Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

A Novel Method to Minimize Secondary Loading in a Closed-End Shock Tube

  • Research Paper
  • Published:
Journal of Dynamic Behavior of Materials Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The development of shock tubes and understanding of shock wave propagation and its interaction with a model is of significant interest in various domains. In this context, shock tubes effectively recreate the field explosion in controlled laboratory conditions and ensure safety, low cost and repeatability. The blast wave simulators (BWS) are operated in a reflective (for barrier wall, blast absorbent material, etc.) and diffractive (for biofidelic head and torso, In-vivo, etc.) mode. The side wall reflections in refractive mode and end wall reflections from the model in reflective mode shock tube cause secondary loading to the model. In this study, a reflection wave eliminator (RWE) with a flap assembly was developed to minimize secondary loading in closed-end shock tubes, and its performances are discussed. As the first cycle of shock wave crosses the RWE, it will open the flap assembly and helps in minimizing the successive cycles of shock waves. The effect of RWE location and the number of flap openings on shock wave parameters, such as positive peak overpressure and impulse, for the case of two different shock tubes length, such as 3.3 m and 5.3 m, has been studied. It was observed that the peak overpressure reduction in the secondary shock wave because of single flap RWE at the model location is 71.31% and 88.12% for 3.3 m and 5.3 m long shock tubes, respectively. The secondary loading of the model in closed-end shock tubes can be significantly reduced by tuning the standard shock tube using the RWE proposed in this study.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8
Fig. 9
Fig. 10
Fig. 11
Fig. 12
Fig. 13

Similar content being viewed by others

Data availability

Data will be made available on request.

References

  1. Vieille P (1899) Sur les discontinuités produites par la détente brusque de gaz comprimés. Comptes Rendus 129(1228):68

    Google Scholar 

  2. Fomin N (2010) 110 years of experiments on shock tubes. J Eng Phys Thermophys 83(6):1118–1135

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Glass I, Patterson G (1955) A theoretical and experimental study of shock-tube flows. J Aeronaut Sci 22(2):73–100

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Ieshkin AE, Danilov A, Chernysh V, Ivanov I, Znamenskaya I (2019) Visualization of supersonic flows with bow shock using transversal discharges. J Vis 22(4):741–750

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Ram O, Geva M, Sadot O (2015) High spatial and temporal resolution study of shock wave reflection over a coupled convex-concave cylindrical surface. J Fluid Mech 768:219–239

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Reshma IT, Vinoth P, Rajesh G, Ben-Dor G (2021) Propagation of a planar shock wave along a convex-concave ramp. J Fluid Mech 924:A37

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. Treanor C, Skinner G (1961) Molecular interactions at high temperatures. Planet Space Sci 3:253–256

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. Downes S, Knott A, Robinson I (2014) Towards a shock tube method for the dynamic calibration of pressure sensors. Philos Trans R Soc A 372(2023):20130299

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Saravanan S, Jagadeesh G, Reddy K (2009) Aerodynamic force measurement using 3-component accelerometer force balance system in a hypersonic shock tunnel. Shock Waves 18(6):425–435

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Tasissa AF, Hautefeuille M, Fitek JH, Radovitzky RA (2016) On the formation of Friedlander waves in a compressed-gas-driven shock tube. Proc R Soc A 472(2186):20150611

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Friedlander FG (1946) The diffraction of sound pulses I. Diffraction by a semi-infinite plane. Proc R Soc Lond Ser A 186(1006):322–344

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  12. Chandra N, Ganpule S, Kleinschmit N, Feng R, Holmberg A, Sundaramurthy A, Selvan V, Alai A (2012) Evolution of blast wave profiles in simulated air blasts: experiment and computational modeling. Shock Waves 22(5):403–415

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Obed Samuelraj I, Jagadeesh G (2018) Shock tubes: a tool to create explosions without using explosives. Blast Mitig Strateg Marine Compos Sandwich Struct 2018:337–356

    Google Scholar 

  14. Kochavi E, Gruntman S, Ben-Dor G, Sherf I, Meirovich E, Amir B, Shushan G, Sadot O (2020) Design and construction of an in-laboratory novel blast wave simulator. Exp Mech 60(8):1149–1159

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Sundaramurthy A, Chandra N (2014) A parametric approach to shape field-relevant blast wave profiles in compressed-gas-driven shock tube. Front Neurol 5:253

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Colombo M, Di Prisco M, Martinelli P (2011) A new shock tube facility for tunnel safety. Exp Mech 51(7):1143–1154

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Panzer MB, Matthews KA, Yu AW, Morrison B III, Meaney DF, Bass CR (2012) A multiscale approach to blast neurotrauma modeling: part I-development of novel test devices for in vivo and in vitro blast injury models. Front Neurol 3:46

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Cernak I, Merkle AC, Koliatsos VE, Bilik JM, Luong QT, Mahota TM, Xu L, Slack N, Windle D, Ahmed FA (2011) The pathobiology of blast injuries and blast-induced neurotrauma as identified using a new experimental model of injury in mice. Neurobiol Dis 41(2):538–551

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Sundaramurthy A, Alai A, Ganpule S, Holmberg A, Plougonven E, Chandra N (2012) Blast-induced biomechanical loading of the rat: an experimental and anatomically accurate computational blast injury model. J Neurotrauma 29(13):2352–2364

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Sundar S, Ponnalagu A (2021) Biomechanical analysis of head subjected to blast waves and the role of combat protective headgear under blast loading: a review. J Biomech Eng 143(10):100801

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Belov E, Blachman M, Britan A, Sadot O, Ben-Dor G (2015) Experimental investigation of the stress wave propagation inside a granular column impacted by a shock wave. Shock Waves 25(6):675–681

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. ASCE: blast protection of buildings, Asce/sei 59-11 edn, pp 1–108 (2011). American Society of Civil Engineers. DOIurlhttps://doi.org/10.1061/9780784411889

  23. Ismail A, Ezzeldin M, El-Dakhakhni W, Tait M (2020) Blast load simulation using conical shock tube systems. Int J Prot Struct 11(2):135–158

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Rigby S, Knighton R, Clarke S, Tyas A (2020) Reflected near-field blast pressure measurements using high speed video. Exp Mech 60(7):875–888

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  25. Isaac O, Jagadeesh G (2020) Impulse loading of plates using a diverging shock tube. Exp Mech 60(4):565–569

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Toutlemonde F, Rossi P, Boulay C, Gourraud C, Guedon D (1995) Dynamic behaviour of concrete: tests of slabs with a shock tube. Mater Struct 28(5):293–298

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  27. Commerford GL, Whittier JS (1970) Uniaxial-strain wave-propagation experiments using shock-tube loading. Exp Mech 10(3):120–126

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Kuriakose M, Skotak M, Misistia A, Kahali S, Sundaramurthy A, Chandra N (2016) Tailoring the blast exposure conditions in the shock tube for generating pure, primary shock waves: the end plate facilitates elimination of secondary loading of the specimen. PLoS ONE 11(9):0161597

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Gan ECJ, Remennikov A, Ritzel D, Uy B (2020) Approximating a far-field blast environment in an advanced blast simulator for explosion resistance testing. Int J Prot Struct 11(4):468–493

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Oakley J, Bonazza R (2004) xt. exe Wisconsin Shock Tube Laboratory (WiSTL) code. University of Wisconsin, Madison

  31. Anderson JD (1990) Modern compressible flow: with historical perspective, vol 12. McGraw-Hill, New York

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

The authors would like to thank the Structural Engineering Laboratory in the Civil Engineering Department, Indian Institute of Technology Madras (IITM), Chennai for this research facility. The authors are grateful to Prof. G Rajesh (Rarefied Gas Dynamics Laboratory, IITM), for fruitful discussions and support. The help received from Mr. M. Vijay Vanaraj and Mr. Janarthanan in conducting the experiments is gratefully acknowledged.

Funding

Funding was provided by Science and Engineering Research Board India (Grant Number SRG/2019/001126).

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Civil Engineering, Indian Institute of Technology Madras, Chennai, Tamil Nadu, 600036, India

    K. Kaviarasu, S. Shyam Sundar & P. Alagappan

Authors
  1. K. Kaviarasu
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. S. Shyam Sundar
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. P. Alagappan
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to P. Alagappan.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper.

Rights and permissions

Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Kaviarasu, K., Sundar, S.S. & Alagappan, P. A Novel Method to Minimize Secondary Loading in a Closed-End Shock Tube. J. dynamic behavior mater. 9, 286–299 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s40870-023-00384-9

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s40870-023-00384-9

Keywords

Search

Navigation