Advertisement

Flow, Turbulence and Combustion

, Volume 87, Issue 4, pp 639–671 | Cite as

Characterization of the Mixing Layer Resulting from the Detonation of Heterogeneous Explosive Charges

  • Kaushik BalakrishnanEmail author
  • Suresh Menon
Article

Abstract

A dense, two-phase numerical methodology is used to study the mixing layer developing behind the detonation of a heterogeneous explosive charge, i.e., a charge comprising of a high explosive with metal particles. The filtered Navier–Stokes equations are solved in addition to a sub-grid kinetic energy equation, along with a recently developed Eulerian–Lagrangian formulation to handle dense flow-fields. The mixing layer resulting from the post-detonation phase of the explosion of a nitromethane charge consisting of inert steel particles is of interest in this study. Significant mixing and turbulence effects are observed in the mixing layer, and the rms of the radial velocity component is found to be about 25% higher than that of the azimuthal and zenith velocity components due to the flow being primarily radial. The mean concentration profiles are self-similar in shape at different times, based on a scaling procedure used in the past for a homogeneous explosive charge. The peak rms of concentration profiles are 23–30% in intensity and decrease in magnitude with time. The behavior of concentration gradients in the mixing layer is investigated, and stretching along the radial direction is observed to decrease the concentration gradients along the azimuth and zenith directions faster than the radial direction. The mixing and turbulence effects in the mixing layer subsequent to the detonation of the heterogeneous explosive charge are superior to that of a homogeneous explosive charge containing the same amount of the high explosive, exemplifying the role played by the particles in perturbing the flow-field. The non-linear growth of the mixing layer width starts early for the heterogeneous explosive charge, and the rate is reduced during the implosion phase in comparison with the homogeneous charge. The turbulence intensities in the mixing layer for the heterogeneous explosive charge are found to be nearly independent of the particle size for two different sizes considered in the initial charge. Overall, this study has provided some useful insights on the mixing layer characteristics subsequent to the detonation of heterogeneous explosives, and has also demonstrated the efficacy of the dense, multiphase formulation for such applications.

Keywords

Heterogeneous explosive Instability Mixing layer Discrete Equations Method (DEM) Dense flow 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Zhang, F., Frost, D.L., Thibault, P.A., Murray, S.B.: Explosive dispersal of solid particles. Shock Waves 10, 431–443 (2001)zbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Frost, D.L., Ornthanalai, C., Zarei, Z., Tanguay, V., Zhang, F.: Particle momentum effects from the detonation of heterogeneous explosives. J. Appl. Phys. 101, 113529 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Balakrishnan, K., Nance, D.V., Menon, S.: Simulation of impulse effects from explosive charges containing metal particles. Shock Waves 20, 217–239 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Balakrishnan, K.: On the high-fidelity simulation of chemical explosions and their interaction with solid particle clouds. PhD Thesis, Georgia Institute of Technology (2010)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Lanovets, V.S., Levich, V.A., Rogov, N.K., Tunik, Y.V., Shamshev, K.N.: Dispersion of the detonation products of a condensed explosive with solid inclusions. Combust. Expl. Shock Waves 29(5), 638–641 (1993)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Taylor, G.I.: The instability of liquid surfaces when accelerated in a direction perpendicular to their planes. Proc. R. Soc. Lond., A Math. Phys. Sci. 201, 192–196 (1950)zbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Brode, H.L.: Blast wave from a spherical charge. Phys. Fluids 2(2), 217–229 (1959)zbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Richtmyer, R.D.: Taylor instability in a shock acceleration of compressible fluids. Commun. Pure Appl. Math. 13, 297–319 (1960)MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Kuhl, A.L.: Spherical mixing layers in explosions. Dynamics of Exothermicity, pp. 291–320. Gordon and Breach Publishers (1996)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Kuhl, A.L., Ferguson, R.E., Oppenheim, A.K.: Gasdynamic model of turbulent exothermic fields in explosions. Prog. Astronaut. Aeronaut. 173, 251–261 (1997)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Balakrishnan, K., Genin, F., Nance, D.V., Menon, S.: Numerical study of blast characteristics from detonation of homogeneous explosives. Shock Waves 20, 147–162 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Balakrishnan, K., Menon, S.: On the role of ambient reactive particles in the mixing and afterburn behind explosive blast waves. Combust. Sci. Tech. 182(2), 186–214 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Balakrishnan, K., Menon, S.: On turbulent chemical explosions into dilute aluminum particle clouds. Combust. Theory Model. 14(4), 583–617 (2010)zbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Balakrishnan, K., Ukai, S., Menon, S.: Clustering and combustion of dilute aluminum particle clouds in a post-detonation flow field. Proc. Combust. Inst. 33(2), 2255–2263 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Frost, D.L., Zarei, Z., Zhang, F.: Instability of combustion products interface from detonation of heterogeneous explosives. In: 20th International Colloquium on the Dynamics of Explosions and Reactive Systems, Montreal, Canada (2005)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Menon, S., Patel, N.: Subgrid modeling for simulation of spray combustion in large-scale combustors. AIAA J. 44(5), 709–723 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Patel, N., Menon, S.: Large-eddy simulation of swirl-stabilized spray combustion. AIAA paper 2006-154 (2006)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Genin, F., Menon, S.: Studies of shock/turbulent shear layer interaction using large-eddy simulation. Comput. Fluids 39(5), 800–819 (2010)MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Genin, F., Menon, S.: Dynamics of sonic jet injection into supersonic crossflow. J. Turbul. 11(4), 1–30 (2010)MathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Oefelein, J.C.: Large eddy simulation of turbulent combustion processes in propulsion and power systems. Prog. Aerosp. Sci. 42, 2–37 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    White, F.M.: Viscous Fluid Flow. McGraw-Hill (1991)Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Fureby, C., Moller, S.I.: Large-eddy simulations of reacting flows applied to bluff-body stabilized flames. AIAA J. 33, 2339–2347 (1995)zbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Dobratz, B.M.: LLNL Handbook of Explosives. LLNL Publication UCRL-52997, Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory (1985)Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Zukas, J.A., Walters, W.P.: Explosive Effects and Applications. Springer (1998)Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Cowperthwaite, M.: Significance of some equations of state obtained from shock-wave data. Am. J. Phys. 34(11), 1025–1030 (1966)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Schwer, D.A., Kailasanath, K.: Numerical simulations of the mitigation of unconfined explosions using water mist. Proceedings of the Combustion Institute 31(2), 2361–2369 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Abgrall, R., Saurel, R.: Discrete equations for physical and numerical compressible multiphase mixtures. J. Comput. Phys. 186, 361–396 (2003)MathSciNetzbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Chinnayya, A., Daniel, E., Saurel, R.: Modelling detonation waves in heterogeneous energetic materials. J. Comput. Phys. 196, 490–538 (2004)MathSciNetzbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Toro, E.F.: Riemann Solvers and Numerical Methods for Fluid Dynamics. Springer (1999)Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Snider, D.M.: An incompressible three-dimensional multiphase particle-in-cell model for dense particle flows. J. Comput. Phys. 170, 523–549 (2001)zbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Patankar, N.A., Joseph, D.D.: Modeling and numerical simulation of particulate flows by the Eulerian–Lagrangian approach. Int. J. Multiph. Flow 27, 1659–1684 (2001)zbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Akhatov, I.S., Vainshtein, P.B.: Transition of porous explosive combustion into detonation. Combust. Explos. Shock Waves 20(1), 63–69 (1984)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Baer, M.R., Nunziato, J.W.: A two-phase mixture theory for the deflagration-to-detonation-transition (DDT) in reactive granular materials. Int. J. Multiph. Flow 12(6), 861–889 (1986)zbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Gokhale, S.S., Krier, H.: Modeling of unsteady two-phase reactive flow in porous beds of propellant. Prog. Energy Combust. Sci. 8, 1–39 (1982)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Youngs, D.L., Williams, R.J.R.: Turbulent mixing in spherical implosions. Int. J. Numer. Methods Fluids 56, 1597–1603 (2008)zbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Liu K., Haworth, D.C.: Large-eddy simulation for an axisymmetric piston-cylinder assembly with and without swirl. Flow Turbulence Combust. 85, 279–307 (2010)zbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Pope, S.B.: Ten questions concerning the large-eddy simulation of turbulent flows. New J. Phys. 6(35), 1–24 (2004)Google Scholar
  38. 38.
    Kannan, R., Wang, Z.J.: A Study of viscous flux formulations for a p-multigrid spectral volume Navier Stokes solver. J. Sci. Comp. 41(2), 165–199 (2009)MathSciNetzbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Kannan, R., Wang, Z.J.: LDG2: a variant of the LDG viscous flux formulation for the spectral volume method. J. Sci. Comput. Published online. doi: 10.1007/s10915-010-9391-0 (2010)Google Scholar
  40. 40.
    Kannan, R., Wang, Z.J.: The direct discontinuous Galerkin (DDG) viscous flux scheme for the high order spectral volume method, Comput. Fluids 39(10), 2007–2021 (2010)MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Liang, C., Kannan, R., Wang, Z.J.: A p-multigrid spectral difference method with explicit and implicit smoothers on unstructured triangular grids. Comput. Fluids 38(2), 254–265 (2009)MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    Freund, J.B., Moin, P., Lele, S.K.: Compressibility effects in a turbulent mixing layer. Part 2. Mixing of a passive scalar. J. Fluid Mech. 421, 269–292 (2000)MathSciNetzbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    Zhang, Q., Graham, M.J.: A numerical study of Richtmyer–Meshkov instability driven by cylindrical shocks. Phys. Fluids 10(4), 974–992 (1998)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. 44.
    McNesby, K.L., Homan, B.E., Ritter, J.J., Quine, Z., Ehlers, R.Z., McAndrew, B.A.: Afterburn ignition delay and shock augmentation in fuel rich solid explosives. Propellants Explos. Pyrotech. 35, 57–65 (2010)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Computational Research Division, Lawrence Berkeley National LaboratoryBerkeleyUSA
  2. 2.School of Aerospace EngineeringGeorgia Institute of TechnologyAtlantaUSA

Personalised recommendations