Abstract

The work presented here involves the numerical simulation of a shock wave
interaction with an interface separating two different fluids. When a shock wave with a Mach
number, M, propagates in a shock tube filled with light or heavy density gas and interacts with
an interface containing heavy or light density gas, respectively, then any perturbations on the
interface undergo distortion, due to Richtmyer-Meshkov Instability. This work describes the
processes and changes that happen in the interface due to instabilities.

The interface is located in the test section at the right end of the shock tube and
contains four-bumped perturbations. Air was used as the light-density gas in the simulations,
and SF6 was used as the heavy-density gas. In addition, the simulations were carried out in
OpenFOAM with a simulation time of 4 milliseconds. In this analysis, straight and divergent
test sections were used, with the straight test section simulated with slip and no – slip
boundary conditions. Furthermore, the perturbation's initial amplitude was increased from 6
mm to 12 mm and simulated with a straight test section.

The result explains the interaction of shock waves with the perturbations, mentioning
the reasons behind the formation of vortex motions. Furthermore, the evolution of the
perturbations and the causes of their growth were investigated. It was observed that the
reflected shock wave plays a crucial role in the formation of bubbles. A detailed comparison
of the simulation images, vorticity magnitude curves, and amplitude curves was carried out,
highlighting the major features.

i
 Nomenclature
𝜔: Vorticity.
𝑢: Velocity.
𝜌: Density.
𝑃: Pressure.
𝜌 : Density of heavy fluid.
𝜌 : Density of light fluid.
𝐴: Atwood number.
𝜇: Dynamic viscosity.
𝑅: Gas constant.
𝛾: Specific heat ratio.
𝑐 : specific heat at constant pressure.

𝑐 : specific heat at constant volume.

𝑒: Total energy per unit mass.

𝜎 : Viscous stress tensor.

𝑃 : Pressure in the driven section.

𝑃 : Pressure in the driver section.
𝑇 : Temperature in the driven section.
𝑇 : Temperature in the driver section.
𝑊: Shock wave velocity.
𝑎 : Speed of sound in the driven section.
𝑀 : Shock Mach number.
𝑢 = 𝑢 = 𝑢 : Induced wave velocity.

: Density ratio.

: Temperature ratio.

𝑀 : Reflected Shock Mach number.

𝑊 : Reflected Shock wave velocity.
𝑎 : Speed of sound in the driver section.

ii
𝐶𝑜: Courant number.
𝛿𝑡: time step.
|𝑈|: Magnitude of velocity through the cell under consideration.

𝛿𝑥: Cell size in the velocity direction.

a: Amplitude of the perturbations.
𝜆: Wavelength of the perturbations.
RMI: Richtmyer – Meshkov Instability.

iii
 Contents
Abstract …….………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………… i
Nomenclature ………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….… ii
Contents ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………. iv
1. Introduction ………………………………………………………………………………………………………….… 1
1.1 Background …………………………………………………………………………………………………. 1
1.2 Previous Work …………………………………………………………………………………………….. 2
1.3 Project Outline ……………………………………………………………………………………………. 3
2. Theory ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………. 4
2.1 Governing Equations …………………………………………………………………………………… 4
2.2 Shock Wave Relations ………………………………………………………………………....…….. 4
2.3 Solver & Numerical Methods ………………………………………………………………….….. 6
2.3.1 Solver ……………………………………………………………………..………………………. 6
2.3.2 Time Control ……………………………………………………………………………………. 6
2.3.3 Numerical Schemes ……………………………………………………………………….… 7
2.3.4 Solution & Algorithm Control ………………………………………………………..… 7
2.4 Meshing Methodology …………………………………………………………………………….…. 8
2.4.1 Generating Mesh on OpenFOAM ……………………………………………..……… 9
2.5 Computational Setup & Boundary Conditions ……………………………………..……. 11
3. Results and Discussion ……………………………………………………………………………….…………. 13
3.1 Interaction of a shock wave with gaseous interface ………………………….………. 13
3.2 Flow Fields Visualisation ……………………………………………………………….…………… 18
3.2.1 Straight Test Section ……………………………………………………………………… 18
3.2.2 Divergent Test Section ………………………………………………………….………. 21
3.3 Effect of Increasing the Amplitude of Perturbations ………………….……………… 23
3.4 Effect of Using a no – slip Boundary Condition ………………………………….………. 25
3.5 Average Vorticity Magnitude Curves …………………………………………………………. 26

iv
 3.6 Shock Wave Properties …………………………………………………………………………….. 29
4. Conclusion ………………………………………………………………………………………………..………….. 32

5. Future Work …………………………………………………………………………………………….…………… 34

References …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….…. 35
Appendices …………………………………………………………………………………………………………..………….. 37
Appendix – A ………………………………………………………………………………………..………………. 37
Appendix – B ………………………………………………………………………………………………………… 39
Appendix – C …………………………………………………………………………………………….………….. 41
Appendix – D ……………………………………………………………………………………………..…………. 44
Appendix – E ……………………………………………………………………………………………………..…. 47
Appendix – F …………………………………………………………………………………………………….….. 48
Appendix – G ………………………………………………………………………………………………………… 50