Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-mlc7c Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-02T23:40:40.110Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The theory of inoizing shock waves in a magnetic field. Part 1. Skew and oblique shock waves, boundary conditions and ionization stability

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  13 March 2009

M. A. Liberman  and
A. L. Velikovich
M. A. Liberman
Affiliation:
Institute for Phusical Problems, Academy of Sciences of the USSR, 117334 Moscow, Vorobyevskoye Shosse, 2 USSR
A. L. Velikovich
Affiliation:
Institute for Phusical Problems, Academy of Sciences of the USSR, 117334 Moscow, Vorobyevskoye Shosse, 2 USSR
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The general theory of ionizing shock waves in a magnetic field has been constructed. The theory takes into account precursor ionization of a neutral gas ahead of the shock wave front, caused by photo-ionization, as well as by the impact ionization with electrons accelerated by a transverse electric field induced by the shock front in the incident flow of a neutral gas. The concept of shock wave ionization stability, being basic in the theory of ionizing shock waves in a magnetic field, is introduced. An additional equation for the electric field in the shock wave is obtained. This equation, together with the investigation of the singular point in the downstream flow behind the shock wave front, provides all the information required for solving the problem. For example, this provides two additional boundary conditions for the shock waves of type 2, determining the value and direction of the electric field in the incident flow. One additional boundary condition determines a relation between the value and direction of the electric field for supersonic shock waves of type 3. There are no additional boundary conditions for supersonic shock waves of type 4. The electric field ahead of the shock front has two degrees of freedom. As well as for shocks of other types, its value is less than that of the transverse electric field at which an ionization wave could be emitted by the shock wave front (the ionization stability condition). The additional relationship for supersonic waves of type 4 determines the onset of an isomagnetic (viscous) jump in the structure of the shock wave front. The boundary conditions and ionizing shock wave structures, considered earlier by the authors of the present paper in the ‘limit of electrostatic breakdown’, as well as the structural determination of the electric field, considered earlier by Leonard, are limiting cases in the theory developed here. The ionizing shock wave structures are shown to transform from the GD regime at a low shock velocity to the MHD regime at an enhanced intensity of the shock wave. The abruptness of such a transition (e.g. the transition width on the Mach number scale) is determined by precursor photo-ionization.

Type
Research Article
Information
Journal of Plasma Physics , Volume 26 , Issue 1 , August 1981 , pp. 29 - 53
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1981

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

REFERENCES

Akhiezer, A. I., Lubarski, G. J. & Polovin, R. K. 1959 Soviet Phys. JETP, 8, 507.Google Scholar
Barmin, A. A. & Kulikovskii, A. G. 1972 Hydrodynamics, vol.5 (ed. Sodov, L. I.). Moscow.Google Scholar
Chu, C. K. 1964 Phys. Fluids 7, 1349.Google Scholar
Chu, C. K. & Gross, R. A. 1969 Advances in Plasma Physics, vol. 2 (ed. Simon, A. and Thompson, W. B.), p. 139. Interscienoe.Google Scholar
Cowley, M. D. 1967 J. Plasma Phys. 1, 37.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cross, R. C. & Mathers, C. D. 1979 J. Plasma Phys. 21, 151.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Germain, P. 1960 Rev. Mod. Phys. 32, 951.Google Scholar
Hoffert, M. I. 1968 Phys. Fluids, 11, 77.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jeffrey, A. & Taniuti, T. 1964 Nonlinear wave propagation. Academic.Google Scholar
Kulikovskii, A. G. & Lyubimov, O. A. 1959 Dokl. Akad. Nauk, SSSR, 129, 52.Google Scholar
Kunkel, W. B. & Gross, R. A. 1962 Plasma Hydromagnetics (ed. Bershader, D.), p. 58. Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
Leonard, B. P. 1972 a J. Plasma Phys. 7, 133.Google Scholar
Leonard, B. P. 1972 b J. Plasma Phys. 7, 157.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Leonard, B. P. 1972 c J. Plasma Phys. 7, 177.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Leonard, B. P. 1973 J.Plasma Phys. 10, 13.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Leonard, B. P. 1977 J. Plasma Phys. 17, 69.Google Scholar
Liberman, M. A. & Velikovich, A. L. 1978 Plasma Phys. 20, 439.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Liberman, M. A. 1979 a Uspekhi Fiz. Nauk, 127, 528.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Liberman, M. A. 1979 b Zh. Experim. Teor. Fis. 77, 124.Google Scholar
Liberman, M. A., Synakh, V. S., Velikovich, A. L. & Zakajdakov, V. V. 1980 Plasma Phys. 22, 317.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Maksimov, A. M. & Ostashev, V. E. 1975 Tepl. Vysokikh Temp. 13, 644.Google Scholar
Robertson, S. H. & Chen, Y. G. 1975 Phys. Fluids, 18, 917.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stebbins, C. F. & Vlases, G. G. 1968 J. Plasma Phys. 2, 633.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Velikovich, A. L. & Liberman, M. A. 1977 Soviet Phys. JETP, 46, 469.Google Scholar
Velikovich, A. L. & Liberman, M. A. 1978 Soviet Phys. JEPT, 47, 860.Google Scholar
Velikovich, A. L. & Liberman, M. A. 1979 Uspekhi Fiz. Nauk, 129, 377.CrossRefGoogle Scholar