Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-fscjk Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-25T11:26:02.462Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Testing continuum descriptions of low-Mach-number shock structures

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  26 April 2006

Gerald C. Pham-Van-Diep ,
Daniel A. Erwin  and
E. Phillip Muntz
Gerald C. Pham-Van-Diep
Affiliation:
University of Southern California, Department of Aerospace Engineering, Los Angeles, CA 90089–1191, USA
Daniel A. Erwin
Affiliation:
University of Southern California, Department of Aerospace Engineering, Los Angeles, CA 90089–1191, USA
E. Phillip Muntz
Affiliation:
University of Southern California, Department of Aerospace Engineering, Los Angeles, CA 90089–1191, USA
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Numerical experiments have been performed on normal shock waves with Monte Carlo Direct Simulations (MCDS's) to investigate the validity of continuum theories at very low Mach numbers. Results from the Navier—Stokes and the Burnett equations are compared to MCDS's for both hard-sphere and Maxwell gases. It is found that the maximum-slope shock thicknesses are described equally well (within the MCDS computational scatter) by either of the continuum formulations for Mach numbers smaller than about 1.2. For Mach numbers greater than 1.2, the Burnett predictions are more accurate than the Navier—Stokes results. Temperature—density profile separations are best described by the Burnett equations for Mach numbers greater than about 1.3. At lower Mach numbers the MCDS scatter is too great to differentiate between the two continuum theories. For all Mach numbers above one, the shock shapes are more accurately described by the Burnett equations.

Type
Research Article
Information
Journal of Fluid Mechanics , Volume 232 , November 1991 , pp. 403 - 413
Copyright
© 1991 Cambridge University Press

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Aziz, R. A. & Chen, H. H. 1977 An accurate intermolecular potential for argon. J. Chem. Phys. 67, 5719–5726.Google Scholar
Aziz, R. A. & Nain, V. P. S. 1979 An accurate intermolecular potential for helium. J. Chem. Phys. 70, 4336–4341.Google Scholar
Bird, G. A. 1976 Molecular Gas Dynamics. Clarendon.
Bird, G. A. 1981 Monte-Carlo simulation in an engineering context. In Rarefied Gas Dynamics: Proc. 12th Intl Symp. (ed. S. Fisher), pp. 239–255. AIAA.
Bird, G. A. 1983 Definition of mean free path for real gases. Phys. Fluids 26, 3222–3223.Google Scholar
Bird, G. A. 1989 The perception of numerical methods in rarefied gas dynamics. In Rarefied Gas Dynamics: Proc. 16th Intl Symp. Ill: Theoretical and Computational Techniques (ed. E. P. Muntz, D. Weaver & D. Campbell), pp. 211–226. AIAA.
Chapman, S. & Cowling, T. G. 1952 The Mathematical Theory of Non-uniform Gases (2nd Edn). Cambridge University Press.
Elliott, J. P. 1975 On the validity of the Navier—Stokes relation in a shock wave. Can. J. Phys. 53, 583–586.Google Scholar
Erwin, D. A., Pham-Van-Diep, G. C. & Muntz, E. P. 1991 Nonequilibrium gas flows I: A detailed validation of Monte Carlo direct simulation for monatomic gases. Phys. Fluids A 3, 697–705.Google Scholar
Fiscko, K. A. & Chapman, D. R. 1988 Comparison of shock structure solution using independent continuum and kinetic theory approaches. SPIE Symp. Innovative Sci. and Technol.Google Scholar
Fiszdon, W., Herczyski, R. & Walenta, Z. 1974 The structure of a plane shock wave of a monatomic gas. In Rarefied Gas Dynamics: Proc. 9th Intl Symp. (ed. M. Becker & M. Fiebig), pp. 23–1–23–57.
Dfvlr. Foch, J. D. & Ford, G. W. 1970 The dispersion of sound in monoatomic gases. In Studies in Statistical Mechanics, vol. V (ed. J. de Boer & G. E. Uhlenbeck). North-Holland.
Gilbarg, D. & Paolucci, D. 1953 Arch. Rat. Mech. Anal. 2, 617.
Holtz, T., Muntz, E. P. & Yen, S.-M. 1971 Comparison of measured and predicted velocity distribution function in a shock wave. Phys. Fluids 14, 545–548.Google Scholar
Liepmann, H. W., Narasimha, R. & Chahine, M. T. 1962 Structure of a plane shock layer. Phys. Fluids 5, 1313.Google Scholar
Lumpkin, F. & Chapman, D. 1991 Accuracy of the Burnett equations for hypersonic real gas flows. AIAA Paper 91–0771.
Muntz, E. P. & Harnett, L. N. 1969 Molecular velocity distribution function measurements in a normal shock wave. Phys. Fluids 12, 2027.Google Scholar
Muntz, E. P., Pham-Van-Diep, G. & Erwin, D. A. 1991 A review of the kinetic detail required for accurate predictions of normal shock waves. In Rarefied Gas Dynamics: Proc. 17th Intl Symp. (ed. A. E. Beylich), pp. 198–206. VCH.
Pham-Van-Diep, G. C., Erwin, D. A. & Muntz, E. P. 1989 Highly non-equilibrium molecular motion in a hypersonic shock wave. Science 245, 624–626.Google Scholar
Schmidt, B. 1969 Electron beam density measurements in shock waves in argon. J. Fluid Mech. 39, 361–373.Google Scholar
Simon, C. E. & Foch, J. D. 1977 Numerical integration of the Burnett equations for shock structure in a Maxwell gas. In Rarefied Gas Dynamics: Proc. 10th Intl Symp. (ed J. L. Potter), pp. 493–500. AIAA.
Talbot, L. & Sherman, F. S. 1960 Experiment versus kinetic theory for rarefied gases. In Rarefied Gas Dynamics: Proc. 1st Intl Symp. (ed. F. M. Devienne). Pergamon.