA Rep. N 1 3 3 3 (1957).
G. I. Mishin, A. P. Bedin, N. I. Yushchenkova, G. E. Skvortsov, and A. P.
Ryazin, Zh. Tekh. Fiz. 5 1 (1981) 2315.
S. Miyashiro, Jap. J. Appl. Phys. 2 2 (1983) 1901.
M. Mond and I. M. Rutkevich, J. Fluid Mech. 2 7 5 (1994) 121.
M. A. Nettleton, Gaseous Detonations: their nature, effect and control (Chap
men and Hall, London, New York, 1987) p . 42.
J. von Neumann, Collected Works 6 (Pergamon, 1963) p.239.
M.Nishida and H.Kishige, in Proc. 16th Int. Symp. on Shock Tubes and
Waves, ed. H.Gronig (Aachen, 1988).
M. Nishida, in Proc. Int. Workshop on Shock Wave Focusing, ed. K. Taka
y a m a (Tohoku University, 1990).
M. Nishio, in Shock Waves at Marseille I, eds. R. Brun, L. Z. Dumitrescu
(Springer-Verlag, Berlin, Heidelberg, New York, 1995).
J. W . Nunziato and E. K. Walsh, Phys. Fluids 15 (1972) 1397.
E. Outa, K. Tajima and H. Morii, Bull. JSME 19 (1976) 384.
L. E. Pekurovsky and S. M. Ter-Minassiants, PMM J. Appl. Math, and Mech.
3 8 (1974) 484.
P. J. Petrie and P. A. Jacobs, in 20th Int. Symp. on Shock Waves ( G A L C I T ,
Pasadena, 1995).
M. V. Piskareva and F . V. Shugaev, Moscow University Bulletin, ser. Phys.,
Astron. 19 (1978) 11.
P. Prasad, Ada Mech. 4 5 (1982) 163.
A. S. Predvoditelev, in Gas Dynamics and Physics of Combustion (Izd. AN
SSSR, Moscow, 1959), p . 5 (in Russian).
A. A. Raines, in Proc. 13th Int. RGD Symp. (Plenum Press, New York, 1985).
Yu. P. Raizer, Laser Spark and Spreading of Discharges (Nauka, Moscow,
1974) (in Russian).
R. R a m and R. S. Mishra, Rend. Circ. Matem. di Palermo, 2 5 (1966) 365.
S. A. Ramsden and W . E. R. Davies, Phys. Rev. Lett. 13 (1964) 227.
S. A. Ramsden and P. Savic, Nature 2 0 3 (1964) 1217.
W . J. Rankine, Trans. Roy. Soc. 1 6 0 (1870) 277.
R. Ravindran and P. Prasad, Q. J. Mech. Appl. Math. 4 6 (1993) 131.
References 239
B. Riemann, Werke (Leipzig, 1876) p. 145.

G. S. Roslyakov, in Numerical Methods in Gas Dynamics 4 (1965) 28 (in
Russian).
E. M. Rothkopf and W. Low, Phys. Fluids 17(1974) 1169.
E. M. Rothkopf and W. Low, Phys. Fluids 19 (1976) 1885.
B. L. Rozhdestvenskii and N. N. Yanenko, Systems of Quasilinear Equations
and their Application to Gas Dynamics (American Mathematical Society,
Providence, R. I., 1969) p. 250.
J. Ruetenik and B. Lemcke, J. Spacecraft and Rock. 4 (1967) 1030.
V. V. Rusanov, USSR Computational Mathematics and Mathematical Physics
1 (1961) 267.
A. P. Ryazin, Zhurn. Tekhn. Fiz., Pis'ma 6 (1980) 516 (in Russian).
A. V. Samsonov, L. S. Shtemenko, F. V. Shugaev and V. E. Yanitskii, Moscow
University Bulletin, ser. Phys., Astron. 36 (1995) 33.
L.I. Sedov, Similarity and Dimensional Methods in Mechanics (AP, New York,
1959) p. 317.
A. O. Serov, L. S. Shtemenko and F. V. Shugaev, Uchenye Zapiski TsAGI 16
(1985) 98 (in Russian).
A. O. Serov, L. S. Shtemenko and F. V .Shugaev, in 20th Int. Symp. on Shock
Waves, eds. B. Sturtevant, H. G. Hornung (World Scientific, Singapore,
New Jersey, London, Hong Kong, 1996).
V. D. Shafranov, Zh. Eksp. Teor. Fiz. 32 (1957) 1453.
V. D. Sharma and Ch. Radha, Int. J. Non-Linear Mechanics 30, 3 (1995)
302.
M. Shigemi, H. Koyama and J. Aihara, Trans. Jap. Soc. Aero-Space Sci. 19
(1976) 70.
L. S. Shtemenko, Moscow University Bulletin, ser. Phys., Astron. 22 (1967)
34.
50.
63.
101.
32.
L. S. Shtemenko, F.V. Shugaev and A.O. Serov, J. Flow Vis. and Image
Processing 1 (1993) 11.
F. V. Shugaev, Zh. Prikl. Mekh. i Tekhn. Fiz. 6 (1963) 101 (in Russian).
F. V. Shugaev, USSR Computational Mathematics and Mathematical Physics

16 (1976) 251.
F. V. Shugaev, Interaction of Shock Waves with Disturbances (Moscow Uni
versity Publishing House, Moscow, 1983) (in Russian).
F. V. Shugaev and V. I. Ivanov, in SU-Japan Symp, on Comp. Fluid Dyn.,
Proc, eds. P. I. Chushkin and V. P. Korobeinikov (Computing centre of
the USSR Acad. ScL, Moscow, 1989).
F. V. Shugaev, S. A. Bystrov and A. O. Serov, in 2nd Japan-SU Symp. on
Comput. Fluid Dyn., ed. Y. Yoshizawa (Tsukuba, 1990).
C. J. M. Simpson, T. R. D. Chandler and K. B. Bridgemen, Phys. Fluid. 10
(1967) 1894.
B.W.Skews, in Symp on Shock Waves, ed. F.Higashino (Tokyo, 1997).
D. A. Spence and B. A. Woods, J. Fluid Mech. 19 (1964) 161.
R. Strelow and A. Cohen, J. Chem. Phys. 30 (1959) 257.
B. Sturtevant and V. A. Kulkarny, J. Fluid Mech. 73 (1976) 651.
E. V. Stupochenko and I. P. Stakhanov, Doklady AN SSSR 117 (1957) 65 (in
Russian).
E. V. Stupochenko, S. A. Losev and A. I. Osipov, Relaxation in Shock Waves
(Springer-Verlag, New York, 1967) p. 260.
M. P. Syshchikova, A. N. Semenov and M. K. Beryozkina, Zhurn. Tekhn. Fiz.,
Pis'ma2 (1976) 61.
E. G. Tabak and R. R. Rosales, Phys. Fluids 6 (1994) 1874.
S. M. Ter-Minassiants, USSR Computational Mathematics and Mathematical
Physics 2 (1962) 351.
V. M. Teshukov, Dynamics of Continuous Media 76 (1986) 134 (in Russian).
T. Y. Thomas, J. Math. Mech. 6 (1957) 311.
T. Y. Thomas, Plastic Flow and Fraction in Solids (New York, London, 1961)
p. 37.
T. Y. Thomas, Concepts from Tensor Analysis and Differential Geometry (AP,
New York, 1966) p. 77.
M. Tsukahara, M. Katano, T. Morioka, N. Watanabe, K. Maeno and H. Honma,
in Symp. on Shock Waves, ed. R. Yamane (Tokyo, 1996).
P. Vieille, Comptes Rendus 129 (1899) 1228.
R. J. Virgona, W. Y. Cruchfield and L. F. Henderson, in Proc. 20th Int. Symp.
on Shock Waves, eds. B. Sturtevant, J. E. Shepherd, H. G. Hornung, (World
Scientific, Singapore, New Jersey, London, Hong Kong, 1996).
E. V. Vlasov, A. S. Ginevsky and R. K. Karavasov, Uchenye Zapiski TsAGIl
(1978) 25 (in Russian).
M. Watarai, D. Satoh, T. Obara and S. Ohyagi, in Symp. on Shock Waves
References 241
(Tokyo, 1997).
D. R. White, J. Fluid Mech. 4 (1958) 585.
G. B. Whitham, Linear and Nonlinear Waves (Wiley, New York, 1974) p. 256.
H. Wintrich and W. Merzkirch, in Shock Waves at Marseille IV, eds. R. Brun,
L. Z. Dumitrescu (Springer-Verlag, Berlin, Heidelberg, New York, 1995).
T. W. Wright, Quart Journ. of App. Mech. and Math. 29 (1976) 311.
S. V. Yordansky, PMM J. Appl. Math, and Mech. 21 (1957) 465.
N. I. Yushchenkova, Pis'ma Zh. Tekh. Fiz. 6 (1980) 1283.
V. I. Zapryagaev and S. G. Mironov, Zh. Prikl. Mekh. i Tekhn. Fiz. N 6
(1991).
Ya. B. Zeldovich, Theory of Shock Waves and Introduction to Gas Dynamics
(Izd. AN SSSR, M., L., 1946) p. 94 (in Russian).
Ya. B. Zeldovich and Yu. P. Raizer, Physics of Shock Waves and High-
Temperature Hydrodynamic Phenomena (AP, 1967) p. 497.
I. A. Znamenskaya and F. V. Shugaev, Doklady AN SSSR 254 (1980) 57 (in
Russian).
I. A. Znamenskaya, I. V. Stepanets and F. V. Shugaev, Fluid Dynamics - Izv.
AN SSSR MZhG 25 (1990) 43.
SUBJECT INDEX
amplification coefficient at shock focus 155

focusing 155
frequency of oscillations of a vor
amplification of turbulent pulsa tex ring 173
tions 177
frequency of oscillations 141, 152
break-up of an arbitrary discon
tinuity 7, 13 frozen velocity of sound 6
ChristoffePs symbols 46, 47 geometrical compatibility condi

tions 44, 45
compatibility conditions 41, 42,
45, 54, 56 instability of shock waves 96
continued fractions 77, 114 jet 26, 157, 162
corrugation instability 97 kinematical compatibility condi

tions 49, 50, 51, 57, 62, 63
covariant derivative for normal
laser-supported detonation 203,
47
205, 207
curvilinear coordinates 55, 108
linear interaction of disturbances
derivative of a fluid parameter with a shock wave 79, 82
along the ray 67
linear wave equation 80
determinant of metric tensor 57
Mach reflection 105, 108
dispersed shock wave 7
mean curvature 61
disturbance on shock front 163,
metric surface tensor 56
172, 173, 175, 176
metric tensor 42, 45, 56
equilibrium velocity of sound 6
243
nonlinear interaction of disturb time-derivative for mean curvature

ances with a shock wave 84, 91 of the shock front 61
normal 47 time-derivative for normal 49, 50
oscillations of a vortex ring 163 time-derivative of the Mach num

ber 62
oscillations 141, 152
turbulence 177, 190, 224
point explosion 209
two-step structure of a shock
precursor 219
wave 219
ray 43, 55
velocity of displacement 43, 50
ray method 55
velocity of propagation 42, 50,
regular reflection 107 108
resonant excitation of vortices vorticity behind the shock wave

173, 176 54
rhombus flow pattern 157
second fundamental surface tensor

45
shock focusing 154
shock interaction 7, 10, 14, 15,

17, 127
shock refraction 12, 18
shock tube 20
shock waves in dusty gas 191,

196
shock wave 41
spontaneous emission of sound

97
structure of a shock wave 7

(Series On Advances in Mathematics For Applied Sciences, V. 49) Shugaev F.V., Shtemenko L.S. - Propagation and Reflection of Shock Waves-World Scientific (1997)

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

(Series On Advances in Mathematics For Applied Sciences, V. 49) Shugaev F.V., Shtemenko L.S. - Propagation and Reflection of Shock Waves-World Scientific (1997)

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

PROPAGATION

Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data

British Library Cataloguing-in-Publication Data

Copyright 1998 by World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd.

This book is printed on acid-free paper.

Printed in Singapore by Uto-Print

Tjj - Christoffel's symbols

Vi - covariant components of the external unit normal to the

The notation, a denotes covariant surface differentiation. Lower indices 1,2

Chapter 5. Reflection of a shock wave from a concave body and

Shock waves belong to one of interesting phenomena that occur in nature.

Fig. 1. Inverse shock thickness against Mach number (Fisco et al.

Let us consider in detail the evolution of a nonlinear wave in one-dimen

Let us investigate the first case. The derivative of r with respect to a is

where S is the entropy. It follows from (3)

Pi+ />!? = P2 + P2vln,

shock wave, respectively. Subscript n denotes the component normal to the

h{r2jp2) - A(ri,pi) - - ( p 2 ~ P i ) ( n + r 2 ) = 0. (6)

#(r,p;n,pi) = h{r,p)-h(T1,p1) - ^(p-Pi^r + n)

Here T is the temperature. Thus if AS > 0 then it must be Ap > 0 for

dH = TdS+ i ( r - n)dp- (p-Pl)dr. (7)

ds_( r i , p i ) < 0 , ds (r2,p2) >0.

lUaj7s J( r, i( ,rPi 'l )P>l ) >^^- ^n: >>

The quantity (v>.

Fig. 3. Reflection of fully dispersed wave, 0 = 20, M = 1.037

2.L Head-on interaction of shock waves

The interaction of shock waves is reduced to the problem of break-up of

disturbances that propagate in opposite directions. The disturbances are either

v = c1^-7=Jk===1 p>Pl. (12)

"=^ T i h r ~1?' P<PI- (13)

propagates as a rarefaction wave, and no break-up takes place. If v2 < Vb then

^ * > Jl . %~l v2 >0,v3< 0. (14)

The velocity of sound behind the shock wave is as follows

By making use of Eq. (20), Eq. (19) takes the form

M* > Mi if Mi < M(7) = A/ 2 (2-7)'

If 7 > 5/3 then M ( 7 ) > 1. Let 7 < 5 / 3 . Then M ( 7 ) < 1, M i > M ( 7 ) ,

(b) If M i > M ( 7 ) then M* > Mi. The following condition is valid:

M = \{Mx(i - 1) + y/fr - 1)M2 + 2 ( 7 - 1)}, 7>5/3

then no disturbance moves from right to left.

W % > 72-' I > ^ 7 2 ( 7 2 + 1)- T h e i n e < l u a l i t y / i ( P ) > /(P) is valid for

all values of p > pi. A shock wave reflects.

(b) % < 7 ? . % < ^ j ^ + l j - T h e inequality h{p) < f2(p) is valid for

P* = Pi{71 - 1 ~ (ci/c 2 ) 2 72(72 - l ) / 7 i } / { ( c 2 / c i ) 2 7 2 ( 7 2 + l ) / 7 i - 7i ~ 1}.

If p2 = p* then there is no reflected disturbance.

/(7-i)6i+7 + l 6-66 -6)

2.2. Oblique interaction of shock waves

a) Regular interaction of two plane shock waves of opposite families. Let

Fig. 5. Regular interaction of shock waves of opposite families

8{ = arctan < [ ( -*-n ** 1 1 tan LJ;

S3 = a r c t a n ( M 2 - l ) " 1 / 2 + h arctan((M 3 2 - l)1/2/h)

M3=^{^(/2-l)}, />=((7 + l)/(7-l))1/2,

Fig. 6. Regular interaction of shock waves of the same family.

By using the boundary condition across the contact discontinuity, we have

On having determined the unknown quantity 4, we find 3 by using Eq. (27)

Fig. 7. Refraction of a plane shock wave at an interface, i - incident

The pressure reflection and transmission coefficients are as follows (Henderson

V2 -Pi _ Z2{Zt - Zj)

It follows from Eq. (28)

cos at (1 n~2 sin 2 cti)1'2.

The quantity cos at becomes imaginary if a 4 > ac,

It is obvious that ac only exists for slow-fast refraction, n < 1. If a = ac then

3. Shock tube as an apparatus for obtaining shock waves in the

simple one-dimensional theory.

4 ? - ^-Vr<, <",, + ,?*<; Vk