Skip to main content
Log in

Computation of the mean hydrodynamic structure of gaseous detonations with losses

  • Original Article
  • Published:
Shock Waves Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

In this paper, computations of gaseous detonations in several configurations are performed and discussed. The objective is to investigate the detonation characteristics, specially the influence of losses, through a quantitative analysis of the mean hydrodynamic structure. The results are divided into two parts: The first one relates to the propagation of ideal detonations without losses and to their characterization for a specific set of thermodynamic parameters, and the second part investigates the influence of losses on the averaged hydrodynamic structure of detonations. This is achieved by means of a specific and canonical configuration, in which a detonation wave propagates in a reactive layer bounded by an inert gas. This topology is investigated through a comparison of the instantaneous flow-field, cellular structure, and averaged quantities such as the mean curvature and the hydrodynamic thickness. This configuration may be regarded as non-ideal, as the detonation experiences losses due to the expansion of the detonation products toward the inert layer. The prediction of the detonation characteristics, as well as the conditions at which quenching occurs, remains a challenge when losses are involved. The main objective is to assess to what extent the hydrodynamic thickness can be used as a relevant length scale in the analysis of the resulting database. The results also highlight the key features of this configuration, which isolates a specific issue related to the rotating detonation engines. The temperature of the inert layer strongly affects the structure of the detonation–shock combined wave. For a high-temperature inert gas confinement, a detached shock appears in the upper layer and a jet of fresh mixture develops downstream of the front. For this condition, we observed a reduction in the critical dimensions by a factor of two. The degree of regularity of the detonation structure, from weakly unstable to mildly unstable cases, through the variation of the reduced activation energy, was investigated. The hydrodynamic thickness appears to be a useful characteristic length scale for the detonation, as it allows a better analysis of the results and a scaling of data. Moreover, the detonation velocity deficit can be globally expressed as a function of the ratio of the hydrodynamic thickness to the mean radius of curvature at the bottom of the wall.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8
Fig. 9
Fig. 10
Fig. 11
Fig. 12
Fig. 13
Fig. 14
Fig. 15
Fig. 16
Fig. 17

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Sharpe, G., Radulescu, M.: Statistical analysis of cellular detonation dynamics from numerical simulations: one-step chemistry. Combust. Theory Model. 15(5), 691–723 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1080/13647830.2011.558594

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  2. Soloukhin, R.I.: Multiheaded structure of gaseous detonation. Combust. Flame 10(1), 51–58 (1966). https://doi.org/10.1016/0010-2180(66)90027-7

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Soloukhin, R.I.: Nonstationary phenomena in gaseous detonation. Symp. (Int.) Combust. 12(1), 799–807 (1969). https://doi.org/10.1016/S0082-0784(69)80461-3

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Vasil’ev, A.A., Gavrilenko, T.P., Mitrofanov, V.V., Subbotin, V.A., Topchiyan, M.E.: Location of the sonic transition behind a detonation front. Combust. Explos. Shock Waves 8(1), 80–84 (1972). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00740288

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Vasiliev, A.A., Gavrilenko, T.P., Topchian, M.E.: On the Chapman–Jouguet surface in multi-headed gaseous detonations. Astronaut. Acta 17(4), 499–502 (1972)

    Google Scholar 

  6. Weber, M., Olivier, H.: The thickness of detonation waves visualised by slight obstacles. Shock Waves 13(5), 351–365 (2003). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00193-003-0220-3

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Lee, J.H.S., Radulescu, M.I.: On the hydrodynamic thickness of cellular detonations. Combust. Explos. Shock Waves 41(6), 745–765 (2005). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10573-005-0084-1

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Edwards, D.H., Jones, A.T., Phillips, D.E.: The location of the Chapman–Jouguet surface in a multiheaded detonation wave. J. Phys. D Appl. Phys. 9(9), 1331 (1976). https://doi.org/10.1088/0022-3727/9/9/010

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Short, M., Quirk, J.J.: High explosive detonation–confiner interactions. Annu. Rev. Fluid Mech. 50, 215–242 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-fluid-122316-045011

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  10. Chiquete, C., Short, M.: Characteristic path analysis of confinement influence on steady two-dimensional detonation propagation. J. Fluid Mech. 863, 789–816 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1017/jfm.2018.995

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  11. Sommers, W.P., Morrison, R.B.: Simulation of condensed-explosive detonation phenomena with gases. Phys. Fluids 5(2), 241–248 (1962). https://doi.org/10.1063/1.1706602

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Dabora, E.K.: The influence of a compressible boundary on the propagation of gaseous detonations. PhD Thesis, University of Michigan (1963)

  13. Dabora, E.K., Nicholls, J.A., Morrison, R.B.: The influence of a compressible boundary on the propagation of gaseous detonations. Symp. (Int.) Combust. 10(1), 817–830 (1965). https://doi.org/10.1016/S0082-0784(65)80225-9

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Adams, T.G.: Do weak detonation waves exist? AIAA J. 16(10), 1035–1040 (1978). https://doi.org/10.2514/3.61001

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Vasil’ev, A.A.: Critical diameter of gas-mixture detonation. Combust. Explos. Shock Waves 18(3), 349–355 (1982). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00783050

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Vasil’ev, A.A., Zak, D.V.: Detonation of gas jets. Combust. Explos. Shock Waves 22(4), 463–468 (1986). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00862893

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Murray, S.B., Lee, J.H.S.: The influence of yielding confinement on large-scale ethylene–air detonations. In: Soloukhin, R.I., Oppenheim, A.K., Manson, N., Bowen, J.R. (eds.) Dynamics of Shock Waves, Explosions, and Detonations. Prog. Astronaut. Aeronaut. 94, 80–103 (1984). https://doi.org/10.2514/5.9781600865695.0080.0103

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Murray, S.B., Lee, J.H.S.: The influence of physical boundaries on gaseous detonation waves. In: Leyer, J.C., Soloukhin, R.I., Bowen, J.R. (eds.) Dynamics of Explosions. Prog. Astronaut. Aeronaut. 106, 329–355 (1986). https://doi.org/10.2514/5.9781600865800.0329.0355

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Borisov, A.A., Khomic, S.V., Mikhalkin, V.N.: Detonation of unconfined and semiconfined charges of gaseous mixtures. In: Leyer, J.C., Borisov, A.A., Kuhl, A.L., Sirignano, W.A. (eds.) Dynamics of Detonations and Explosions: Detonations. Prog. Astronaut. Aeronaut. 133, 118–132 (1991). https://doi.org/10.2514/5.9781600866067.0118.0132

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Rudy, W., Kuznetsov, M., Porowski, R., Teodorczyk, A., Grune, J., Sempert, K.: Critical conditions of hydrogen–air detonation in partially confined geometry. Proc. Combust. Inst. 34(2), 1965–1972 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.proci.2012.07.019

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Rudy, W., Zbikowski, M., Teodorczyk, A.: Detonations in hydrogen–methane–air mixtures in semi confined flat channels. Energy 116(3), 1479–1483 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.energy.2016.06.001

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Rudy, W., Dziubanii, K., Zbikowski, M., Teodorczyk, A.: Experimental determination of critical conditions for hydrogen–air detonation propagation in partially confined geometry. Int. J. Hydrog. Energy 42(11), 7366–7373 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhydene.2016.04.056

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Grune, J., Sempert, K., Friedrich, A., Kuznetsov, M., Jordan, T.: Detonation wave propagation in semi-confined layers of hydrogen–air and hydrogen–oxygen mixtures. Int. J. Hydrog. Energy 42(11), 7589–7599 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhydene.2016.06.055

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Cho, K.Y., Codoni, J.R., Rankin, B.A., Hoke, J., Schauer, F.: Effects of lateral relief of detonation in a thin channel. 55th AIAA Aerospace Sciences Meeting, Grapevine, TX, AIAA Paper 2017-0373 (2017). https://doi.org/10.2514/6.2017-0373

  25. Houim, R.W., Fievisohn, R.T.: The influence of acoustic impedance on gaseous layered detonations bounded by an inert gas. Combust. Flame 179, 185–198 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.combustflame.2017.02.001

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Chiquete, C., Short, M., Quirk, J.J.: The effect of curvature and confinement on gas-phase detonation cellular stability. Proc. Combust. Inst. 37(3), 3565–3573 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.proci.2018.09.005

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Kessler, D.A., Gamezo, V.N., Oran, E.S.: Multilevel detonation cell structures in methane–air mixtures. Proc. Combust. Inst. 33(2), 2211–2218 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.proci.2010.07.071

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Gamezo, V.N., Vasil’ev, A.A., Khokhlov, A.M., Oran, E.S.: Fine cellular structures produced by marginal detonations. Proc. Combust. Inst. 28(1), 611–617 (2000). https://doi.org/10.1016/S0082-0784(00)80261-1

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Khasainov, B., Virot, F., Presles, H.N., Desbordes, D.: Parametric study of double cellular detonation structure. Shock Waves 23(3), 213–220 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00193-012-0419-2

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  30. Varatharajan, B., Williams, F.A.: Chemical-kinetic descriptions of high-temperature ignition and detonation of acetylene–oxygen–diluent systems. Combust. Flame 124(4), 624–645 (2001). https://doi.org/10.1016/S0010-2180(00)00235-2

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Sharpe, G.J., Maflahi, N.: Homogeneous explosion and shock initiation for a three-step chain-branching reaction model. J. Fluid Mech. 566, 163–194 (2006). https://doi.org/10.1017/S0022112006001844

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  32. Suresh, A., Huynh, H.: Accurate monotonicity-preserving schemes with Runge–Kutta time stepping. J. Comput. Phys. 136(1), 83–99 (1997). https://doi.org/10.1006/jcph.1997.5745

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  33. Xu, S., Aslam, T., Stewart, D.S.: High resolution numerical simulation of ideal and non-ideal compressible reacting flows with embedded internal boundaries. Combust. Theory Model. 1(1), 113–142 (1997). https://doi.org/10.1080/713665233

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  34. Mignone, A., Tzeferacos, P., Bodo, G.: High-order conservative finite difference GLM–MHD schemes for cell-centered MHD. J. Comput. Phys. 229(17), 5896–5920 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcp.2010.04.013

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  35. Toro, E.F.: Riemann Solvers and Numerical Methods for Fluid Dynamics: A Practical Introduction. Springer, Berlin (2009). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-662-03915-1

    Book  MATH  Google Scholar 

  36. Taylor, G.I.: The dynamics of the combustion products behind plane and spherical detonation fronts in explosives. Proc. R. Soc. Lond. A 200(1061), 235–247 (1950). https://doi.org/10.1098/rspa.1950.0014

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  37. Sow, A., Chinnayya, A., Hadjadj, A.: On the viscous boundary layer of weakly unstable detonations in narrow channels. Comput. Fluids 179, 449–458 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compfluid.2018.11.006

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  38. Li, J., Mi, X., Higgins, A.J.: Geometric scaling for a detonation wave governed by a pressure-dependent reaction rate and yielding confinement. Phys. Fluids 27(2), 027102 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1063/1.4907267

    Article  Google Scholar 

  39. Li, J., Mi, X., Higgins, A.J.: Effect of spatial heterogeneity on near-limit propagation of a pressure-dependent detonation. Proc. Combust. Inst. 35(2), 2025–2032 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.proci.2014.06.039

    Article  Google Scholar 

  40. Taileb, S., Reynaud, M., Chinnayya, A., Virot, F., Bauer, P.: Numerical study of 3D gaseous detonations in a square channel. Aerotec. Missili Spazio 97(2), 96–102 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF03405804

    Article  Google Scholar 

  41. Gamezo, V.N., Desbordes, D., Oran, E.S.: Two-dimensional reactive flow dynamics in cellular detonation waves. Shock Waves 9(1), 11–17 (1999). https://doi.org/10.1007/s001930050134

    Article  Google Scholar 

  42. Gamezo, V.N., Desbordes, D., Oran, E.S.: Formation and evolution of two-dimensional cellular detonations. Combust. Flame 116(1–2), 154–165 (1999). https://doi.org/10.1016/S0010-2180(98)00031-5

    Article  Google Scholar 

  43. Reynaud, M.: Modélisation numérique des détonations confinées par un gaz inerte. PhD Thesis, ISAE-ENSMA, Poitiers (2017). https://tel.archives-ouvertes.fr/tel-01685507/document

  44. Kaneshige, M., Shepherd, J.E.: Detonation database. Technical Report FM97-8, GALCIT (1997). https://shepherd.caltech.edu

  45. Radulescu, M.I., Sharpe, G.J., Law, C.K., Lee, J.H.S.: The hydrodynamic structure of unstable cellular detonations. J. Fluid Mech. 580, 31–81 (2007). https://doi.org/10.1017/S0022112007005046

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  46. Favre, A.: Equations des gaz turbulents compressibles. J. Mec. 4(4), 391 (1965)

    Google Scholar 

  47. Sow, A., Chinnayya, A., Hadjadj, A.: Mean structure of one-dimensional unstable detonations with friction. J. Fluid Mech. 743, 503–533 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1017/jfm.2014.49

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  48. Tsugé, S.I.C., Fujiwara, T.: On the propagation velocity of a detonation-shock combined wave. ZAMM J. Appl. Math. Mech./Z. Angew. Math. Mech. 54(3), 157–164 (1974). https://doi.org/10.1002/zamm.19740540305

    Article  Google Scholar 

  49. Reynaud, M., Virot, F., Chinnayya, A.: A computational study of the interaction of gaseous detonations with a compressible layer. Phys. Fluids 29(5), 056101 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1063/1.4982659

    Article  Google Scholar 

  50. Mi, X.C., Higgins, A.J., Kiyanda, C.B., Ng, H.D., Nikiforakis, N.: Effect of spatial inhomogeneities on detonation propagation with yielding confinement. Shock Waves 28(5), 993–1009 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00193-018-0847-8

    Article  Google Scholar 

  51. Chinnayya, A., Hadjadj, A., Ngomo, D.: Computational study of detonation wave propagation in narrow channels. Phys. Fluids 25(3), 036101 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1063/1.4792708

    Article  Google Scholar 

  52. Lau-Chapdelaine, S.S.M., Radulescu, M.I.: Viscous solution of the triple-shock reflection problem. Shock Waves 26(5), 551–560 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00193-016-0674-8

    Article  Google Scholar 

  53. Wood, W.W., Kirkwood, J.G.: Diameter effect in condensed explosives. The relation between velocity and radius of curvature of the detonation wave. J. Chem. Phys. 22(11), 1920–1924 (1954). https://doi.org/10.1063/1.1739940

    Article  Google Scholar 

  54. Sommers, W.: The interaction of a detonation wave with an inert boundary. PhD Thesis, University of Michigan (1961)

  55. Taileb, S., Melguizo-Gavilanes, J., Chinnayya, A.: Quenching limits and dynamics of multidimensional detonation waves confined by an inert layer. 27th International Colloquium on the Dynamics of Explosions and Reactive Systems, Beijing, Paper 320 (2019)

  56. Radulescu, M.I.: The propagation and failure mechanisms of gas detonations: experiments in porous tubes. PhD Thesis, McGill University, Canada (2003). https://escholarship.mcgill.ca/concern/theses/w37637360

  57. Ng, H.: The effect of chemical reaction kinetics on the structure of gaseous detonations. PhD Thesis, McGill University, Canada (2005). https://escholarship.mcgill.ca/concern/theses/4b29b651q

  58. Maxwell, B.M., Bhattacharjee, R.R., Lau-Chapdelaine, S.S.M., Falle, S.A., Sharpe, G.J., Radulescu, M.I.: Influence of turbulent fluctuations on detonation propagation. J. Fluid Mech. 818, 646–696 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1017/jfm.2017.145

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  59. Bdzil, J.: Steady-state two-dimensional detonation. J. Fluid Mech. 108, 195–226 (1981). https://doi.org/10.1017/S0022112081002085

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  60. Taylor, B.D., Kasimov, A.R., Stewart, D.S.: Mode selection in weakly unstable two-dimensional detonations. Combust. Theory Model. 13(6), 973–992 (2009). https://doi.org/10.1080/13647830903324186

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  61. Jarsalé, G., Virot, F., Chinnayya, A.: Ethylene–air detonation in water spray. Shock Waves 26(5), 561–572 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00193-016-0679-3

    Article  Google Scholar 

  62. Zeman, O.: On the decay of compressible isotropic turbulence. Phys. Fluids A Fluid 3(5), 951–955 (1991). https://doi.org/10.1063/1.857971

    Article  Google Scholar 

  63. Radulescu, M.I., Borzou, B.: Dynamics of detonations with a constant mean flow divergence. J. Fluid Mech. 845, 346–377 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1017/jfm.2018.244

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

Computations were performed on the supercomputer facilities of the Mésocentre de calcul de Poitou Charentes and from GENCI-CINES (Grant 2018-A0052B07735). This work was supported by the CPER FEDER Project of Région Nouvelle Aquitaine. This work is part of the CAPA research program on Alternative Combustion Mode for Air-breathing Propulsion supported by SAFRAN Tech, MBDA France, and ANR (French National Research Agency).

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to A. Chinnayya.

Additional information

Communicated by G. Ciccarelli.

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Appendix: Influence of the numerical resolution

Appendix: Influence of the numerical resolution

The influence of the numerical resolution on the numerical results is investigated. Simulations were conducted for different grid spacings: \(N_{1/2}=10\), \(N_{1/2}=30\), and \(N_{1/2}=60\). The physical configuration is similar to the one investigated in Sect. 3.1.2, i.e., marginal detonations for \(E_{{\text {a}}}^*=38.23\). The detonation wave speed is identical in the three cases and is equal to \(\bar{D}=2845\,\hbox {m}\,\hbox {s}^{-1}\).

Fig. 18
figure 18

Temperature field obtained for different numerical resolutions \(N_{1/2}\): a \(N_{1/2}=10\), b \(N_{1/2}=30\), and c \(N_{1/2}=60\)

Fig. 19
figure 19

Vorticity field obtained for different numerical resolutions \(N_{1/2}\): a \(N_{1/2}=10\), b \(N_{1/2}=30\), and c \(N_{1/2}=60\)

Figure 18 presents the temperature field obtained for various values of \(N_{1/2}\). This comparison enables the identification of qualitative differences associated with different numerical resolutions. The shape of the detonation front is not affected by the increase in mesh resolution. On the other hand, structures that develop downstream are significantly affected. In particular, the shape of the pockets of fresh gas depends on \(N_{1/2}\). In Fig. 18a (\(N_{1/2} = 10\)), the outline of the pocket is smooth. This is not the case in  Fig. 18b, c, for which the hydrodynamic instabilities deform the interface of the fresh gas pocket and give it a serrated and filamentary shape. This is particularly pronounced for the case with \(N_{1/2} = 60\). The flow in its entirety is impacted by these differences, as shown by the temperature fields for the different values of \( N_{1/2} \). The fields in Fig. 19 show the vorticity fields associated with the different numerical resolutions. The points of high vorticity foreshadow the trajectory of the triple points along the front, but especially the presence of vortex structures in the downstream flow. Their number is reduced for \( N_{1/2} = 10\) and increases significantly for \( N_{1/2} = 30\) and \( N_{1/2} = 60\).

Figure 20 compares the average profiles obtained for \(N_ {1/2} = 10\), 30, and 60 in order to quantify the influence of the numerical resolution on the average flow. While the visualizations of Figs. 18 and 19 demonstrate a significant increase in hydrodynamic instabilities with resolution, the average profiles agree with each other. The pressure and density profiles (Fig. 20a, b) and mass fraction (Fig. 20c) converge to the same solution. It is the same with the fluctuations of pressure and speed. The sonic plane is determined at \( 7 \pm 1 \, \lambda \) (Fig. 20d). The fluctuations, shown in Fig. 21, have similar levels.

Fig. 20
figure 20

Evolution of the mean pressure \(\bar{p}\) normalized by \(p_0\) (a), the mean density \(\bar{\rho }\) normalized by \(\rho _0\) (b), the mean mass fraction \(\widetilde{Y}\) (c), and the mean local Mach number \(\widetilde{M}\) (d) as a function of the distance from the leading shock normalized by the half-reaction length for different numerical resolutions \(N_{1/2}\)

Fig. 21
figure 21

Evolution of the mean pressure fluctuations \((\bar{p'^{2}})^{1/2}\) normalized by \(\bar{p}\) (a), the mean density fluctuations \((\bar{\rho '^{2}})^{1/2}\) normalized by \(\bar{\rho }\) (b), the mean velocity fluctuations \((\widetilde{u''^{2}})^{1/2}\) normalized by \(\widetilde{u}\) (c), and the mean local Mach number \(\widetilde{M_\mathrm{t}}\) (d) as a function of the distance from the leading shock normalized by the half-reaction length for different numerical resolutions \(N_{1/2}\)

These results demonstrate that the main characteristics of the mean flow are correctly recovered by calculations made with a relatively low resolution (\( N_ {1/2} = 10\)). The speed of the front, its cellular structure, and the average profiles differ marginally with the spatial resolution of the simulations. On the other hand, the flows are of a degree of complexity and turbulence which evolves with \( N_ {1/2} \). This is particularly the case with hydrodynamic fluctuations (Kelvin–Helmholtz, Rayleigh–Taylor, and Richtmyer–Meshkov). These instabilities are intended to play an important role in the mechanism of propagation of highly unstable detonations. The fact that the mean flow characteristics are recovered with a relatively low numerical resolution reinforces the hypothesis that the modeled mixture (\( {\text {H}}_2 / {\text {O}}_2 \) at stoichiometry and pressure of 1 atm) is only moderately unstable at the difference from other mixtures such as \( {\text {CH}}_4{-}{\text {O}}_2 \) or \({\text {C}}_3 {\text {H}}_8{-}{\text {O}}_2 \). On the other hand, the results obtained here as to the influence of the numerical resolution on the propagation of a marginal detonation do not completely prejudge the influence of \( N_ {1/2} \) for a different configuration, in particular, when the cell irregularity is increased by losses in the reaction zone.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Reynaud, M., Taileb, S. & Chinnayya, A. Computation of the mean hydrodynamic structure of gaseous detonations with losses. Shock Waves 30, 645–669 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00193-020-00964-x

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00193-020-00964-x

Keywords

Navigation