Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-t5tsf Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-17T21:32:31.125Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Flow interactions on supersonic projectiles in transitional ballistic regimes

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  11 May 2020

C. M. Athira ,
G. Rajesh Open the ORCID record for G. Rajesh [Opens in a new window] ,
Sreelal Mohanan  and
Aadhy Parthasarathy
C. M. Athira
Affiliation:
Department of Aerospace Engineering, Indian Institute of Technology Madras, Chennai,Tamil Nadu600036, India
G. Rajesh*
Affiliation:
Department of Aerospace Engineering, Indian Institute of Technology Madras, Chennai,Tamil Nadu600036, India
Sreelal Mohanan
Affiliation:
Department of Aerospace Engineering, Indian Institute of Technology Madras, Chennai,Tamil Nadu600036, India
Aadhy Parthasarathy
Affiliation:
Department of Aerospace Engineering, Indian Institute of Technology Madras, Chennai,Tamil Nadu600036, India
*
†Email address for correspondence: rajesh@ae.iitm.ac.in
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

A projectile moving in the transitional/intermediate ballistic regime encounters many complex flow phenomena as the flow field contains two blast waves and several flow interfaces. The aerodynamic characteristics of the projectile are highly influenced by the interaction of the projectile with the surrounding flow field. The present study aims to experimentally visualize the flow structures associated with a moving projectile in the immediate vicinity of the launch tube (transitional/intermediate ballistic regime). In this work, the main focus is to investigate three significant phenomena which normally occur in the transitional ballistic regime and have significant effects on the aerodynamic characteristics of the projectile. These are the moving projectile-standing shock interaction termed as unsteady shock diffraction, shock generation due to the transition in the relative projectile Mach number and the moving projectile-moving shock interaction known as the projectile overtaking phenomenon. Experiments are carried out with projectiles of various configurations for various projectile Mach numbers. The flow field is visualized using time-resolved schlieren and shadowgraph flow visualization techniques. The experiments could capture several interesting features of projectile-flow interactions such as the unsteady shock diffraction, shock generation and overtaking phenomenon in various flow regimes through visualization and quantification of the images using image processing techniques.

JFM classification

Compressible Flows: Shock waves Aerodynamics: High-speed flow
Type
JFM Papers
Information
Journal of Fluid Mechanics , Volume 894 , 10 July 2020 , A27
Copyright
© The Author(s), 2020. Published by Cambridge University Press

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Ahmadikia, H. & Shirani, E. 2005 Transonic and supersonic overtaking of a projectile preceding a shock wave. J. Adhes. Sci. Technol. 2 (4), 45–53.Google Scholar
Ben-Dor, G. 2007 Shock Wave Reflection Phenomena, 2nd edn. Springer.Google Scholar
Biele, J. K. 1984 The relationship of gun dynamics to accuracy in a 120 mm tank gun. In Proceedings of the 8th International Symposium on Ballistics. American Defense Preparedness Association.Google Scholar
Erline, T. F. & Hathaway, A. F.1999 Dispersion analysis of the xm881 armor-piercing, fin-stabilized, discarding sabot (apfsds) projectile. Tech. Rep. Army Research Lab, MD.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gay, H. P. & Elder, A. S.1959 The lateral motion of a tank gun and its effect on the accuracy of fire. US Army Ballistic Research Lab., BRL Rep. 1070.Google Scholar
Jiang, Z. 2003 Wave dynamic processes induced by a supersonic projectile discharging from a shock tube. Phys. Fluids 15 (6), 1665–1675.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jiang, Z.-L., Takayama, K. & Skews, B. W. 1998 Numerical study on blast flow fields induced by supersonic projectiles discharged from shock tubes. Phys. Fluids 10 (1), 277–288.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Law, C., Felthun, L. T. & Skews, B. W. 2003 Two-dimensional numerical study of planar shock-wave/moving-body interactions. Part i. Plane shock-on-shock interactions. Shock Waves 13 (5), 381–394.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Law, C. & Skews, B. W. 2003 Two-dimensional numerical study of planar shock-wave/moving-body interactions. Part ii. Non-classical shock-wave/moving-body interactions. Shock Waves 13 (5), 395–408.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Murphy, C. H.1963 Free flight motion of symmetric missiles. Tech. Rep. Army Research Lab, MD.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Muthukumaran, C. K., Rajesh, G. & Kim, H. D. 2013 Launch dynamics of supersonic projectiles. J. Spacecr. Rockets 50 (6), 1150–1161.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Plostins, P., Bornstein, J. A. & White, C. O.1988 The transitional ballistics, aeroballistics and jump characteristics of a 25 mm-ap training projectile with base bleed. Tech. Rep. Army Research Lab, MD.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rajesh, G., Kim, H. D. & Setoguchi, T. 2008 Projectile aerodynamics overtaking a shock wave. J. Spacecr. Rockets 45 (6), 1251–1261.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rajesh, G., Kim, H. D., Setoguchi, T. & Raghunathan, S. 2007 Performance analysis and enhancement of the ballistic range. Proc. Inst. Mech. Engrs 221 (5), 649–659.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Skews, B. W. 1967 The perturbed region behind a diffracting shock wave. J. Fluid Mech. 29 (4), 705–719.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Skews, B. W. 2005 Shock wave diffraction on multi-facetted and curved walls. Shock Waves 14 (3), 137–146.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Soencksen, K., Newill, J. & Plostins, P. 2000 Aerodynamics of the 120 mm m831a1 projectile-analysis of free-flight experimental data. Atmospheric Flight Mechanics Conference, p. 4198. AIAA.Google Scholar
Sun, M. & Takayama, K. 1997 The formation of a secondary shock wave behind a shock wave diffracting at a convex corner. Shock Waves 7 (5), 287–295.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Watanabe, R., Fujii, K. & Higashino, F. 1995 Numerical simulation of the flow around a projectile passing through a shock wave. 13th Applied Aerodynamics Conference. p. 1790. AIAA.Google Scholar
Weinacht, P., Newill, J. F. & Conroy, P. J.2005 Conceptual design approach for small-caliber aeroballistics with application to 5.56 mm ammunition. Tech. Rep. Army Research Lab, MD.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zhang, H.-H., Aubry, N., Chen, Z.-H., Wu, W.-T. & Sha, S. 2019 The evolution of the initial flow structures of a highly under-expanded circular jet. J. Fluid Mech. 871, 305–331.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zhou, Y. 2017 Rayleigh–Taylor and richtmyermeshkov instability induced flow, turbulence, and mixing. I. Phys. Rep. 720–722, 1–136; Rayleigh–Taylor and Richtmyer–Meshkov instability induced flow, turbulence, and mixing. I.Google Scholar
Zielinski, A. E., Weinacht, P., Webb, D. W. & Soencksen, K. P.1997 An investigation of the ballistic performance for an electromagnetic gun-launched projectile. Tech. Rep. Army Research Lab, MD.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Athira et al. supplementary movie 1

Unsteady shock diffraction and interaction of secondary blast wave (corresponding to test-7 in table 1 and figure 8 in the manuscript).

Download Athira et al. supplementary movie 1(Video)
Video 2.5 MB

Athira et al. supplementary movie 2

Shock formation in front of the projectile due to change in relative Mach number as it passes through the diffusing contact surface (corresponding to test-31 in table 1 and figure 13 in the manuscript)

Download Athira et al. supplementary movie 2(Video)
Video 1.4 MB

Athira et al. supplementary movie 3

Projectile overtaking phenomenon (corresponding to test-21 in table 1 and figure 21 in the manuscript)

Download Athira et al. supplementary movie 3(Video)
Video 528.4 KB