Hostname: page-component-6dbcb7884d-64ff6 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-02-13T15:35:09.396Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Shock-wave surfing

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  06 April 2011

S. J. LAURENCE  and
R. DEITERDING
S. J. LAURENCE*
Affiliation:
Institute of Aerodynamics and Flow Technology, Spacecraft Section, German Aerospace Center, Bunsenstraße 10, 37073 Göttingen, Germany
R. DEITERDING
Affiliation:
Oak Ridge National Laboratory, PO Box 2008 MS6367, Oak Ridge, TN 37831, USA
*
†Email address for correspondence: stuart.laurence@dlr.de
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

A phenomenon referred to as ‘shock-wave surfing’, in which a body moves in such a way as to follow the shock wave generated by another upstream body, is investigated numerically and analytically. During the surfing process, the downstream body can accumulate a significantly higher lateral velocity than would otherwise be possible. The surfing effect is first investigated for interactions between a sphere and a planar oblique shock. Numerical simulations are performed and a simple analytical model is developed to determine the forces acting on the sphere. A phase-plane description is employed to elucidate features of the system dynamics. The analytical model is then generalised to the more complex situation of aerodynamic interactions between two spheres, and, through comparisons with further computations, is shown to adequately predict the final separation velocity of the surfing sphere in initially touching configurations. Both numerical simulations and a theoretical analysis indicate a strong influence of the sphere radius ratio on the separation process and predict a critical radius ratio that delineates entrainment of the smaller body within the flow region bounded by the larger body's shock from expulsion. Furthermore, it is shown that an earlier scaling law does not accurately describe the separation behaviour. The surfing effect has important implications for meteoroid fragmentation: in particular, a large fraction of the variation in the separation velocity deduced by previous authors from an analysis of terrestrial crater fields can be explained by a combination of surfing and a modest rotation rate of the parent body.

JFM classification

Aerodynamics: High-speed flow Compressible Flows: Shock waves
Type
Papers
Information
Journal of Fluid Mechanics , Volume 676 , 10 June 2011 , pp. 396 - 431
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2011

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

Artem'eva, N. A. & Shuvalov, V. V. 1996 Interaction of shock waves during the passage of a disrupted meteoroid through the atmosphere. Shock Waves 5, 359–367.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Artemieva, N. A. & Pierazzo, E. 2009 The Canyon Diablo impact event: projectile motion through the atmosphere. Meteorit. Planet. Sci. 44 (1), 25–42.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Artemieva, N. A. & Shuvalov, V. V. 2001 Motion of a fragmented meteoroid through the planetary atmosphere. J. Geophys. Res. 106 (E2), 3297–3309.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Barri, N. G. 2009 Aerodynamic interaction of meteor-body fragments: the collimation effect. Dokl. Phys. 54 (9), 423–425.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Berger, M. & Colella, P. 1988 Local adaptive mesh refinement for shock hydrodynamics. J. Comput. Phys. 82, 64–84.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bertin, J. J. & Cummings, R. M. 2006 Critical hypersonic aerothermodynamic phenomena. Annu. Rev. Fluid Mech. 38, 129–157.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Billig, F. S. 1967 Shock-wave shapes around spherical- and cylindrical-nosed bodies. J. Spacecr. Rockets 4 (6), 822–823.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bland, P. A. & Artemieva, N. A. 2003 Efficient disruption of small asteroids by Earth's atmosphere. Nature 424, 288–291.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bland, P. A. & Artemieva, N. A. 2006 The rate of small impacts on Earth. Meteorit. Planet. Sci. 41 (4), 607–631.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chyba, C. F., Thomas, P. J. & Zahnle, K. J. 1993 The 1908 Tunguska explosion: atmospheric disruption of a stony asteroid. Nature 361, 40–44.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cirak, F., Deiterding, R. & Mauch, S. P. 2007 Large-scale fluid–structure interaction simulation of viscoplastic and fracturing thin shells subjected to shocks and detonations. Comput. Struct. 85 (11–14), 1049–1065.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Deiterding, R. 2003 Parallel adaptive simulation of multi-dimensional detonation structures. PhD thesis, Brandenburgische Technische Universität Cottbus.Google Scholar
Deiterding, R. 2005 a Construction and application of an AMR algorithm for distributed memory computers. In Adaptive Mesh Refinement: Theory and Applications (ed. Plewa, T., Linde, T. and Weirs, V. G.), Lecture Notes in Computational Science and Engineering, vol. 41, pp. 361–372. Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Deiterding, R. 2005 b Detonation structure simulation with AMROC. In High Performance Computing and Communications (ed. Yang, L. T.), Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol. 3726, pp. 916–927. Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Deiterding, R. 2009 A parallel adaptive method for simulating shock-induced combustion with detailed chemical kinetics in complex domains. Comput. Struct. 87, 769–783.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Deiterding, R., Cirak, F. & Mauch, S. P. 2009 Efficient fluid–structure interaction simulation of viscoplastic and fracturing thin-shells subjected to underwater shock loading. In Int. Workshop on Fluid–Structure Interaction (ed. Hartmann, S., Meister, A., Schäfer, M. and Turek, S.), pp. 65–80. University Press GmbH.Google Scholar
Deiterding, R., Radovitzky, R., Mauch, S. P., Noels, L., Cummings, J. C. & Meiron, D. I. 2005 A virtual test facility for the efficient simulation of solid materials under high energy shock-wave loading. Engng Comput. 22 (3–4), 325–347.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Edney, B. E. 1968 Effects of shock impingement on the heat transfer around blunt bodies. AIAA J. 6 (1), 15–21.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fedkiw, R. P., Aslam, T., Merriman, B. & Osher, S. 1999 A non-oscillatory Eulerian approach to interfaces in multimaterial flows (the ghost fluid method). J. Comput. Phys. 152, 457–492.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hayes, D. H. & Probstein, R. R. 1966 Hypersonic Flow Theory. Academic Press.Google Scholar
Heide, F. 1963 Meteorites. University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Hills, J. G. & Goda, M. P. 1993 The fragmentation of small asteroids in the atmosphere. Astron. J. 105 (3), 1114–1144.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hoerner, S. F. 1965 Fluid-Dynamic Drag: Practical Information on Aerodynamic Drag and Hydrodynamic Resistance. Hoerner Fluid Dynamics.Google Scholar
Krinov, E. L. 1966 Giant Meteorites, translated by Romankiewicz, J. S.. Pergamon Press.Google Scholar
Laurence, S. J. 2006 Proximal bodies in hypersonic flow. PhD thesis, California Institute of Technology, Pasadena, California.Google Scholar
Laurence, S. J., Deiterding, R. & Hornung, H. G. 2007 Proximal bodies in hypersonic flow. J. Fluid Mech. 590, 209–237.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lees, L. 1955 Hypersonic flow. In Proc. 5th Intl Aero. Conf., Los Angeles. Inst. Aero. Soc., pp. 241–276.Google Scholar
Passey, Q. R. & Melosh, H. J. 1980 Effects of atmospheric breakup on crater field formation. Icarus 42, 211–233.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sanderson, S. R., Hornung, H. G. & Sturtevant, B. 2004 The influence of non-equilibrium dissociation on the flow produced by shock impingement on a blunt body. J. Fluid Mech. 516, 1–37.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schultz, P. H. & Sugita, S. 1994 Penetrating and escaping the atmospheres of Venus and Earth. In 25th Lunar and Planetary Science Conference, pp. 1215–1216.Google Scholar
Sedov, L. I. 1959 Similarity and Dimensional Methods in Mechanics (translation edited by Holt, Maurice; translation by Friedman, Morris from the fourth Russian edition). Academic Press.Google Scholar
Svetsov, V. V., Nemtchinov, I. V. & Teterev, A. V. 1995 Disintegration of large meteoroids in Earth's atmosphere: theoretical models. Icarus 116, 131–153.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Toro, E. F. 1999 Riemann Solvers and Numerical Methods for Fluid Dynamics. Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Vincenti, W. G. & Kruger, C. H. 1965 Introduction to Physical Gas Dynamics. Wiley.Google Scholar