Abstract
The interaction of two spheres immersed in a Mach 4 flow is experimentally studied at a static pressure of 2.666 Pa, representing 80 km in altitude. This work was carried out in the hypersonic and rarefied facility MARHy, and aims to investigate the rarefaction effects on the fragmentation of space debris, and their becoming during atmospheric re-entry. Indeed, after fragmentation, the new debris will, in turn, interact with each other, which can lead to a change in their trajectory. The purpose is to investigate some interactions that can occur during high altitude phase of the atmospheric re-entry. This paper is focused on the analysis of shock/shock interference between two similar spheres interacting in a rarefied supersonic flow, where the second sphere is displaced in the wake of a first sphere, considered as the parent debris. The flow field was examined using the glow discharge technique. An adapted image processing was applied to the detailed analysis of shock wave interactions. Edney-type interactions were identified and discussed as rarefied experimental conditions introduce viscous effects. Compared to continuum regime, the thickness of the shock wave shapes modifies the shock wave interactions.
Graphical abstract
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
Abbreviations
- \(\lambda\) :
-
Mean free path (m)
- \(\mu\) :
-
Dynamic viscosity (Pa s)
- \(\rho\) :
-
Density (kg m\(^{-3}\))
- \(\varsigma\) :
-
Similarity number
- D :
-
Sphere diameter (m)
- Kn:
-
Knudsen number
- Ma:
-
Mach number
- p :
-
Pressure (Pa)
- Re:
-
Reynolds number
- \(R_m\) :
-
Specific gas constant = 287.058 m\(^2\) s\(^{-2}\) K\(^{-1}\)
- T :
-
Temperature (K)
- U :
-
Flow speed (m s\(^{-1}\))
- \(\infty\) :
-
Free-stream conditions
- 0:
-
Stagnation conditions
- 1:
-
First sphere (fixed)
- 2:
-
Second sphere (moving)
- i:
-
Interaction point
- l:
-
Local conditions
- ml:
-
Most luminous point
References
Adelgren RG, Yan H, Elliott GS, Knight DD, Beutner TJ, Zheltovodov AA (2005) Control of Edney IV interaction by pulsed laser energy deposition. AIAA J 43(2):256. https://doi.org/10.2514/1.7036
Ailor WH, Patera RP (2007) Spacecraft re-entry strategies?: Meeting debris mitigation and ground safety requirements. Proc Inst Mech Eng Part G J Aerosp Eng 221(6):947. https://doi.org/10.1243/09544100JAERO199
Akhlaghi H, Daliri A, Soltani MR (2017) Shock-wave-detection technique for high-speed rarefied-gas flows. AIAA J 55(11):3747. https://doi.org/10.2514/1.J055819
Bertrand F (1997) Etude du flux thermique généré par interaction d’ondes de chocs sur les mâts d’injection d’un statoréacteur à combustion supersonique
Bird GA (1981) Monte-Carlo simulation in an engineering context. PrAA 74:239–255
Bird GA, Brady JM (1994) Molecular gas dynamics and the direct simulation of gas flows, vol 42. Clarendon Press, Oxford
Borovoy VY, Chinilov AY, Gusev VN, Struminskaya IV, Délery J, Chanetz B (1997) Interference between a cylindrical bow shock and a plane oblique shock. AIAA J 35(11):1721. https://doi.org/10.2514/2.41
Chabut E (2005) Simulation aérothermodynamique en régime d’écoulement raréfié par méthode de monte-carlo
Coumar S, Lago V (2017) Influence of Mach number and static pressure on plasma flow control of supersonic and rarefied flows around a sharp flat plate. Exp Fluids 58(6):74. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00348-017-2346-6
Dulov VG, Levchenko VY, Kharitonov AM (1987) Progress of aerodynamic research at the Institute of Theoretical and Applied Mechanics, Siberian Branch, Academy of Sciences of the USSR. J Appl Mech Tech Phys 28(4):550
Edney B (1968) Anomalous Heat Transfer and Pressure Distributions on Blunt Bodies at Hypersonic Speeds in the Presence of an Impinging Shock (No. FFA-115). Flygtekniska Forsoksanstalten, Stockholm (Sweden)
Fan J (2002) A generalized soft-sphere model for Monte Carlo simulation. Phys Fluids 14(12):4399. https://doi.org/10.1063/1.1521123
Fauqueux S (2020) Marine pollution caused by space debris. https://www.spacelegalissues.com/marine-pollution-caused-by-space-debris/
Fisher TB (2019) Development of advanced techniques for aerodynamic assessment of blunt bodies in hypersonic flows. The University of Manchester (United Kingdom)
Fisher T, Quinn MK, Smith K (2018) In: 2018 Aerodynamic measurement technology and ground testing conference, p 4283. https://doi.org/10.2514/6.2018-4283
Golubev VK (2012) In: 15th International symposium on flow visualization
Harvey JK, Jeffery RW, Uppington DC (1971) The imperial college graphite heated hypersonic windtunnel
Josyula E, Burt J (2011) Review of rarefied gas effects in hypersonic applications. Air force research lab Wright-Patterson Afb OH
Khatta A, Gopalan J (2018) Hypersonic shock tunnel studies of Edney Type III and IV shock interactions. Aerosp Sci Technol 72:335. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ast.2017.11.001
Klinkrad H (2010) Space debris. Encycl Aerosp Eng. https://doi.org/10.1002/9780470686652.eae325
Koppenwallner G (1968) In: 6th Aerospace sciences meeting, p 49. https://doi.org/10.2514/6.1968-49
Laurence SJ, Deiterding R, Hornung G (2007) Proximal bodies in hypersonic flow. J Fluid Mech 590:209. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0022112007007987
Laurence SJ, Parziale NJ, Deiterding R (2012) Dynamical separation of spherical bodies in supersonic flow. J Fluid Mech 713:159. https://doi.org/10.1017/jfm.2012.453
Li T, Sui J, Gong S, Wu C (2015) Dynamical separation of rigid bodies in supersonic flow. Sci China Technol Sci 58(12):2110. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11431-015-5966-1
Merzkirch W (1987) Techniques of flow visualization. Advisory group for aerospace research and development neuilly-sur-seine (france)
Min CO, Lee DW (2018) Reentry analysis and risk assessment for end-of-life disposal of a multi-layer LEO satellite. Int J Aeronaut Space Sci 19(2):496. https://doi.org/10.1007/s42405-018-0036-0
Moreno-Ibáñez MMI, Silber EA, Gritsevich M, Trigo-Rodríguez JM (2018) Verification of the flow regimes based on high-fidelity observations of bright meteors. Astrophys J 863(2):174. https://doi.org/10.3847/1538-4357/aad334
Olivieri L, Francesconi A (2019) Large constellations assessment and optimization in LEO space debris environment. Adv Space Res 65(1):351. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.asr.2019.09.048
Pardini C, Anselmo L (2015) Space safety is no accident. Springer, Cham, pp 453–462. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-15982-9_52
Park SH, Park G (2017) Reentry trajectory and survivability estimation of small space debris with catalytic recombination. Adv Space Res 60(5):893. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.asr.2017.05.004
Park SH, Park G (2020) Separation process of multi-spheres in hypersonic flow. Adv Space Res 65(1):392. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.asr.2019.10.009
Park SH, Laboulais JN, Leyland P, Mischler S (2020) Re-entry survival analysis and ground risk assessment of space debris considering by-products generation. Acta Astronautica. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.actaastro.2020.09.034
Passey QR, Melosh HJ (1980) Effects of atmospheric breakup on crater field formation. Icarus 42(2):211. https://doi.org/10.1016/0019-1035(80)90072-X
Prevereaud Y, Vérant JL, Moschetta JM, Sourgen F, Blanchard M (2012)Debris aerodynamic interactions during uncontrolled atmospheric reentry. In: AIAA atmospheric flight mechanics conference, p 4582. https://doi.org/10.2514/6.2012-4582
Probstein RF (1961) Shock wave and flow field development in hypersonic re-entr. ARS J 31(2):185. https://doi.org/10.2514/8.5423
Rajasooria GPD, Brundin CL (1970) An Experimental Investigation of the Laminar Near Wake Behind a Circular Cylinder in a Mach 6, Rarefield Air Stream. University of Oxford
Register PJ, Aftosmis MJ, Stern EC, Brock JM, Seltner PM, Willems S, Guelhan A, Mathias DL (2020) Interactions between asteroid fragments during atmospheric entry. Icarus 337:113468. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.icarus.2019.113468
Rembaut N, Joussot R, Lago V (2020) Aerodynamical behavior of spherical debris in the supersonic and rarefied wind tunnel MARHy. J Space Saf Eng 7(3):411-419. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jsse.2020.07.031
Reyhanoglu M, Alvarado J (2013) Estimation of debris dispersion due to a space vehicle breakup during reentry. Acta Astronautica 86:211. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.actaastro.2013.01.018
Riabov VV, Botin AV (2019) In: AIP conference proceedings, vol 2132, p 100003. AIP Publishing LLC. https://doi.org/10.1063/1.5119598
Riabov VV, Botin AV (1999) In: 17th Applied aerodynamics conference, p 3207. https://doi.org/10.2514/6.1999-3207
Sanson F (2019) On-ground risk estimation of reentering human-made space objects (Doctoral dissertation, Université Paris Saclay (COmUE))
Vas I, Koppenwallner G (1964) The princeton university high pressure hypersonic nitrogen tunnel N-3. Part I. Facility description. Part II. Calculation of gas characteristics and evaluation of effects of vibrational non-equilibrium. Part III. Preliminary measurements. princeton univ nj gas dynamics lab
Vashchenkov P, Kashkovsky A, Ivanov M (2003) In: AIP conference proceedings, vol 663, pp 226–233. https://doi.org/10.1063/1.1581554
White C, Kontis K (2018) In: International conference on RailNewcastel talks, pp 299–311. Springer, Cham
Wieting AR, Holden MS (1989) Experimental shock-wave interference heating on a cylinder at Mach 6 and 8. AIAA J 27(11):1557. https://doi.org/10.2514/3.10301
Wu Z, Xu Y, Wang W, Hu R (2013) Review of shock wave detection method in CFD post-processing. Chin J Aeronaut 26(3):501. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cja.2013.05.001
Acknowledgements
This work is part of a PhD fully financed by the Agence Nationale de la Recherche for the Project IPROF (IPROF: ANR-19-CE39-0003-01).
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Conflict of interest
The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.
Additional information
Publisher's Note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Cardona, V., Joussot, R. & Lago, V. Shock/shock interferences in a supersonic rarefied flow: experimental investigation. Exp Fluids 62, 135 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00348-021-03225-4
Received:
Revised:
Accepted:
Published:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00348-021-03225-4