Shock Waves (2012) 22:307316
DOI 10.1007/s00193-012-0373-z
ORIGINAL ARTICLE
Classification of pseudo-steady shock wave reflection types
A. N. Semenov M. K. Berezkina I. V. Krassovskaya
Received: 6 April 2011 / Revised: 5 March 2012 / Accepted: 23 March 2012 / Published online: 12 May 2012
Springer-Verlag 2012
Abstract Classification of various types of the reflections
of a shock wave over a straight wedge is proposed. The idea
about entire reflection phenomenon as a result of interaction
of two processesthe shock wave reflection process and the
flow deflection processserves as a basis for the classifi-
cation. To recognize the types of reflection, changes in the
shapes of the reflected wave, Mach stem, and contact sur-
face (slipstream) are taken into account. The boundaries and
domains of existence for various types of reflection config-
uration are reported. New terms for some types of reflection
are proposed. The domain of irregular non-Mach reflection is
analyzed carefully. It is shown that the von Neumann reflec-
tion pattern can result from not only the weak shock reflec-
tion but also the strong shock reflection over thin wedges.
Shadowgraph images of different types of irregular reflec-
tion that illustrate the suggested classification are presented.
Emphasis is placed on near-wall behavior of the contact dis-
continuity in the Mach configuration.
Keywords Shock reflection Flow deflection
Pseudo-steady flow Shadowgraph
1 Introduction
In the 130 years of extensive investigation of shock waves,
attempts to classify reflection types have been undertaken
Communicated by B. W. Skews.
A. N. Semenov: Deceased.
A. N. Semenov M. K. Berezkina I. V. Krassovskaya (B)
Ioffe Physico-Technical Institute, Russian Academy of Sciences,
Politekhnicheskaya ul. 26, St. Petersburg 194021, Russia
e-mail: i.kras@mail.ioffe.ru
many times. Mach [1] was the first to discover the effect
of reflection and reported two types of reflections. Regular
reflection results in a two-shock configuration, and a three-
shock structure results from a reflection that was called the
Mach reflection. Later, von Neumann [2] formulated two-
and three-shock theories of reflection. He also put forward the
idea that reflection can be both regular and irregular (in con-
trast to the regular one) and that the Mach reflection is a type
of irregular reflection. Von Neumann qualitatively described
the type of irregular reflection and had no hesitation in term-
ing it as the non-Mach reflection. Subsequently, the latter
type was named the von Neumann reflection [3,4].
Courant and Friedrichs [5] theoretically showed that the
Mach reflection, in turn, could be divided into three types
depending on the direction of motion of the triple point. They
distinguished three types of reflection: single Mach reflec-
tion (with the triple point moving away from the surface),
stationary Mach reflection (the triple point moves parallel
to the surface) and inverse Mach reflection (the triple point
moves toward the surface). It should be noted that a gasdy-
namic sense of the above-mentioned configurations was not
analyzed; therefore, the question of whether they all can be
referred to, as reflections remained unclear.
As new more complex configurations with additional
gasdynamic discontinuities in the reflected shock were dis-
covered, they received the names: transitional-Mach reflec-
tion, double-Mach reflection, and terminal double-Mach
reflection.
Taking into account that the shock wave reflection phe-
nomenon has principal differences in steady, unsteady, and
pseudo-steady flows, in the present paper, we confine our-
selves to consideration of the pseudo-steady process. In this
case, the entire process of interaction of a shock wave with a
wedge is a combination of two sub-processes: the reflection
of the incident wavefront from an inclined surface and the
123
308 A. N. Semenov et al.

incident shock-induced flow deflection around the leading

edge of the reflecting wedge. The idea was first put forward by
Law [6] and later was elaborated upon by Semenov and Sys-
hchikova [7]. They considered the isolated shock front reflec-
tion and flow deflection processes and, taking into account the
combined influence of each other, distinguished the reflec-
tion types with radically differing properties. Applying this
concept to all known types of reflection, Semenov [8] sug-
gested a classification containing nine types of the shock
wave reflection. Unfortunately, the work was published in
Russian (in an in-house collection of works) and so was not
available for a wide range of researchers.
Ben-Dor [9] in his review concerning the pseudo-steady
shock wave reflections suggests the following classification:

regular reflection RR,

von Neumann reflection vNR,
single-Mach reflection SMR,
transitional-Mach reflection TMR,
double-Mach reflection DMR.
In his classification, the reflection types vNR, SMR, TMR,
and DMR are differentiated by the shape of the reflected sig-
nal. He also takes into account the interaction between the
shock wave reflection process and the flow deflection process
[911], but considers only an influence of a band of compres-
sion disturbances emanating from a leading edge of a wedge
on the structure of the reflection configuration.
The present work pursues the investigation initiated in [8].
An attempt is made to summarize the results of the long-time
investigation on shock wave reflection in pseudo-steady flow
in order to classify the reflection types from a common view-
point. With the help of the boundaries for the shock reflection
and flow deflection, the domains of the initial parameters,
where the different reflection types are possible, are deter-
mined. A new term for the configuration with the additional
triple point on the Mach stem is suggested. The configura-
tions with two and three triple points are considered in detail.
Special attention is paid to the behavior of the contact discon-
tinuity. The direct shadowgraph images of different reflection
types are given to illustrate the proposed classification.
2 Boundaries and domains of reflection types
Whereas the specific features of the different configurations
of Mach reflection are caused by the mutual influence of
shock reflection and flow deflection processes, it is necessary
to clarify what kind of pressure pulse (compression or rare-
faction) comes to the triple point of the main Mach configu-
ration from the leading edge of the wedge and also whether
the pressure pulse can reach the mentioned triple point. This
analysis should be made with the help of main boundaries for
shock reflection and flow deflection processes. These bound-
Fig. 1 Boundaries and domains of the different reflection types in the
(, )-plane for perfect CO2 ( = 1.29)
aries in the (, )-plane are shown in Fig. 1 for gas with
= 1.29. Here, , , and are the angle of a wedge, the
density ratio across an incident shock wave and gas-specific
heat ratio, respectively. The value is related to a Mach num-
ber of an incident shock wave Ms through
Ms 2 = (n 1) /(n ),
where n = ( +1)/( 1) is the limiting value of the density
ratio across the shock front. For the purpose of convenience,
Ms is plotted on the upper abscissa.
The two-shock theory of a regular reflection gives bound-
ary E, which divides the (, )-plane into two sub-domains:
regular reflection (above line E) and irregular (not neces-
sarily Mach) reflection (under line E). Line E has extreme
point e. The tangent f e to curve E determines the domain
(a f eta) of the anomalous regular reflection aRR. The spe-
cific feature of a aRR is that the pressure of oblique regular
reflection exceeds the pressure of normal reflection.
Before proceeding to the description of the specific bound-
aries of Mach reflection, some remarks about the three-
shock theory have to be done. The simplest model of Mach
reflection was considered both by von Neumann [2] and by
Cabannes [12]. Von Neumann proposed the local (differen-
tial) theory of three-shock configuration regardless the reason
of its origination. Cabannes gave full (closed) theory of Mach
reflection of a moving shock wave from a wedge. The main
assumption of the Cabannes theory was the postulate that a
rectilinear along its whole length Mach stem is perpendicu-
lar to the reflecting surface. The von Neumann three-shock
theory is valid in the small vicinity of the triple point of a
three-shock configuration. The Cabannes theory describes
the flow in the finite domain of the reflection. The basic

123
Classification of pseudo-steady shock wave reflection types
difference between the two theories is that Cabanness the-
ory, unlike the Neumanns, makes it possible to calculate the
length of the Mach stem. However, from the mathematical
point of view, both theories are equivalent to each other and
the formal difference is that the given and unknown variables
swap places. In the present paper, the Cabannes three-shock
theory was used for describing the flow field of the pseudo-
steady shock wave reflection.
The three-shock theory of the pseudo-steady Mach reflec-
tion predicts two (B and C) boundaries (Fig. 1). They
divide the solution domain into three sub-domains, which
are distinct from each other in directivity of the shocks of
three-shock configuration. Above line B, the configurations
contain two incoming shocks propagating in the opposite
directions and one outgoing shock. Between lines B and C,
the configurations contain one incoming and two outgoing
shocks. The point b is the extreme point of line B, t is the
point of tangency with the boundary E, and s is the sonic
point. Line C marks off the domain of the Mach reflection
from the domain where two co-propagating shocks collide,
merging into one resulting shock wave. The domain under
line C can be referred to as domain of irregular non-Mach
reflection. Line S and line S1 correspond to sonic flow behind
the reflected shock of the three-shock configuration with
respect to the triple point T . The flow is supersonic above S
and below S1 . Between lines S and S1 , the flow is subsonic.
Along with boundary E, the theory of the regular reflec-
tion predicts another boundary. This is boundary U separat-
ing the subsonic and supersonic flows behind the incident
shock in the frame of reference attached to the point where
the incident shock front touches the surface of the wedge. In
Fig. 2, schematic illustration of the reason for planar shock
wave reflection in pseudo-steady flows is shown. Here, the
flow states ahead and behind an incident shock are denoted
by (0) and (1), respectively. R is the reflection point; M1R is
the Mach number of the flow behind an incident shock with
respect to the point R. When the flow behind the incident
shock is subsonic in a frame of reference to the point R, the
flow should continuously turn to negotiate the wedge surface
without any reflection wave (Fig. 2a). Hence, the irregular
reflection cannot result in appearance of a reflected shock
wave. If the flow behind the incident shock is supersonic,
the flow deflection will be achieved by either an attached or
detached shock wave, which will form either a two-shock
or a three-shock reflection configuration (Fig. 2b). First, an
attention to the domain of the initial reflection parameters
where a flow behind an incident shock wave is subsonic was
drawn by Ben-Dor [10]. Because neither shock nor expan-
sion can arise in the subsonic flow, this domain was defined as
NO REFLECTION domain. The boundary U gives indica-
tion of some properties of the irregular (not necessary Mach)
reflection and it will be used at an analysis of the irregular
non-Mach reflection domain lying under line C.
309
a b
Fig. 2 Schematic illustration of the reason for shock wave reflection
in pseudo-steady flows: a M1R < 1, b M1R > 1
The flow around the leading edge can be either subsonic or
supersonic (V is the boundary between subsonic and super-
sonic one in the laboratory coordinate system). If the flow is
supersonic, an attached or detached bow shock forms over
the leading edge of the wedge. Line A separates the regions
where bow shocks attach to and detach from the leading edge
of the wedge.
As it is seen in Fig. 1, the domains of the irregular
and Mach reflections (at E za and it BzCnmi, respectively)
do not coincide. Surprisingly, the domain of Mach reflec-
tion embraces two characteristic sub-domains (ibtdi and
th B Eet) of regular reflection; therefore, the question of
reflection duality arises at certain values of key parameters. It
seems that the former sub-domain ibtdi, which entirely falls
into the range of small Mach numbers, has not been studied
comprehensively; it may have been completely ignored. Per-
haps, the reason is that, the Mach reflection in this range
exhibits an ambiguous property: in the case considered,
reflected shock waves are waves of the strong family. It is the
only difference between the domain ibtdi and the domain
dtskV nmd (cyan-shaded area) of the proper Mach reflec-
tion. A remarkable property of the domain ibtdi is that it is
entirely embedded in sub-domain a f eta of the anomalous
regular reflection. The latter sub-domain of duality th B Eet
is the focus of intensive research. In the case of pseudo-steady
processes, the regular reflection is established in sub-domain
th B Eet, while in the case of nonstationary processes, either
an RR or an MR will be established in the dual solutions
sub-domain, depending on the pre-history [1322].
3 Analysis of various types of Mach reflection
Figure 3 represents the schematic illustration of the various
types of pseudo-steady shock wave reflection. It is based on
both experimental and numerical data [8,10,11,21]. Here, I
and R are the incident and reflected waves, respectively; M
is the Mach stem, C is the contact discontinuity, T is the
main triple point, t R and t M are additional triple points,
is the angle of incidence of the shock wave on the surface,
123
310
a b
c d
e f
g h
i j
k l
Fig. 3 Schematic illustration of the various shock wave reflection
configurations
123
A. N. Semenov et al.
is the angle of the wedge, and is the angle of incidence of
the shock wave on the trajectory of triple point T . Figure 3a
illustrates a regular reflection configuration RR. In Fig. 3b,
the configuration of glancing incidence GlR is shown. In this
case, R is a circle of the sonic signal. This model is not the
limiting case of the three-shock theory but it is constructed
on the basis of simple gasdynamic grounds. In Fig. 1, the az
axis corresponds to this reflection pattern. It should be noted
that the real process of the reflection of weak shock waves
from small wedges is very well described by the GlR model
[23]. The various types of the Mach reflection are given in
Fig. 3cj. Recall that in Fig. 1, the domain of a Mach reflec-
tion lies between boundaries B and C where the elementary
theory of three-shock configurations gives the solutions with
one incoming and two outgoing shocks. In order to describe
the types of the pseudo-steady Mach reflection and deter-
mine its special properties, it is necessary to find out what
kind of a pressure pulse (compression or rarefaction) ema-
nates from the vicinity of the leading edge of the wedge to
the triple point and also to check whether this signal may
catch up to the triple point. Necessary analysis was carried
out using the sonic boundary for the reflected shock (line S,
Fig. 1) and the sonic boundary for the incident shock (line
V , Fig. 1). Within this approach, we distinguish between the
following types of interaction between shock reflection pro-
cess and flow deflection process: (i) pure subsonic, (ii) hybrid
subsonicsupersonic, (iii) hybrid supersonicsubsonic, and
(iv) pure supersonic.
In the case of the pure subsonic interaction (cyan-shaded
area dskV nmd), the flow is subsonic both behind the
reflected wave and around the leading edge of the wedge. In
such a regime, the rarefaction pulse, emitted from the lead-
ing edge toward the triple point T , easily reaches this point.
As a result, the reflection pattern is distorted: all discontinu-
ities in the three-shock configuration are curved. Attention
should be paid to the fact, that the reflected wave is convex
but the Mach stem is concave relative to their motion direc-
tion. Schematic illustration of this type is given in Fig. 3c.
Since this type of reflection was first detected by Smith [22],
it would be appropriate to call it a single MachSmith reflec-
tion SMSR.
A specific feature of the hybrid subsonicsupersonic inter-
action observed in sub-domain kshgk (light peach-shaded
area) is that the flow behind the reflected wave moves with a
supersonic velocity relative to the triple point; therefore, none
of the perturbations originating at the leading edge of the
wedge can catch up to the triple point. In sub-domain kshgk,
the rarefaction pulse acts as such a perturbation. The reflec-
tion pattern under these conditions is depicted in Fig. 3d. The
given type of reflection gets in line with the idealized con-
sideration of this process to the greatest extent and can be
named the single MachCabannes reflection SMCR.
Classification of pseudo-steady shock wave reflection types
In the case of supersonicsubsonic interaction (sub-
domain k Sznklight green-shaded area), the compression
pulse from the leading edge of the wedge easily catches up
to the triple point and distorts the reflection configuration.
Under these conditions, all gasdynamic discontinuities are
curved throughout their length (see Fig. 3e). Today, it is
believed that a slipstream rolls up into a spiral vortex under
the action of the compression pulse [10,24]. In this paper, we
suggest the hypothesis that this behavior of the slipstream
is not related to vortex formation. The compression pulse
makes the near-wall part of the slipstream curl forward. To
maintain the separation between the gas from the flow deflec-
tion region and the gas behind the Mach stem, the slipstream
curls back with the end perpendicular to the reflecting sur-
face. The reflection type observed in the sub-domain k Sznk
can be termed as single MachWhite reflection SMWR.
The pure supersonic interaction (domain kgh B Skboth
peach- and green-shaded area) is notable for the fact that
the compression pulse emitted from the leading edge of the
reflecting wedge cannot reach the triple point. It is possible
to assume that the lines kgh and k S which are the parts of
the sonic boundaries V and S, correspond to the initial con-
ditions under which the type of reflection with a kink k on
the reflected wave forms. Between a kink and the triple point
the reflected wave is straight. This configuration is termed
as transitional-Mach reflectionTMRand is shown sche-
matically in Fig. 3f. Inside the domain kgh B Sk, the com-
pression pulse may give rise to a shock wave in the flow
behind the reflected shock wave. As a result, an additional
triple point appears on the reflected shock front. It is neces-
sary to find out whether this shock wave shields the vicinity
of the triple point from extraneous influences partially or
completely. One can expect that pseudo-steady Mach reflec-
tions in domain kgh B Sk differ considerably at large and at
small angles of a wedge, and this difference is due to the
above features of interference in hybrid domains kshgk and
k Sznk. Therefore, having divided domain kgh B Sk by a hor-
izontal line L into two sub-domains, one can hope to observe
different types of interaction in them.
Sub-domain k L Sk (green-shaded area) of the pure super-
sonic interaction and domain k Sznk of hybrid interaction
border on one another. In the latter, interference of local pro-
cesses of shock reflection and flow deflection causes defor-
mation of the slipstream. This means that the additional shock
behind the reflected wave in domain k L Sk usually arises
after the contact discontinuity has already formed (Fig. 3g);
in other words, the additional shock incompletely protects
the reflection region from the extraneous influence of the
flow around the leading edge, allowing this influence to
penetrate into the near-wall zone of the flow. The type of
the pseudo-steady Mach reflection observed in sub-domain
k L Sk can be termed as double MachWhite reflection
DMWR, since this type of reflection was first observed
311
in Whites experiments [25]. As the intensity of the incident
shock grows, the influence of the process of flow deflection
may become so significant that not only the contact disconti-
nuity but also the Mach stem of the main Mach configuration
curves up to arising of a kink and formation of a triple point
t M (Fig. 3i). This type of reflection can be referred to as the
triple MachWhite reflection TMWR.
Sub-domain kgh B Lk (peach-shaded area) of the pure
supersonic interaction is adjacent to domain kshgk of the
hybrid interaction. In the former, the MachCabannes reflec-
tion is observed. This means that, in comparison with the
pattern in the domain kshgk, the Mach reflection pattern in
the domain kgh B Lk will have new features: a new shock
and second triple point t R will form. The second triple point
will generate a new slipstream. The slipstream in the main
three-shock configuration remains undisturbed. This type of
reflection will be referred to as a double MachCabannes
reflection (DMCR, Fig. 3h).
Since pseudo-steady Mach reflections in two neighbor-
ing domains kshgk and kgh B Lk exhibit a number of com-
mon properties, these two domains can be combined into
a single one. One can call the reflection in the combined
domain sh B Lks the MachCabannes reflection, discrimi-
nating between the SMCR and DMCR. In experiments
[26,27], the type of reflection shown in Fig. 3j was reported.
Lee and Glass [27] classified this type of reflection as the
terminal double Mach reflectionTDMR (the case when
the second triple point is very nearly to the reflecting sur-
face). Such a reflection was observed in gases with a complex
molecular structure, that is, in gases with a low value of gas
specific heat ratio , such as Freon-12 or sulfur hexafluoride
SF6 and for the high Mach numbers of the incident shocks.
4 Analysis of the domain of irregular non-Mach
reflection
As seen in Fig. 1, the domain of Mach reflection does not
span extended domain admnza of an irregular reflection, for
which the type of reflection under real conditions remains
uncertain. For weak shock waves and small wedges, the
experiments showed that the MR-like phenomena exist. Von
Neumann was the first who found and described qualitatively
a particular type of an irregular reflection, which he called as
non-Mach one. This disagreement between theory and exper-
imental results is referred to as the von Neumann paradox,
and the reflection type as von Neumann reflection (vNR).
Recall that in the domain admnza under line C the theory
gives the solutions, which describe the irregular regime of
two co-propagating shocks collision but not the regime of
a shock reflection and, consequently, there are no grounds
to expect any agreement between the theory and experimen-
tal data. Therefore, the first rather general conclusion can be
123
312
made that the von Neumann paradox has to be detected in the
domain under line C. To answer the question about the failure
of the three-shock theory to describe correctly the real reflec-
tion process, it is necessary to analyze the part of the domain
of Mach reflection (cyan-shaded area) under line S. Here,
the subsonic flow zone in the vicinity of the triple point may
already experience a distorting influence of the flow over the
leading edge of a wedge, therefore in the considered domain,
we should inevitably expect an increasing (as one goes off
line S) disagreement between theory and experiment. This
theoryexperiment disagreement means that in the consid-
ered domain, the basic assumption about a Mach stem (rec-
tilinear along its whole length Mach stem is perpendicular to
the reflecting surface) is violated and a Mach stem must be
bent more and more with distance from line S. As soon as we
cross line C to get into the domain under it, we have to state
that under these conditions the theory has nothing in com-
mon with the real reflection process because here we deal
with a perfectly different phenomenonthe process of two
co-propagating shocks collision. Continue the analysis and
direct our attention to the sonic boundary U . It divides the
domain admnza into two parts. In the sub-domain amnza
(magenta-shaded area), there is a flow over the edge of a
wedge accompanied by the process of reflected wave forma-
tion as a result of the instantaneous turn of the subsonic flow
from its direction behind the incident shock wave along the
surface (see Fig. 2a). There is no sense to expect any agree-
ment between theory and experiment; in other words, one
can state that in this domain the reflection does not have its
elementary theory. The question is which of the three-shock
theory assumptions makes it principally invalid for descrip-
tion of the real reflection process? On the basis of our own and
other experimental date and theoretical results, we arrive at
the conclusion that under certain conditions the basic axiom
of the Cabannes theory, i.e. the assumption that all waves are
shocks turns out to be invalid and the reflected wave can be
a simple (isentropic) compression wave.
Semenov [3] proposed the pseudo-steady model of irregu-
lar non-Mach reflection with the PrandtlMeyer compression
fan as a reflected wave. The specific features of the proposed
model are the following:
1. Instead of the wave fracture at the triple point there is a
finite portion of the wavefront where the front smoothly
deviates through angle (angle of the reflecting wedge).
2. From the curved shock wave portion, the characteristics
emanate to form the centered simple compression wave.
3. Instead of the slipstream there is the extended isobaric
zone with variable enthropy.
4. The contact zone narrows toward the wedge surface.
It was proposed to call this configuration the von Neu-
mann reflection pattern. The schematic illustration of the von
123
A. N. Semenov et al.
Neumann configuration (vNR) is given in Fig. 3k. Colella and
Henderson [4] carried out both the high-resolution numeri-
cal and experimental study of reflection under von Neumann
paradox conditions. They also hypothesized that there are
cases in which instead of a reflected shock a compression
wave appears in the vicinity of the shock confluence.
Another approach to the problem of the von Neumann
paradox of a weak shock reflection is developed in [2837].
Vasilev and Kraiko [28], following Guderleys idea [38],
proposed a four-wave reflection pattern, consisting of three
shocks and a centered expansion fan. Skews and Ashworth
[33] made an attempt to confirm the existence of the four-
wave configuration experimentally. They argue that high-res-
olution experiments have shown the existence of a small flow
structure with an expansion wave behind the reflected shock
wave. But it is quite difficult to give an unambiguous inter-
pretation of the schlieren pictures. At any rate, it is fair to say
that this question still remains obscure. It should be note that,
when a strong shock wave reflects off a small wedge angle,
the vNR pattern is also generated. This fact was demonstrated
by the numerical results ([39]).
In the sub-domain adma above line U (light cyan-shaded
area), as it was mentioned above, an irregular reflection can
give rise to a reflected shock wave (see Fig. 2b). In this
sub-domain, the solutions of three-shock theory describe
not reflection but perfectly different phenomenon because
the configurations contain an incoming shock wave as a
reflected one. Taking into consideration that an incoming
shock with a subsonic flow behind its front is equivalent to
outgoing one, it would appear reasonable that these solutions
of three-shock theory with such incoming reflected waves
might be referred to as the solutions of reflection. There-
fore, in the sub-domain adma, the reflection configuration
will be the same the single MachSmith reflection type but
differs in the angles between incident and reflected shocks.
The schematic illustration of this configuration that could be
preliminary termed as weak Single MachSmith reflection
wSMSRis given in Fig. 3l.
5 Results and discussion
Figure 4 shows the shadowgraph images illustrating a vari-
ety of the reflection types. The experiments were carried
out at different times on the Ioffe Physico-Technical Insti-
tute (Russian Academy of Sciences) 5 15 cm shock tube
by M.P. Syshchikova, A.N. Semenov and M.K. Berezkina.
Carbon dioxide, nitrogen and Freon-12 at the initial pres-
sures 20 < po < 100 kPa were used as the test gas. The
initial temperature T0 was about 293 K. The flow pictures
were recorded using the simple shadowgraph method (with-
out optics). The spark discharge in the xenon flash lamp was
used as a light source (for the technique used, see [24]).
Classification of pseudo-steady shock wave reflection types 313

Fig. 4 Shadowgraph images of

the different types of the
irregular (Mach, von Neumann)
reflection: a CO2 ,
= 10 , Ms = 1.23,
p = 101,574 Pa; b CO2 ,
= 15 , Ms = 1.83,
p = 78,647 Pa; c CO2 ,
= 45 , Ms = 1.96,
p = 66,650 Pa; d CO2 ,
= 15 , Ms = 2.18,
p = 101,574 Pa; e CO2 ,
= 45 , Ms = 2.39,
p = 101,574 Pa; f CCl2 F2 ,
= 15 , Ms = 3.84,
p = 39,990 Pa; g CCl2 F2 ,
= 45 , Ms = 4.09,
p = 26,660 Pa and h
CCl2 F2 , = 15 ,
Ms = 4.94, p = 26,660 Pa

The image of the vNR is shown in Fig. 4a. Its distinc-
tions are: absence of apparent discontinuity in slope between
the incident wave and the Mach stem and, as we believe,
appearance of compression wave as a reflected signal. A
pro-argument of this suggestion is the optical image of the
reflected wave, which is registered as a gray washed-out
stripe. It differs greatly from the optical image of the inci-
dent shock wave. It is known that a shock wave registered
by shadow method, is depicted as distinct white-black stripe,
whose structure does not change in time. Our experiments
show that the optical image of the reflected wave smears
out over time and, under the given sensitivity of the opti-
cal scheme, becomes gradually invisible. On the base of the
above-mentioned remark, the conclusion may be done that,
in this case, a compression wave but not a shock wave occurs
as the reflected signal.

123
314 A. N. Semenov et al.

The images of the single Mach reflections (Fig. 4bd) a t=4.5

differ in the curvature of the shock waves and contact dis- 2.5 T
continuities. The three-shock configuration SMCR shown
in Fig. 4c features shock waves that are rectilinear through- 0.17
out the length and a rectilinear contact discontinuity; that is, C 0.16
it conforms to the idealized pattern of shock wave reflection 2
SR 0.15
0.14
from a ramp. The SMSR (Fig. 4b) and SMWR (Fig. 4d) 0.14
differ not only in the shock wave curvature, but also in the 0.13

y
behavior of the contact discontinuity. In the former, the con- 0.12
0.12
tact discontinuity is stable throughout the length but curves 1.5
0.11
from the Mach stem; in the latter, the contact discontinu- 0.10
ity becomes unstable and its near-wall part turns toward the C 0.09
Mach stem. 0.09
1 0.08
Comparing the flow patterns for the DMCR (Fig. 4e) and 0.07
DMWR (Fig. 4f), one can see that these types of reflection 2.5 3 3.5 4
differ largely in the effect of the compression pulse emanating x
from the edge of the wedge on the reflection configuration.
In the former case, an additional shock wave nearly com-
b t=4.5
1.6
pletely protects the region of reflection from the influence of
the compression pulse, so that the slipstream remains almost
undistorted (except for in a very narrow zone at the surface
1.5
of the wedge). In Fig. 4e, it is seen that the additional shock
does not reach the reflecting wall and the near-wall part of
the main slipstream smoothly passes into the surface of the
y

wedge.
In the case of the DMWR, the additional shock wave pro-
tects much smaller zone around the main triple point (Fig. 4f).
The unprotected part of the slipstream spirals near the wall.
It has been believed so far, that a compression pulse causes
the slipstream to roll up into a large-scale vortex [10,24].
To gain a deeper insight into the behavior of the slip-
stream near the wedge surface, we performed a series of
computations with the use of the solver [40] intended for
integration of the Euler equations. The simulation method
is based on the Godunov quasi-monotonic scheme of higher
order of approximation with the use of unstructured grids
with local dynamic adaptation to flow inhomogeneities. The
results of numerical simulation for the initial conditions
= 15 , Ms = 4.0, = 1.13 are shown in Fig. 5a, b. The
temperature field with imposed instantaneous streamlines
are given in Fig. 5a. The image is typical of the DMWR.
Additional shock S R , which can be considered as a bound-
ary between the region of reflection and the region of the
incident shock induced flow deflection, protects a vicinity
of the triple point only partially. The compression pulse dis-
torts the unprotected part of the slipstream. It is clearly seen
that slipstream becomes s-shaped near the wall and the end
of the contact discontinuity is perpendicular to the reflect-
ing wall. As follows from the streamline pattern, circulation
near the distorted part of the slipstream is absent. Figure 5b
presents the enlarged fragment of the temperature field with
the imposed velocity vectors. The velocity vectors also dem-
onstrate an absence of the circular motion.
1.4
1.3
3.4 3.5 3.6 3.7 3.8
x
Fig. 5 DM-WR computed pattern, = 15 , Ms = 4.00, = 1.13:
a temperature distribution, instantaneous streamlines; b enlarged frag-
ment with velocity vectors
One more shadowgraph flow pattern of the DMWR
obtained for = 30 , Ms = 4.56 and = 1.4 is shown
in Fig. 6. The slipstream originating at the triple point T
is depicted as a white-black stripe. Taking into account the
mutual position of the stripes along the length of the slip-
stream, it is possible to conclude that the slipstream does not
roll up into the spiral but folds and unfolds with the end per-
pendicular to the reflecting surface. At closer examination,
the same may be seen in the image of the DMWR given in
Fig. 4f.
The configuration shown in Fig. 4h has two additional tri-
ple points and can be classified as the TMWR, since the
initial parameters for which this shadowgraph image was
obtained fall into the domain of the DMWR. Perturbations
originating at the leading edge of the wedge reach the Mach
stem, on which an additional shock and the third triple point

123
Classification of pseudo-steady shock wave reflection types
Fig. 6 Shadowgraph image of DM-WR: N2 , = 30 , Ms = 4.56,
p0 = 20,530 Pa
t M arise. The slipstream diffuses because of the flow turbu-
lence. The TMWR configuration was observed for density
ratio = 9.9 at the incident wave. A distinguishing feature
of the TDMR (Fig. 4g) is the location of the second triple
point t R on the reflected shock wave. It is close to but not
directly on the surface and this configuration is the limiting
case of the double-Mach reflection. From the shadowgraph
pattern in Fig. 4g, we can confirm that the second triple point
is close to but not on the surface. The parameters at which
the flow pattern depicted in Fig. 4g was obtained are close
to the parameters of the boundary between MachCabannes
reflection and regular reflection. As a consequence, the angle
of the triple point trajectory is small. Unfortunately, the small
scale of the pattern and the poor quality of the image make
it impossible to discern details of the shock-wave structure.
6 Conclusions
Classification of shock wave pseudo-steady reflections from
a wedge is given. Classification takes into account the shape
of not only the reflected shock but also of the contact dis-
continuity and the Mach stem. Classification is worked out
on the basis of the conception of combination of the shock
reflection and flow deflection processes.
Following the most accepted nomenclature, such terms
as regular reflection, irregular reflection, von Neumann
reflection, Mach reflection, single-Mach reflection, transi-
tional-Mach reflection, double-Mach reflection and glancing
incidence reflection were not changed. New terms for the
some reflection types are proposed:
315
single MachSmith reflection SMSR,
weak single-MachSmith reflection wSMSR,
single MachWhite reflection SMWR,
single MachCabannes reflection SMCR,
double MachCabannes reflection DMCR,
double MachWhite reflection DMWR,
triple MachWhite reflection TMWR.
These terms should be considered as preliminary ones, and
the final terms will be agreed upon in future by consultation
with other members of shock-wave community in the course
of the ISSW and ISIS meetings.
The existence domains for different types of reflections are
indicated. Special attention is given to the domain of irregular
non-Mach reflection. It is shown, that von Neumann pattern
can be observed not only for weak shocks but also for strong
shocks reflecting from thin wedges.
Assumption is made that under a compression pulse ema-
nating from the leading edge of the reflecting wedge the slip-
stream does not roll up into a spiral but is only distorted
without arising a vortex.
References
1. Mach, E.: Uber den verlauf von funkenwellen in der ebene und im
raume. Vienna Acad. Sitzungsbr. 78, 819 (1878)
2. von Neumann, J.: Collected Works. Taub A.H. (ed.) V1. Pergamon,
Oxford (19611963)
3. Semenov, A.N.: Properties of solutions in the elementary theory of
Mach reflection. Preprint No. 1159, vol 49. FTI im. A. F. Ioffe AN
SSSR, Leningrad (1987)
4. Colella, P., Henderson, L.F.: The von Neumann paradox for the dif-
fraction of weak shock waves. J. Fluid Mech. 213, 7194 (1990)
5. Courant, R., Friedrichs, K.: Supersonic Flow and Shock Waves.
Interscience, New York (1948)
6. Law C.K.: Diffraction of strong shock waves by sharp compressive
corner. UTIAS, Tech. Note, No. 150. Toronto, Canada (1970)
7. Semenov, A.N., Syshchikova, M.P.: Mach reflection properties
when interacting shock waves with an immovable wedge. Comb.
Expl. Phys. 11(4), 596608 (1975)
8. Semenov, A.N.: Types of shock wave reflection from a wedge. In:
Unsteady Gas Flows with Shock Waves. Collection of Scientific
Works, pp. 162172. FTI im. A. F. Ioffe AN SSSR, Leningrad
(in Russian) (1990)
9. Ben-Dor, G.: A state of the review on pseudo-steady shock wave
reflections. In: Proceedings of the 25th International Symposium
on Shock Waves (ISSW 25), Bangalore, pp. 2130 (2005)
10. Ben-Dor, G.: Shock Wave Reflection Phenomena. Springer,
New York (1992)
11. Ben-Dor, G., Igra, O., Elperin, T.: Handbook of Shock Waves Aca-
demic, vol. 2. San Diego (2001)
12. Cabannes, H.: Lois ge la reflection des ondes de choc dans les
ecoulements plans non stationares. ONERA, No. 80 (1955)
13. Syshchikova, M.P., Krassovskaya, I.V.: Some properties of reg-
ular and irregular interaction of shock waves. Arch. Mech. 31,
135145 (1979)
14. Henderson, L.F., Lozzi, A.: Further experiments on transition to
Mach reflection. J. Fluid Mech. 94, 541559 (1979)
123
316
15. Takayama, K., Ben-Dor, G., Gotoh, J.: Regular to Mach reflec-
tion transition in truly nonstationary flowsinfluence of surface
roughness. AIAA J. 19, 12381240 (1981)
16. Krasovskaya, I.V., Berezkina, M.K.: On reflection of shock waves
and shock wave configurations. Tech. Phys. Lett. 34(2), 177180
(2008)
17. Ben-Dor, G., Dewey, J.M., Takayama, K.: The reflection of a
planar shock wave over a double wedge. J. Fluid Mech. 176,
483520 (1987)
18. Ben-Dor, G., Dewey, J.M. et al.: Experimental investigation of the
asymptotically approached Mach reflection over a second surface
on a reflection over a double wedge. Exp. Fluids 6, 429434 (1988)
19. Syshchikova, M.P., Berezkina, M.K.: Some properties of the
nonstationary shock wave reflection from concave surfaces. In:
Unsteady Gas Flows with Shock Waves. Collection of Scientific
Works, pp. 152161. FTI im. A. F. Ioffe AN SSSR, Leningrad
(1990)
20. Syshchikova, M.P., Semenov, A.N., Berezkina, M.K.: Shock wave
reflection by a curved concave surface. Sov. Tech. Phys. Lett. 2,
6166 (1976)
21. Bazhenova, T.V., Gvozdeva, L.G. et al.: Unsteady Interactions of
Shock Waves. Nauka, Moscow (1977) [in Russian]
22. Smith, L.G.: Photographic investigation of the reflection of plane
shocks in air. NORC (National Opinion Research Center) Rep.
A-350, Washington (1945)
23. Dewey, J., McMillin, D.: Observation and analysis of the Mach
reflection of weak uniform plane shock waves. J. Fluid Mech.
152, 49 (1985)
24. Semenov, A.N., Syshchikova, M.P., Berezkina, M.K.: An experi-
mantal study of the pecularities of Mach reflection in a shock tube.
J. Tech. Phys. 40(5), 10331040 (1970)
25. White, D.R.: An Experimental Survey of the Mach Reflection of
Shock Waves. Princeton University, Dept. Phys. Tech. Rep. II-10,
Princeton, N.J. (1951)
26. Ikui, T., Matsuo, K., Aoki, T., Kondoh, N.: Investigation of Mach
reflection of a shock wave. Bull. Jpn. Soc. Mech. Eng. 25, 1513
1520 (1982)
27. Lee, J.-H., Glass, I.I.: Pseudo-stationary oblique shock wave reflec-
tions in frozen and equilibrium air. Prog. Aero. Sci. 21, 3380
(1984)
123
A. N. Semenov et al.
28. Vasilev, E.I., Kraiko, A.N.: Numerical simulation of weak shock
diffraction over a wedge under the von Neumann paradox condi-
tion. Comput. Math. Math. Phys 39, 13351345 (1999)
29. Zakharian, A., Brio, N., Hunter, J., Webb, G.: The von Neu-
mann paradox in weak shock reflection. J. Fluid Mech. 422,
193205 (2000)
30. Sandeman, R.: A simple physical theory of weak Mach reflection
over plane surfaces. Shock Waves 10, 103112 (2000)
31. Tesdall, A., Hunter, J.: Self-similar solutuins for weak shock reflec-
tion. Siam. Appl. Maths 63, 4261 (2002)
32. Sakurai, A., Takayama, K.: Analitical solution of flow field for
weak Mach reflection over plane surface. In: 24th International
Symposium on Shock Waves. Springer, Berlin (2004)
33. Skews, B.W., Ashworth, J.T.: The physical nature of weak shock
wave reflection. J. Fluid Mech. 542, 105114 (2005)
34. Vasilev, E.I., Elperin, T., Ben-Dor, G.: Analytical reconsideration
of the von Neumann paradox in the reflection of a shock wave over
a wedge. Phys. Fluids 20, 046101 (2008)
35. Abe, A., Takayama, K.: Neumann reflection over curved bodies in
shock tubes. In: Book of Proc., 27th International Symposium on
Shock Waves, p. 257 (2009)
36. Ivanov, M., Bonfiglioli, A., Sabetta, F., Pacciorri, R.: Internal struc-
ture of three shocks intersection. In: Book of Proc., 27th Interna-
tional Symposium on Shock Waves, p. 301 (2009)
37. Sakurai, A., Tsukamoto, M., Khotyanovsky, D., Ivanov, M.:
Numerical study of three-shock intersection at von Neumann par-
adox conditions. In: Book of Proc., 27th International Symposium
on Shock Waves, p. 302 (2009)
38. Guderley, K.G.: Theorie Schallnaher Stromungen. Springer,
Berlin (1957)
39. Semenov, A. N., Berezkina, M. K., Krassovskaya, I. V.: Study of
of shock waves with a wedge under von Neumann paradox condi-
tions. In: Book of Proc., 27th International Symposium on Shock
Waves, p. 370 (2009)
40. Fursenko, A.A., Sharov, D.M., Timofeev, E.V., Voinovich, P.A.:
An efficient unstructured Euler solver for transient shocked flows.
Shock Waves Marsielle I, pp. 371376 (1995)