Hostname: page-component-8448b6f56d-cfpbc Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-24T08:00:35.762Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

A general buoyancy–drag model for the evolution of the Rayleigh–Taylor and Richtmyer–Meshkov instabilities

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  03 March 2004

YAIR SREBRO
Affiliation:
Department of Physics, Ben-Gurion University, Beer-Sheva, Israel Department of Physics, Nuclear Research Center–Negev, Israel
YONI ELBAZ
Affiliation:
Department of Physics, Ben-Gurion University, Beer-Sheva, Israel Department of Physics, Nuclear Research Center–Negev, Israel
OREN SADOT
Affiliation:
Department of Physics, Nuclear Research Center–Negev, Israel Department of Mechanical Engineering, Ben-Gurion University, Beer-Sheva, Israel
LIOR ARAZI
Affiliation:
School of Physics and Astronomy, Tel-Aviv University, Tel-Aviv, Israel
DOV SHVARTS
Affiliation:
Department of Physics, Ben-Gurion University, Beer-Sheva, Israel Department of Physics, Nuclear Research Center–Negev, Israel Department of Mechanical Engineering, Ben-Gurion University, Beer-Sheva, Israel

Abstract

The growth of a single-mode perturbation is described by a buoyancy–drag equation, which describes all instability stages (linear, nonlinear and asymptotic) at time-dependent Atwood number and acceleration profile. The evolution of a multimode spectrum of perturbations from a short wavelength random noise is described using a single characteristic wavelength. The temporal evolution of this wavelength allows the description of both the linear stage and the late time self-similar behavior. Model results are compared to full two-dimensional numerical simulations and shock-tube experiments of random perturbations, studying the various stages of the evolution. Extensions to the model for more complicated flows are suggested.

Type
Research Article
Copyright
© 2003 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

REFERENCES

Alon, U., Shvarts, D., & Mukamel, D. (1993). Scale invariant regime in Rayleigh–Taylor bubble-front dynamics. Phys. Rev. E 48, 10081014.Google Scholar
Alon, U., & Shvarts, D. (1995). Two phase flow model for RT and RM mixing. Proc. Fifth Int. Workshop on Compressible Turbulent Mixing (Young, D., Climm, J. & Boston, B., Eds.), pp. 1422.
Alon, U., Hecht, J., Ofer, D., & Shvarts, D. (1995). Power Laws and Similarity of Rayleigh-Taylor and Richtmyer-Meshkov Mixing Fronts at All Density Ratios Phys. Rev. Lett. 74, 534537.Google Scholar
Andronov, V.A., Bakhrakh, S.M., Meshkov, E.E., Mokhov, V.N., Nikiforov, V.V., Pevnitskii, A.V., & Tolshmyakov, A.I. (1976). Turbulent mixing at contact surface accelerated by shockwaves. Sov. Phys. JETP 44, 424427.Google Scholar
Arazi, L. (2001). A drag-buoyancy based study of the late time RT and RM scaling laws. M.Sc. Thesis, Tel Aviv, Israel: Tel Aviv University.
Bell, G.I. (1951). Taylor instability on cylinders and spheres in the small amplitude approximation. Report LA-1321, Los Alamos, NM: Los Alamos National Laboratory.
Bodner, S.E. (1974). Rayleigh–Taylor instability and laser-pellet fusion. Phys. Rev. Lett. 33, 761764.Google Scholar
Brouillette, M., & Sturtevant, B. (1989). Growth induced by multiple shock waves normally incident on plane gaseous interfaces. Physica D 37, 248263.Google Scholar
Cheng, B., Glimm, J., & Sharp, D.H. (2000). Density dependence of Rayleigh–Taylor and Richtmyer–Meshkov mixing fronts. Phys. Lett. A 268, 366374.Google Scholar
Dimonte, G. (2000). Spanwise homogeneous buoyancy-drag model for Rayleigh–Taylor mixing and experimental evaluation. Phys. Plasmas 7, 22552269.Google Scholar
Dimonte, G., & Schneider, M. (2000). Density ratio dependence of Rayleigh–Taylor mixing for sustained and impulsive acceleration histories. Phys. Fluids 12, 304321.Google Scholar
Erez, L., Sadot, O., Oron, D., Erez, G., Levin, L.A., Shvarts, D., & Ben-Dor, G. (2000). Study of the membrane effect on turbulent mixing measurements in shock tubes. Shock Waves 10, 241251.Google Scholar
Freed, N., Ofer, D., Shvarts, D., & Orszag, S.O. (1991). Two-phase flow analysis of self-similar turbulent mixing by Rayleigh–Taylor in stability. Phys. Fluids A 3, 912918.Google Scholar
Gauthier, S., & Bonnet, M. (1990). A k-epsilon model for turbulent mixing in shock-tube flows induced by Rayleigh–Taylor instability. Phys. Fluids A 2, 16851694.Google Scholar
Goncharov, V.N. (2002). Analytical model of nonlinear, single-mode, classical Rayleigh–Taylor instability at arbitrary Atwood numbers. Phys. Rev. Lett. 88, 134502-1-4.Google Scholar
Hansom, J.C.V., Rosen, P.A., Goldack, T.J., Oades, K., Fieldhouse, P., Cowperthwaite, N., Youngs, D.L., Nawhinney, N., & Baxter, A.J. (1990). Radiation driven planer foil instability and mix experiments at the AWE HELEN laser. Laser Part. Beams 8, 5171.Google Scholar
Hecht, J., Alon, U., & Shvarts, D. (1994). Potential flow models of Rayleigh–Taylor and Richtmyer–Meshkov bubble fronts. Phys. Fluids 6, 40194030.Google Scholar
Layzer, D. (1955). On the instability of superposed fluids in a gravitational field. Astrophys. J. 122, 112.Google Scholar
Oron, D., Arazi, L., Kartoon, D., Rikanati, A., Alon, U., & Shvarts, D. (2001). Dimensionality dependence of the Rayleigh–Taylor and Richtmyer–Meshkov instability late-time scaling laws. Phys. Plasmas 8, 28832889.Google Scholar
Oron, D., Alon, U., & Shvarts, D. (1998). Scaling laws of the Rayleigh–Taylor ablation front mixing zone evolution in inertial confinement fusion. Phys. Plasmas 5, 14671476.Google Scholar
Plesset, M.S. (1954). On the stability of fluid flows with spherical symmetry. J. Appl. Phys. 25, 9698.Google Scholar
Shvarts, D., Alon, U., Ofer, D., McCrory, R.L., & Verdon, C.P. (1995). Nonlinear evolution of multimode Rayleigh–Taylor instability in two and three dimensions. Phys. Plasmas 2, 24652472.Google Scholar
Youngs, D.L. (1984). Numerical simulation of turbulent mixing by Rayleigh–Taylor instability. Physica D 12, 3244.Google Scholar