Abstract
AbstractInterestingly, the Chapman–Jouguet detonation velocity ($\def \xmlpi #1{}\def \mathsfbi #1{\boldsymbol {\mathsf {#1}}}\let \le =\leqslant \let \leq =\leqslant \let \ge =\geqslant \let \geq =\geqslant \def \Pr {\mathit {Pr}}\def \Fr {\mathit {Fr}}\def \Rey {\mathit {Re}}D_{CJ}$) based on a one-dimensional and steady model compares well with the measured data. For the spinning detonation, in particular, this agreement is particularly notable, since the flow is highly three-dimensional and unsteady; perpendicular to the leading shock front, a transverse detonation wave (TDW) spins periodically. In the wake of this TDW, a secondary flow, called here the cross-current, appears which is orthogonal to the leading shock. Despite the presence of these cross-currents, the $D_{CJ}$ agreement remains remarkably satisfactory, and we investigate the reason for this, for spinning detonation in a tube. First, we focus on the origin of the cross-current. The cross-current, driven by the shock pressure, arises initially across a warped shock frontal surface, and both its sign and magnitude depend on the local slopes of the shock surface. The cross-current undergoes further pressure-driven transitions, with its magnitude eventually diminishing downstream and reducing the flow to a quasi-one-dimensional one. Second, regarding the unsteadiness, under the assumptions that the TDW spins at constant angular wave speed and the flow is steady in the frame rotating with it, the unsteady energy equation becomes integrable, resulting in the invariance of the so-called rothalpy. Also, in the integral forms of the mass and momentum balance, the unsteady terms drop out. Taken together, in the far field the governing equations are reduced to being one-dimensional and steady. From these the $D_{CJ}$ follows immediately, which appears to be the reason for the enduring usefulness of the $D_{CJ}$. The results of the analysis are confirmed with computational fluid dynamics (CFD). Additionally, the area-averaged flow profiles are found to display more than a passing resemblance to the Zeldovitch–Von Neumann–Doering (ZND) model.
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.