Experiments in Fluids

, 58:24 | Cite as

Shock wave interactions with liquid sheets

Research Article

Abstract

Shock wave interactions with a liquid sheet are investigated by impacting planar liquid sheets of varying thicknesses with a planar shock wave. A square frame was designed to hold a rectangular liquid sheet, with a thickness of 5 or 10 mm, using plastic membranes and cotton wires to maintain the planar shape and minimize bulge. The flat liquid sheet, consisting of either water or a cornstarch and water mixture, was suspended in the test section of a shock tube. Incident shock waves with Mach numbers of \(M_\mathrm{s} = 1.34\) and 1.46 were considered. A schlieren technique with a high-speed camera was used to visualize the shock wave interaction with the liquid sheets. High-frequency pressure sensors were used to measure wave speed, overpressure, and impulse both upstream and downstream of the liquid sheet. Results showed that no transmitted shock wave could be observed through the liquid sheets, but compression waves induced by the shock-accelerated liquid coalesced into a shock wave farther downstream. A thicker liquid sheet resulted in a lower peak overpressure and impulse, and a cornstarch suspension sheet showed a higher attenuation factor compared to a water sheet.

References

  1. Bischoff White EE, Chellamuthu M, Rothstein JP (2009) Extensional rheology of a shear-thickening cornstarch and water suspension. Rheol Acta 49:119–129CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Bleakney W, Weimer DK, Fletcher CH (1949) The shock tube: a facility for investigations in fluid dynamics. Rev Sci Instrum 20:807–815CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Brady JF, Khair AS, Swaroop M (2006) On the bulk viscosity of suspensions. J Fluid Mech 554:109–123MathSciNetCrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  4. Brown E, Jaeger HM (2014) Shear thickening in concentrated suspensions: phenomenology, mechanisms and relations to jamming. Rep Prog Phys 77:046602CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Chauvin A, Jourdan G, Daniel E, Houas L, Tosello R (2011) Experimental investigation of the propagation of a planar shock wave through a two-phase gas-liquid medium. Phys Fluids 23:113301CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Chen Y, Huang W, Constantini S (2012) Blast shock wave mitigation using the hydraulic energy redirection and release technology. PLoS One 7:e39353CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Fall A, Huang N, Bertrand F, Ovarlez G, Bonn D (2008) Shear thickening of cornstarch suspensions as a reentrant jamming transition. Phys Rev Lett 100:018301CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Fischer C, Braun SA, Bourban PE, Michaud V, Plummer CJG, Månson JAE (2006) Dynamic properties of sandwich structures with integrated shear-thickening fluids. Smart Mater Struct 15:1467–1475CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Guildenbecher DR, López-Rivera C, Sojka PE (2009) Secondary atomization. Exp Fluids 46:371–402CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Henderson L, Ma JH, Sakurai A, Takayama K (1990) Refraction of a shock wave at an air-water interface. Fluid Dyn Res 5:337–350CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Igra O, Falcovitz J, Houas L, Jourdan G (2013) Review of methods to attenuate shock/blast waves. Prog Aerosp Sci 58:1–35CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Jeon H, Gross JR, Estabrook S, Koumlis S, Wan Q, Khanolkar GR, Tao X, Mensching DM, Lesnick EJ, Eliasson V (2015) Shock wave attenuation using foam obstacles: does geometry matter? Aerospace 2:353–375CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Jiang W, Gong X, Xuan S, Jiang W, Ye F, Li X, Liu T (2013) Stress pulse attenuation in shear thickening fluid. Appl Phys Lett 102:101901CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Jourdan G, Biamino L, Mariani C, Blanchot C, Daniel E, Massoni J, Houas L, Tosello R, Praguine D (2010) Attenuation of a shock wave passing through a cloud of water droplets. Shock Waves 20:285–296CrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  15. Kailasanath K, Tatem PA, Mawhinney J (2002) Blast mitigation using water-a status report. Technical Report No. NRL/MR/6410-02-8606, Naval research lab, Washington, D.CGoogle Scholar
  16. Kleine H, Timofeev E, Hakkaki-Fard A, Skews B (2014) The influence of reynolds number on the triple point trajectories at shock reflection off cylindrical surfaces. J Fluid Mech 740:47–60CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Lee YS, Wetzel ED, Wagner NJ (2003) The ballistic impact characteristics of Kevlar\(\textregistered\) woven fabrics impregnated with a colloidal shear thickening fluid. J Mater Sci 38:2825–2833CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Meekunnasombat P, Oakley JG, Anderson MH, Bonazza R (2006) Experimental study of shock-accelerated liquid layers. Shock Waves 15:383–397CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Naidoo K, Skews B (2011) Dynamic effects on the transition between two-dimensional regular and mach reflection of shock waves in an ideal, steady supersonic free stream. J Fluid Mech 676:432–460MathSciNetCrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  20. National Research Council (1995) Protecting buildings from bomb damage. National Academy Press, Washington, D.CGoogle Scholar
  21. Petel OE, Ouellet S, Loiseau J, Marr BJ, Frost DL, Higgins AJ (2013) The effect of particle strength on the ballistic resistance of shear thickening fluids. Appl Phys Lett 102:064103CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Roché M, Myftiu E, Johnston MC, Kim P, Stone HA (2013) Dynamic fracture of nonglassy suspensions. Phys Rev Lett 110:148304CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Sakurai A (1974) Blast wave from a plane source at an interface. J Phys JAP 36:610–610CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Son SF, Zakrajsek AJ, Miklaszewski EJ, Kittell DE, Wagner JL, Guildenbecher DR (2014) Experimental investigation of blast mitigation for target protection. Blast mitigation. Springer, New York, pp 1–19CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Wagner NJ, Brady JF (2009) Shear thickening in colloidal dispersions. Phys Today 62:27–32CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Waitukaitis SR, Jaeger HM (2014) Impact-activated solidification of dense suspensions via dynamic jamming fronts. Nature 487:205–209CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Wang C, Eliasson V (2012) Shock wave focusing in water inside convergent structures. Int J Multiphys 6:267–282CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Aerospace and Mechanical EngineeringUniversity of Southern CaliforniaLos AngelesUSA
  2. 2.Department of Structural EngineeringUniversity of California, San DiegoLa JollaUSA

Personalised recommendations