(Fluid Mechanics and Its Applications 22) R. S. Srivastava (Auth.) - Interaction of Shock Waves-Springer Netherlands (1994)

INTERACTION OF SHOCK WAVES
FLUID MECHANICS AND ITS APPLICATIONS

Volume 22
Series Editor: R. MOREAU

MADYLAM
Ecole Nationale Superieure d'Hydraulique de Grenoble
Bofte Postale 95
38402 Saint Martin d'Heres Cedex, France
Aims and Scope of the Series

The purpose of this series is to focus on subjects in which fluid mechanics plays a
fundamental role.
As well as the more traditional applications of aeronautics, hydraulics, heat and
mass transfer etc., books will be published dealing with topics which are currently
in a state of rapid development, such as turbulence, suspensions and multiphase
fluids, super and hypersonic flows and numerical modelling techniques.
It is a widely held view that it is the interdisciplinary subjects that will receive
intense scientific attention, bringing them to the forefront of technological advance-
ment. Fluids have the ability to transport matter and its properties as well as
transmit force, therefore fluid mechanics is a subject that is particulary open to
cross fertilisation with other sciences and disciplines of engineering. The subject of
fluid mechanics will be highly relevant in domains such as chemical, metallurgical,
biological and ecological engineering. This series is particularly open to such new
multidisciplinary domains.
The median level of presentation is the first year graduate student. Some texts are
monographs defining the current state of a field; others are accessible to final year
undergraduates; but essentially the emphasis is on readability and clarity.
For a list of related mechanics titles, see final pages.

Interaction of Shock Waves
by
R. s. SRIVASTAVA
formerly of the
Defence Science Center
New Delhi, India
with a Foreword
by
Professor Sir James Lighthill, F.R.S.
SPRINGER SCIENCE+BUSINESS MEDIA, B.V.

Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data
Srivastava, Radhey Shyam, 1931-

Interaction of shock waves / by R.S. Srivastava ; with a foreword
by Sir James Lighthill.
p. cm. -- (Fluid mechanics and its applications v. 22)
Inc 1udes index.
ISBN 978-94-010-4474-5 ISBN 978-94-011-1086-0 (eBook)
DOI 10.1007/978-94-011-1086-0
1. Shock waves. 1. Tit le. 11. Se r ies.
OA927.S75 1994
532' .0593--dc20 94-20092
ISBN 978-94-010-4474-5
Printed on acid-free paper
AlI Rights Reserved

1994 Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht
Originally published by Kluwer Academic Publishers in 1994
Softcover reprint of the hardcover 1st edition 1994
No part of the material protected by this copyright notice may be reproduced or
utilized in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical,
including photocopying, recording or by any information storage and
retrieval system, without written permission from the copyright owner.
Dedicated to
Professor Sir James LighthilJ, F.R.S.
who has been my guide and source of inspiraton

during all these years.
CONTENTS
FOREWORD ix
PREFACE Xl
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS XlI
CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION
CHAPTER 2 REFLECTION OF SHOCK WAVES 7
CHAPTER 3 DIFFRACTION OF NORMAL SHOCK WAVE 25
CHAPTER 4 DIFFRACTION OF OBLIQUE SHOCK WAVE 73
CHAPTERS DIFFRACTION OF NORMAL SHOCK BY YAWED

WEDGES 157
CHAPTER 6 DIFFRACTION OF OBLIQUE SHOCK BY YAWED

WEDGES 187
CHAPTER 7 SHOCK INTERACTION WITH MOVING AEROFOIL 237
CHAPTER 8 DIFFRACTION OF SHOCK BY FLAT SURFACES 265
CHAPTER 9 APPROXIMATE THEORY ON DIFFRACTION OF SHOCKS 283
SOURCE LIST 303
INDEX 319
FOREWORD
One of the great twentieth-century achievements in the mechanics of fluids was the full
elucidation of the physics of shock waves and the later comprehensive development of
understanding of how shock waves propagate (i) through otherwise undisturbed fluid and
(ii) in interaction either with solid bodies or with independently generated fluid flows.
The interaction problems (ii) were soon found to raise some very special difficulties
(beginning with the common formation of "Mach stems" in shock-wave reflection) yet
they also turned out to possess enormous scientific interest as well as being highly
important in practical applications.
For all these reasons the appearance of this book on "Interaction of Shock Waves" by one
of the world's major contributors to knowledge in that field is most particularly to be
welcomed. It covers all those approaches to the subject which have been found fruitful,
and most satisfactorily goes into comprehensive detail about each. At last the important
achievements of the leading research workers, experimental as well as theoretical, on
shockwave interaction problems are brought together in a single convenient and well
written volume. I warmly congratulate the author and the publisher on having performed,
for the benefit of everyone interested in the mechanics of fluids, this immensely valuable
service.
James Lighthill
IX
PREFACE
This monograph attempts to give a connected account of the work on interaction

of shock waves. Earlier a review article entitled "On Aerodynamics of Blasts" by
H.F.Ludloff has appeared in Advances in applied mechanics in 1953 covering the work
carried out upto 1952. Subsequently, a survey article entitled "The reflection and
diffraction of shock waves" by D. C. Pack has appeared in the Journal of Fluid
Mechanics (1964) covering the work carried out during past ten years reckoned from
1963. The area covered mainly was with respect to diffraction of normal shock
waves. Several important contributions have appeared in recent years on problems
related to diffraction of oblique shock waves. The need, therefore, was felt to bring out
a recent account of the work on the subject.For analysing the problem related to
diffraction of oblique shocks, a complete understanding regarding reflection of shock
waves (normal and oblique) from the rigid boundaries is necessary. A chapter on
reflection of shock waves has therefore been included apart from the chapters dealing
with diffraction of shock waves. The entire available work on diffraction of oblique
shock waves is based on two classic papers by Sir James Lighthill on "The diffraction
of blast (1949, 1950)". In this monograph therefore Lighthill's theory on the subject
has been brought out in all its details although it has earlier also received majestic
treatment by H.F.Ludloff and D.C.Pack. A general account however, is given in the
introductory chapter of the monograph. More recently W.C.Griffith's reveiw article has
appeared in Journal of Fluid Mechanics (1981) dealing with shock interaction
problems, apart from other topics. The notations of the different authors whose work
has been included in the monograph has generally been retained.
I take the opportunity to sincerely record my gratitude to Sir James Lighthil1,
F.R.S. for inspiring me to write this monograph. I am grateful to Prof. Lighthil1 who
took pains in going through the manuscript and offered many valuable suggestions. In
fact he has been guiding me directly or indirectly over three decades and but for his
encouragement and help, the problems included in the monograph would not have been
completed. I wish to thank Prof. I. I. Glass for the invaluable support and help in the
successful completion of the experimental work, at UTIAS, Canada.
I would like to record my sincere thanks to Sankalp for his dedicated effort in
preparing the camera ready manuscript. I am indebted to my wife Vijay Laxmi for her
co-operation and help in the success of the project. Thanks are also due to Ravi,
Sunita, Sanjay, Smriti, Manoj and Sangeeta for their invaluable help.
A-3 / 260, Janakpuri

New Delhi - 110058 , INDIA R. S. SRIVASTAVA
xi
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
Due acknowledgement is made to the authors and the publishers for their
permission to reproduce the figures from their publications. The list of the journals are
as follows:
1) American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics

(A.l.A.A.)(U.S.A)
2) Journal of Aeronautical Sciences (J.A.S.)(U.S.A.)
3) Journal of Fluid Mechanics (J.F.M.), (Cambridge

University Press,U.K.)
4) Proceedings of the Royal Society (Proc.Roy.Soc.) Series A,London(U.K.)
5) Reviews of Modern Physics (U.S.A.)
6) Physical Review (U.S.A.)
7) British Aeronautical Research Council (A.R.C.) (U.K.)
8) Quarterly Journal of Mechanics and Applied Mathematics (Q.J.M.A.M.)(U.K.)
Author's name and year of publication duly appear after every publication in the
manuscript. The details of the references, however, appear at the end of each chapter.
xii
CHAPTER- I
INTRODUCTION
The problems relating to the behaviour of a shock wave encountering either

another shock wave, or a rarefaction wave, or an interface separating two media (one of
which may be rigid) are described as 'Interaction of Shock Waves'. This subject,
associated with almost all the real physical situations involving shocks, is one of the
most important branches of modern mechanical science. This study is of great practical
importance in connection with blast effect on supersonic aircrafts from the view point
of weapon analysis and the vulnerability of either a missile or a re-entry vehicle to
blast. This branch of science inspite of its manifold utility has not received the
attention it warrants because of considerable difficulties involved in obtaining the
solution of the problems.
Amongst the interaction problems , reflection of shock waves from rigid
boundaries has received considerable attention durilng recent years and this topic may be
divided into three parts:-
i) Normal Reflection
ii) Oblique Reflection
iii) Mach Reflection
Normal reflection occurs when the shock impinges head on to an unyielding
surface with the plane of the shock parallel to that of the surface. Oblique reflection
occurs when a shock impinges with a small angle between the direction of propagation
of the shock and the plane of the reflecting surface. Mach reflection occurs when a
shock front impinges on a surface near grazing incidence. The details about the three
types of reflections have been incorporated in the chapter on 'Reflection of Shock
Waves'.
The other important topic of the study has been in the field of diffraction of
shock waves. A theoretical investigation of the flow field produced by the interaction
of plane shocks with an obstacle, stationary or moving, is difficult and the mathematical
complications prevent an explicit theory. The complication is not only because of the
non-linear nature of the problem but also because of the fact that the non-uniform shock
waves which occur imply variations in the entropy of the fluid and a loss of irrotational
character of the motion. The problems on diffraction of shock waves have been
attempted in two ways. The first is to linearilze the basic equations of motion on the
assumption that the incident shock is weak. Since the entropy change across a weak
shock is of third order in shock strength, the entropy variations are also effectively
excluded and in fact the problem belongs to the theory of acoustics. The method was
2 Interaction Of Shock Waves
first used by Sommerfeld (1895) to solve the problem of diffraction by a semi-infinite

plane. Friedlander (1946) subsequently treated the diffraction of a sound pulse by a
semi-infinite screen, bounded by a straight edge, normal to the direction of propagation
of the pulse.
The second possibility is to consider an incident plane shock of arbitrary
strength and linearize the basic equations on the assumption that the obstacle produces
only small perturbations in the uniform flow field behind the shock. Although the
entropy variations are no longer negligible, it appears that they can be suppressed from
the theoretical investigations by concentrating the analysis on the pressure variations in
the field. The problems incorporated in this monograph belong to this category.
The earliest work on the diffraction of a plane shock wave was carried out by
Bargmann (1945). The work was carried out on the assumption that the flow behind
the shock is irrotational. It was followed up by Lighthill (1949) who investigated the
diffraction of a plane shock wave encountering a small bend in the wall. Lighthill's
treatment was however free from the restriction of irrotationality. Subsequently,
Lighthill (1950) investigated the head on collision of a shock wave of arbitrary strength
with a wedge having surfaces making small angles with the plane of the shock.
Lighthill's derivation, free from restriction to weak shocks, was nevertheless restricted
to wedges because an essential element was the conefield transformation. He reduced
the problems to Riemann-Hilbert type and solved them by the method of complex
variables. Fletcher, Weimer and Bleakney (1950) experimentally tested Lighthill's
(1949) theoretical results concerning the pressure distribution on the wedge surface.
Ting and Ludloff (1952) attempted the problems of a blast wave passing over
the surface of an arbitrary flat structure. The pressure and density fields in the whole
domain behind the advancing blast are obtained in explicit analytic form. The
consideration of Ting and Ludloff for the diffraction of a plane shock by a symmetrical
aero foil were later modified by Ludloff and Friedman (1952) to be applicable to the
diffraction of plane shock waves by axisymmetric bodies of arbitrary profile. These
derivations are more general than those of Lighthill (1949, 1950).
Whitham (1957, 1958, 1959) developed an approximate theory for the
prediction of shock patterns associated with the interaction between a blast wave and
two or three dimensional bodies. The diffraction pattern predicted by Whitham's theory
concerns the shape and location of the diffracted shock at any time. Bryson and Gross
(1961) presented experimental investigations of the diffraction of plane strong shock
waves by several cones, a cylinder and a sphere. The diffraction pattern, in particular,
the shape of the diffracted shock and the loci of the Mach triple points, compared
favourably with the theoretical results based on Whitham's theory. Skews (1967a) made
an experimental study of the shape of the shock diffracting round a corner made up of
two plane walls. The results were in agreement with profiles predicted by the
diffraction theory of Whitham(1957, 1959). The behaviour was also found to follow
the trends established by Lighthill (1949).
Skews (1967b) and Bazhenova et al (1971) made numerous measurements with
Introduction :3
shock Mach number up to 4.5 to 10, respectively, and observed a wide array of effects
for which no theory has been initiated. Srivastava (1963) has extended Lighthill's
(1949) theory to the case of monoatomic gases (y = 5/3) .
Most of the work carried out was with respect to normal shocks. In general,
however, there is always some angle of inclination between the shock and the body with
which it interacts and such study of interaction of oblique shocks will be of more
practical importance. We have, however, very few papers in this field mainly because
of the complexity of the problem. Diffraction of oblique shock with small bends have
been attempted by Srivastava and Ballabh (1955, 1956), Srivastava (1962), Srivastava
(1968), Ter-Minassiants (1969), Srivastava and Chopra (1970) and Chopra (1970). The
theory proposed by Srivastava and Chopra has been tested experimentally by Srivastava
and Deschambault(1984). Chester (1954) has extended Lighthill's (1949) result to the
case of yawed wedges. Extensive investigations have been made by Chopra and
Srivastava (1972), and Chopra (1972) for extending the oblique shock diffraction
problem with small bends to the case of yawed wedges.
REFERENCES
1. Bazhenova, T.V. , Gvozdeva, L.G. , Kamarov, V.S. & Suchov, B.G.

Diffraction of strong shock waves. Proc. 8th Int. Shock Tube Symp. Paper 54
Chapman and Hall. (1971)
2. Bargman, V.
On nearly glancing reflection of shocks. AMP report 108-2R NDRC. (1945)
3, Bryson, A. E. & Gross, R. W. F.

Diffraction of strong shocksby cones, cylinders and spheres. 1. Fluid Mech., 10, l.
(1961)
4. Chester, W.
The diffraction and reflection of shock wave. Quar. Jour!. Mech App\. Maths, 7, 57-
82. (1954)
5. Chopra, M.G.
Ph.D. Thesis (Some problems on interaction of shock waves) Delhi University, India.
(1970)
6. Chopra, M.G.
4 Interact;on Of Shock Waves
Pressure distribution on a yawed wedge interacted by an oblique shock. AIAA

Journal, 10, 7. (1972)
7. Chopra, M.G. & Srivastava, R. S.

Reflection and diffraction of shocks interacted by yawed wedges. Proc. Roy. Soc. A,
330, 319 - 330. (1972)
8. Fletcher, C.H. , Weimer, D.K. & Bleakney, W.

Pressure behind a shock wave diffracted through a small angle. Physical review 78, 5,
634 - 635. (1950)
9. Friedlander, F.G.
The diffraction of sound pulses I Diffraction by a semi-infinite plane. Proc. Roy.
Soc. A, 186, 322-343. (1946)

The diffraction of sound pulses II : Diffraction by an infinite wedge. Proc. Roy. Soc
A186, 344-351. (1946)

The diffraction of sound pulses III : Note on an integral occuring in the theory of
diffraction by a semi- infinite screen. Proc. Roy .Soc .AI86, 352-355. (1946)

The diffraction of sound pulses IV : On a paradox in the theory of reflection. Proc.
Roy. Soc. A186, 356-367. (1946)
13. Lighthill, M.J.

The diffraction of blast I . Proc. Roy. Soc A, 198, 454-470. (1949)
14. Lighthill, M.J.

The diffraction of blast II. Proc. Roy. Soc A, 200, 554 - 565. (1950)
15. Ludloff, H.F. & Friedmann, M.B.

Diffraction of blasts by axisymmetric bodies. 1. Aero. Sci .19, 425-426 . (1952)
16. Skews, B.W.

The shape of diffracting shock wave, 1. Fluid Mech. 29, 2, 297-304 . (1967a)
Introduction 5
17. Skews, B.W.
The perturbed region behind a diffracting shock wave, J. Fluid Mech. 29, 4, 705-719 .
(1967b)
18. Sommerfeld, A.
Math Analysis, 47, 317. (1895)
19. Srivastava, R.S. & Ballabh, R.

Diffraction of oblique shock wave past a small bend. Proc. I Congo Theoretical and
Applied Mechanies, India 220. (1955)

Proc. Nat Academy of Sciences, Vol. XXV , Sec A Part III Allahabad (India) .
(1956)
21. Srivastava, R.S.

Ph.D Thesis (Study of diffraction of shock waves) Lucknow University, India. (1962)

Diffraction of a plane straight shock wave. British Aeronautical Res. Council, c.P. No.
603 . (1963)

Diffraction of blast wave for the oblique case. British .Aero Res.Counc. Current
paper No . 1008 . (1968)
24. Srivastava, R.S. & Chopra, M.G.

Diffraction of blast wave for the oblique case. J.Fluid Mech. 40, 4, 821-831 . (1970)
25. Srivastava, R.S. & Deschambault, R.L.

Pressure distribution behind a non stationary reflected diffracted shock wave. AlA A 22,
2, 305 . (1984)
26. Ter-Minnassiants, S.M.

The diffraction accompanying the regular reflection of a plane obliquely impinging
shock wave from the walls of an obtuse wedge. J.Fluid Mech. 35, 2, 391-410 .
(1969)
27. Ting; L. & Ludloff, H.F

Aerodynamics of Blasts. J. Aeronautical Sci., 19, 317-328 . (1952)
28. Whitham, G.B.

A new approach to problems of shock dynamics Pt I Two dimensional problems.
J.Fluid Mech 2, 145-171 . (1957)
29. Whitham, G.B.

On the propogation of shock wave through regions of non-uniform area. J. Fluid
Mech 4, 337-360 . (1958)
30. Whitham, G.B.

A new approach to problem of shock dynamics Pt. II : Three-dimensional problems.
J. Fluid Mech., 5, 369-386 . (1959)
CHAPTER- XI
REFLECTION OF SHOCK WAVES
The study of reflection of shock waves from rigid boundaries has been a subject
of considerable interest. Reflection phenomenon can be divided into three sub-heads.
1. Normal Reflection:
The simplest problem of interaction of shock waves is the reflection of a head on
plane shock of arbitrary strength from a rigid wall. If the strength of a shock wave is
defined in terms of pressure ratios it is interesting to note that, for y = 1.4 as the
strength of the incident shock increases to infinity, the strength of the reflected shock
approaches the limiting value 8. This result has widely been used in the experimental
studies of the properties of gases at high enough temperatures. Bradley (1962) has
stated that shock-tube diaphragm pressure ratio of 95 with helium as the driving gas
produces a reflected shock temperature in argon of 4000 OK whereas a diaphragm
pressure ratio of 1600 would have been needed to produce the same temperature rise in
the incident shock.
2. Regular Reflection:
In general there is always some angle between the shock and the body with
which it interacts. The algebraic treatment of a shock wave impinging obliquely on an
interface of two media is complicated although principles are straight forward. The
problem becomes involved because of the simultaneous occurrence of a retlected shock.
This study which was initiated about a century back was subsequently neglected for a
considerable time and the first thorough discussion of reflection of oblique shock waves
was made by Von Neumann (1943). The more general properties of oblique shock
reflection from a rigid wall were studied carefully both theoretically as well as
experimentally, during and after World War II. The properties are highly significant in
the understanding o( damage due to an explosion and in a number of other military
applications. For instance it was found out that head-on or normal reflection of a shock
wave does not necessarily produce the strongest reflected shock wave. Oblique
reflection results often in a stronger reflected shock wave and hence a higher peak
pressure at the reflecting surface than does normal reflection. This air burst effect was
utilized in an attempt to optimize the blast damage radius due to the atomic bomb
explosion at Hiroshima and Nagasaki.
The regular reflection theory of Von Neumann (1943) and Polachek and Seeger
(1944,1949,1951), later reviewed by Courant and Fredrichs (1948), and Griffith and
Bleakney (1954) rests on the following assumptions:-
a) The interaction of the incident shock with the wall results in single reflected
shock travelling away from the wall into the medium behind the incident shock.
b) Each of the three angular regions of flow formed by this configuration of
shocks and boundary is uniform; hence the state of the gas changes only across two
shocks.
c) Each shock can be treated as in the standard Rankine- Hugoniot theory to
relate the change in flow velocity to the pressure ratio across it.
d) The net deflection of the gas flow by the two shocks is such that the flow in
the region behind the reflected shock is parallel to the wall.
e) The configuration is stationary when expressed in coordinates Xlt and YIt
(i.e. self similar).
t) No energy is lost to the wall during the process.
Based on these assumptions, theories of regular reflection of shock waves have
been developed. For a plane shock of given strength ( S= ;:) making an angle a o
with the reflecting plane one gets theoretically two reflected shock waves, one with low
angle of reflection and low shock strength and the other with high angle of reflection
and high shock strength. Thus corresponding to each set of values of sand a o two
solutions are obtained. As we go on increasing the angle of incidence, a situation arises
when these two solutions merge into one and the same solution. The corresponding
angle of incidence is called the extreme angle of incidence (ae ).
The most important point to be determined about regular reflection is as to
which of the two solutions for reflected shock should be chosen. This point has been
discussed by Bleakney and Taub (1949) in detail but still remains unsettled for strong
incident shock strength due to the absence of experimental results. For moderate shock
strengths, experimentally one finds that the lower values for the reflected shock strength
and angle apply. It is noted that for a fixed value of S the angle of reflection a z is a
monotonic increasing function of the angle of incidence. There is one critical angle of
incidence corresponding to which the angle of reflection equals the angle of incidence
and it is given by cos 2 acrilical = 'Y -

1 . It is interesting to note that the critical angle
2
of incidence is independent of the incident shock strength and is 39.23 0 for air.
For angle of incidence less than this critical angle the angle of reflection is less
than the angle of incidence; whereas for larger angles the angle of reflection is greater
than the angle of incidence. As a o increases from the head on value, the pressure ratio
across the reflected shock first decreases below the head on value, then increases and
attains the head on value for the critical angle of incidence and finally exceeds the head
on value for angles of incidence greater than the critical angle. Polachek and Seager
(1949) have shown that the strongest incident shock for which such regions can exist is
Reflection Of Shock Waves 9
given by
2Y(3-y)~-(y-1)
(y + 1)
which for air comes out to be 0.1424.

Another important feature of regular reflection is that relative outflow behind
the reflected shock ( flow from the reflected shock when the moving configuration of
incident and reflected shock has been reduced to n:~st ) is supersonic, sonic or subsonic.
Furthermore the relative outflow behind the reflected shock is a monotonic decreasing
function of the angle of incidence.
As the angle of incidence increases beyond its extreme angle an anomalous type
of reflection pattern occurs unlike the one observed in acoustic reflection, which is the
most interesting effect connected with oblique reflection of shock waves and is called
the Mach reflection after E. Mach (1878).
More details of the theory will now be presented.
Let p be the pressure and ~ = Px;'1 ' the shock strength, where the subscripts 0, I
refer to conditions upstream and down stream of incident shock (Figure 2. I).
Suppose that ~ is held fixed while 8w is varied continuously from the initial value 8", =
n12, where incident shock makes a head on collision with the sloping wall, to a final
value 8w = 0, where the incident shock is at a glancing incidence with the wall
( a.)
(b)
!
o o
c.
Figure 2.1 Schematic drawing for regular reflection (a) and Mach reflection (b).
10 Interaction pr Shock Waves
(Figure 2.1). Then as is well the initial reflection is specular like and was called regular
reflection by Von Neumann (1943) (Figure 2.la), but with smaller 8 w it eventually
changes to a three shock system which he called irregular or Mach reflection. In Mach
reflection, part of the gas is swept by the Mach stem shock and consequently there are
entropy differences in the gas which lead to the appearance of contact discontinuity c.d.
(Figure 2.1b). Von Neumann formulated the classical theory and he called the incident
shock to be weak, or strong, by reference to a polynomial equation of eight degree in
which the variable was the Mach number of incidence shock M. The boundary between
weak and strong shocks is at S > 0.433 or M < 1.46 and strong otherwise.
Bleakney and Taub (1949) have proposed theoretical and experimental aspects of
regular reflection and Mach reflection, and we would be discussing some of their
results.
Figure 2.2 shows the situation of regular reflection. This of course is a purely
W-------I'--~-.....L.----W
Figure 2.2 Notation for theory of regular reflection (Bleakney and Taub , 1949)
Reflection Of Shock Waves II
regular reflection situation consisting of incident and reflected shocks from a rigid wall
and is a detailed description of Figure 2.1 a.
It is convenient to work in the coordinate system in which the point 0 is at rest.
Then the assumption of constant conditions in each of the angular domain is equivalent
to assuming that the phenomenon is stationary in the coordinate system.
In Figure 2.2 WW is the rigid wall, OJ is the incident shock, and OR is the
reflected shock. In the region WOJ the fluid is characterized by the constant values of
pressure, density, sound velocity, particle velocity denoted respectively by P, p, c and
Z. In the region lOR we denote the corresponding quantities by a prime and in ROW
by a double prime.
The vectors Z and Z' denote the flow incident and emergent from the incident
shock wave I. As the tangential components of particle velocity are conserved in
crossing a shock wave and the normal components are decreased, the flow vector is
deflected away from the normal to the shock crossing it. We shall denote the angle
between the vector Z and Z' by 8 and call this the angle of deflection of tlow. In
Figure 2.2, N( and NR are the normals to the incident and reflected shock, respectively.
The angle measured from the normal to a shock to the flow vector incident upon it, is
denoted by 't with or without a prime, depending on whether the shock is the incident
or the reflected one.
These angles are positive if they are counter clockwise when measured as stated.
Thus in Figure 2.2 't and 8 are positive and 1:' and 8' are negative. The angle 0' is
defined similarly in terms of the flow vector Z', incident on the reflected shock, and Z"
emergent from it.
The problem of retlection of a plane shock is that given the angle of incidence
a = ~ - 't and the strength of the incident shock, P'/P, to determine the position and
2
strength of the reflected shock, that is a' or 't' and P". The condition that must be
satisfied is that Z" must be parallel to the wall. That is, we must have 8 + 8' = O.
The Rankine-Hugoniot equations enable us to determine the deflections
produced by a shock wave in terms of the strength of the shock and the angle of
incidence of the flow. These relations will now be used to obtain the mathematical
formulation of the condition that the total deflection is zero.
This will be done in terms of angle 't and 1:'. From Figure 2.2 we find that
It
a+'t=- a' - 8' - 't' =~ (2.1)
2' 2
The Rangine-Hugoniot equations
If z denotes the magnitude of the flow vector Z incident upon a shock, then
Z.cos 't is the magnitude of the component of the velocity normal to the shock and
(z/c).cos't is the Mach number of this flow. The relation between pressure ratio and
Mach number for a perfect gas with ratio of specific heats y is
p' -P
(2.2)
P
Putting x = tan 't and y = P'/P in (2.2) we obtain
y-I _
-
2y
l+y
[(Z)2
~
1
l+x 2 -
I] (2.3)
The relation between the pressure ratio and the compression ratio is given by
= p' (y+1)y+y-1
p
= (y-1)y+y+1
~ I (2.4)
or conversely
(y+l)l1-(y-l)
y = (y+l) -(y-l)l1
(2.5)
The two remaining Rankine-Hugoniot equations are taken in the form
(::J cos 2 ('t+O) = _I [(y-1) + (y+ 1)..!.]

2y y
(2.6)
and tan ('t + 0) = 11 tan 't (2.7)

Equation (2.6) in the statement that the relation between the Mach number of the
flow emergent from a shock wave and strength of a shock wave is that given by (2.3)
with y replaced by l/y. Equation (2.7) is a consequence of the fact that the tangential
components of the flow are continuous whereas normal components are compressed in
the ratio 1/11. The equation may be solved to give
= tan 0 = (2.8)
I +l1x 2
Equations (2.3) to (2.8) hold across the shock I. The equation holding across
the reflected shock R may be obtained from these by replacing each quantity properly.
In the notation of Bleakney and Taub (1949) this is achieved by replacing an additional
prime on all quantities where
Reflection OJ Shock Waves 13
x' = tan 1', . 11' = PI:, y' = Ph' (2.9)

The deflection by the reflected wave is given by
.1' = tan 8' = (11'-l)x' (2.10)

1+11'x,2
This equation may be written in terms of 11, x and x' alone, for 11' is related to y' by
the analog of (2.4) and y' is given in terms of x', 11, and x by the analog of (2.3). Thus
,
Y -
1 -
-
2 Y [(
1+ Y c'
Z')2 1+1X,2 - 1] (2. 11)
Substituting from (2.6) for (zfc,r we obtain

11' = (2.12)
where B2 (2.13)
Hence (2.10) may be written as
.1' = [2(B2 -1) - (11-1)(y + x' 1))

(y + 1){1 + 11X2)11- 2(B 2 -1)
(2.14 )
[2(11 2 XZ x,z) - (11-1)(y + 1)(1 + x,z)] x'
-
= (y + 0(1 + X,2 )(1 + 11 x2)11- 2(11 2x2 - X,2)
We are assuming that the reflected wave is a shock wave, that is, 11' > 1. This
condition gives us a limit for the possible value of x', for it follows from (2.12) that
11' ~ 1 if and only if
1 + X,2 ::; 1 + x~ = (2.15)

1 +.!. (y + 1)(11-1)
2
The values of x' obtained by using the equality sign in 2.15 are such that the reflected
wave is just sonic.
14 Interaction OJ Shock Waves
If x and 11 are such that
< (2.16)
1+.!.(y+l)(l1-l)
2
then the flow behind the reflected wave is subsonic and no reflected wave can exist. If
the inequality is replaced by an equality, the flow behind the reflected shock wave is
sonic. The condition for this is
cota = tan't
(2.17)
The deflection condition is equivalent to the requirement that il + il' 0, that is,
to
(11 x - x/)(y + 1)(1 + x/2)(11-1)(1 + llx2)

(2.18)
+ 2{11 2 x 2 - x ){x /{1 + llx2) -
/2 (11-0x} = o
This is a cubic equation in x' from which we are to determine x' as a function of 11 and
x. It is immediately evident that one root of this equation is
x' 11x > Ix~1
if 11 > 1. Hence this root lies outside the limits obtained above and is not admissible.
Dividing (2.18) with the linear factor (l1x - x'), we are left with a quadratic equation
for x' whose roots are negative and given by
[ x 2{1 + l1'x')' - {I + llx2 )((y + 1)(11-1) +2)(11-1)((y -1)(1 + ll

1
- x (I + 112x2) X') +2)f

=
I
X
(1 + llx 2} (y + 1)(11- 1) + 2]
(2.19)
From equations (2.19), (2.10) and (2.1) we can compute a', the angle between
the normal to the reflected wave and the normal to the wall, as a function of ~ = lIy,
and a. Graphs of these functions for ~ = 0.8 and ~ = 0.2 are given on the curves
labeled "two-shock" in Figure 2.6. The upper portion of these curves correspond to the
use of plus sign in front of the radical in (2.19), the lower portion to the minus sign.
Figure 2.3 taken from the report of Polachek and Seeger(1944) and included in
Bleakney and Taub' s (1949) paper gives a set of curves each of which represents a' as
a function of ex for the fixed value of ~ given on the curve and y = 1.4.
Thus there are two possible positions for the reflected shock. For each of these
we may compute the pressure behind the reflected wave by computing 11' from (2.12)
IO~Al GAS .,.._1",0
OC INCIDENT
lDfGREE5)
Figure 2.3 Angle of incidence versus angle of reflection for shocks of different
strengths undergoing regular reflection (Bleakney & Taub , 1949).
and y' from the analog of (2.5). It is evident that 11' and y' are monotonic increasing
function of B2 for fixed 11 and hence monotonic de:creasing function of x' 2. Therefore
for the root given by the plus sign in equation (2.19) the pressure on the wall is greater
than for that given by the minus sign. Moreover when 11 approaches one, the incident
wave becomes sonic, the root given by the plus sign approaches zero and the pressure
on the wall approaches infinity whereas that given by the minus sign approaches -x and
the pressure on the wall remains infinite. Thus when 11 ~ 1 the root given by the plus
sign must be discarded. The same conclusion could be extended when 11 is different
from one. In several experiments on regular reflection the measurements show that the
position of the reflected wave is always that corresponding to that given by the minus
sign in front of the radical in the equation (2.19).
Extreme Angle
When
x2(1+T\2x2Y < (1 +T\x 2)(y+l)(T\-1)+2)(T\-1)(y-I)(1+T\x 2)+2) (2.20)
the roots given by (2.19) become complex. Hence the assumed configuration is
impossible for such values of x and T\. The experiments show that for most angles of
incidence and shock strengths such that the inequality (2.20) holds, Mach reflection
takes place.
When the inequality sign in (2.20) is replaced by an equality sign we obtain a
condition for the smallest value of 't, and hence the greatest value of a, the angle of
incidence, for which the two shock configuration is possible. The extreme values of 't
and a would be denoted by 'te and a e respectively. Bleakney and Taub (1949) have
shown experimentally the region of regular reflection (Figure 2.4). A theoretical
boundary of this region is given by
Y=
x 2(1+T\ 2x 2 (1 + T\X2)(y+ 1)(T\-1)+2)(T\-1)(y-1)(1+ T\x2)+2) (2.21)
8 /
1.
j
ex MACH
REFLECTION L,"
'"
I
~ ~
~
a,.
.... ....-:::::" ~~
4
-
~::tUf~~~
--I
0
o 2 ~ 4
Figure 2.4 Regions of regular and Mach reflection in the a , S plane . as - sonic angle.
curve, a e - extreme angle curve, a; - Mach reflection curve (Bleakney and Taub,
1949).
Sonic Angle
In the region of regular reflection, the two shock configuration is determined as

above for a given shock strength and angle of incidence less than the extreme angle.
We may now consider that Mach number of the flow behind the reflected shock,
namely, z"/
Ic" where,
(I + 11'2 x,2)[(y-l)y' + (y+l)]

= 2yy'
(2.22)
In this expression 11', x' and y' are known function of 11 and x. Hence for each
11 we may determine the value of x such that z%" = I The corresponding value of 1
and a denoted by 1, and as , will be called the sonic angle.

This angle has been plotted as a function of a and ~ = lIy for y = 1.4 in
Figure 2.4. It is evident from this plot that a. is less than one degree smaller than a,..
In the Figure 2.4 there is a curve above a e curve which is the experimental
curve for the onset of Mach reflection. Theoretically Mach reflection should start just
beyond the ex e curve but the regular reflection continues to persist between a o and a' I
curve and the Mach reflection starts only beyond a' I
There is yet another criterion for transition between regular and Mach reflection.
There is a good deal of evidence that this occurs at the condition where the Mach stem,
although vanishingly short, is normal to the flow. This is referred as the normal shock
criterion and is true for strong incident shocks (incident shock Mach number > 1.46)
Henderson and Gray (1981). This was first proposed by Von Neumann and some
controversy about it has arisen in recent years (Henderson and Lozzi 1975,1979,
Bezhenova et al 1976; Heilig 1978; Bendor and Glass 1979, 1980; Hornung and
Kychakoff, 1978; Hornung et al 1979).
3. Mach Reflection
In Mach reflection, incident and reflected shock waves leave the wall being
joined to it by a third shock wave referred to as the Mach stem. The gas swept up by
this stem has to follow side by side the gas that has passed through both the incident
and reflected shock waves. It is, therefore, essential that a contact discontinuity passes
through the "Triple Point" of the intersection of shocks. The direction of motion of the
triple point is an additional parameter of this problem. The detailed characteristics of
the Mach reflection has been provided in Figure 2.5.
Angles will be given with respect to the line joining the triple point and the
comer which, in case of regular reflection, is the boundary wall itself. The fOllr
discontinuities I, R, M and S of the Figure 2.5 make angles (0, (0', A and
respectively, at the triple point with the line TC.
Also (0 = a - X , (0' = a' + X (2.23)
18 Interaction Qr Shock Waves
Figure 2.5 Notation of angles used in Mach reflection. (Bleakney and Taub, 1949)
where 00 and 00' reduce to the angles of incidence and reflection for regular reflection
(X= 0)
A comparison between theory and experiment may be made by referring to
Figure 2.6. Data have been plotted for the two shock strengths <;1 = 0.8 and <;2 = 0.2
representing weak and strong shocks. The solid curves were plotted from the values
computed by Polachek and Seeger (1944). The circles and crosses are experimental
observations of regular and Mach reflection, respectively. The details have been
presented in Figure 2.6.
We assume that three plane shocks all meet in a line. The notation will be a
simple extension of that used in Figure 2.2. Figure 2.7 illustrates the shock
configuration assumed in the coordinate system in which the line of intersection of the
three shocks is at rest.
The line TI represents the incident shock, TR the reflected shock, and TM a
third shock which we will call the Mach shock. The line TD represents the direction of
the flow incident on TM and TI (the path of the triple point) and the line TD', the slip
stream represents the flow emergent from T. In the angular regions MTI, TIR, RTD',
DT'M all quantities of interest will be assumed to be constant. The pressure, density,
sound velocity, and particle velocity in the region MTI will be denoted by P, p, c and
Z. In the region ITR they will be denoted by the same letters with a prime, in RTD' by
the same letters with a double prime and in D'TM by the same letters with subscript 1
and a prime. The lines NI ,NR and NM are the normals to the incident, reflected and
Mach
120 I
I
I
110
I
I
100 - Three shock theory --'11--+---+--+--1
S " 0.80 --........ I
90 S:: 0.20 ~~I'-11f-----f-v---t---+-----I
~------~D( ; ~ x IJ
80
~r-. ,. I ~ ""'~
t--~-~I~'~+_~~-+--~\~Or_~~/-~--+_-1

70
Ol
ILl
"'0
~.,
....'-- GO ---- - ---- '\. \lIl
\ i' /
~
SO ,II.
,I
IX
40
30
20
10 20 30 40 SO 60 70 90
Gel ( deg)
Figure 2.6 Comparison of theory and experiment in regular and Mach retlection. The
points enclosed in the square boxes represent values of (() and (()' at which total tlow
behind the incident shock is just sonic with respect to an observer moving with the
triple point. There can be no solution for (() greater than this limiting value (Bleakney
and Taub, 1949)
ppc
o
--~
Z, ~,
M
Figure 2.7 Notation for the theory of Mach reflection.
shock respectively.
If only three shocks are to be present we must have
pit = p; (2.24)
We shall denote as in the two - shock case the angle between the normal to a shock and
the flow incident upon it by 't with appropriate primes and subscripts to distinguish
between shocks.
In addition we must have
(2.25)
The two conditions (2.24) and (2.25) serve to determine the allowed
configuration of 't and ~ (or 1). The explicit formulas may be obtained from the
formulas given by Taub (1947) in a paper on refraction of shock waves. Solutions of
these equations have been given by Polachek and Seeger (1944). The results of one
family of such solutions are plotted in Figure 2.6 as the curves labeled "three shock".
The experimental results seem to come closest to the solutions plotted and this gives a
justification for discarding the others.
Experiments on Mach reflection, especially those involving weak incident
shocks are in disagreement with the three shock theory. Bendor 1987 has reconsidered
the three shock theory for a psuedo-steady Mach reflection with some interesting
results.
The need for accurate analytical and numerical descriptions of oblique shock
wave reflections and the associated properties of the flow fields cannot be over-
emphasized. Problems such as the transition from regular to Mach reflection and other
related problems, can benefit greatly from an enhanced understanding of the entire tlow
field (Deschambault and Glass 1983).
Reference may also be made to the review article on the subject by Hornung
(1986) and to the recent book entitled 'Shock Wave Reflection Phenomena' by Ben Dor
(1992).
REFERENCES
1. Bazhenova, T.V. , Fokeev, V.P. & Grozdeava, L.G.

Regions of various forms of Mach reflection and its transition to regular retlection.
Acta astronaut 3, 131-140 (1976)
2. Ben-Dor, G. & Glass, I.I.

Domain and Boundaries of non-stationary oblique shock wave reflections, I Diatomic
Gas. 1. Fluid Mech, 92, 459 -496 (1979)
3. Ben-Dor, G. & Glass, LI.

Domains and Boundaries of non-stationery oblique shock wave reflections, 2 Diatomic
Gas. J. Fluid Mech, 96, 735-756. (1980)
4. Ben-Dor, G.
Shock wave reflection phenomena. Springer Verlag. (1992)
5. Bleakney, W. & Taub, A.H

Interaction of shock waves. Revs. Mod. Phys.31,589-605. (1949)
6. Bradley, J.N.
Shock waves in Chemistry and Physics. John Wiley, New York. (1962)
7. Courant, R. & Friedrichs, K.O.

Supersonic flow and shock waves. Inter Science, New York. (1948)
8. Deschambault, R.L & Glass, I.I.

An update on non-stationery oblique shock-wave reflections: actual isopycnics and
numerical experiments. 1.Fluid Mech, 133, 27 - 57. (1983)
9. Griffith, W.C. & Bleakney, W.

Shock wave in gases American Jour Phys 22, 597. (1954)
10. Heilig, W. H.
In shock tube and shock wave research. Proc. Eleventh Int Sym Shock Tubes and
Waves, 288-295 Seattle: University of Washington Press. (1978)
11. Henderson, L. F. & Lossi, A.

Experiments on transition to Mach reflection. 1. Fluid Mech. 68, 139-155. (1975)

Further experiments on transition to Mach reflection. J. Fluid Mech 94,541-560.
(1979)
13. Hendersen, L. F. & Gray, P. M.

Experiments on the diffraction of strong blast waves. Proc. Roy. Soc. Lond. A , 371 ,
363-378. (1981)
14. Hornung, H. G. & Kychakoff, G.

In shock tube and shock wave research, Proc. Eleventh Int Symp. Shock Tubes, 296-
302 Seattle: University of Washington Press. (1978)
15. Hornung, H. G. , Oertel, H. & Sandeman, R. J.

Transition to Mach reflection of shock waves in steady and pseudosteady flow with and
without relaxation. 1. Fluid Mech 90,541 - 560. (1979)
16. Hornung, H.
Regular and Mach reflection of shock waves, Ann. Rev. Fluid. Mech . (1986)
17. Mach, E.
Uberden verlauf von Funkenwelien in der Ebene und im Raume. Sitzber. Akad. Wiss.
Wien 78,819-838 . (1878)
18. Polachek, H. & Seeger, R.J.

Regular reflection ofshock waves in ideal gases.Buro Ord. Explosives Res. Rept. 13 .
(1944)

On the shock-wave phenomena: Interaction of shock waves in gases. Proc. I
symposium Appl. Math. , 119 , American Math. Soc New York. (1949)

On shock wave phenomena; Reflection of shock waves at a gaseous interface. Phys.
Rev. , 84, 922 . (1951)
21. Taub, A. H.
Refraction of plane shock waves. Physical Review 72, 51 . (1947)
22. Ter-Minnassiants, S.M.

(1969)
23. Von Neumann, J.

Proposal and analysis of a new numerical method for the treatment of hydrodynamical
shock problems. N.D.R.C.Applied Maths Panel Memo 38.7 M(Appl.M-NYO No.
18). (1943)
CHAPTER - III
DIFFRACTION OF NORMAL SHOCK WAVE
Investigations of the flow field produced by the interaction of a plane shock with
an obstacle, stationary or moving, preclude an explicit theory because of the
mathematical complications. The complication is primarily because of the fact that non
uniform shock waves which occur imply variation in the entropy of the fluid and a loss
of irrotational character of the motion. Two possible courses are open for attacking the
problem from a theoretical stand point.
i) The first is to linearize the basic equations of motion on the assumption that
the incident shock is weak.
ii) The second possibility is to consider an incident plane shock of arbitrary
strength and linearize the basic equations on the assumption that the obstacle produces
only small perturbation in the uniform flow field behind the shock.
Lighthill has considered the diffraction of a normal shock wave passing a small
bend (1949) and the diffraction of a normal shock wave striking head on to a wedge
(1950) based on the second possibility. Both these papers will be dealt with in this
chapter as the work in the subsequent chapters are based on the these two papers.
Diffraction of a normal shock wave past a small bend CLighthill' s Theory)
Let there be a plane shock of any strength moving into still air which after
meeting a bend of small angle gets diffracted. The bend of an angle 8 is formed when
two walls join to form an angle 1t - 8 . The configuration is shown in Figure 3. I.
The physical constants defining the problem will be U, the original shock
velocity, Po and Po ,the pressure and density in still air and 8 .Since there is no
fundamental length in the problem, each physical quantity is a function of two space
coordinates (X, Y) (with the corner as origin), and the time t, these variables can only
occur in the problem in the combinations Xlt and YIt. The angle of the bend being
small, it being assumed that the variations in velocity, pressure, and density behind the
diffracted shock are small. In the treatment of the whole problem, viscous stresses anel
conduction of heat has been neglected.
Formulation of the problem:
Let the velocity, pressure and density behind the shock before diffraction be ql'
PI and PI . Applying the principle of conservation of mass, momentum and energy
across the shock we obtain
SHoelo(
Figure 3.1 Schematic drawing for a normal shock passing over a small bend.
PoUql = PI -Po (3.1)
assuming y = 1.4 ( Y being the ratio of specific heats).
Equations (3.1) solved for ql ,PI ,PI give
"65Po (U a~)
-7 (3.2)
2
Diffraction OJ Normal Shock Wave 27
U
Let Mach number of the shock wave be M = - be the
ao
Mach number of the uniform flow behind the shock, so that
= (3.3)
Then the flow is supersonic (M 1 >

1) when M > 2.068 and subsonic (M 1 <
1) when M < 2.068. After diffraction let iL ,P2' P 2 and Sz be the velocity vector,
pressure, density and entropy at any point. Choose (X, Y) axes with origin at the corner
and X-axis along the original wall produced. If E. = i

+ q2 . V signifies time-rate-
ot at
of-change for a given fluid element, the equations of conservation of mass and
momentum can be written as
OP2 + P div
Ot 2
q2
= 0
OQ2 1 t7
-+- v P2 = 0 (3.4)
Ot P2
and in the absence of heat transfer between fluid elements by friction, conduction or
radiation, the entropy will satisfy DS 2 = 0

Ot
On the assumption that q2 ,P2 ,P2 differ only by small quantities from the
values ( ql ' 0 ), PI , PI' which they had before diffraction, the equations can be
approximated as
ap2 + q opz + P div q- 0

at I ax 1 2
iT iT I
~+q~+-Vp = 0
at I ax PI 2
o (3.5)
The entropy and density variations can now be eliminated since by virtue of the
last equation of (3.5) a~2 + ql ~~ of the first equation of (3.5) can be replaced
by
(3.6)
owing to the thermodynamic principle that density is a function of pressure and

entropy.
Making use of the transformations
<i.2 =(1+ u, v), (3.7)

ql
the first two equations of (3.5) become

Diffracfion of Normal Shock Wave 29
xap+/~p au av
= -+-
ax ay ax ay
au dU dP
x-+y- = (3.8)
dX dy ax
dV dV dp
x-+y- =
dX dy dy
as u, v, p depend only on x and y.
In the x,y system, the origin is at a point on the original wall produced. The
part of the shock which is straight lies on the original wall produced. The part of the
shock which is straight lies along a fixed line.
X =U-ql =MI(.Q._I)=(M22+5)~ =k <1 (3.9)

al ql 7M -1
The corner is at (-MI ' 0 ).
The conditions at a point immediately behind the diffracted shock will depend
on the local velocity of the shock normal to itself. If h gives the normal velocity of
the shock at a point then th will be the vector perpendicular drawn from the corner to
the tangent to the shock at that point. In terms of h the boundary conditions at the
shock are
(3.10)
Let the equation of the shock in the new coordinates be x = k + f(y) ; then
f(y) will be small if 0 is small, and then
- ( X-Y-
th::= dX - X dX)
- (3.11 )
dY' dY
But X =Ut +a1t f(y) and Y =a l t y; hence h can be taken as
h =
(U +a l f(y) - a l Y f' (y) , - U f' (y) (3.12)
From (3.7), (3. 10) and 3. 12), the approximate shock boundary condi tion on x
= k, is obtained as
u = ~ (f(y) _ Y f' (y) )( M2, +1)

U M--1
v = - f' (y) (3.13)
p -
P1 [ f']
fey) - y (y) (
2U
2 )
q1P1 U2_~
7
On the shock boundary x = k, we have, therefore,
dV B dp
u = Ap y- = (3.14)
dy dy
where
(M2 +1)(7M 2 _1)11

A
2M2 M2 +5
(3.15)
3(M2-1)
B
(M2 +5)
The problem is now reduced to mathematical terms. The equations (3.8) must
be solved under the boundary conditions that on y = 0, v = -0 for x > -M1 and v =
o for x < -M1 ; that on x = k equations (3.14) hold and that on the remaining
boundary between the uniform flow and the disturbed flow u = v = p = 0
Elimination of !! and y
Using equation (3.8) and eliminating u and v a single second order differential
equation in p is obtained as
= (X~+y~+I)(xdP+ydP)
dx dy dX dy
(3.16)
Equation (3.16) is hyperbolic for x 2 +y2 >1 elliptic for x 2 +y2 <1, its
Diffraction Of Normal Shock Wave 31
characteristics are all the tangents to the unit circle x 2 +y2 =1 . It is, therefore
reasonable to assume that the non-uniform region is enclosed by the diffracted shock,
the wall and the unit circle.
On the x-axis v is a step function and dV

dX
= except at the corner where it does
not exist. Also, on the x-axis y = 0, we have therefore from (3.8), dP =0
dy

On the point of the circle x 2 +y2 =1 with y > and x < k in the subsonic
case (when this constitutes the whole third boundary) p =0, but in the supersonic case
this is only true beyond the point of contact of the tangent from (-Ml ' for x > )
. -M 1- 1 In the region between the tangent and the circle, p is given by the Prandtl-
Meyer expansion i.e.,
(3.17)
Thus the boundary values of p are discontinuous on the circle. In the subsonic
case, though (d P) o on both sides of the corner, at the corner ( x = - M1 )

dy y=O
we would have
d
f
.M,+C
Lt --. dx (3.18)
y--,O.M -c
, dy
using equation (3.8) and the fact that v increases by -0 at the corner.
From the shock boundary condition (3.14) and equation (3.8) only one condition
on p can be deduced namely
k(k dp + y dP ) = dp _ Ay dp + Bkyl dp (3.19)

dy dy ax dy dy
An additional condition is obtained from the fact that v = -0 at (k,O) and hence
that (if the integral be taken along the shock from the wall to where it becomes straight)
dV = fB.::::..c:Ip =0
f ~y (3.20)
dy y
Busemann's Transformation
In polar coordinates x = r cos a , y = r sin a equation (3.16) becomes
a 2+
- 1 ap
p - 2
- + 1- a- p= (r-+1
a )( ra-p ) (3.21)
ar2 r ar r2 ae 2 ar ar
p = [1 - (1 - r2 ) 14 ]
and with
r
this becomes Laplace's equation
(3.22)
in ( p , e ) as polar coordinates while the circle r = 1 becomes the circle p = 1, since

p increases from 0 to 1 monotonically as r = 1 does so. The line x = k becomes the
arc of the circle 2p cose = k( 1 + p2) as r =2/t +p2)
This circle cuts the circle p = 1 orthogonally at cos a = k . The transformed

boundaries in s-plane are shown in Fig 3.2. The shock boundary condition is
transformed to (Lighthill, 1949)
(%a~) _ (Ak tanO- B cotO)

(3.23)
( ~ ) - (1-k 2sec 20)Yz
where dn and ds are elements normal and tangential to the circular arc
2p cos e = k(1 +p2) respectively towards its centre and away from the line a =
o.
The other boundary conditions are unaltered, except for the discontinuity
condition (3.18) at the corner in the subsonic case. Putting ~ = pcos e , 11 =psin e
{1-(1-M/)7q
the corner becomes the point ~ =------- o and the condition
M1
holding there is that
Lt
11-->0
f (r' dndp) (dpdr ) d~ (3.24)
(3.25)
Solution of the Potential Problem
Now P is given as a harmonic function satisfying certain boundary conditions in

a curvilinear triangle ABC with A Band B C circular arcs and A C a straight segment
and all its angles right angles.
UNIT
CIRCl~
f:>.'
UNIT
CIRCLE SHOCK
6'
WAll
'S-- PlMIE Z- PLANE
! UNIT CIf\cLE t WALL t SHOCK

-00 -I +, +c:o
Z,- PLANE.
Figure 3.2 Transformation of boundaries from ~ - plane to Z - plane and then to ZI

plane.
To solve this problem conformal transformation into a simpler domain IS

necessary. The transformation
Z
=
(k
+1
"k')('1 - 1; _(k2k'+ik') ) , I;
= pe
is (3.26)
transforms the figure in the I;-plane to the Z-plane. When I; IS on the arc
2pcosS =k(1 +p2)
Z
(cos 2S - k 2 t2 (3.27)
(k'cos9 - ksin9)
which is purely real and increases from 1 to 00 as S increases from 0 to
tan1(k/k) = cos- 1 k
Equation (3.27) when solved in terms of S gives
k'(Z2 -1)
tanS (3.28)
k(Z2 + 1)
In the Z-plane the boundary condition (3.23) therefore becomes
(3.29)
Finally with the transformation
Zl =~(Z2 + Z2)
(3.30)
Z2 =Zl +( Z1 2 -lt 2
the z, domain corresponding to the triangle A' B' C' in Z-plane is the upper half plane.
The transformed boundaries from 1;-plane to Z-plane and then to z,-plane are shown in
Figure 3.2. The shock boundary condition (3.29) becomes (with Zl =x, +iy,)
Diffraction qr Normal Shock Wave 35
(3.31 )
on Xl > 1, Yl = 0 . The wall boundary condition is that dp =0 when -1 < XI < I,

dYI
YI =0. The discontinuity condition (3.24) becomes
(3.32)
and holds at the points corresponding to
which is
(3.33)
The condition on the third boundary (i.e. on the circle) can be written dp = 0
dX I
when XI < -1 , YI =0. But in the supersonic case this must be supplemented with
(3.34)
by (3.17): an equation which holds at the point in the ZI plane corresponding to

S = - M I - l + i (1- MI-2)Yz; but the point is found to have exactly the same
algebraic expression as Xo of (3.33), only in the supersonic case Xo < -1.
Solution
The solution is effected by the introduction of a function

(3.35)
which is regular throughout the upper half plane since p is harmonic. In terms of w ,
the discontinuity condition (3.32) and (3.34) can be expressed by saying that, near ZI ==
Xo ,
(3.36)
iMIO
w"" ( )1/2 ,M I < 1 (3.37)
1t 1- M/
Further, w is real on x I <-1, YI == 0 and purely imaginary on -1 < XI <1, YI

= o.
Lastly on XI > 1 , YI == 0
(3.38)
(3.39)
where
(3.40)
so that by (3.9) and (3.15)
(3.41)
whence (since M k > 1), both a and ~ are positive. A function which satisfies (3.39)
is given by
D{ffraction of Nonnal Shock Wave 37
[ a - I.( ZI - 1)1/2]-1[ ~ - .(
1 ZI - 1)112]-1
Lighthill has worked out a function w (ZI ) which satisfies all the boundary
conditions. This turns out to be
(3.42)
where C and D are constants and are determined from either of equations (3.36) and
(3.37) depending on whether MI < 1 or MI > 1 and on the other condition (3.20)
which in the ZI plane is modified to
(3.43)
The constants C and D work out to be
C 2M 1k'(M I + k)
(3.44)
(~ +y)(y + a) 1t(M lk + 1)2
and
(M1k + 1)2 D(a + ~)(y + a) (a+p+y)

2~MI(MI + k) = a~ apy
Table No.1 gives the choice of values for which Lighthill has determined
pressure distribution along the wall
38 Interaction Qf Shock Waves
Table - I
M 1.36277 1.64751 2.06809 2.95200 00
1 2 3 4.82315 10 00
PI/
/Po
o 0.47245 0.72739 1.34463 1.88982
k 0.75593 0.65465 0.56619 0.47809 0.37796
The shape of the Diffracted Shock
At a point (k, y) of the shock, or in the (XI , YI) plane (XI ' 0) the shock
curvature (taken positive when the shock is convex to the still air) is
K = _ f" (y ) = dv = B dp = B dx I dp
dy y dy y dy dX I
(3.46)
_ BC8(u+P)(x l +It'2[D(XI -xo)-I]
- (l-k 2 )(x l -xo)(u 2 +XI _1)(p 2 +XI -1)
In (3.46) , dX I has been obtained from the relation y = k'( XI

dy XI + 1
-1)~ on the shock XI
> 1, Yl = 0 and dp is known from the relation (3.42) , ~ is graphed against .L
dX I 8 k'
(which runs from 0 to 1 on the curved part of the shock) , for the four values of M
listed in Table 1 , in Fig 3.3, where the limit as M ~ 00, which is
K 2M l k'(M I +k)(P+y) B(x i +1r'2[D(xl -x o )-I)

(3.47)
8' = 1t(M l k + 1)2 (I - k 2)(x i - Xo )(p2 + XI -1)
is also shown. While (3.46) is zero at XI = 00 (y = k') , (3.47) is infinite;
the Fig. 3.3 shows that this infinity is the limit of a very steep peak, which occurs
just before (y = k') for M < 00
5r-----+-----~----_r----_+--
4~----+-----~----_r----_+--
3
~
~
2
2
3
4.~
0 10
00
1
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 O.CO 1.0
!:Ilk'
Figure 3.3 Curvature of the diffracted Shock. The number on the curves are the values
of PYvo ( M. 1. Lighthill , 1949)

It is observed that , for the larger values of M (or of P(po ), K is negative for
smaller y; so that the shock is concave to the still air ,changing to convex farther out
through a point of inflexion . This is due to the term [D(XI - xo) -1] in (3.46 ) and
(3.47 ) ; the point of inflexion is at Xl = Xo + ..!.. and appears if Xo + D-1 > 1 . The
D
1
transition occurs when Xo + D- l = 1 i.e. when D = - , hence by (3.45) when
y2
1= y2(Mlk+l)2 =Ml+k
2BMI (M l k + 1) BMI
whence, by (3.3) , (3.9) and (3.15) , M= 2.53111 and PI = 7.30760po . Hence

it is for shock pressure ratio > 7.31 that a point of inflexion should appear in the
diffracted shock. It will be observed that the maximum weakening at the wall for
entirely convex shock, which would be obtained by a function K(y) always non-
negative but entirely concentrated near y = k' ,would be obtained by drawing the
diffracted shock as a straight line normal to the shock . Lighthill ( 1949 ) has further
indicated that greater weakening is possible once a point of inflexion is allowed .
Pressure distribution along the wall
At a point (x , 0 ) of the wall (-1 < x < k), the Xl coordinate is
x =1- 2(k - X)2

I (1- kx)2
and satisfies -1 < Xl < 1. Now in this region, by (3.42),
~= C8[D(x l -x o)-I]
(3.48)
oX I t2 (Xl - Xo)[ a + (1- Xl )112][13 + (1- Xl t2 J
(1- X l2
Lighthill has integrated equation (3.48) and has obtained pressure distribution along the
wall for values of M given in the table 1. In the figures (3.4 to 3.8), the relative
deficiency of pressure at the wall, divided by angle 8 in radians, that is
(3.49)
has been plotted. In the subsonic case the deficiency rises from zero at the boundary of
the disturbed region to a logarithmic infinity at the corner, this falls to a minimum and
rises again to its final value at the shock. In the sonic case the deficiency falls from its
algebraically infinite value at the corner to a minimum and then rises, that in the
supersonic case it has a Prandtl-Meyer discontinuity at the corner from which ,in
-1 < x < k , it falls and then slightly rises again when PI/PO < 7.31 ,but falls
monotonically when PI/PO > 7.31.
,
--
) 1\ ./
'/ """""'- ... ~
o -( ~ ,..,..- --- 1---

--.
-
M. .. DA72/
I
,//
./
",- " "-
" , "-,
/
/
I
I
f , 5-71
"' , -
Figure 3.4 Wall Pressure distribution and shape of disturbed
region. ( 0 = 0.1 radian, P'; = (M. J. Lighthill , 1949)

/Po
2
,
)
1
V I"
-- - -
0
~a: - 0-
- /'
l---
--.....,.
r---,
I
I
ct' c:-
M, 0.727
/
/,
/
"
I
I
11'
5.7" j ---
'~
'! .. '(
region. ( () = 0.1 radian, Plro = 3) (M. J. Lighthill , 1949)

D{ffracrion of Nonnal Shock Wave 43
I
\
\
3
'"
2
........
0.... 0.0
~ -
, ,
0
- ...
!r 0.- J,.- I-- -- '-..
/. ~
Ml::1 .,/
'/
/
I /
/
I
-. 15J~:L
f I I
-r .....--
region. ( 8 0.1 radian, Pl/ 4.82 ) (M. J. Lighthill , 1949)

/Po
2 \
1
"'- "'--....
o."/Q;,
, 0
a:-
-
0.-
1.O
0
,,- 1----ro_ .....
- ",'
l
/
M, =1345
//
/ 0
~/5'l-*- T .
r
7" ....,
region. ( 0 = 0.1 radian, plro = 10) (M. 1. Lighthill , 1949)

D(ifraCfion Of Normal Shock Wave 45
, " .........
~ ..............
()
'" ~,
t('
v-
0.
I 1"-0- ......
~ 0.-
'-"
1..0
M, i890 ,/
;'
.("'0'
"" "" I
L.- "'5.7 i _
I
T , ...-,- I
-r-
Figure 3.8 Wall Pressure distribution and shape ot Gtsturbed
region. ( 8 = 0.1 radian, P;;;o = 00) (M. J. Lighthill , 1949)

Experiments were carried out by Fletcher, Weimer and Bleakney (1950) to test
the theoretical results of Lighthill (1949). The shock wave was produced in the shock
tube described by Fletcher, Weimer and Bleakney (1950) and densities in the diffracted
flow were measured interferometrically. The shock waves used were of strength P2 / PI
= 2 (Fletcher et al notation) corresponding to Figure 3.4 of Lighthill.
1.6
1/1
f HO' Radifl.'I'I
1 ' - 0.1 Radian

\0
P
oa
04
0-2
Q..Or5 04- OJ 0-2 0.\ 0 0\ 02 O~ 0-4 0-5 O-G 07 08 09 ,0

X
Figure 3.9 Diffraction of a shock wave at a corner. Reduced pressure defect along the
wall as a function of position along the wall. Pfp: = 2 , = 0.1 radian.

The vertical length of the experimental points indicate approximately the reliability of
the measurements_ ( C. H. Fletcher, D. K. Weimer and W. Bleakney, 1950)
The shock were diffracted at a convex angle of 0.1 radian ( 8 = + 0.1) or

were reflected at a concave angle of the same magnitude ( S = -0.1). Pressures were
obtained from the densities by assuming the behavior of the gas behind the original
shock to be isentropic. The results are shown in Figure 3.9. The theoretical treatment
shows a logarithmic infinity at the corner. This of course, would not be obtained
experimentally but a relative maximum in the pressure does exist there.
Nature of the Mach circle for convex and concave corners
From equation (3.42 ) it is possible to calculate op =0 on Xl < -1, Y1 =0

YI
t he Busemann's (P, 8 ) plane,
; an d In the value 0
. . -ap
f the pressure denvatlve
an
along the inward normal on that part of the boundary with p = 1 , is obtained there
from by mUltiplying by a factor I:z~ Iwhich varies but remains positive . Thus, when
8 >0,
Op -ldZ I
I CS[ D(x i - xo) - 1)
On - d( -(x~ _1)JJ2(x l -x o )[CX+(I-x l )IJ2)[/3+(1-x l )JJ2] (3.49)
which is negative when Xl < Xo , but is positive when Xo < XI < -1 (provided also
Xl < Xo + D- I ; but actually Xo + D I 2': -1 for all M)
But in the original plane (r , 8) , (op) is infinite, since it is obtained from (3.49 )
or r=l
by multiplying by the term - (ddrP)r=l = 00. The actual behavior of p near r = I is
deduced from the asymptotic equality 1- P
op
p-(P),=l -(1-p)
on
This behavior is probably not what really occurs but is a singularity which is the only
way the linearized theory knows of describing complicated phenomenon. Lighthill
(1949) has observed that the true phenomenon is a shock when dp > 0 and expansion
an
when dp < 0 . In the latter case the boundary must be circle exactly, since it must be a
an
characteristic : but in the former the shock must be slightly further from the origin than
the circle , in order that its own motion shall be supersonic . On this assumption ,
Lighthill (1949) concluded that when 8 > 0 the whole circle represents an expansion
in the subsonic case; it is accordingly dotted in Figs. 3.4 , 3.5 and 3.6 . But in the
supersonic case Xo < -1 , and the circle is an expansion for XI < Xo , i.e. for points to
the right of the point of contact of the tangent from the corner; and this part , together
with the tangent representing a prandtl-Meyer expansion, is shown dotted in Figures
3.7 and 3.8 ; but the remainder of the circle, shown plane, has ap > 0 and probably
an
corresponds to a weak shock .
But when 8 < 0, so that the corner is concave to the flow dp is

, the sign of
an
changed throughout and the whole circle corresponds to a shock in the subsonic case,
which in the supersonic case is replaced by part of the circle plus the tangent from the
corner . The shock pattern has been sketched by Lighthill (1949) in two cases
(~: =3 and 10) in Figure 3.10 . The type of three shock intersection that occurs is
similar to the well-known phenomenon of Mach reflection .
-
Mj= 0727
Figure 3.10 Corner concave to flow three shock intersections.
(0 = 0.1 radian, PI/

/po
= 3,10 ) (M. J. Lighthill , 1949)
]jmiting case as M~ 1
Let M = 1+ , then k "" 1 - and

1+ x
x l +1",,4--
I-x
, 13 , y all tend to -fi as E ~ 0 . So by (3.44) and (3.45)
16 (')
C~ "" - M k and D "" -1
1t I 8
(BM )-1 "" -403_? I
-
Hence in (3.48) (XI - xot can be neglected (in the limit in comparison with D) , if
X:F- 0; and
k/)!(BM t
ap_5 O(-~M
1t 8 I I
ax - dx . [(1 + X)]~
8E-(- ) 81- x
8E s[-16~]( E~I )
"" --.". -=-----=-:-r--
(l-X)2 [ (l+X)]g
8E-(- ) 8
1- x
1t
(3.50)
Integrating equation (3.50) we obtain
p=-- - -
o (1+ x)
1t (I-x)
as p is zero at x = -1
So we obtain
(3.51 )
This expression for (t -

P2 \ indicates the wall pressure distribution (for small 8
8 PI - Po
and M-l = E small) correctly , except that the infinite limit as x~ 1 conceals a true
finite limiting value (Lighthill 1949) . This has been drawn in Fig. 3.11 . This is in fact
continuation of Figs. 3.4 to 3.8 for M~1 .
, /
- ~
o
--- - - -- ....... .......
- v/ " .......
/
"
Ml:;O ~" "-
.. I
V/ '\
\
- I
/ \
\
/ \
I
I \
I I
I
I I S.7\:L I
r -r-.
region. ( 8 = 0.1 radian, plop

( 0
(M. J. Lighthill , 1949)
Diffraction Of Nomal Shock Wave 51
Diffraction of normal shock for monoatomic gases
Srivastava (1963) has considered diffraction of normal shock wave past a small
bend for monoatomic gases ( 'Y = 5/3). We have following results corresponding to
equations (3.2), (3.3) and (3.15).
<I =-U
I 4
a _
3 ( 1__
U2
2)
p ~it +3~:l
J(M2 + 3) )1/2
X =k = 1(SM 2 _ 1) <1
A =_1_(5M 2 -1)1/2(M2 + 1)
2M2 M2+3
For determining the pressure distribution along the wall and curvature of the shock , the
same Mach numbers have been chosen as those of Lighthill (1949). This is given in
Table No.2.
Table - 2
M 1.36277 2.75782 2.95200 00
2.07142 9.25690 10.64288

PI/
Ipo
o 0.40534 1.03634 1.34164
k 0.76564 0.53518 0.52456 0.447213
The shape of the diffracted shock
As Lighthill (1949) has plotted the curvature in Fig. 3.3 , curvature of the
diffracted shock has been plotted in Fig. 3.12 for y=5/3.
Now we find that when M has the value 1.36627 and 2.75782 the nature of the
curve is similar as for the case when y=7/5 . When M=2.95200 then there arises a
quite good deal of difference. For this Mach number in the case y=7/5. , there is a
point of inflexion, i.e. the shock which is concave to the still air near the wall changes
to convex but for the case when y=5/3, there is no point of inflexion. The case when
M -7 00 , the nature of the curve is similar to that of Lighthill (1949) . Here also
1(
--7
Y
as--71
o
oo
k'
Pressure Distribution along the wall
As in Lighthill's paper (1949), (PI - P2) /8 (PI - Po ) is graphed against x. In

the subsonic case MI < I the deficiency is zero at the boundary but attains a
logarithmic infinite value at the corner. From infinity it again decreases and finally
rises. The graph is shown in Fig. 3.13. In this case the final value at shock wave is
nearly the same as in the case when y = 7/5.
In the sonic case MI = 1, the graph comes out to be similar as for the case
when y = 7/5 (Figure 3.14). In the supersonic case (M I = 1.03634) there appears to
be some major differences between the two cases (Figure 3.15). Firstly, when y =
5/3, the value of (PI - P2 ) /8 (PI - Po ) which maintains a constant value from the
corner to the point of intersection of the unit circle and wall is much higher than in the
case wheny = 7/5. Secondly for this value of MI for y = 7/5, there is a monotonic
decrease in the value of (PI - P2 ) /8 (PI - Po )which has a minimum at the shock
wave. In the case when y = 5/3 for the same Mach number this is not so. Here after
Diffraction Qf Normal Shock Wave 53
8
i
~
h
926- --I'/
10-64 -
Iff
f--/-..J
~ r;/-
2
201 1---1--~
.-"'" ~
~v ""''\
VV
o -
i.--- i,....--
~ V
~
- I ce
o 0-2 0-8 1- 0
Hgure 3.12 Curvature of the diffracted shock. The numbers on the curves are the
values of Pjpo . (R. S. Srivastava, 1963)

maintaining a constant value from the corner to the point of intersection of the unit
circle and wall the value. of (PI - P2 ) 18 (PI - Po ) decreases, attains a minimum and
then slightly rises. For the case when MI = 1.34164 (M ~ 00 ) there is a monotonic
decrease in the value of (PI - P2 ) 10 (PI Po) from the point of intersection of the wall
and unit circle to the shock wave (Figure 3.16).
/ I,
'"
2
V
./
V ~-
~--
---
o /
, M,==O.405
--- -- --... .....
r
I
cr
0.0
I
0.-
//
/'
"./ " '- ......
"- ,
"
/
r-II
f
". -
, "/I /I
5'7 0 /
" '1lT77Tni
region. ( 8 = O.l radian, %0 2.07 ) (R. S. Srivastava, 1963)

3 \
2 \
"~r---
I~oa..- 1 --"
-'---
....... --- ... ...........
\c>
0 .",.' .........
M,:a 1 /'
//
I
I
I
I
.~~ !Sor- I
/
I A
'I I I" I I
t:: / '/
T
region. ( 8 = O.l radian, PXo CR. S. Srivastava, 1963)

'\
7~~
6 ~ __
5
,-..
0.0 3
I
Q.p
'-'
t.O 2
1
",/
-- --- .................
M,'1.036 '"
/'
~
/
I
I
I
I
I
I
1"'.70
I
77"~""'"
region. ( 0 = 0.1 radian, pJ = 10.64 ) (R. S. Srivastava, 1963)

IPa
Diffraction Qf Normal Shock Wave 57
3,
1\
'"
2
o!'~0
I
era;-
I
1 -
~ 10..
0
! 1--- t- ........
Ml =-1.342 i ",;"
V
/
./
7
/
V J
" I
151-
, 1
~
region. ( 8 = 0.1 radian, P/ro = 00) (R. S. Srivastava, 1963)

Diffraction of Blast in a Head on Encounter CLighthill's Theory)
.x
Figure 3.17 Schematic drawing of a normal shock striking a corner of a building. (M.
J. Lighthill, 1950)
A plane shock advancing into still air may encounter a corner of a building
where two faces make angles <\ and 02 with the shock so that the angle of corner is

It - (01 + ( 2 ) = It - (Fig 3.17.) Let (X , Y) be the coordinates with corner as the
origin, and direction of motion of the shock as the negative X- direction. As in
Lighthill's problem dealt earlier the state of affairs defining the problem are U ,the
incident shock velocity, Po and Po the pressure and density in still air respectively.
Hence no fundamental length or time scale exists and measuring the time t from the
initial encounter with the corner, the pressure and velocity fields depend only on Xlt,
YIt.
This problem will be considered in the same manner as has been done in
Lighthill's earlier paper. As shown in the Fig 3.17, the region of disturbance is
enclosed by the diffracted shock, parts of the unit circle with the centre at the corner
and symmetric about it and the faces of the two walls.
The boundary value problem in the region of non-uniform flow is formulated
and solved by use of Busemann transformation and conformal transformation.
Regular reflection ill an infinite wall:

In Fig 3.18 suffix zero denote the value of quantities in still air, suffix unity
Diffraction Of Nonnal Shock Wave 59
may be reserved for the intermediate region and suffix two for the region behind the
reflected shock. Let the velocity and angle of incidence be U ,8 let the velocity and
angle of reflection be V and 8' . Since the shocks always meet at the wall,
V cosec 8' = U cosec 8 (3.52)
Using equations (3.2) on the reflected shock, replacing U therein by the velocity V +
ql cos (0 + 0' ) (relative to the air ahead of it) of the shock normal to itself, ql by
the change ql cos ( 0 + 0' ) + q2 sin 0' in normal velocity at the shock, and PI'
PI , Po , Po , a 0 by P2' P2 ,PI ,PI ,a l and expressing also the condition of
continuous tangential velocity, the equations
Figure 3.18 Regular reflection (M. 1. Lighthill , 1950).

(3.54)
(3.55)
ql sin(o + 0') = q2 coso' (3.56)

are obtained.
Neglecting the squares of 0 and 0' and using (3.2) , the following equation are
obtained.
V=U(1+2M- 2 )
3
O'=~(1+2M-2)
3
qz = q1o( 1~ + M- 2)
5(7M2 -1)(4M 2 -1) 0
P2 = 21M2(M2 + 5) PoU-
3M 2(7M2 -1)
P2 = (M2 + 5)(M2 + 2) Po
a =(7 P2 )Yl =.!. U(4M2 _ 1)(M 2 + 2)75 M- 2

2 5pz 3
(3.57)
where M = U / ao is the Mach number of the incident shock. It should be noted that
P2' P2 and a z are independent of 0 if 0 2 is neglected.
Conditions in the region of Non- Uniform flow:
If q3 ' P3 ,P.l denote velocity, pressure and density in the region of non-
uniform flow, then where this adjoins the regions of uniform flow behind the reflected
shocks, namely on the two circular arcs, P3 = P2 ,P3 = P2 on both and that q3
is (0, q IOI(1+%M- 2 )) on the one and (0, - q 1 02(1+%M- Z )) on the other, if 12
and 0/ IS neglected. This indicates that a solution should be sought

withqJ ,PJ - pz and PJ - pz small throughout the field. On this assumption the equations
of motion, namely (3.5) with suffix 3 replacing 2, become approximately
~)P3 + P div q =0
at 2 2
=0 (3.58)
Replacing dP3 by _1_ dP3 by virtue of the last equation, and putting
at a 22 at
(3.59)
the first two equations of (3.58) would become the fundamental equation (3.8) in u,v,p
in terms of x,y.
The approximate position of the shock is
(3.60)
Thus the region of non-uniform flow in the x,y plane is approximately 0 < x
< k 0 , ( X 2 + y2 ) < 1 (Fig 3.19). The approximate shock positions x = ]("
,
replaces the relation x=k (equation 3.9)
The boundary condition at the wall is u/v = - 01 2 on the two faces; but v is
small and therefore these may be replaced by u = on x = 0. On the circular arc
boundary with y > 0, p=u=O and v = qI81(~+~M-2); on that y < 0, p=u=O

3 3
and v =- q
I
us:
2
(43 + -23 M -2)
-
Following Lighthill (1949) the boundary condition on the diffracted shock is

obtained as
u =Aop Ydv = B dp on x= v (3.61)

dy 0 dy "Q
where
A =(4M2 +2)(4M2 -1)~

o 7M2 -1 M2 + 2
3(M2 -1)
B - --r--::--....,.
0- 2(M2 +2)
Solution of the boundary value problem:
In terms of p alone, we obtain here also the differential equation(3.16). On the
wall ap = 0 (obtained from the equation (3.8. On the curved positions of the
ax
boundary p=O. At x = ko the equation (3.61) holds which is same as (3.14) except
that the constants A, B,k are replaced by Ao ,Bo ,k 0 .There will also be the
condition that the change in v along the shock from the bottom to the top be
(3.62)
Diffraction Of Nomwl Shock Wave 63
Busemann's Transformation ~
When Busemann' s transformation to a (p , e) plane is made where
2p cose 2p sine
x y
1 +p2 1 +p2
the equation (3.16) becomes Laplace's equation in ( p , e) as plane polar coordinates.

The transformed boundaries in the 1;, plane are shown in Fig. (3.19)
The boundary conditions are as follows:
On the wall 8= .::2

' an
op = 0 (an is in the normal direction)
On the two arcs of the circle p = 1, P = O. On x =, ko which becomes that arc of the
circle 2p cos 8 =ko(l + p2) which is inside p = 1 (which it cuts orthogonally)
(3.63)
exactly as in (3.23). Here dn is along the outward normal, and as is in the positive
l:angential direction
0
0 C
C C
E B E E B
A A
F A
F F
(X, y) plane ~ plane ZI plane
Figure 3.19 Transformation of boundaries from (x,y) plane to t; plane and then to ZI
plane.
Now put 1;, = p e iO and making the foIIowing conformal transformation
(3.64)
Then the diameter DEF (Figure 3.19) becomes the segment XI = 0 , 0 < YI < 1t
( where ZI = XI +iy, ) and the circular arcs D C and F A becomes parts of YI Te
and Yl = 0 respectively; while on ABC
ZI = -IIog 1+2pcos8+p2 + 1.{1t- + tan -I

?
psin8
+ tan
-I psin8 }
2 1- 2pcos8 +p- 2 1 + psin e 1 - pcose
11
=- o g - -
I+k o + 1_{1t
- + tan
_12 Psi ne}
? = FI.~ + IYl
-
2 1- ko 2 1- p- (3.65)
where A is shown as a constant, and
tan(YI -~)= ko tane(l- k oz sec z8r Yz

so that the relationship between Y and YI on ABC is
(3.66)
Thus the Z plane is a rectangle 0 < Xl < A., 0 < Yl < Te. On DC and FA , p=o, on
DEF dp =0 i.e. ~P = 0 . On ABC we have

dn oX I
(~~) _ - Ao k~ cos Yl + Bo ko k~-' sec YI (3.67)

( ~~)-
o k~ sin Yl
on ~ =A (3.68)
By symmetry of the boundary condition p is an even function of YI so that its

derivative normal to EB vanishes, hence also on EB (YI = Tt/2 ) in the new plane.
= 0
Here W(ZI) = ~p
~p in regular function of ZI . which is purely imaginary on
- i
YI
oX I
DEF, DC and FA vanishes at E. On ABC
argw(zl) = tan-I ( tany]_z 2

Ao - Bo ko k sec YI
J (3.69)
= tan-I (a. tan YI)+ tan-I (ptan YI)
where = A _ Bo ko
o k,2'
o
so that by using Ao and Bo of (3.61), a. , p are positive members
(7M 2 -1)(M 2 + 2)~ (M2 -1)(2IM 2 - 3)Yz

(3.70)
(M2 +S)(4M 2 -l)Yz
The solutionis finally obtained in the form
(3.71 )
K is a normalization factor determined by numerical integration, v z and v4 are theta

functions and
(a -1)/ _(~ -1)/

where a = /(a +1) and b- /(~ +1)
The normalization factor K is determined from the equation (3.62) and (3.66) and is
given by
"(a)
f.....E.
O aYI _'
sec YI dy =-~ - +- M- 2 )
Ok'(42
Bo 3 3
(3.72)
XI-A
The expression for p )

(d/aYI has been deduced by Lighthill (1950) and therefore ,
X\=A
through numerical integration of the integral on the L.H.S. of (3.72) K is known. Table
3 gives the value of K for different Pho .

Table - 3
2 3 00
PI/
Ipo
0.420 0.331 0.158
Wall Pressure Distribution
The wall pressure distribution is given by
(3.73)
where
q = , a and b have already been defined. By integrating
equation (3.73) Lighthill has plotted the pressure deficiency l( P2 _Po )along
(P2 - P3;)
I.J
the wall and the curves are shown in figures 3.20, 3.21 , 3.22 , 3.23 for values of
Pvnp = 1, 2, 3 and 00 respectively. Lighthill concludes that quantitatively in a

( 0
given problem, the distribution of (P2 - P%P2 _ Po) after the incident shock has
travelled a given distance beyond the corner is ( to within about 25 %) independent of
shock strength.
Figure 3.20 Shock pattern and wall pressure distribution after reflexion
=
4
8 - ~). Suffixes on the pressure p refer to regions so
numbered in the figure . .12. 1 . (M. J. Lighthill , 1950)

Po
D(ffraCfion qr Normal Shock Wave 69
Figure 3.21 Shock pattern and wall pressure distribution after retlexion
=
4
o = 1), Suffixes on the pressure p refer to regions so
numbered in the figure . .E!. = 2. (M. J. Lighthill , 1950)
Po
Figure 3.22 Shock pattern and wall pressure distribution after reflexion
= =
1
= "21) . Suffixes .
on the pressure p refer to reglOns so
4
numbered in the figure . .i = 3. (M. 1. Lighthill , 1950)

Po
Diffraction Of NOfmai Shock Wave 71
Figure 3.23 Shock pattern and wall pressure distribution after retlexion
= 8 ~). Suffixes on the pressure p refer to regions so

4
numbered in the figure. Jl 00 (M. 1. Lighthill , 1950)

Po
REFERENCES
1. Busemann, A.
Infinitesimal Kegelige Uberschallstromung. Luftfahrforschung, 20, 105. (1943)
2. Fletcher, C.H. , Weimer, D.K. & Bleakney, W.

634 - 635. (1950)
3. Lighthill, M.J.
The diffraction of blast I. Proc. Roy .Soc A, 198,454-470. (1949)
4. Lighthill, M.J.
The diffraction of blast II. Proc. Roy. Soc A, 200, 554 - 565. (1950)
5. Srivastava, R.S.
Diffraction of a plane straight shock wave. British Aeronautical Res. Council, c.P. No.
603 . (1963)
CHAPTER - IV
DIFFRACTION OF OBLIQUE SHOCK WAVE
Lighthill (1949) has considered the diffraction of a plane shock travelling

parallel to a wall and meeting an edge where the wall turns through a small angle. The
analogous problem for a plane shock impinging on the wall at an incidence together
with the reflected shock has been considered by Srivastava and Ballabh (1955),
Srivastava (1968) and Srivastava and Chopra (1970). In Lighthill's case the relative
outflow from the normal shock is always subsonic but in the case of oblique shock
wave, relative outflow from reflected shock can be subsonic, sonic or supersonic. In
the oblique case therefore, three cases have to be considered. Before one considers the
reflected diffracted shock, it would be necessary to consider the intermediate region
between the incident and reflected shock waves.
Intermediate Region (Region between incident and reflected shock)
CD @)
Q2,P2 ,P2 ,0 2 0, ~o' Po' <10
Reflec ted sroc k / - - _ ncident shock
Figure 4.1 Schematic drawing for oblique shock configuration passing over a bend.
(R. S. Srivastava & R. Ballabh , 1955).
In Figure 4.1 values of velocity, pressure, density, and sound velocity are
denoted by subscript (0) in front of incident shock wave, with subscript (l) in the
intermediate region and with subscript (2) in the region behind the reflected shock. U
in the figure denotes the velocity of the point of intersection of the incident and
reflected shock, and 8 is the angle of bend.
Since in region (0), air is at rest, continuity of tangential component gives the
velocity of air in region (1) to be normal to the incident shock wave. We would,
therefore, obtain across the incident and reflected shock the following relation:
Across the incident shock
where U =U sin a o' a o = 1 YPo

Po
Across the reflected shock
p, = {I + (:.:~,~,)' )
u =U sin a 2 , <II =-qI cos(a o +( 2 ) ,
(4.1)
Also from figure we have

Diffraction Of Oblique Shock Wave 75
ql cos8 ' = q2 cosa 2 , 8' =a o + a 2 - 2"1t

In this region (1) let Qp PI' 0"1' SI be the velocity , pressure, density and
entropy at any point. Choose (X, Y) axes with origin at the corner and X - axis along
the original wall produced.

D a
If - = - + qI V' signifies time rate of change for a
Dt at
given fluid element, the equations of conservation of mass and momentum can be
written
DO" -
Dt + 0" I div QI = 0
_:..:::.1.
,
(4.2)
and if there is no heat transfer between fluid elements by friction , conduction or
radiation the entropy will satisfy DS I = O.

Dt
On the assumption that QI' PI' 0"1 differ only by small quantities from the
values {ql sin a o (= uJ, -ql cos u o (= vJ}, PI' PI the equations (4.2) along with the
entropy equation can be approximated as
dO" dO" dO" .-

+U _ I + V _ I + P dtv Q = 0
at
_I
I dX I dY I I
dQ- dQ- dQ- I

__I +U _ _I + V _ _I + - V'P =0
dt I ax I dY I (4.3)
PI
aS
I I I dS dS 0
-+u -+ v-=
dt I ax loY
The entropy and density vanatIOns can now be eliminated from the entire
problem since by virtue of the last equation.
dO"l dO"l dO"l

-- + u -
at I ax + v lay
- can be replaced by
( aPI) (aPI + u aPI + v aPI ) = _1 (aPI + u aPI + v aPI )

a PI s dt I dX I dY a l 2 dt I ax I dY
owing to the thermodynamic principle that the density is a function of pressure and of
entropy alone.
Making use of the transformation
X-ut
_ _I =x Y-vt
_ _I =y,
al t ' al t
<21 ={ul(l + u) , v l(1 +v)} (4.4)
P -p =p
_1_ _1
alP I
the first two equations of (4.3) become
dp dp du dv
x-+y-=u -+v -
ax ay I dx I dy
X au + y dU)u = dp
(
ax dy I ax
X av + y dV)v _ op
(
ox oy 1- oy (4.5)
Putting uU I = TI, vV I =v, these become
ap dp du dv
x-+y-=-+-
dx ay ax ay
dU du dp
x-+y-=-
dx dy dx
dv dv dp
x-+y-=- (4.6)
ax
dy dy
Eliminating TI, v the equation in p is
(ddX
d
V2 P = x-+y-+1 )( x-+y-
dp
dy
op )
ax ay (4.7)
This is hyperbolic for x 2 +y2 > 1 and elliptic for x2 +i < 1 . its
characteristics are all tangents to the unit circle. As a first approximation the position
of P is given by
U -_U VI
x =Ut, Y =0 i.e. x = _ 1 ,y =--
al al
P therefore lies inside the unit circle if
(4.8)
Substituting forql and a l from (4.1), we see that (4.8) is satisfied if
For this to be true, U 2 must not lie between the roots of the equation
7x 2 -2x(3U 2 -2a o2 )-5a o4 = 0

One root of the equation is negative. Hence the intermediate region will be
disturbed if
where M =~ is the Mach number.

ao
Now from the Rankine-Hugoniot equations
(4.10)
Putting y = 1.4 and ~ = Po we obtain from (4.10)

PI
(4.11)
Substituting M2from (4.11) in (4.9) and simplifying we find that for

intermediate region to be disturbed
(4.12)
or in other words intermediate region will or will not be disturbed accordi

ng as
where
(4.13)
We shall show that a o is greater than the extreme value of the angle
of incidence
consistent with the regular reflection of shock wave.
In Chapte r II we have discussed the theory of Bleakney & Taub (1949).
In order
to recapitulate the theory we reproduce the figure 2.2 here. Referri
ng to Figure 4.2
and the results obtained in Chapter - II, the equation for the extrem
e angle of incidence
(a e) for which the regular reflection is possible is given by
? ? )2
x-? ( l+rrx- (1 + Ylx 2 )(YI -l}{(y -1)(1 + YlX2)+ 2}{(Y + 1)(YI -1) + 2}
(4.14)
where
x = cot a e
D{f(racrion of Oblique Shock Wave 79
w o
Figure 4.2 Regular Reflection (W. Bleakney & A. H. Taub , 1949)
Now
_ (y + 1) + (y - 1)~ _ 6 + ~
11- --- (4.15)
(y - 1) + (y + l)~ 1+ 6~
since y has been taken equal to 1.4 .

Also we note that as (O:S; ~ :s; I), we would have (O:S; 11:S; 6) . Putting y = 1.4
in equation (4.14), we obtain
25t(t,2 t +1)2 =4(t' -1)(6t' -l)(tt' +l)(tt' +6) (4.16)
where t =x 2 and 11 =t'
6+~
From (4.13) and using the fact that 11 = - - we get
1+ 6/;
80 interaction Of Shock Waves
2 6(11-1) 6(t'-1)
cot a =--- =---- (4.17)
o 5 112 5 t,2
Now if we regard t as independent variable and t' as dependent variable we can

plot (cot 2 a o' versus 11) from (4.17) and another (cot 2 a e versus 11) from (4.16).
Solving (4.16) and (4.17) we get the points of intersection of the two curves as
t' 29/44
t' = I /6
t' 00
t' =
The first three values are inadmissible as 1 ~ t' ~ 6.
The two curves intersects only at the point given by t' 1. From (4.16) and
(4.17) it is clear that when t' = 1 , t = 0 that is
1t
a e =a 0 =-
2
From the curve (4.16)
( ~)
dt' t'~1
= 48

and for the curve (4.17)
( ~)
dt' t'~1
= 12

that is
( ~)
dt' t'~1 (for the curve 4,16l
=4.(~)
dt' t'~1 (for the curve 4.17)
It is easy to see that the two curves given by (4.16) and (4.17) represent
continuous function for 1$ t' $ 6. We therefore conclude, the curve given by (cot 2 a e
versus 11) remain always above the curve (cot 2 a o' versus 11) for (1$ t' $ 6) .
Consequently for every admissible value of 11 ( or ~ ) i.e. for all possible shock
strengths
So analytically the region between the incident and reflected shock will not be
dIsturbed for all possible shock strengths. It may be interesting to find out if the unit
circle intersects the reflected shock. We will see that this is also not the case, that is
reflected shock is not intersected by the unit circle. The equation of the retlected shock
is given by
y + -VI (1t)(
= tan - - u 2 X -U- u
- -l )
al 2 al
Now finding the intersection of the unit circle it is easy to see that the reflected
shock wave will not intersect unit circle if
that is (U~IUI )sin U z - :: cosu z > 1
But
ul = ql sinu o
VI = - ql cosu o
so that the condition becomes
>1
that is >I
al
which is the case in the intermediate region. The unit circle therefore does not intersect
the reflected shock wave. The results discussed in the section have been proved by
Srivastava and Ballabh (1955). This result has received experimental confirmation
(Srivastava & Deschambault (1984), Figure 4.17) .
Region behind the reflected diffracted shock wave
Let us suppose that at t = 0 the shock line ( line of intersection of the plane
incident shock and plane reflected shock) coincides with the edge of the wedge and
the velocity pressure, density, and entropy of the flow field behind the reflected
diffracted shock after interaction be q; , p; , p; , and S; . Choose X , Y axes with
origin at the corner and X-axis along the original wall produced. Then the laws of
conservation of mass and momentum referred to this coordinate system can be written
as
D'
Dt + p'2 V q-'2 = 0
-.J2 ,
(4.18)
Dq;
- 1p
+-v n ' - 0
- (4.19)
Dt p;
2
If there is no heat conduction or radiation, the entropy satisfies the equation
DS; =0
Dt '
On the assumption that q;, p; ,p; differ by small quantities which they had
before diffraction, the equations (4.18) and (4.19) along with the entropy equation can
be approximated to
-l(a'
a 2 2 at 2 ax
a')
--.I2+ q ~ +p Vq-'
2 2
o (4.20)
a-' a-' 1
~+q ......5k+-Vp' =0 (4.21)
at 2 ax P2 2
Making use of the transformations
-, (4.22)
~=(l+u, v)
q2
the equations (4.20) and (4.21) yield the following equations
dp ap au dv
x-+y-=-+- (4.23)
dx dy ax dy
du au ap
x-+y-=- (4.24)
dx dy ax
{)y ov op
x- + y- = - (4.25)
ax oy oy
In the new axes the origin is at a point on the original wall produced. The
straight part of the reflected shock lies along a fixed line
x = k - Y cot (Xz
where
k= (U-qz)
az
The comer is at the point (-Mz' 0) where Mz = qz I ~. Immediately behind the
reflected diffracted shock the condition at a point will be given by the right hand sides
of equation (4.1) if U' is replaced therein by the shock velocity normal to itself and iL
denotes the total velocity in the region between the incident and reflected shock.
Now since the whole field suffers a uniform expansion in time about the comer,
the velocity on each point of the shock is ( Xlt , YIt ) in the ( X , Y ) system of
coordinates. Hence the velocity of the shock normal to itself is h where this the
vector perpendicular drawn from the comer to the tangent to the shock at that point. In
terms of h , the boundary conditions at the shock are
(4.26)
p; ~ p{(jh\-\cl:\Y _a;Z)
= (4.27)
where
q; = ql sin(S' + )sin(Xz + ) , ql sin(S' + )cos(Xz + ) ,
being small.
Let the equation of the shock in the new coordinates be x = k - Y cot (xz + f(y)
where f(y) could be regarded as small as the angle of bend is small. In figure 4.3, ON
is t h and is denoted by
( X - Y :~ )sin z'V, (X - Y :~ )sin 'V cos 'V

where
'V = cx z +
Rerkded shock
Inc i den t shock
o~----------------------~+-------------------
Cor ner
Figure 4.3 Reflected diffracted shock wave (R. S. Srivastava, 1968) .

Therefore
t h '" {( X - Y :~ )sincxzcosa z (tancx 2 + 2) ,
(X - Y :~ }sinaz cosa l + cos 2CX z )}
Hence
h "" {U +al(y) -a 2 yf'(y) +U sin 2u 2 f'(y)}sin 2 u 2 ,

(4.28)
{(U +al(y) - a 2yf'(y) sin u 2 cos u 2 +U sin 2 u 2 cos 2u 2 f'(y)}
As f(y) is small, terms containing f(y) f'(y), y{f'(y)}2 have been neglected.
We have from the first relation across the reflected shock (Ref. equation 4.1)
(4.29)
or since the tangential velocities across reflected shock is equal
(4.30)
where
(fr' - qJ = (V sin u 2 , V cos ( 2 ) ,
V =(U sin u 2 - ql Sine) = (u' - qJ

Also from equation (4.26) we have
(4.31)
Subtracting (4.30) from (4.31) we obtain
<Jr
(4.32)
Now substituting the values we obtain
II =[{F sin 2<X2 +(U sin 2<X2 -q l sin8' cos <X 2 ) sin 2<x z f'(y)} ,
{F sin <X2 cos <X2 + (U cos 2<X2 + ql sin 8' sin <X 2 ) sin 2<X2 f'(y)}]
where
Now
(Ii --q;) =[Y sin <X2 + {F +(U sin 2<X2 - ql sin 8' cos <x 2)f'(y)}sin z<x 2] ,
[Y cos <X2 + Fsin <X2 cos <X z + (U sin <X2 cos 2<X2 +
2 ql sin 8' sin 3 <x 2 )f'(y)]
These give
yZ 12 =-(F +qjsin 8'cos <x 2f'(y)sin 2 <X 2 ,

-{F sin <X 2cos <X2 + sin 2<xi'(y)(U - qjsin 8'sin <xJ}
Hence from equation (4.32) we obtain
~q2U =F sin2<X2(1 + ~:)+ f'(y) sin2<X2{U sin 2<X2 - qjsin 8'cos <Xz(l- ~:)}
(4.33)
(4.34)
Also
(4.35)
Now the equations (4.33), (4.34) and (4.35) can be put in the form
11 =AF +Bf'(y) (4.36)

v =AjF +B1f'(y) (4.37)
P =A2F +B2f'(y) (4.38)
where
5sin (X2 cos (X2

6q2
(1 +~)
y2
5YPIsin (X2
3a 2P2q2
5sin
6q22(X 2 { U ( cos 2(X2 + a~22) +q1sin e' sin (X2 ( 1 - ~
a 2)}
5UYP1sin 2(X2 cos (X2

3a 2P2q2
Now equations (4.36), (4.37) and (4.38) can be put in the form
dU =(B - AG}fll(y)
dy
dv =(B 1 - A1G )fll(y)
dy
~~ = (B z - AzG)fll(y)
Hence , at the shock boundary, we have
dp = B z -A 2 G ,dU = B z -A 2 G dv
(4.39)
dy B-AG dy Bl -A1G dy
Now equations (4.36), (4.37) and (4.38) have now to be solved under the
following boundary conditions
On y = 0
v =-0 X >-M2
V =0 X <-M2
On the shock boundary x = k - Y cot U z , u , v , p are related by the equations (4.39).

On the remaining boundary between the disturbed flow and the uniform flow u = v =
p = O.
Elimination of u and v
By eliminating u and v from equations (4.23), (4.24) and (4.25) we get a single
second order partial differential equation in p. The equation is
(4.40)
This equation is hyperbolic for x 2 + yZ >1 and elliptic for X Z+ yZ <1 , its
characteristics are all tangents to the unit circle. There are three important cases that
need to be considered. These are when (U - qz) / a 2 is less than 1, equal to 1 and
greater than 1. In the cases (U - q2) / a 2 ~1 it is reasonable to assume that the region of
disturbance will be enclosed by the arc of the unit circle, the wall segment and the
reflected diffracted shock. The region of disturbance is shown in the figures 4.4, 4.5,
4.6.
When (U - q2) / a 2 > 1 the region of disturbance is as shown in figures 4.7,
4.8 and 4.9.
Now the boundary condition in terms of p can be given firstly for the case
(U - q2) / a 2 ~1 and then for the case (U - q2) / a 2 > 1.
(a) M2 < 1
i) On the wall y=O, dp

dy
= except at the corner.
At the corner
d
J .:Ectx
-M 2 iC
Lt =M 0 (4.41)
y->O
-M2-C
dy 2
ii) On the circle x 2 + l =1

p = , > ,x <
y k - Y cot u2 (4.42)
(b) M2 > 1
i) On the wall dP
dy

= (4.43)
ii) On the unit circle x 2 + y2 = 1
1
x<-- (4.44)
M2
1
P =0, x>-- (4.45)
M2

U~IT CIRCLE
c w'
Figure 4.4 The configuration in (x,y) plane for the case when the corner is included
within the unit circle. (u -

az
q2 ::; 1
91
Diffraction qr Oblique Shock Wave
CD
0
UNIT ClIi(U
0 @
A c /At'
W
Figure 4.5 The configuration in (x,y) plane for the case when the unit circle passes
through the corner. (U - q2 ::; 1

a2
Figure 4.6 The configuration in (x,y

) plane for the case when the
corner lies outside
the unit circle. (U - q2 ::;; 1

a2
Diffraction Of Oblique Sh
ock Wave
93
ffiZ
00 ::
8
--'"0
Figure 4.7 The configu

ration in (x,Y) plane for
the case when the corne
r is included
within the unit circle. (

~ ~
a
>1 , q2 < 1\ .
2 a2 )
....
Z::.c:
Wu
3~
Zl fl
Figure 4.8 The configu

ration in (x, y) plane for
the case when the unit
circle passes
through the corner. ( ~>1

~ a
2
Diffraction Of Oblique Shock Wav 95
e
Figure 4.9 The configuration in (x,y

) plane for the case when the corn
er lies outside
the unit circle. (U - q2 > 1

a2
(a) M2 O -M
, dy -
ii) On the arc CD of the unit circle
p=o (4.47)
whereas on the arc AB
p (4.48)
P3 is the pressure in the region 3 and is obtained with the help of equations (4.1) by
changing <Xo to <Xo + o.
(b) Mz > I
i) On the wall dp =0
dy
ii) On the arc AB
p (4.49)
whereas on the arc CD, p = 0 is true only from the point of intersection of the shock
and the unit circle up to the point of contact of the tangent from the corner to the unit
circle i.e. on CT,
Diffraction Qf Oblique Shock Wave 97
p = 0
The region 5 bounded between the tangent, the wall and the arc of the unit circle
TO is the Prandtl - Meyer expansion zone. The flow in the region is uniform and to a
linear approximation
(4.50)
which leads to
p on TO (4.51)
On the shock boundary x = k - Y cot (X2 , P satisfies the equation
(k _ ycot<X 2){(k _ ycow 2) ap + y a p } = ap _ y B - AG(Y()) ap

ax ay ax B2 - AzG Y ay
BI - AIG(y) Clp
+ (k - y cot (X2 ) ---"----'--:=--:-
B2 - A 2 G(y) Cly
(4.52)
where G(y) has been written in the place of G to distinguish between the constants A's
and B' s occurring in the problem. Now since v = - 8 at (k, 0 )
(4.53)
where [' denotes the diffracted portion of the shock starting from the wall.
Busemann 's Transformation
Let the transformation be x = r cose ,y = r sin e where

Taking this transformation into consideration the equation (4.40) becomes the
Laplace's equation
a2 p 1 Op 1 a2 p 0
-+--+--= (4.54)
ap2 p ap p2 ae 2
in ( p , e ) as polar coordinates.
Now the circle r = 1 becomes the circle p = 1. Also we have r =2;(+ p2

, so that the line x = k - y cot <X2 becomes an arc of the circle
2psin(S+<x 2) .
----:;2~- = ksm<X 2 (4.55)
1+ P
\ Shock
Unit circle
\
\
\
\
.- 0' C
_- ...... - Wall
(~- <X 2)
Figure 4.10 Boundaries in the r, plane. (R. S. Srivastava, 1968)

;t:'
Figure 4.11 Boundaries in the t; plane. (R. S. Srivastava & M. G. Chopra, 1970)
Let us now rotate the initial line through an angle (~- <xz) . The circle
2psin(S+<x 2) .
-'----::'2--='-=ksm<X 2 is transformed into the circle 2pcosE>=ksin<x?(1+p2).
1+ P
In the cases (U - q2)ja 2 ~ 1 the circle p = cuts the circle
2pcosE> = ksin<x 2(1 + pZ) orthogonally at cosE> = ksin<X 2 . However in the case
2pcosE> .
(U - q2)ja 2 > 1 the circle p = 1 cuts ( 2) = k SIn <X2 orthogonally at
1+ P
[1- 2It - cos- 1 k.sin<x 2 ]
and [1 - cos- 1 k.sin <X 2]

The transformed boundaries in the t; - plane for both the cases (U - Q2)/a Z :S: 1
and (U - q2 )/a z > 1 are shown in Figures 4.10 and 4.11 respectively
Following Lighthill (1949) we now have
~
-:\ ' K
(2 z)~ dp
_ _ tanE>+ 1 - K sec E> -:\
2
_ox_= on (4.56)
~ 1-K2 l-K 2 dP
dy' dS
where x' ,y' refer to new axes, E> is measured from the new initial line, K = k sina2
and dn and ds are elements normal and tangential to the circular arc
2pcose = ksina 2 (1 + pZ) respectively towards its centre and away from the initial line
e = o.
Now
(4.57)
From (4.52) we have
(4.58)
Now putting
y =K[ cosa 2 + sin a 2 tan e] (4.59)
in (4.58) and simplifying we obtain
dp
:.\ _ _
uX C+Dtane+Etan e+Ftan
_ _ _ _ _ _---::--_
2 e
_---::--
3
(4.60)
dp - C' + D'tan e + E'tan 2 e + F'tan 3 e
dy
where
C' =0
F' = -A'K
2
2 cosa
2
B' = B - AUsina 2 cosa 2
B; = BI - AIU sinaz cosa 2
Substituting dP/d,Ya'p/dy from (4.60) in (4.57) we obtain

~
dX' _ C\ + D\ tan 8 + E\ tan 2 8 + F\ tan 3 8 (4.61)
::l.,. - C'\ + D'\ tan8+ E'I tan 2 8+ F'tan
_vp_ I
38
dy'
where
C = C' + C tan a 2
D =D' +Dtana 2
E = E' + Etana 2
C; = C' tan a 2 - C
D; = Dtana 2 - D
F( = F' tan a 2 - F =0
From (4.55) and (4.59) we obtain
dp
~~ = f(tan8) = f{ tan ( 8+ a -~)}
2 (4.62)
dS
where e in the second expression is measured from the original position of the initial
line. The function f is known. Putting ~ = p cos e, 11 = p sin e the corner becomes
the point
, 11 =0 (4.63)
and the condition holding there is
i.e.
Lt
11->0
f dlldP d~ =[rp- ddrP] r~M2 M ()
1
2
M2() (4.64)
The other boundary conditions remain unaltered.
~onformal transformation (U -qJ/a 2 > 1
Now P is given as harmonic function satisfying certain boundary conditions in

the quadrilateral ABCD with AB, BC and CD as circular arcs and DA as straight
segment (Fig 4.11) . The solution of this potential problem is obtained by transforming
the region bounded by ABCD to semi-infinite medium in the Zl plane by the
following successive transformations
(i) The transformation
Z = (K + iK'){i _
I ~ _
2K'
(K + iK')
}, ~ =pe iH
(4.65)
transforms the region bounded by ABCD to a quarter space having a semi-circular cut
with centre ( 0 , a + I ) and radius a (Figure 4.l2(a) ) where
104 Interaction qr Shock Waves
K'
a=------- and
K'sina 2 + Kcosa 2
K - sinaz
l-Ksina z +K'cosa z
The circular arc DIAl is the mapping of the wall AIBI of unit circle, BIC I of
the shock front, and CPI of the other parts of the unit circle.
(ii) This quarter space is transformed to the region between two semi-circles
( Figure 4. 12(b with the help of conformal transformation
Z = a (4.66)
Z (a + 1) + iZ I
The radius of inner circle is b = a / {2(a + I)} and of the outer one is unity.
(iii) The transformation
Z - (Zz -A.) (467)

3 - (A.Z z -1) .
converts the region between two non-concentric semi-circles to the region between two
A. = [cosa l + (cos l a l - K'2 )J.c2"]

concentric semi circles of radii unity and
K'
(Fig 4. 12(c
(iv) The transformation Z4 = - 2: + i log Z3

maps the region between two
2
concentric semi-circles to the region bounded by the rectangle (Figure 4. 12(d having
(v) Elliptic function transformation

z
J
=sn(Z4
a"
'K) or
(4.68)
where a' =TC/3{CK) , iC is the modulus of transformation satisfying
K'('K) _ 10gA
K(iC) -lr
and K'('K) = j(-h - i(2) converts the region bounded by the rectangle to a seml-
infinite plane (Figure 4. 12(e. In the transformed Zl plane.
to -1 corresponds to the part of the unit circle C4D4
-1 to +1 corresponds to the wall D 4A4
1
+1 to +- corresponds to the other part of the unit circle A4B4
iC
1
+- to +00 corresponds to the parts B4 0 of the shock front, while
i(
- 00 to corresponds to the remaining part of the shock

iC
Under these transformations the shock boundary condition (4.56) with the help
of the equation (4.61) becomes
C
, VI
(0, tt+V
,
c x,
Figure 4.12 (a) Boundaries in the Zl plane. (R. S. Srivastava & M. G. Chopra, 1970)
~--------+----------r-------------~~~~------~X2
Figure 4.12 (b) Boundaries in the Z2 plane. (R. S. Srivastava & M. G. Chopra, 1970)
~~r-~-----------+---------~~-4--,r------~X~
Figure 4.12 (c) Boundaries in the Z3 plane. (R. S. Srivastava & M. G. Chopra, 1970)
109
Diffraction Of Oblique Shock Wave
,--- ...- --1 -=- ---- --84

o
~
uNITe/Re tE WALL UNIl CIRca SHOCK
G. Chopr a, 1970)
Figure 4.12 (d) Boundaries in the Z4 plane. (R. S. Srivastava & M.
&
Figure 4.12 (e) Boundaries in the Zl plane. (R. S. Srivastava & M. G. Chopr a, 1970)
dP
C +D tan0+E tan 2 0+F tan 3 0 K2 (I-K 2 sec 2 0)Yz dy
I I I I =-tan0+ I
C'I + D'I tan 0 + E'I tan 2 0 + F'tan
I
3 0 K'2 K'2 -
dP
aX I
(4.69)
giving
(4.70)
K' (Z1 2 -1)

Here tan E> = - . (2 ) where ZI is replaced in terms of ZI with the help
K ZI +1
of transformation (i) to (v)
The corner is transformed successively to
l-(I-M 2)14
_ _ _ _2_ _ ( _ sin CX z + i cos( 2 ) in 1;; - plane
M2
K'(I- M/)~ + i(K + M2 sin cxJ

in - ZI plane
and
It
+ in Z4 - plane
2
The coordinates of the corner Xo in the ZI plane are obtained with the help of
transformation (v)
D{ffraction Of Oblique Shock Wave III
The wall boundary condition becomes :p = 0 for -1 < Xl < 1 and

uYI
the discontinuity condition (4.64) at the corner now becomes
= (4.71)
The condition on the parts of the unit circle can be written as ~p = 0 . But
uX I
when M2 > I this must be supplemented with the condition
Lt
y,->O
f~
dX
dX
\
I = (4.72)
which holds at Xo in the Zl plane corresponding to
l-i(M -l)~
S - plane
2
_ _ _:...2_ _ _ ( _ sin a? + i cos ( 2) in
M2 -
i {K'(M 2 2 -l)Yz + (K + M2 sin ( 2)}

In - Zl plane
1 + M 2(K sinaz - K' cosa z)
and
IOgJ~(M~2K___+__s_in_a~2~)(~M~2~Z_-~I)_Yz_~~c_o_s2_a~z___K_'_Z)
1
1t i
+ in Z4 - plane
2 K + M z sinaz
The solution is obtained by the introduction of the function
. dP
1--
dX\ dy\
which is regular throughout the upper half Zl plane, since p is harmonic. In terms of
w(z\), the discontinuity condition (4.71) and (4.72) can be expressed by saying that
(4.73)
Equation (4.53) becomes
J BI - AI G(y) ie.. dx, = b (4.74)

_= B2 - A2 G(y) ax,
where y = K (cos (X2 + sin (X2 tan e) and tan e is replaced in terms of z\ with
the help of conformal transformations.
Now log w( z, ) is a function with known argument on the real axis of the Zl
plane. Therefore w( z, ) is given by the Poisson s integral formula
I
(4.75)
where G I is a real constant.

The above integral when evaluated for points lying on the real axis, will involve
two other constants G2 and H, which arises due to the discontinuity at z\ = xo.
Finally, the constants G2 and G 1 merge, and we are left with only two constants G
and H which are determined from the conditions (4.73) and (4.74) respectively.
The function w( z, ) is completely imaginary on the segments of the real axis
from - ~ to -1 and + 1 to + ~ , real on -1 to + 1 and the value of the arguments
is prescribed on the remaining range by (4.70). To determine w(z\) the integral on the
right hand side of (4.75) is broken into five integrals ranging from
- 00 V - 1
to 1K' V to
K - 1' - 1 to + 1, + 1 to + 7K
1/ and + 1'K
l{ to + 00
D{tfraction of Oblique Shock Wave 113
Taking into consideration the boundary conditions and simplifying, W(ZI) is

given by
w(zJ
1og--
G1
I
1 -:r;
+ -
1t _"
f
1
f
+=
+ -
1t j
"
(4.76)
Making use of the substitutions
= - (~ + 4- 1) and t = C' 4-
+ 1)
In the first and second integrals on the left hand side respectively, and merging
constants G j and G2 we get
Go [H (Zj - xo) - 1] {z/ - C~2 W~ (-z _..!.)% (z _.!.)-Il/rr e')

(Zj-x o) (z/-l)g, I K I K
(4.77)
where
f ( 't ) and f ( 't' ) and are values of ~ and W respectively for different values
of. 't and 't'
1 I
are the values of the argument of W(ZI) on the segments -00 to -- and - to +00
K K
respectively and the integrals have been approximately evaluated by Simpson's rule.
The function W (Zl ) satisfies all the boundary conditions, viz. the function is
real on the wall, imaginary on the segments of the unit circle, and has argument ~ or ~'
on the shock front. On the segments of the real aXIs
-00 to - =, -=
1 1
to +=
1
and =
1
to +00 the value of w( Zl ) is obtained by
and respectively.
KKK K
substituting W = 0, ~ = W= ~ =
DffJracfion Of Oblique Shock Wave lIS
Numerical discussion and the pressure distribution on the wall
For carrying out computations for different incident shocks strengths we have to
choose the angle of incidence which ensures supersonic relative outflow from the
reflected shock. It is interesting to note that this situation results for nearly the whole
range of the angle of incidence except the range between sonic angle and extreme angle
(Figure 4.13) which is in conformity with the regular reflection theory. We have
reproduced the Figure 2.4 as it is very much relevant here for understanding the proper
choice of angle of incidence.
90 I
80
/
70
MACH
HLECTIO J
60
de
~~-
50 ~I
0-
y---=:; ~ 'P'a( S
40
30
REGULAR.
REHEeTION
20
to
o " '2. 3 '4 5 .6 '7 'S 9 \'0

!t/p-
I
Figure 4.13 Critical angles of incidence in shock reflection : Theoretical limit for
regular reflection ex e ; experimentally observed onset of Mach reflection ex; ; and
conditions for sonic outflow ex, ; versus inverse pressure ration across incident shock.
(W. Bleakney & A. H. Taub , 1949)
Numerical results have been obtained for the following parameters
ao a2 M2
Po (U-Q2)
PI a2
0.5 20 14.93 3.02595 0.25418
0.2 20 10.84 3.34748 0.43670
It may, however be pointed out that during course of numerical computation it

was observed that the configuration 4.8 and 4.9 arose only for very high shock
strengths and that too when the angle of incidence is near the sonic angle. The curve
depicting the range for which configurations 4.8 and 4.9 can arise is plotted in Figure
4.14.
~ ~
~
It
\:r 80 EXTREME ANGLE CIJI/VE
.....
Q
...
~ 10
...tI
'-'
60
~
II.!
0 50
tJ
~ 40
"-
I;)
.....
30
.....
<.!I
~
q:,
20
10
0 02 C)4 O'b 08 10
SHOCK STRENGTH (=~/It)
Figure 4.14 Regions of supersonic (~: > 1) and subsonic (~: < 1) in the
plane of angle of incidence and shock strength.

At a point (x,O) of the wall (-1 < x < 1 ) the coordinates in the Z4 plane is
given by
(4.79)
Corresponding to points of the Z4 plane the value of Zl can be read with the
help of the elliptic integral transformation given by (4.68) and by the use of Jahnke and
Emde (1960) . As x varies from -1 to + 1 ,Xl also varies from -1 to + 1 . The val ue
of p is obtained at different points of the wall by integration of the pressure derivative
(4.80)
 is obtained from (4.78) by putting 13 = l3' = 0 and replacing Zl by Xl .

In figures (4.15) and (4.16), the value of
has been plotted for different points of the wall. In both the cases the value of
(P2 - p;)
increases from zero to infinity at the corner, from the corner to the point
<5(P2 - Po)
of intersection of the wall and the unit circle it decreases monotonically and then
maintains a constant value to the point of intersection of the wall and the retlected
shock.
Experiments were conducted by Srivastava & Deschambault (1984) in the
UTIAS 10 X 18 cm Hyperve10city shock tube to test the theoretical results of
Srivastava and Chopra (1970) presented in Figure 4.16. Initially, the incident shock
was allowed to strike a wedge of 700 to produce regular reflection configuration
having angle of incidence equal to 200 . The configuration was then allowed to pass
over a sharp corner angle of <5 = 5.70 at point B in Figure 4. 17. The sharp
expansion angle <5 provided the necessary condition for the diffraction of the regular
reflection pattern. The incident shock was moving at Mach number
)
I"~
I
( '\
~
,/ ' ~
~
F
I
I---- t:::--- /
I
\
I
iJ!"
II
I
Figure 4.15 Wall pressure distribution and shape of disturbed region
(:: = 5, a o = 20 0
,8 = 0.1 radian)' (R. S. Srivastava & M. G. Chopra, 1970)
lr-------.-----~.-----~~----~~----~~----~
o~----+_----~~===t====~=====-~--~
(:: = 2 ,a o = 20 ,0 = 0.1 radian)' (R. S. Srivastava & M. G. Chopra, 1970)

Figure 4.17 Infinite fringe interferogram in air. M, = 1.39 , 8w = 70 deg. ; Po =

750.5 Torr; Po = 0.116 X 10- 2 g/cm 1 ; To = 298.5 K ; M2 = 0.26; P2 = 2980 Torr;
P2 = 0.306 X 10- 2 g/cm 3 ; T2 = 453 K ; q2 = 112.6 m/s ; M3 = 0.30 ; P3 = 2964
Torr; P3 = 0.305 X 10- 2 g/cm 3 ; T J = 453 K ; q3 = 128.7 m/s ; taken at a wave
o
length f... = 3471.5 A ; qj stands for particle velocity in state (i). Copyright AIAA
1984. Used with permission. (R. S. Srivastava & R. L. Deschambault , 1984)
Diffraction Qf Oblique Shock Wave 121
(U sin uoja o) = 1.39 into air initially at a pressure of 750.5 Torr and a temperature
of 298.5 K . The uniform and disturbed region and their constant density lines (
isopycnics ) are clearly shown in the infinite fringe interferogram in Figure 4.17. Four
uniform regions (0 - 3 ) and two non uniform region (4 , 5) are generated. The
mathematical analysis by Srivastava and Chopra (1970) required the consideration of
four uniform region ( 0 - 3 ) and one non- uniform region (4) Region (4) is produced
when the signal from the corner at point B in Figure 4.17 propagates in states (2) and
(3) with a Mach circle bounded by states 4(a) and 4(i)

OLL____~====~=I.~_______ L_ __
o 0.5
Figure 4.18 Comparison of calculated (-) and measured (0) relative pressure deficiency
along the surface of the wedge. Copyright AIAA 1984. Used with permission. (R. S.
Srivastava & R. L. Deschambault , 1984)
The other non-uniform region (5) is produced on account of first compressive

corner when the signal propagates into the flow behind the reflected shock until it
reaches state (2). Thus we find that five of the observed region after diffraction agree
with the prediction given by Srivastava and Chopra (1970)
The pressure distribution over the wedge surface was obtained from the
experimental density distribution by assuming the isentropic equation of state p = Ap Y ,
where p is the pressure, p is the density and A is a constant to be determined from the
initial parameters. The pressure distribution obtained experimentally and theoretically
has been compared in Fig 4.18 . In the analysis a mathematical singularity exists at the
corner, point B . As expected a finite pressure is measured at the corner experimentally,
as shown in Fig 4.18 . For pressure ratio p/ Po = 2 , the analytical shock number was
obtained to be 1.36 and this was slightly lower than the experimental shock Mach
number of 1.39. However ,the results are in good agreement despite this small
difference.
Conformal transformation (( u - qra:
Now, P is given as a harmonic function satisfying certain boundary conditions

in a triangle ABC with AB and BC circular arcs and AC a straight segment. (Figure
4.10) To solve this conformal transformation is necessary.
The transformation is
Z = (K + iK'){i _ 2K' }
S- (K + iK') (4.81)
where K2 +K,2 =1 and S =pe iH
On the shock boundary (1 + pZ)K = 2pcose we get
.../cos 2 e - K2
Z= ~-------=
[K' cose - Ksin e]
which is purely real and increases from
to + 00
Solving the above we get
K /(Z2 -1)
tan0= (?
K Z- + 1
) (4.82)
On the unit circle X = 0 and Y varies from
K + sin a 2
to + 00
K + K sin a 2 - K cos a 2
I
The wall gets transformed into the circle
2
X2+ ( Y_ cosa 2 )
K' sin a 2 + K cosa 2 [K' sin a 2 + K cos a 2 12
This is shown in Figure 4. 19

The region enclosed inside the triangle in the S - plane goes into the shaded region
of Z plane.
The transformation
h
were b ' -_ (KI sin a 2 + K cosa 2 )g
K / sina 2 - Kcosa 2
and
converts the. shaded region in Z- plane into the lower half of the z,-plane. The shock
boundary corresponds to the real z\ -axis with z\ > 1 . The unit circle becomes the part
of the real axis with -I < z, < 1 .The transformed boundaries are shown in Figure
4.19.
UNIT CIRCLE
I
A
WALL
SHOCK
Z - PLANE
-DO
WALL UNIT CIRCLE SHOCK

z,-PLANE
Figure 4.19 Transformation of boundaries from Z-plane to Zl plane . (R. S.

Srivastava, 1968)
We have the same boundary condition (4.69) on the shock i.e.
C +D tan8+E tan 2 8+P tan 3 8 K2

I I I I ---tan8=
C'I + D'I tan 8 + E'I tan 2 8 + P'tan
I
38 1- K2
(4.84)
for XI > 1 , YI = 0
K'(Z2 -1)
Here tan 8 = (0 ) where Z is replaced by ZI = XI from (4.83) and C I '
K Z- + 1
D\ etc. are known constants. The wall boundary condition is that dp = 0 when Xl
dYI
< 1 'YI = 0 .The discontinuity condition (4.64) now becomes,
= (4.85)
and holds at the point
(4.86)
corresponding to the point
in the ~ - plane
The condition on the third boundary can be written ~=0 when - 1 < x, <
dx,
1. But in the supersonic case ( M2 > 1 ) this must be supplemented with the condition
Lt
-y,-->O
f axdp dX 1 (4.87)
1
which holds at the point
z, = Xo = cos( 2~1t ) > - 1 (4.88)
(sin 2 a? - K2)Yz
where A = tan -I - - - - - - -
cosa 2
and
Solution
Now we shall find a solution which satisfies all the boundary conditions. The
solution is effected by the function
(4.89)
which is regular throughout the lower half plane since p is harmonic. In terms of w
the discontinuity condition (4.85) and (4.87) can be expressed.
(4.90)
(4.91)
Equation (4.53) becomes
(4.92)
where y = K(cosCX 2 + sincx 2 tane) from the section on Busemann's transformation and
tane is replaced by its value in terms of Zl by help of equations (4.82) and (4.83)
We know that log w ( Zl ) is such a function that the value of its imaginary parts
is known on the real axis of the Zl - plane. In such a case an extension of Poisson's
integral formula gives the value of log w ( Zl ) as
(4.93)
[tan- 1 - (dP!dY%P!dxJ] has been replaced by t. Now when the above integral IS
evaluated for points in the real axis, due to the discontinuity condition in the supersonic
case ( M2 > 1 ) or subsonic ( M2 < 1 ) case at the point Zl = Xo we get two other
constants G2 and H. Finally in the expression of W(ZI) we will get two constants G
and H, G being determined either by the conditions(4.90) and (4.91) and H is
determined from the condition (4.92). This completes the theoretical solution.
Numerical solution for the pressure distribution
The calculations have been carried out for two shock strengths. The table given
below gives the choice of the data.
aO a2 M2
ElL U -q2
PI a2
0 39.97 0
32.97 0
0.94699 1.48137
0.5 42.45 0
51.10 0
0.95765 0.67255
Now for determining the function W(ZI) , the integral on the left hand side of
(4.93) could be broken into three integrals ranging from - 00 to - 1 , - 1 to + 1 and
+ 1 to + 00 Then applying the boundary condition W(ZI) and simplifying we would
obtain
(4.94)
Finally after breaking the integral in two parts, integrating the first integral
analytically and the second integral approximately through Simpson s rule, we obtain I
_( )IYn ill G8[H(zl- xo)-I]

W(ZI)- zl- 1 e ( )l 2
ZI - Xo "'IIZI -1
(4.95)
_~[{f(X),_o-II)+ 4{f(x)'oOZi-II} 2{f(x),",,,,-II} + 4{f(X)'-071-~},{f(X)'-\-~}l
e 12n I 1- 025z, 1- 050z, 1- 0.75z, 1- z,
ZI > 1
Diffraction qr Oblique Shock Wave 129
where
and
(4.96)
as p= 0 for ZI < 1.
The function W(ZI) satisfies all the boundary conditions. At a point (x,O)
of the wall (- 1 < x < (U - q2)/ a2) the XI coordinate is
1t (I-x2)
Xl = -cosh [ "i tanh-I (I _ kx) "' 1- k 2
r.--:-;] (4.97)
and satisfies XI < -1.

Corresponding to the points of X , XI can be obtained and therefore integration
of the pressure derivative will give the pressure distribution along the wall. The
pressure derivative is given by the equation (4.96) by replacing ZI by XI .
~= G8[H(x l -x o)-I]
aX I (XI - XO )JX I2 -1 (4.98)
......!l..[{f(X),=u
12n I
I, 4 (flx),=",,1+2{f(x)Fo,,1 + 4 {f(X),=075 l+{f(x),=,
1- 0.25x, 1- 0.50x, 1- 0.75x, I - x,
I]
.e
Discussion of the pressure distribution:
The value of ([; - P2 \ = (a2Q2P2 )

o P2 - PI P2 - PI
(_E)
0
has been plotted for different points
of the wall and have been shown in figures (4.20) and (4.21) . The disturbed region has
also been shown. In the case M2 = 1.48137 the pressure maintains a constant value
from the corner to the point of intersection of unit circle and wall as it is given by
Prandtl-Meyer expansion theory. From the point of intersection of wall and unit circle
to the point of intersection of shock and wall we find that there is a monotonic decrease
. (p; - P2 ) (p' - p )
10 the value of
( ). In the case M2 = 0.67255 the value of 2 2 which
o P2 - PI O(P2 - PI)
is zero at the boundary increases to infinity at the corner.
Case (U: =I)

2
Q2
In this case the boundaries in the Z-plane are different than in the case
( U - Q2 <
a2
1)
< I . Here in the Z -plane the shock boundary runs from 0 to as the
00
point C' of the Z-plane ( Ref. Fig. 4.22) shifts to the origin, the wall becomes the
semi-circle of radius 1/(2 sin (Xz) with center at (0, 1/(2 sin (X2 and the unit
circle runs from 1/(2 sin (Xz) to on the imaginary axis. The boundaries are shown in
00
Fig 4.22. A new transformation is to be introduced for transforming the boundaries on

the real axis.
The transformation
Zl = COSh(~
Z
_._1_)
SIn (X2
(4.99)
transforms the shaded region in the Z - plane (Fig 4.22) into a lower half plane in the
ZI -plane. The shock boundary condition corresponds to the real ZI - axis with ZI > I .
The wall becomes the part of the real axis with ZI < - 1 . The unit circle becomes the
part of the real axis with - I < ZI < I . The transformed boundaries are shown in
Fig. 4.23 . The shock boundary condition (4.69) is
3~==~--------------~
2r-----~---------------------J
!E~.o:;
I I
JJ:A..""
~ Ol----------------------------~
~
(8 = 0.1 radian; ~~ = 00 ; (Xo = 39.9r ; (X2 = 32.97 ) . (R. S. Srivastava, 1968)

3~----r-----r---~----~~---;
Or-~--+-----+-----+-----~----~
(8 = O.l radian; ;: = 2 ; (Xo = 42.45 0; (X2 = 51.1 0) . (R. S. Srivastava, 1968)

Diffraction Of Oblique Shock Wave
f;------..~ UNIT C IRC LE
A'
WALL
SHOCK
C'
Z -PLANE
Figure 4.22 Boundaries in the Z-p1ane. (R. S. Srivastava, 1968)

C 1 +Dl tan8+E 1 tan 2 8+Fl tan 3 8 K2

3 -( ?)tan8
C'+D'tan8+E'tan
I I I
2 8+F'tan- 8
I
l-K-
(4.100)
Here
(Z2 - 1)
tan8 =cot (X2 ( 2 ) (4.101)
Z +1
where Z is given in terms of Zl from the transformation
Zl =COSh(':: _._1- ) (4.102)

Z sm (X2
-~ +1
W~LL UNIT CIRCLE SI-IOCI<
%, - PLANE
Figure 4.23 Boundaries in the zl-plane. (R. S. Srivastava, 1968)

D(/fraclion qr Oblique Shock Wave 135
Further we have to substitute (U - q2)/~ k in the expressions for the

constants occurring in the shock boundary condition.
The wall boundary condition is that dP = 0 when - 1 < XI , YI o. The

dYI
discontinuity condition (4.64) in this case also gives
= (4.103)
z, ~ x. ~ -COSh[ xcota, <-1 (4.104)
------sin<X 2 + i------cos<X 2
M2 M2
in the ~ plane.
The condition on the third boundary is that ddP =0 when - 1 < XI -1 (4.106)

.
(-smal .
+ lcosa )[ 1
l -
Ml
. J( M; - 1)
-l~---
Ml
1
in the I; plane.
The solution is again obtained by introducing the function
(4.107)
Here we would have
1t(I- M;)!1
w'" (4.108)
(Zl - xo)
1t(I - M;)l-i
w"" (4.109)
(Zl - xo)
Equation (4.53) gives
(4.110)
(Z2 - 1)
where y = K( cosa 2 + sin 0. 2 tan e), tan e =cot 0. 2 ( 2 ) is replaced by its value in
Z +1
terms of Zl by equation (4.102).
The function w (Zl ) is obtained from the integral formula given in (4.94).
The constant G is determined by the conditions (4.108) and (4.109) and H is
determined by the condition (4.110). This complete the theoretical solution of the
problem.
Numeric,\l calculations for the pressure distribution:
The numerical calculations has been carried out for the parameters given in the
table below:
Po U-q2
PI a2
o 39.91 0 31.23 0
1.00009 1.44938
0.5 42.18 0
48.87 0
1.00002 0.64616
As in the case (U - q2)/ ~ < 1 , firstly the function W(ZI) is determined and then the
pressure distribution is obtained by integrating the pressure derivative. The procedure
adopted is the same.
Discussion of the result:
At a point ( x, 0 ) of the wall ( -1 < x < (U -q2) / ~) , the XI coordinate is
XI = - cosh ( 1tcot<X 2 (1 + x) ) (4.111)

(1- x)
which satisfies X1 < -1.
In figures (4.24) and (4.25) the value of
been plotted for different points of the wall. The disturbed region has also been shown.
In the case M2 = 1.44938 the value of (p; - P2)/8(P2 - pJ after maintaining a constant
value from the comer to the point of intersection of unit circle and wall decreases
monotonically to the point of intersection of shock and wall. In the case M2 =
0.64616 the value (P2' - P2) /8( P2 - PI) increases from zero at the boundary to infinity
at the comer. From infinity it again decreases and finally rises.
Ter-Minassiants approach (1969)
An alternative approach for obtaining the solution of diffraction of oblique shock

wave problem has been proposed by Ter-Minassiants (1969) and it will therefore be
relevant to give his results in detail. By taking axes parallel and perpendicular to
incident shock wave and by the ingenious adaptation of Lighthill's theory (1949, 1950)
, Ter- Minassiants has been able to obtain the solution of the problem. Ter-
Minassiants's results are true for the case when the relative outflow behind reflected
shock wave is supersonic. The approach being independent, the results of Ter-
Minassiants have been compared with those of Srivastava and Chopra (1970).
3r---~----------------------~
2 r-----~~------------------~
o~------------------------~
II
(0 = 0.1 radian; ;: = 00; a o = 39.91 ; <X z = 31.23 J.(R. S. Srivastava, 1968)

Diffraction OJ Oblique Shock Wave 139
3r----,----.----.----~--~
2r---~~--~----4_----+_--_4
o~--_;-----+----~----~----~
( 0 = 0.1 radian; :~ = 2 ; a o = 42.18 ; a z = 48.87 ) . (R. S. Srivastava, 1968)

Let us refer to the Figure 4.26. The figure is self explanatory and will not be
explained again particularly in view of what has been said about it in the earlier portion
of this chapter. In Ter- Minassiants case the configuration moves towards left while in
Figure 4.26 case the configuration is moving towards right.
\
\ ,
F ~H
H __ 4,\...
Figure 4:26 Oblique shock configuration after diffraction. (Ter Mmassiants , 1969)
The relations across the incident shock giving pressure, density and normal tlow
velocity are
PI -
_ (Y + /y
1/ - I )Po I( 2 a~)
1+ Y _ I u~
V =--u
2
2
( 1 _a_
0 )
I Y+ 1 0 U~
(4.112)
The velocity of the gas WI in the region relative to the point of reflection (i.e.,
by imposing velocity equal and opposite to the velocity of the point of intersection of
the two shocks) in terms of VI may be obtained by projecting these two velocity on the
normal to the wall, we would have then
(4.113)
The flow rotation angle in the expression ( referred to fixed coordinate system )
is defined by the well known formula
cot~ = tan a[_Y_+_I (_M-,,~,-c_o-::-s?e_c_2a_-_I)] (4.114)

2 M;;-1
where Mo = Uo
ao
We have also the relation
(4.115)
The flow velocity normal to the reflected shock in terms of the normal velocity
of the reflected shock is given by
V, =--u
2 2
( 1 _a_
0 )
(Moving coordinate system) (4.116)
- Y+ 1 I U;
If W2 is the velocity behind the reflected shock relative to the velocity of the
point of intersection of the two shocks (stationary coordinate system) we would have
W 2 cos(90 -~) = V2 cos(~ + v) (4.117)
We would have then
W 2
=--u ( a;)cos(13+ V ) (4.118)
2
Y+ 1 I 1-
U'- . R
i SIn I-'
We also introduce
Mw = Uo coseca - W,
- = M 0 (a- oo) cos eca - M (4.119)
a2 a2
When Mw > 1 we have from the figure
sece'G = Mw (4.120)
where e' G is the angle between the radius EG and the portion EG' of the wall.
Introduction of the small parameter
It is convenient to connect the system of the non- dimensional coordinate (x,y)

with the gas behind the reflected shock wave, its origin coinciding with the gas particle
which at the moment t = 0 was at the point of reflection. The x axis is directed
perpendicular and the y axis parallel to the undisturbed reflected shook front. The
coordinates (x,y) are given by the relations
(4.121)
where (X, Y) are the coordinates connected with the gas ahead of the reflected shock
front. In region 2 we take
p = P2 + p'
p = P2 + p'
U V2 + U'
,
V = v
and if they are substituted in the system of equations governing the plane non-
stationary motion of an ideal gas we obtain
a- -
a~ +V.(pW)=O,
aw (- )- 1
- + W.V W =--V'p
at p
(:t +W.V}pp-'I)=O
(4.122)
If new non-dimensional unknown function are introduced
(4.123)
and if the last equation of (4.122) is used for eliminating the density the equation of
motion given by (4.122) reduces to a system of three linear equations
dp dP dU dV
x-+y-=-+-
ax ay ax ay
au au ap
x-+y-=- (4.124)
ax ay ax
dV dV dp
x-+y-=-
ax dy dy
In (x,y) coordinates the equation of the undisturbed reflected wave front is
x= U1-V?- = W?sinv
- .
=Mslnv=m (4. 125 )
a2 a2
Let the equation of curved portion of the reflected shock front be

x=m+f(y) (4.126)
where fey) is assumed to be a small quantity of order E , then following Lighthill
(1949)
u=~ M~ + 1( f(y) - yf'(y)]

U 1 M 1 -l
v = -f'(y)
p= :2 22U~
2P2 U ---
-1 [f(y) - yf'(y)]
I 2y
(4.127)
These relations are assumed to be satisfied on the line x = m .
Now we obtain
u= Ap ydV =Bdp (4.128)

dy . dy
A= (M; + 1) [2YM; - Y+ 1]
2Mi 2 + (y -l)Mi
where
(y+1) (M:-l)
B = - - ---:---:--..,,-
2 2+(y-1)Mi
Ter - Minassiants has obtained the relation
Vi = ( sin 2 v )f A} (2 tan a - 3 tan v) + [( 1 - An tan a tan v + (y + 1) tan v - (3 - ~)~] tan a l

1
2
E 2tana A.(A(tanv-2tana)+(3-y)tana]-[tanv-(y-l)tana]sm-a J
(4.129)
We also have from the figure
V" = Vi + E (4.130)
Following Ter-Minassiants the resulting expression for the quantity p in the

region 3 is given by
(4.131)
The conditions on the wall and the Mach arc FA is obtained easily by rotating
the coordinate axis (x,y) until the axis y coincides with the normal to the right portion
of the wall (see Figure 4.26). Let these coordinates and corresponding velocity
component be denoted by (x,y) and (li,v) and let the equations (4.122) be written in
this system of coordinates. On the portion DH in the subsonic case and on the portion
DF in the supersonic case v = E on the portion HF in the subsonic case v = O.
From the last of equations (4.122 ) it then follows that on the portion DF of the wall we
have
~; = -eMw8(x - x H ) when Mw ~1
(4.132)
ap=O when Mw> 1
ay
since on the portion y =0 and ~~ = -e8(x - x

H) where 8 is a delta - function of
The quantity p in the region 4 is defined by the supersonic flow past a small
angle.
(4.133)
Along the Mach arc FA, p =0 in the subsonic case, in the supersonic case p
= 0 on AG and p=- eMXM~ -1)~ on GF. The position of the point G is given by
the formula (4.120) . Thus on the arc FA we have
P = dp = 0 when M ~1
ae' w
(4.134)
~ = _ eMw8(8' - e;;)/ when M >1
ae' /(M~-l)Y; w
where 8( e' - e~ ) is a delta function of e' the polar angle in the coordinate systems
(x,y)
Conversion to harmonic function
By eliminating u, v from the system of equations (4.124) and using the polar
coordinates:
x = rcose
(4.135)
y = rsin e
and performing the transformation
2R
r=-- (4.136)
1 + R2
we would obtain Laplace's equation for the function p in (R,e)

The only portion of the boundary of the diffraction region which deforms by the
transformation (4.136) is the chord line ABC, r = %ose which becomes a circle (
Figure 4.27)
D ........---t-~- ......----eH----~F
\
\
\
\
\
"
"" "tII 2
Figure 4.27 Transformation of boundaries from s-plane to z-plane. (Ter-Minassiants ,

1969)
D C
H
B
A
F~----------~~~r
Figure 4.27 (Coutd.) Transformation of boundaries from ~-plane to z-plane. (Ter-

Minassiants , 1969)
(4.137)
cutting the circle R = r = 1 orthogonal at e = COS~l m as shown by Lighthill
(1949)
As the situation is similar to that of Lighthill (1949) which has been described
in detail in chapter III, we obtain on the diffracted reflected shock
(4.138)
The transformation (4.137) changes the condition (4.132) at the corner in the subsonic
case. Taking Into account the relation 0( r(R)] = i:~l II wdl have theform
(4.139)
(4.140)
the remaining boundary conditions are not changed by the transformation (4.137) , one
should only note the relation
, 1t
S(', = Sl', - -2 - v (4.141)
Formulation of the Hilbert problem
The conformal transformation
Z = (J + i1: = log
s- exp(iSJ- S= Re,a.
S- exp(iS 1) , (4.142)
converts the curvilinear quadrangle in the t; -plane to a rectangle in the z - plane (see
Figure 4.27) .
The right vertical side of this rectangle (J = 1 corresponds to the retlected
shock, the left vertical side (J =0 to the wall, 0 < 1: < 1t ; the arcs CD and FA,
correspond to the horizontal sides 1: = 1t and 1: = 0 ,0 < (J < I respectively.
The positions of the point G on the side FA and of the point H on the portion
EF of the side DEF are determined from (4.119), (4.120 ) , (4.140) and (4.142)
respectively for the supersonic and subsonic cases.
(4.143)
150 Interacrion Of Shock Waves
In order to obtain the boundary condition on the transformed reflected shock

front it is sufficient to consider only the transformation of the right hand side of the
relation (4.138) using (4.142) . The inversion of the transformation (4.142) for cr = I
gives
tane = mo mo - Mcos't (4.144)

M tan v M - mo cos 't
Substituting it in (4.138) leads to the condition on ABC
(4.145)
The condition on the transform of the wall DEF according to (4.139) and
(4.140) may be written in the form
(4.146)
dp = 0
dcr
The condition on the transform of the Mach arc FA, according to (4.134) takes
the form
(4.147)
dp =0
dcr
and finally on the transform of the Mach are CD takes the form
dp =0 (4.148)
dcr
The whole system of boundary conditions for the derivatives in the z- plane may
be written as a single relation
D(ffracrion of Oblique Shock Wave lSI
(4.149)
if it is assumed that according to (4.145) R. = bet), S = 0 on ABC, that on COEFA P

Q
= 1, Q = 0 and S is given by the right hand sides of the expressions (4.146),
(4.147) and (4.148) on the corresponding elements ( i. e. CO, OF, FA) of the
contour. The relation (4.149) is the boundary condition for the non-homogenous Hilbert
problem for a function analytic in the rectangle (4.142) (Figure 4.27)
r(z) = dp _ i dp (4.150)
do d't
The unknown derivatives of the function p must satisfy also two integral conditions.
The first of these, obtained by the second relation (4.128) on the reflected wave front
and indicated by Lighthill (1950) in the investigation of the symmetrical case of the
problem, defines the normalization of the solution for the pressure. the second
condition arises due to the non- symmetrical case. We have the conditions then
(4.151)
In order to obtain the solution for such a boundary value problem it is necessary first to
obtain the solution of the corresponding homogeneous problem
1 (z) - dPo _ i dpo (4.152)

o - dO d't
which is obtained by assuming that the right hand side S in the condition (4.149)
vanishes everywhere in the contour.
Lighthill's method in the absence of symmetry:
We may write explicitly the expression for the function lo(z) in terms of a
Cauchy type integral based on the theory developed for boundary value problem.
However, the procedure employed by Lighthill (1950) in the symmetrical case leads to
a simple way to expressions which are more effective in carrying out calculations.
The representation of the argument of the unknown analytic function on the transform
of the reflected wave front in the form of the additive terms of the type tan -I (a tan 't)
permits easy calculation ( by means of residue theory) of the integrals which determine
its Fourier coefficients and extension of every term of the series into the domain, after
multiplying it by the required elliptic function, to find the solution.
It is interesting to find that in the non- symmetrical case inspite of the relative
complexity of the expression (4.145) , the argument of 10 (z) on the transform of the
reflected shock front also admits a simple representation, i. e . on ABC (refer Figure
4.27) we have
(4.153)
where
(4.154)
Following Lighthill (1950) Ter - Minassiants obtained ro(z) as

10(Z) = cA(z)L(z) (4.155)
where
(4.156)
(4.157)
where
,.. k1.l2 v?(-iz,q)

w (z) = S + III = - 72 - (4.158)
V3(-IZ,q)
Conformal mapping has been carried out to convert the rectangle in the z- plane
to lower half in w- plane and is realized by the equation (4.158), v 2 ,v 3 in (4.158)
being elliptic theta function and
The coordinates of the point z = Zo ,where ro(zo) = 0 become
s = So(zo), 11 = 0 in the w- plane.
Pressure distribution along the wall
In the subsonic case (Mw< 1) the expression for the derivative d%~ along the
transform of the wall (z = i't) is given by Ter- Minassiants (1969)
(4.159)
(4.160)
L,(i't) = 1- s(i't) (4.161)

- 1+ S(i't)
s(i't) = -k~ v 2 ('t,q) (4.162)

v 3 ('t,q)
Lo(i't) = s(i't) - So(zo) (4.163)

154 interaction Of Shock Waves
(4.164)
(4.165)
(4.166)
(4.167)
II' 12 , 13 , 14 , 15 and 16 are integrals given by the equation (7.10) of Ter-

Minassiants (1969) and has been integrated numerically.
The pressure derivative terms given by equation (4.159) tends to infinity when
'!--j'!H and stipulates the singularity of the logarithmic type for the function p.
Therefore the calculation of the non- dimensional pressure disturbance p at points'! in
the intervals 0 < '! < '!H and '!H < '! < 1t should be carried out respectively by the
formulae.
t t
p=-j1mr-(i'!)d'! or p=c 2 + Jlmr-(i'!)d'! (4.168)

o
where c2 is defined by the right hand side of (4.166)

For further details the paper of Ter- Minassiants (1969) may be referred.
Ter -Minassiants has shown the influence of the angle of incidence a on the
character of the pressure distribution in the subsonic case. These pressure distribution
curves correspond to the pressure ratio of the incident wave .E!. =3.33 and to an
Po
angleE = 6 0 (Fig. 4. 28 ) . The growth of the values of the quantity
(P2 - Ps) /( ) with increasing a is clearly demonstrated. While Ter- Minassiants

/(P2 - Po
has brought out the effect of the angle of incidence on the pressure distribution curves
I -0 I------,,------j---:--~-___:~ffi__++_\_--~
0-5r---------+-~~--~~-r--------_4--_+--_+~~r_~--~~
I+=-=I==::::::ilt- M = 6-82 - - ' ' - - - - - - - 1

o ~__L=t~;j;~~~~M~:::~3~-20 M = '-88 = __--+__-+__L - j -____~..,
W' N' N' Y o-s T
o F
a. '" 10 a:= 20e(:: 30 0
Figure 4.28 Wall pressure distribution (E = 6 ; ~: = 3.33; (a o = 10 ,20" and 30")) -

(Ter Minassiants , 1969)
for fixed shock strength, Srivastava and Chopra (1970) have shown how the increase in
shock strength, keeping angle of incidence fixed, results in higher pressure deficiencies.
The choice of values by Srivastava and Chopra (1970) is such that one can compare the
curves with at least one of the curves of Ter- Minassiants where in he has taken the
angle of incidence to be 200 . The results of the two different approaches with regard
to the oblique shock diffraction problem conform extremely well.
1. Busemann, A.
2. Lighthill, M.J.
The diffraction of blast I . Proc. Roy .Soc A, 198, 454-470. (1949)
3. Lighthill, M.J.
The diffraction of blast II. Proc. Roy. Soc A200, 554 - 565. (1950)

Diffraction of oblique shock wave past a small bend. Proc. I Congo Theoretical and
5. Srivastava, R.S.
paper No . 1008 . (1968)

Diffraction of blast wave for the oblique case. J. Fluid Mech. 40, 4, 821-831 . (1970)
7. Srivastava, R.S. & Deschambault, R.L.

Pressure distribution behind a non stationary reflected diffracted shock wave. AlA A 22,
2, 305 . (1984)
8. Ter-Minnassiants, S.M ..
(1969)
CHAPTER - V
DIFFRACTION OF NORMAL SHOCK BY YAWED WEDGES
Chester ( 1954 ) extended Lighthill' s ( 1949 ) theory by considering the

interaction of a plane normal shock wave with an infinite thin wedge at small angle of
incidence, and arbitrary angles of yaw up to a certain limiting value depending on the
shock strength . If the velocity of the shock is U and the wedge is yawed through an
angle ~, then the point of intersection of the shock front and leading wedge travels
along the leading wedge with velocity ~. If an equal and opposite velocity is
sm~
superimposed on the whole field, the shock becomes stationary and we have the steady
flow behind the shock. The flow in fact in many respects has similarity to Busemann's
cone field problem .
The problem becomes a three dimensional one. In Lighthill's case the flow is
expanding with respect to time while in Chester's case it could be regarded as growing
with the axis of cone of disturbance.
If the component velocity of the fluid normal to the leading wedge is subsonic,
the region of perturbed flow is bounded by the Mach cone with vertex at the point of
intersection of shock and the leading edge and the wedge surface. But if the fluid
velocity normal to the leading edge is supersonic, then the boundary must be augmented
by the tangent plane from the leading edge to the Mach cone.
The simplifying feature of the problem arises from the. lack of fundamental
length in the data defining the problem implying that the flow variables must be
constant along straight lines from the vertex of the Mach cone.
Notation and Basic equations
Behind the shock there will be region of uniform flow which is not affected by
the presence of the wedge . In this region the fluid velocity, pressure, density and
sound velocity are denoted by ql' PI' PI anda l respectively; ahead of the shock the
corresponding quantities are qo, Po, Po anda o' U being the velocity of the shock, the
shock transition relations for Y= 1.4 give
q, ~u (l_aVuz)
PI = ~Po (U2_a~) (5.1)
=
6 Po
PI
(1+5~ )
U
Let M = - be the Mach number of the shock and let M, = .9.L be the Mach
ao al
number of the uniform flow behind the shock. Then from (5.1)
= (5.2)
The equations (5.1) and (5.2) are the same equations as those of Lighthill (equations
3.2 and 3.3). As indicated earlier imposition of a velocity ~ on the whole field in a
sm~
direction opposite to the direction of the motion of the point of intersection of the shock
and the leading wedge , the shock becomes stationary . The resultant velocity behind
the shock for stationary configuration say VI is
? UI u
qi + ~ + 2ql ~cos(~ + 90)
sm I-' sml-'
(5.3)
2 U2
= ql + - ' - 2 - - 2Ql U
sm ~
The velocity is supersonic provided
? U2
ql+~-2qIU >
sm I-'
which is equivalent to
Diffract;on of Normal Shock By Yawed Wedges 159
(5.4)
The right hand side of (5.4) decreases rapidly to a minimum and then increases
monotonically to the value 6 ( ~ < 67.8) as M ~ 00There is a restriction on ~ for

the different Mach numbers for V1 to be supersonic.
Figure 5.1 Configuration in the (x',z') plane. (W. Chester, 1954)

Now it is assumed that condition (5.4) is satisfied .The perturbations introduced
by the presence of the wedge are then confined to the region bounded by the shock
front and Mach Cone with vertex at the junction of the shock and the wedge leading
edge. The axis of the Mach cone is in the direction of VI and subtends an angle Il with
the shock where
(U - ql)
tanll =
Ucot~
= (1- U~lqJtan~ (5.5)
(M2 + 5)tan~
=
6M 2
The semi angle of the Mach Cone
sina = = = (
7M2 -1)~
?
M- +5
.
SInIl (5.6)
al
Let x' , y' , z' be the rectangular cartesian coordinates in the field with the origin at the
point 0 and z'- axis in the direction of VI (Fig 5.1). If the flow quantities in the region
of perturbed flow behind the shock are designated by suffix 2, the equations of
conservation of mass, momentum and entropy are then
Vz.Vpz = -Pz VVz

I
(V2 ,V)V2 = --Y'P2 (5.7)
Pz
Vz.VS z =

where S2 denotes entropy
The wedge is supposed to lie approximately in the plane y' = 0, equations (5.7)
may be linearized if the flow variables are assumed to be differing by small quantities
from there values in the region of uniform flow behind the shock. If
Vz = (u l , V 2' VI + W 2)' we then have
Diffraction Of Normal Shock By Yawed Wedges 161
V dP2 = _ {dU 2 +dV 2 +dW 2}

I dZ' PI dX' dy' dZ'
V dU,
=
_1. dP2
I dZ' PI dX'
V dV 2
=
_1- dP2
I dZ' PI dy'
V aW 2 ~ ap2
I az' =
PI az'
aS 2
= 0
az'
(5.8)
The left hand side of the first of these equations may be written as V; ~P2
aj az'
since
density is a function of pressure and entropy alone.

Since there is no fundamental length defining the problem the flow variables are
expressible as functions of x: ' y: only . Introducing then the following transformations

Z z
x' y'
x = y = (5.9)
z'tana z'tana
p, - PI
p = PI = ~(P2 -PI)
alPlql Plql
uz Vz
u = V (5.10)
ql cosa ql cosa
w2
w =
ql sina
equations (5.8) would yield

dU dU dp
X-+y-
dX dy ax
dV dV = ap
X-+y-
dX dy ay
au dV
( X dP + yap ) = -+-
ax dy ax dy
au dV
(x ap + y a p ) = -+-
ax oy ax dy
(aw
dU ov
x - + yaw)
- == -+-
ax dy ax ay
(5.11)
These equations are formally identical with the equations obtained by Lighthill
(1949) ( equation 3.8 ). We have however additional equation for w. Some remark
about the relation of wand W z in equation (5.10) is given in Chapter VI.
The independent variables defined by (5.9) are already seen to reduce to
equation (3.7) if we take a fixed set of coordinates (X, Y, Z) for which
' U sin(~ - f.!)

X = x + t
sin~
Y = y' (5.12)
' Ucos(P-f.!)
Z = z - t
sin~
where for the purpose of this transformation, the origin 0 is considered to be moving
U
along tht} leading edge with the velocity
sin~
We now have
x' X-q t
_ _l_
x =
~
z' tan a a1 t
(5.13)
y' Y
Y = ~-
z'tana a1 t
DtflraCfion Pl Normal Shock By Yawed Wedges 163
Boundary conditions on the shock
The undisturbed part of the shock lies in the plane
x'
= tan Jl
z'
(5.14 )
tan Jl
or x = = k
tan a
Consequently we take the equation of the perturbed shock front to be
x tan a = tan 11 + f(y)secll

or
x'cosll- z'sinJl- Z,f(-;L) = 0 (5.15)

z tana
or
x'cosll-y'f'cota-z'(sinll+f-yf') = 0
The direction cosines of the normal to the shock front are then proportional to
COSIl,f'cota,-(sinll+f-yf') (5.16)
and if n is a unit vector normal to the shock, we have
n = {cosll-sinJlcosll(f-yf'),-f'cota,-sinJl-cos2 Jl(f-yf')} (5.17)
after neglecting the second order terms.

Now the shock transition relations will depend on the normal component of the
velocity in front of the shock, in fact the relations for stationary shock may be written
as
Vz - Vo a~
= 26 V ( V; n
-1)
(5. 18)
pz = ~ Po ( V; _ a; )
U
where Yo is the velocity in front of the shock , in the present case parallel to
sin~
the wedge leading edge, and Yn is the component of this velocity normal to the shock.
Since
= { U sin (~ - /-l) 0 u cos(~ - /-l)}

sin ~ " sin ~
and Vn = (Yo .n)n it follows with the help of (5.17) , that
Y n = -u{1+cot~cos/-l(f-yf/)}n (5.19)
Equations (5.17) , (5.18) and (5.19) then yield the following relations-
u = ~ ~ cos/-l {cos(~ + /-l) + M- 2 cos(~ -/-l)}(f - y f/)

6 ql sm~cosa
v = - ffs'ina
(5.20)
w = ~ ~cos~ {sin(/3+/-l)-M-2 sin(/3-j.L)}(f-yf / )
6 ql sm/3sma
P = -5 ..!::l!..
P _ U_ cotp cos/.! (f -
2
yf/)
3 al PI ql
Thus on the shock we must have
u = Ap , w = A'p
Y(jy = B dp (5.21 )
dy dy
where
= ~ cos(P + fl) + M-2 COS(P - fl)

A
2po U cosa cosp
(5.22)
= .!.(7M2 -1)~ cosCP+fl)+M-2 cosCP-fl)
2 M2 + 5 cosa cosp
~ sin(p + fl) - M- 2 sin(p - fl)

A'
2po U sina cosp
(5.23)
= .!.(7M2 -1)~ sinCP+ fl) - M-2 sinCP - fl)
2 M2 + 5 sin a cos P
B = 3 a l PI ql tan P
5 Po U2 sin a cosfl
M2
= 3 ( ~ sec 2 fl
1) (5.24)
M +5
Equations (5.22) and (5.24) reduce to (3.15) when P = o.
Taking into consideration the basic equations (5.11) , the first and last of
equations (5.21) yield the following condition on p , to be satisfied when x = k
(equation 3.19)
(5.25)
If the upper surface of the wedge is inclined at an angle 8 to the plane y =0 ( 8

is defined as a rotation about a line in the plane y =0 parallel to the shock) ,then the
boundary condition on the wedge is v = 0 sec a . In particular this is true at the
shock, and so we must also have
f dvdy = f By dp = - 0 sec a (5.26)
where the integral is taken along the shock on the wall to the Mach cone.
Boundary condition on y=O
We assume first that the leading edge of the wedge lies outside the Mach cone ,the
condition for which is a < (~-11) or by (5.6) and (5.5)
or MI cos~ > I, as one would
expect.
s: . dp dv
On y = 0 we have v u sec a . SlOce - = x dx on y = 0, by (5.11)
dy
also .
thIS .
Imphes -dp = 0 on y = 0.
dy
As pointed out by Chester (1954) in the sub-sonic case (MI cos~ < 1)
it is more convenient to separate the symmetrical and anti-symmetrical contributions,
say 8. and 8. (these are the contributions to the effective inclination of the upper
surface relative to the flow behind the shock so that, the semi angle of the wedge would
be 8. sec ~ ). We then have two contributions to pressure, the first is symmetrical about
y =0 and so dps = 0 on y = 0 remains true. However at the leading edge

dy
a a
f ...B:.dx f~
-m+c -m+c
Lt - m dx = - m 0s sec a (5.27)
y-->O -m-cdy dx
ITI--C
tan(~ - /-1)
where m = (5.28)
tan a
and -m is the x coordinate of the leading wedge. The second contribution p. is anti
symmetrical about y = 0, and continuous for -I < x < -m. Hence P. = 0 for
-I < x < m and dP. = 0 for -m < x < k. Furthermore

dy
ov
f -'
-111+(,;
0. sec a (5.29)
Lt
y-,O
I
dx dx
Diffraerion Of Normal Shock By Yawed Wedges 167
Boundary conditions on the Mach cone
In the subsonic case the boundary condition on the Mach cone is p = 0 , but in
the supersonic case this is true only from the shock to the point of contact of the tangent
plane from the wedge leading edge. The pressure within the region from the leading
edge to the point of contact of the tangent to the Mach cone from the leading edge is
due to Prandtl-Meyer expansion. This is given by
m
p = ---"-Ioseca (5.30)
(m 2 -1)"2
Thus on the Mach cone p is zero only for -m l < x < k; in the interval
-m < x < m- I it is given by (5.30).
Solution in terms of pressure
From equations (5. II) we would obtain
= (x.i!.- + y.i!.- + 1) (x dP + Ydp) (5.31 )

dX dy dX dy
With the transformation
x = ~cose
1+ P
Y = ~sine
1+ p-
the equation (5.31) reduces to Laplace's equation (3.22) with ( p , e ) as polar
coordinates. The Mach cone becomes the circle p = 1. The shock transforms to
2 p cos e = k( I + p2) cutting p = I orthogonally at cos e= k in the ( p , e)
plane. The condition on the shock boundary becomes
dPjdP Ak tan 8 - B cot 8

(5.32)
dn ds (l-k 2 sec 2 e)g
The equation (5.32) corresponds to equation (3.23) , ds and dn have therefore

the same meaning.

The leading edge of the wedge becomes the point
8 = 1t, P =
m
and the condition (5.27) and (5.29) become, respectively
L
G~~
fpae
1 dps (5.33)
and
(5.34)
Conformal transformation
With ~ = pe iH and k' = (I - k 2 )Y:;, the region is transformed into the

upper half plane of the Zl plane by successive transformation (equations 3.26 ,3.30)
z = (k+ik'){i- 2k' }
~ - (k + i k')
Zl = Xl + iYI = .!.2 (Z2 + Z-2) (5.35)
Z2 = 'Zl +(z~ -1)~
The boundaries in the ( p , e) plane defined by arcs of the curve p = 1,

2pcos8 = k(l + p2) and e = 0 ,1t now become, respectively, the three portions
of the real axis defined by
-00 < Xl < - 1, - 1 < Xl < 1, 1 < Xl < 00
The boundary condition (5.32) now becomes
(5.36)
The condition to be satisfied on the real axis for -00 < Xl < - I , which
now represents the Mach cone, is dp = 0

dX I
For -1 < Xl < 1 , the boundary eondition in the symmetrical and
supersonic cases is ~ = 0, but in asymmetrical subsonic problem this is only true

ClYI
for Xo < Xl < 1, where Xo is the point corresponding to the leading edge i.e. to
1; = m
We have thus
> -1 (5.37)
For -1 < < Xo , the boundary condition is = o. The
discontinuity condition (5.33) and (5.34) becomes
a
f..L
Xo+C
Lt dX I (5.38)
)" ->0 dy
X{I-C 1
(5.39)
The condition on the third boundary becomes ~p = o. But in the supersonic

uX I
case (MlcosP > 1) this must be supplemented with
= (5.40)
The condition (5.40) holds at a point on the Mach cone represented by
t; - m + i (1 - m 2)Yz. This point is represented in the zl-plane by the same

expression as the Xo in (S.37) but now of course Xo < -1.
Solution
We would first consider t,he supersonic case. If we introduce the function
.Op
+ 1- (S .41)
aX I
w is real for - 0 0 < Xl < - I , and wholly imaginary for -1 < Xl < 1.
On the real axis for Xl > 1
(S.42)
Using equations (5.5) , (5.6) , (5.22) and (5.24) , these give
(5.43)
In terms of w , (S.40) can be expressed as
w (5.44)
A function which satisfies all these conditions and in addition integrable at all
points in the upper half plane , except Zl = Xu is ( equation 3.42 with the sign of 8
changed) given by
w = (5.45)
Diffraction Of Nonnal Shock By Yawed Wedges 171
where C and D are constants. The constant C is determined by equations (5.44) and
(5.45).
This is given by
2m(m+k)k'(y. +Y,)(Y2 +Y3)

c = (5.46)
rc(l + mk)2 cosa
where Y; = 1 - Xo (5.4 7)
The value of D is obtained from equations (5.26) and (5.45).

Since on the shock , we have
Y = k'(~)Y;
x +1
l
(5.48)
we must have
"' B dp
()seca = -f--dX
1 Y aX l 1
= f~(Xl +1)75 C8[D(x l -xo)-l] dx

.k' x.-l (x~-I)M(x.-xo~y;+x.-lIy;+xl-l]
(Dy; -l)(y. +Y 2 +yJ +D

BC8(Y 1 + yJrc (YI Y2 yJ
k' (YI +Y2)(Y2 +yJ(Y3 +Y 1 )
(5.49)
With the help of (5.46) and (5.49) , D is given by the relation
(mk + 1)2 D(Y. + yJ(Y2 + yJ (y. +Y2 +yJ

= (5.50)
2Bm(m+k) (y. yJ (Y.Y2yJ
In the subsonic symmetrical case w. satisfies the same boundary conditions but the
asymptotic inequality corresponding to ( 5.44) by virtue of (5.38) is
imo,seca
w, (5.51 )
near z = Xo . Thus we have
= (5.52)
Thus C. and D. are still given by (5.46) and (5.50 ).

The boundary conditions in the subsonic anti-symmetrical problem are that, on
the real axis, w. is real for Xl < Xo and wholly imaginary for Xo < Xl < 1 . When
Xl > 1 relation (5.45 ) is to be satisfied.
Now the function
w. = (5.53)
satisfies all these conditions and is integrable at all points in the upper half plane except
Zl = xo
The relations which determine C and D., namely (5.26) and (5.39) with the
II
help of (5.53) give

= _0- 1 f~ Bop. dx
1 Y aXI 1
= J~ (Xl + I)Yz c.[ D.(XI - xo) -11,( Yl + yJ(x l, -1)l4 dX l
I k Xl -1 (Xl -l)l4(XI - Xo)%[yj + Xl -11 Y; + Xl -I]
2BC. (Yl+Y2)J~ (x2+2)l4[D.(x2+Y;)_I]
= --"'---'-,--"-- Yo dx
k o(x2+y;)2(x2+yn(x2+y;)
(5.54)
and
=
1 C.k'(1 + xJ[ D.(xl - xo) -1]
-I(I-x l )Yz(x O -XY'2 (l-xJ~-2Yzk Yl+(I-x l )Yz Y2+(I-xJ"'2" dX I
(2-x2)Yz[D
= - 2 C k' f
2H:
(X2 _y2)+I]
3 dx
a y, (X2 -Y;f~(x-2Yzk)(x+yJ(X+Y2)
(5.55)
Ca and Da are known after integrating (5.54) and (5.55) and solving them.
Pressure Distribution on the face of the wedge
In the Zl - plane the wedge surface is represented by the real aXIs for
Xo < XI < 1 ( corresponding to - m < X < k)
At a point ( Xl , 0 ) on the wedge we thus have, in the supersonic and subsonic
symmetrical case
= (5.56)
Since.p is zero at Xl = -I , p(x l) is known after integration of (5.56). So P is

known at different points of Xl and hence at X in the physical plane as XI and X are
related through the relation
1 _ 2(k - X)2
= (I - kx)2
(5.57)
The anti symmetrical contribution, on the surface of the wedge, is given by
p.(X I) determined from (5.58) at different points of Xl and hence at X as XI and X are
related through the relation (Chester, 1954)
2~(k-x)
(5.59)
Yl(i-kx)
Discussion of results
The unyawed wedge
Equations (5.13 ) give the limiting form of the independent variables, and all the
parameters occurring tended to finite limiting value as ~ ~ O.
The Mach cone now becomes part of a cylinder of radius a 1 t , and its axis, in
the physical problem, travels downstream with the velocity of the fluid behind the
shock. The supersonic case now arises when fluid velocity behind the shock is itself
supersonic, that is when Ml > 1 or by (5.2) when M > 2.068 .
The present results for the unyawed supersonic case, and for the symmetrical
wedge in the subsonic case, agree with those originally obtained by Lighthill (1949).
(PZ-Pl)
The variation of the quantity
8(Pl - Po)
on the face of the wedge is graphed in Figure 5.2 for ~ = 0 and
Px;'o = 1,2,3,4.823
These values of the pressure ratio correspond respectively to M = 1, 1.36277,
l.64751, 2.06807 and to Ml = 0, 0.47245, 0.72739 , l. A typical distribution
when supersonic flow prevails behind the shock is shown in Figure 5.5 .
The pressure distribution in the symmetrical and supersonic cases are based on
calculations carried out by Lighthill (1949 ).
In the subsonic case the pressure is singular at the leading edge, decreases
rapidly to a minimum, then rises steadily until the shock is reached. The symmetrical
and anti-symmetrical contributions are roughly comparable for given shock strength,
complete agreement being obtained for the case of sonic flow behind the shock .
It is observed that the symmetrical contribution is considerably higher in
absolute value except near the wedge.
Effect of yaw
Iri Figure 5.3 the pressure distribution is shown on the shape of the wedge for
Pl/ 2 , ~ 0 ,40 and 61.9 0 , the latter value of ~ being the maximum
Ipo
angle of yaw permissible for this shock strength. The pressure is plotted along a line
Diffraction Qf Nonnal Shock By Yawed Wedges 175
perpendicular to the axis of the Mach cone.
t
LEADING EDGE SHOCK
Figure 5.2 Pressure distribution on the wedge for ~=O and various values of shock
strength.
----- Symmetrical case
--- .--------- Antisymmetrical case.
(Vv. Chester , 1954)
f1= 61 ..9
IA H - - - - - t - - - - - t - - - - - + - - - - - + - - - - - - - l
t
LEADING EDGE
t
SI-DCK
Figure 5.3 Pressure distribution on the symmetrical wedge for .E.L =2 and various
Po
angles of yaw. (W. Chester, 1954)
It will be observed from Figure 5.3 that there is only slight increase in pressure
distribution between ~ == 0 0 and ~ 40 0 , but marked increase at all points of
the wedge for P == 61.9 0 This is shown clearly in Figure 5.4 where the pressure
at the junction of the wedge and shock is plotted against the angle of yaw. There is a
relatively small increase in pressure up to P 50 0 beyond which the pressure
increases rapidly.
\6
J
1-4
o 20
--- 40
~
60
Figure 5.4 Symmetrical wedge (;: == 2). Effect of yaw on pressure at wedge shock
junction. (W. Chester, 1954)

In Figure 5.5 the pressure distribution on the wedge by a stronger incident shock
10, M = 2.9520, M[ = 1.34463) is shown for the two limiting

values of ~. When ~ = 0 there is no singularity at the corner, for the flow behind
the incident shock is now supersonic. In the region of uniform flow before the Mach
cone is reached the pressure is constant, after which it decreases monotonically.
However at the extreme angle of yaw (~ = 64.3 0 }the leading edge lies inside the
Mach co!,!e and a singularity in the pressure appears. The transition will occur when
M[ cos~ = 1 or ~ = 42 for this particular shock strength.
4 0 \ "'-..
~ 1/-6"1'3
'3-2
----
\
\
16 \ ........
~ t-----
t
LEADING EDGE SHOCK
Figure 5.5 Pressure distribution on the symmetrical wedge for .L = 10 . (W. Chester,
Po
1954)
Curvature of normal diffracted shock for yawed we~
Chopra (1973) has derived an expression for the curvature of the diffracted
shock which is given by
lC BC(y, +Y2)(X, +l)Yz[D(X, -xo)-l]cosa secll

= (5.60)
(1- k2)(x, - xolY; + x, -1][Y; + x, -1]
where B, C, m, D, y, , Y2 ' Yl , Xo have been defined earlier.

The curvature in the case of symmetrical subsonic and supersonic cases have
only been considered.
In the limiting case as the shock strength tends to infinity i.e. 1; = Po -7 0 as

PI
the expression for curvature becomes
K 2(2)r; m k(m + k) A(x,)

=
where
= [l+42kYl](x, +1)X[{3-J2ksec 21l + (mk+1)2 } (x,-x(J

. Yl 2m(m+k) l+-J2kYl
I]
(5.61)
with m and k taking the limiting values
These results simplify to (3.46) and (3.47) when the angle of yaw tends to zero
i e. when the shock line is parallel to the leading edge of the wedge.
The diffracted shock corresponds to real axis from + 1 to + and its
00
correspondence to the physical plane is given by relation (equation 5.48)

y =
where k = tan fl/

Itana
As Xl varies from + 1 to + the normalized position , y g of the points on the

(l_k 2)2
00
shock in the physical plane varies from 0 to + 1. The curvature has been plotted
against this normalized variable, so that the results could be compared with those of
Lighthill (1949) .
The numerical work has been carried out for the complete range of the shock
strength and the angle of yaw consistent with equation (5.4). Few sample curves
showing the dependence of curvature on the angle of yaw have been shown in
Figure5.6 , 5.7 , 5.8 ,5.9. Chopra (1973) has given the interpretation of the curves
i) The effect of yaw reduces the curvature of the diffracted shock near the
intersection of the diffracted shock and the cone of disturbance and increases it towards
the intersection of the diffracted shock and the wedge , thereby resulting in a shift of
the point of maximum curvature. This is apparent from the computation for I; = 0.5,
0.33333 and 0.20723.
ii) For high shock strengths the shock is concave to the still air near the wedge
surface changing to convex through the point of inflexion. The point of inflexion is
forced towards the wedge surface with an increase in the angle of yaw as depicted for
shock with infinite strength (I; = 0).
iii) The effect of the angle of yaw is more dominant when we approach the upper
limit of angle of yaw i.e. , the curvature is very sensitive to small change in the angle
of yaw when the upper limit is approached. This is similar to the sensitivity if the
pressure distribution to small changes in the angle of yaw as exhibited in Figure 5.4.
D(ffracfion qr Normal Shock By Yawed Wedges 181
2 J--Ci55~----'\.
5
40
o
M::1.36277
~=05
o
-1~----~------~----~------~----~
o 06 08 10
F'igure 5.6 Curvature of the diffracted shock. Numbers in the curves express the angle
of the yaw in degrees. Copyright ALA A 1973. Used with permission. (M. G. Chopra
, 1973)
M=1.64751
o S=0.33333
-1 L -_ _ _ _ _ _- L_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ ~ ______ ~ ________ ~ ________ ~
o 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1,0
Figure 5.7 Curvature of the diffracted shock. Numbers in the curves express the angle
of the yaw in degrees. Copyright AIAA 1973. Used with permission. (M. G. Chopra
, 1973)
Diffraction Of Normal Shock By Yawed Wedxes 183
~ M = 2.06S09
5;:0.20723
2
60
o 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0
, 1973)
4 QO
t
M:.oo
3 ~ ;,00
"' 2
x:
-1~ ____ ~ ______ ~ ____ ~ ______ ~ ______

o 02 04 06 08 n
,1973) .
Diffraction Qf Normal Shock By Yawed Wedges 185
REFERENCES
1. Busemann, A.
2. Chester, W.
The diffraction and reflection of shock wave. Quar. Jour!. Mech Appl. Maths, 7, 57-
82. (1954)
3. Chopra, M.G.
Diffraction and reflection of shocks from comers. AIAA Journal, 11, 10, 1452-1453.
(1973)
4. Lighthill, M.J.
CHAPTER VI
DIFFRACTION OF OBLIQUE SHOCK BY YAWED WEDGES
Chester (1954) considered the problem of reflection and diffraction of plane

shock wave interacted by yawed wedges which was the extension of the Lighthi II' s
(1949) problem of diffraction of a normal shock wave past a small bend. The results
presented in this chapter are the generalisation of the results given in chapter IV to the
case of yawed wedges (Chopra & Srivastava(1972) , Chopra(1972. More specifically
lhis attempt is concerned with the study of interaction of an oblique shock
configuration(consisting of incident and reflected shock) with a yawed wedge i.e.
~hock line (intersection of incident and reflected shock) makes some non zero angle
with the leading edge of the wedge. The theoretical investigation of the flow field
produced after the interaction is difficult not only because of the nonlinear nature of
the problem " but also because of the fact that the diffraction of the reflected shock will
result in variations in entropy of the fluid and a loss of irrotational character of the
motion. On the assumption that the wedge produces only small perturbations in the
uniform flow, the entropy variations, though not negligible can, however , be
suppressed from the equations governing the flow by basing the analysis on pressure
perturbation; in any case the pressure is the most interesting variable.
This is a three dimensional problem in which the specifying parameters are U,
the velocity of the shock line, Po , Po the pressure and density in the still air ; CX u the
angle of incidence; X the angle of yaw and 8 , the wedge angle. Chester( 1954) has
denoted the angle of yaw as p. Since these parameters cannot be combined to give a
fundamental length , it follows that while in this three dimensional problem, each
physical quantity is a function of space coordinates x', y' and z' these variables can
only occur in the combinations _x_'_ ,-y-'- ( cx being the semi angle of the cone
z' tan ex z' tan ex
of disturbance) and this lack of a fundamental length in the data defining the problem
ensures that the flow variables must be constant along straight lines emanating from the
vertex of the cone of disturbance . The fluid dynamical equations giving the flow
behind the reflected diffracted shock are linearized by small perturbation theory and
the region of perturbed flow is demarcated with the help of theory of characteristics.
Ultimately the problem reduces to the solution of a second order partial differential
equation in the pressure perturbation in a section normal to the axis of the cone of
disturbance. The flow picture obtained in this case is the same as in Srivastava and
Chopra (1970) except that in the problem of interaction of un yawed wedges the tlow
picture grows with time, whereas in the present case it can be regarded to be growing
with the axis of the cone of disturbance. The solution for the consideration of flow
behind the reflected diffracted. shock is build up on the lines of Srivastava and
Chopra.(l970) . Incidentally, it may be mentioned here that Biswas and Srivastava
(1966) have proved that the region between the incident and reflected shock remains
undisturbed after interaction in the case of yawed wedges also.
Region behind the reflected diffracted shock (U: q2 >

2
1)
Behind the reflected diffracted shock, there will be a region of uniform flow
which will not be affected by the presence of the wedge and in this region, the fluid
velocity, pressure and density denoted by q2 ' P2 and P2 are given by the relations
holding across the reflected shock of equations (4.1)
As the shock line is moving with velocity U and the wedge is yawed through an
angle X the point of intersection ofthe shock line and leading edge of the wedge moves
with velocity Ucosecx. By superimposing a velocity on the whole flow field in a
direction opposite to the direction of the motion of the point of intersection of the shock
line and the leading edge,the shock contiguration becomes stationary and the resulting
velocity behind the reflected diffracted shock for stationary configuration, say V2 is
given by
vi = U2cosec2X +q; -2Uqz

(6.1)
= (U -q2)Z + U 2 cot 2 X
We fix a coordinate system Ox'y'z' with 0 at the point of intersection of the

shock line and the leading wedge , the z' -axis in the direction of V2 and the wedge
surface is assumed to lie in x'-z' plane (Fig 6.1). The subsequent treatment depends
upon the fact that the flow is supersonic behind the reflected diffracted shock i.e. V2
> ~ . This is satisfied as the relative outflow from the reflected shock is supersonic
U - q2 > 1 (equation 6.1). Thus the flow behind the reflected shock is similar to
a2
Busemann's conefield pattern with the additional advantage that the analysis becomes
free from any type of restriction on the angle of yaw which had to be taken into
consideration in Chester's (1954) problem. The perturbations introduced by the wedge
are therefore confined to the region bounded by the Mach cone with vertex at the
junction ofthe shock line and the wedge leading edge. The axis of the Mach cone is in
the direction of V2 and subtends an angle with the shock line (Figure 6.1) such that
Dijfracfhm of Oblique Shock By Yawed Wedges 189
------:.:l...-....;;;;:::::IIk---------- SHOCK LlIIE
lEADIN G E.DGE
}i'igure 6.1 Configuration in the x' ,z' plane. (M. G. Chopra & R. S. Srivastava,
1972)
tan)l= (U-q2) (6.2)

Ucotx
The semi angle of the Mach cone is give by
(6.3)
Let the disturbed flow variable behind the reflected diffracted referred to
Ox'y'z' be
V; = (u 2, V2' V2 + w 2) , p; ,p; ,S;
where u 2, v 2' W2 are small perturbations In the velocity along Ox', Oy' and Oz'
respectively; p; is the pressure p; is the density and S; is the entropy . We then
obtain frQm the conservation laws
(6.4)
(V;V)V;+:;VP; = 0 (6.5)
V'VS'
2 2 = 0 (6.6)
On the assumption that the flow variable in the perturbed region differ by small
quantities from their values in the uniform region, equations (6.4) to (6.6) can be
written as
v -+p
dP; (dU
-+ 2 -
dV2
+-dW2
-) = 0 (6.7)
2 dZ' 2 dX' dy' dZ'
V au? + J-. ap; 0 (6.8)

2 az' P2 ax'
V dv 2 + ~ dp; 0 (6.9)
2 Clz' P2 Cly'
V dW 2 +~ dp;
= 0 (6.10)
2 dZ' P2 dy'
Diffraction Of Oblique Shock By Yawed Wedges 191
oS~
o (6.11)
oz'
Entropy and density variations can now be eliminated from the entire problem
since by virtue of equation (6.11) V2 op; can be written as Vi ()op~. Now making lise
oz a2 z
of the transformations
x'
x=---
z'tan a
y=-y-'-
z'tan a
p = p; - P2
a 2P2q"
P = a 2 (p; - P2)
P2Q2
v= v2
Q2 cosa
(6.12)
equations (6.7) to (6.10) become
au au op
x-+- (6.13)
ax oy ax
ov dv dp
x-+y- (6.14 )
dx dy oy
ow ow ou ov (6.15)
x-+y- = -+-
ox oy ox oy
x ap + y ap au av
-+- (6.16)
ax ay ax ay
Eliminating u and v from equations (6.13) , (6.14) and (6.16) we get a single
second order differential equation in p , namely
a a
( x-+y-+l ap )
)( x-+y-
ap (6.17)
ax ay ax ay
It may be pointed out here that there was an error of presentation in the
transformation w -
_(v-wJI
/q I sin a used by Chester (1954) and in fact should have
been w = -wjql sin a . This has been observed by Chopra and confirmed by Chester in
a private communication.
The characteristics of (6.17) are tangents to the unit circle X2 + yZ = 1
which shows that the region of disturbance is enclosed by the circle.
This circle in 0 x'y'z' system becomes
(6.18)
The position of the shock line referred to (x, y ) system is (tan 11 ,0) and
tan a
it will lie inside or on the cone of disturbance and outside the cone of disturbance
according as
tanll:s; 1
tan a
(6.19)
tan 11
and--> 1
tan a
Making use of equation (6.2) and (6.3) , the inequality condition (6.19) gives
i.e when the relative outflow from the reflected shock is supersonic the shock line lie
outside the cone of disturbance.
As the reflected shock makes an angle a z with the plane of the wedge and the
angle between the reflected shock front and z' axis is /l the equation of the undisturbed
part ofthe reflected shock lies in the plane
x = k - ycot<\> (6.20)
where cot <\> = cot a 2 sec /l (6.21)
and k = tan/l (6.22)

tan a
In the present case also three configuration can arise depending on whether the
Mach cone crosses the reflected shock front, touches it or does not touch it. We will see
that the Mach cone intersects the shock front.
The points of intersection of the unit circle X2 + y2 = I with the reflected
shock front are (K sin <\> .)1- K2 cos<\> ,K cos<\> ..fl=I(2 sin <\ where K = k sin <l>
which will be real and different if
K<
.f tan/.l .
or1 --sm<\> < (6.23)
tan a
We observe from equation (6.21) that <\> < a2 so that (6.23) will hold if
tan /l .
--sma? < (6.24)
tan a -
Using equation (6.2) and (6.3) equation (6.24) on simplification yields.
(6.25)
We have Q > 1 as (U - q2)1 > 1 and so from (6.25) we have

/a 2
(a.)
w o
@
w 0 0
A w'
CORNER
--q2
U
(a) > 1 " ~cosX > 1
a2 a2
Figure 6.2
U -q,
(b) ~> 1 , q2 cosX < 1
a2 a2
(M. G. Chopra & R. S. Sriv asta va,
1972)
D?f1'ract;on of Oblique Shock By Yawed Wedxes 195
(U - q2) sin ~ < I which has been established by Srivastava and Chopra (1970) for
angles of incidence consistent with regular reflection. Hence the Mach cone will always
intersect the reflected shock front along two lines and the region of disturbance will be
bounded by the portions of the Mach cone intercepted by the shock and the wedge
surface, the diffracted part of the shock and the wedge segment. If we take a section
of the configuration, normal to the axis of Mach cone (Figure 6.2) the surfaces of the
Mach cone will correspond to AB and CD the arcs of the unit circle; the lines of
intersection of the Mach cone and the shock front to the points Band C and the wedge
surface to WOW'. In fact , for the unyawed case the cone of disturbance will
degenerate into a cylinder of disturbance, the axis of the cone becoming parallel to the
leading wedge and the vertex of the cone approaching infinity.
It is important to note that the cone of disturbance will include, pass through or
exclude the leading edge according as the fluid velocity normal to the leading edge
behind the reflected shock is subsonic, sonic or supersonic i.e. according as
q2 cosX ::; a2
(6.26)
or q2 cosX > az
Different configurations arising in these situations are depicted in Figures 6.2a

and 6.2b. The constant flow region 2 is given by equations 4.1 holding across retlected
shock whereas the flow in region 3 can be determined by these very equations with
changed angle of incidence. The flow in region 4 is , however, yielded by the solution
of (6.17) with the appropriate boundary conditions .
.Boundary Conditions
On the reflected diffracted shock
The undisturbed part of the reflected shock lies in the plane
x = k - ycot<X 2 sec).! (6.27)
and consequently the equation of the reflected-diffracted shock may be written as
x tan <X tan /l - y cot <X2 sec /l tan <X + f(y) sec /l (6.28)
where f (y) is small.

Using the transformation (6.12) the equation of the diffracted part of the shock
given by equation (6.28) becomes
x' cos Il + y' cot 0.2 - z' ( sin Il + f) = 0 (6.29)
Direction ratios of the normal to the perturbed shock front are
( cos Il , cot 0.2 - f' cot 0. , - sin Il - f + y f')

As f(y) is small, the components of the unit vector normal to the perturbed
reflected shock are
n=cos Il sin 0. 2 + f' cot 0. sin 2 0. 2 cos 0. 2 cos Il - (f - yf') sin Il cos Il sin 3 (X2 ,
cos 0. 2 '- f' cot (X sin 3 (X2 - (f - yf') sin Il cos (X2 sin 3 (X2'
- sin Il sin (X2 - f' sin Il cos (X2 cot (X sin 2(X2 + (y - yf') sin (X2 (sin 2Il sin 2 (X2 - 1)
(6.30)
The shock transltlOn relation will depend on the normal component of the
velocity in front of the reflected shock, in fact, the relations for a stationary shock with
'Y = 1.4 are
(6.31)
= (6.32)
where VI is the velocity in front of the reflected shock which is given by
(6.33)
and has components
U sin(x -Il) .
= - . + ql S10 (XO cos Il along Ox' (6.34)
s10 X
= - q1 cos(Xo along Oy' (6.35)
U cos(X -Il) . .
= . - ql SIn a o SIn Jl along Oz' (6.36)
S10X
Diffraction Of Ohlique Shock By Yawed Wedges 197
With the help of the relations (6.34) to (6.36) Vn =(VI' n}n can also be
written as
Yn = {ll+ml(f-yf')+nlf'}n (6.37)
where
=
ql sm u 2 cosu 2 sm 11 sm U o + u 2 ) + U{sm
( . 2 .
u 2 sm COS(X-Il)}
11- --".:":--'--
smx
and the components of nare given by equation (6.30). By using equations (6.37) and
neglecting second and higher degree terms in fey) and fOl(y)
=
(6.38)
J
= ~I {II - 2m l(f - yf') - 2n/'}

I
Substituting equations (6.38) and (6.37) in equation (6.31) and comparing the
components along Ox I
which on simplyfying with the help of transformation (6.12) gives

u,
u = = A + B(f - yf') + Cf' (6.39)
where
A =
C =
Similarly comparing other components we have
(6.40)
w (6.41)
where
VIY' 5 11 (a; -l~ )coS<X 2

---'--+ ,
q2 cosa 6 liq2 cosa
5 ll(a~ -1~)sinllcosa2 sin 2 a 2 + ml(a~ + Incosa 2

6 l~q2 cosa
V2 VI)' +~IJa~-lnsinllsina2
q2 sin a q2 sin a 6 l;q2 sin a
D(fJi'aCfion qr Oblique Shock By Yawed Wedges 199
5 II (a~ -Insin /lcota sin 2(X2 cOSU 2 - n l (a; + Insin 11 sin (X2
6 l:q2 sin (X2
Equation (6.32) with the help of equation (6.37) , (6.38) and (6.12 ) yields
p = A3 + B3 (f - yf') + CJ' (6.42)
where
5 . PI
A3 - {I; -(U' _qJ2} = 0
6 a 2P2 q2
5 PIlI m l
B3 =
3 a z P2 q2
5 PIlI n l
C3 =
3 a 2 pz q2
From equations (6.39) , (6.40), (6.41) and (6.42) we would obtain
du C-By dp
= (6.43)
dy C 3 - B3 y dy
-dv C; - Bly dp
(6.44)
dy C3 - B3 y dy
As we are seeking the solution of equation (4.40) in terms of p , we mllst have

the boundary condition in terms of p alone which with the help of equations (6.13),
(6.14), (6.16), (6.43) and (6.44) becomes
(k - YCot<\{(k _ ycot<\ dP + y dP }
dX dy
(6.45)
-dP - y C - By -dP + (k - y cot "')
'I'
C I. - Bly
.
dp
dx C 3 - B 3 y dy C3 - B 3 y dy
As the surface of the wedge is inclined at an angle 8 cosx to the plane y == 0

the non- dimensionalised vertical component of the perturbation velocity on the wedge
surface is
v = - 0 cos X sec ex (6.46)
Region 3 being a domain of constant flow , the value at B is also given by

(6.46) and therefore
f~
dy Y
= (6.47)
where the integral has been taken from B to C along the diffracted part of the shock.
On the Mach cone
The conditions on the surface of the Mach cone vary according as the leading
edge lies within , on or outside the cone of disturbance ie according as
M2 cosX < or M2 cosX = or M2 cosX > L
Case (i) Figure 6.2a) Leading edge lies within or on the Mach cone
(M 2 cosX ~ 1)
On the arc CD
p == 0 (6.48)
where as on the arc AB
p (6.49)
P3 being the pressure in the constant flow region 3

Diffraction OJ Oblique Shock By Yawed Wedges 201
Case (ii) ( Figure 6.2b) Leading edge lies outside the cone (M 2 cosX > I)
On the arc AB , P3 is given by the equation (6.49) whereas on CD
p=O (6.50)
The region 5 between the tangent plane, wedge portion and part of the surface
of the Mach cone is Prandtl-Meyer zone of uniform flow and the pressure there is p, .
and is given by
2 8secacosx
P2 - P2q2 (M; cos 2 X -I)
Substituting the value of Ps in the non-dimensional relation
p = (6.51 )
and using the equation (6.2) one obtains
m8cosxseca
p = (6.52)
(m 2 -l)g
where
tan(x -11)
m = (6.53)
tan a
-m , is the x coordinate of the leading edge. Thus the boundary values of p on the arc
CD are discontinous at T.
On the Wedge Surface
The boundary conditions on the wedge surface also depend on whether the
leading edge lies outside, on or within the region of disturbance.
Case (i) Leading edge lies outside the Mach cone. (M2 cos X > 1)
On the wedge surface v = 0 upto the leading edge and v - 8 cos X sec ex
beyond it . This gives
o (6.54)
which with the help of (6.14) ,keeping in view that y = 0 on the wedge surface,
yields
ap
ay
= 0 (6.55)
Case (ii) Leading edge lies inside the cone of disturbance ( M2 cos X < 1 )
In this case equation (6.55) holds all along the wedge surface except at the
corner (x = -m) where equation (6.55) has to be replaced by.
d a
f ....E f ~ax dx
-m+r -m+E
Lt dx -m
y-->O -m-ay -rn- E
(6.56)
mS cos X sec ex
using equation (6.14) and the fact that v increases by - Scos X sec ex at the leading
edge.
Now that the boundary conditions have been specified on the area of the
curvilinear quadrilateral, the problem reduces to the solution of (6.17) under the
boundary conditions (6.45) , (6.47) , (6.49) alongwith the conditions (6.50), (6.53)
and (6.55) when the leading edge lies outside the region of disturbance and (6.48),
(6.55), (6.56) when the leading edge lies inside the region of disturbance.
Busemann's Transformation
It is well known that (6.17) , passing to polar coordination (r, e) and

performing the transformation r = 2 R / (I + R2) becomes the Laplace's equation
a 2 p +J...ap +_1 a 2 p = 0 (6.57)

aR 2 R aR R2 ae 2
Unit circle r = 1 becomes the circle R = 1 and reflected shock x = k - Y cot e\>
becomes the arc of the circle
~sin(e+e\ K sine\> , K = k sine\> (6.58)

1+ R
Rotating the initial line (Fig 6.3) through (rr/2 - e\ the circle given by (6.58)
transform to the circle
(6.59)
in ( R, 0) systems which cuts the unit circle orthogonally at

B(I, 2n: - cos-1K) and C(I, cos-1K)
Following Lighthill (1949) we now have
ap
an (6.60)
ap
as
where x" = R cos 0, y" = R sin 0, K' = (1 - K2)1/2 and dn and ds are elements
normal and tangential to the circular arc 2R cos 0 =: K (1 + R2) towards its centre and
away from the line 0 = O.
Putting the relation y = K { cos <1> + sin <1> tan 0} in equation (6.45) and
simplifying
, I, C - B' tan <-J I , C' B', tan (-I

K\cos~ + Sln~ tanH): KISln - cos lane) + i - K(sln - COSI) tanH 1 - - ' - ' - - ' - - -
~~ _ _ _ _ _ _~I_ _ _ _ _~__C~3_-_B~3_tan_e~J~_ _ _ _ _ _ _C~3_-_B~3_ta_n__ "
~ 1 - K 2I sin _ cos tanH 12
i'y
(6.61)
where
C' = C - BK cos <1> , C; = C 1 - B1Kcos<1>, C; = C 3 - B3 K COS <1>

B' BKsin<1>, B; = B 1Ksin<1>, B; BjKsin<1>
After further simplification (6.61) can be written as
G + D tan0 + E tan 2 0 + F tan 30

(6.62)
G' + D' tan0 + E' tan 20 + F' tan 30
X"
I
,I
I
I
I
I
UNIT CIRCLE
FRONT
e
o WALL A
t PLANE
Figure 6.3 Configuration in the s-plane. (M. G. Chopra & R. S. Srivastava, 1972)
where
G = K2C~ sin<\> cos<\> + KC' cos<\> - KC; sin<\>
D = K2C; (sin 2<\> - cos 2<\ - K2B;sin<\> cos<\> + KC' sin<\> - KB' cos<\>
+KC; cos<\> + KB; sin<\>
E - K2 C; sin<\> cos<\> + K2B;(cos 2<\> - sin 2 <\ - KB; sin<\> - KB; cos<\>
F = K2B; sin<\> cos<\>
G' = C;(l- K2 sin 2 <\
D' = - B;(l- K 2 sin 2 <\ + 2K 2C; sin<\> cos<\>
E' = - K 2 C; cos 2 <\> - 2K2B; sin<\> cos<\>
F' K2B; cos 2<\>
Substituting for {ap/ax / ap/ay } from equation (6.62) in the coordinates

transformation relation
1+1 ~) tan<\>
I ay
=
and simplifying one obtains
op
a" =
r:x GI +DI tane +EI tan e +FI tan e
2 3
G' +D' tane +E' tan e +P' tan e

(6.63)
op I I I
2
I
3
ay "
where
GI G' +G tan<\>
DI = D' + D tan<\>
EI = E' + E tan<\>
FI = F' + F tanG>
G'I = G' tanG> - G
D'I = D' tan<jl- D
E'I E' tan<\> - E
F,'I F' tan<\> - F =0
From equations (6.63),(6.60) the shock boundary condition finally transforms to
ap
an
ap
as
(6.64)
Setting ~ = R cos e, 11 = R sin e the leading edge becomes the point
11 = 0
m
and the discontinuity condition (6.56) becomes
mo cosx seca
(6.65)
(1- m2)~
Conformal transformation
The sequence of conformal transformation (4.65) to (4.68) with

Diffraction Qf Oblique Shock By Yawed Wedges 207
tanll . <\>
K - - sm
tan a
K' (I-K 2); (6.66)
(X2 replaced by <\>
transform the region bounded by the orthogonal curvilinear quadilateral ABCD to the
upper semi-infinite plane. The segments of the real axis + 1/ K to +00 and -00 to-
1/ K are mappings of the shock front BC , - 1 to + 1 corresponds to the wall segment
CD , + 1 to + 1/ K and - 1/ K to - 1 correspond to AB and CD , the arcs of the unit
circle.
The leading edge in the s-plane is
1-(1-m 2 )J.!i
---'----- {- sin <\> + i cos<\>J
m
which transforms to different expressions in ZI - plane , Z2 - plane, Zj - plane ancl

becomes
in the Z4-plane
The coordinates of the leading edge in the final ZI -plane can, however, be
obtained with the help of elliptic function transformation (4.68) and this may be
denoted by ZI = xo'
In the ZI plane the shock boundary condition (6.64) becomes
(6.67)
where
K' (Z~ - 1)
tane
K (Z~ + 1)
and ZI is in turn known in terms of XI through the conformal transformations (4.65) to
(4.68).
Noting that the diffracted shock is represented by the segments -00 to
- 1 / K and + 1 / K to +00, the condition in the ZI plane becomes
-Iii(
f = ocosxseca (6.68)
The wall boundary condition (6.55) becomes
~ = 0 for -I<x] <+1

dYI
except at the leading edge where the discontinuity condition (6.65) becomes
mo cos X sec a
= (6.69)
(l_m 2 )15
When the leading edge is included in the region of disturbance, the boundary
conditions on the portion of the XI axis corresponding to the arcs of the unit circle are
= 0 for +1 < XI < J.t and < -I (6.70)
where as for the supersonic case (Figure 6.2) equations (6.49), (6.56) and (6.53) yield
the condition (6.70) except that at the point on x] axis, say Xo corresponding to T
mo cos X sec a
(6.71)
(m 2 _1)15
The point T which in S - plane is

1- i(m 2 _1)15
-----{-sine\>+i cose\>}
m
which transforms to different expressins in Z,-plane, Z2-plane Z,- plane and

becomes
1t
+ in Z4 plane
2
The coordinates of T in the final z, -plane can, however, be obtained with the
help of elliptic function transformation (4.68).
Now that the region of disturbance is transformed to semi - infinite plane and
the boundary conditions are known on x, -axis, the solution of the boundary value
problem can be obtained by the method of complex variables .
Solution
The solution is effected by the introduction of a function
. ap
1- (6.72)
ay,
which is regular throughout the upper half plane. The discontinuity conditions (6.69)
and (6.71) at z, = Xo can be expressed as
(6.73)
i m 8 cosx sec a/
/1t{m 2 -l)~
(6.74)
As the imaginary part of log w(z,) is known on the x, -axis of z, - plane,

Poisson's integral formula gives
(6.75)
2lO Interaction Of Shock Waves
where tan -, { - ("l{~ J"_' denotes known values on the real axis and H, is a
real constant. Corresponding to equation (4.77) of Srivastava and Chopra (1970) we

obtain here
[N(z -x )-1]
w(zJ = H 0 cos Xsec ex (I 0)
Zl - Xo
(6.76)
Equating the expressions for w ( ZI) at ZI = Xo given by equation (6.73) or

(6.74) with (6.76) and simplyfying , we get the value of the arbitrary constant H,
where as the other constant N is determined with the help of (6.68) ,wherein the value
of ~ on the shock front is substituted from (6.76) and the integrals occuring in
aX 1
that equation are evaluated by Simpson's rule by changing the limits appropriately. This
completes the theoretical solution of the problem because the real part of w ( ZI ) when
integrated between different limits yields the pressure distribution details on the wedge
surface. The numerical discussion and plotting of the pressure distribution curves are
given in the following section.
Numerical Discussion
The quantitative estimate of the pressure distribution on the wedge surface

behind the reflected diffracted shock has been carried out for the following parameters:
PO/PI X
0.5 200 14.93 60 0 3.02595
0.2 200 lO.85 60 0 3.34748
The choice of the parameters are such that they give rise to the configurations
6.2a . Numerical computations for the case when the leading edge lies outside the
0.4
0.2
''' - t---.
~1------
----
o
- 0.1f. \.0 +6.13
o A S
Figure 6.4 Pressure ditsribution on the wedge surface along the section perpendicular
to the axis of the cone of disturbance (~ = 0.5 ; aD = 20 ; X = 60 ; (5 = 0.1 radian).
0, Leading Edge; A, Unit circle wall intersection; S, Shock wall junction. (M. G.
Chopra & R. S. Srivastava, 1972)
0.6
0.4
~I----
0.2
o
"'" ----- -- ......
-0.2.1 +1.0 +5.93

a A 5
Figure 6.5 Pressure ditsribution on the wedge surface along the section perpendicular
to the axis of the cone of disturbance (/; = 0.2 ; a o = 20 ; X = 60 ; 8 = 0.1 radian).
0, Leading Edge; A, Unit circle wall intersection ; S, Shock wall junction. (M. G.
Chopra & R. S. Srivastava, 1972)
region of disturbance are not taken up as this situation arises only in very extreme case
i.e. when the angle of incidence is near the sonic angle(Bleakney and Taub 1949) and
the incident shock strength is very high.
In figure(6.4) and (6.5) , the value of
(P2 - P3.J
=
O(P2 - Po)
has been plotted for different points of the wedge surface between the shock line and
the leading edge. It is observed that the values of (P2 - P3,4) {( _ ) remains constant
/o(pz Po
from the point of intersection of the' wedge and reflected shock to the point of
intersection of the wedge and the unit circle and finally increases from this constsnt
value to infinity at the leading edge. Here by keeping the angle of incidence and angle
of yaw fixed we have tried to bring out how the increase in the incident shock strength
affects the pressure deficiency. A comparison between the two curves obtained shows
that the pressure deficiency grows with the shock strength.
It is important to note that a comparison with the unyawed case discussed by
Srivastava and Chopra (1970) cannot be made , as here the pressure deficiency is
depicted at the points of the wedge surface lying on the perpendicular to the axis of the
cone of disturbance, whereas in the unyawed case the pressure deficiency curve were
plotted for the points lying on the line perpendicular to the leading wedge. However, a
comparison can be made for points lying very close to leading wedge and it is observed
that the yaw results in lowering of the pressure deficiency as expected.
Diffraction of oblique shock waves with yawed wedges (V -qla2 ~ I)

We consider here the interaction of an oblique shock configuration (consisting of
incident and reflected shock) encountering a yawed wedge for the case when the
relative outflow from the reflected shock is sonic or subsonic. This investigation is the
generalisation of Srivastava's (1968) results to the case of yawed wedges (the shock line
makes some non zero angles with the leading wedge).
Mathematical formulation
When the oblique shock configuration has interacted with the yawed wedge, the
region of constant flow behind the reflected diffracted shock is governed by equations
(4.1) .
When the whole configuration has been brought to rest by superimposing a
214 Inreraction Of Shock Waves
velocity U cosecx along the leading edge in a direction opposite to the direction of
motion of the point of intersection of the shock line and leading edge , the resultant
velocity V2 behind the reflected shock given by equation (6.1) will be supersonic if
(U-q2)2+U2cot2X > a;
Thus the angle of yaw must satisfy the inequality
(6.77)
for ensuring conical flow field behind the shock which makes the problem amenable to
solutions as it helps in defining the boundary value problem . In fact the limit on X , the
angle of yaw , depends both on the incident shock strength and the angle of incidence.
For a particular shock strength as the angle of incidence increases from the sonic angle
to the extreme angle the limiting value of X decreases and the least value is attained
corresponding to the extreme angle. This result has been shown in Figure 6.6 . It is
observed' that the limit on X decreases slowly as ~ varies from 0 to 0.6 , increases
from 0.6 to 0.9 and finally shows steep rise as ~ varies from 0.9 to 1.0.
Referring the flow equations to the cartesian frame of reference Ox'y'z' with 0
as the vertex of the cone of disturbance, z' -axis along the direction of V2 and Ox' lying
in the plane of the wedge (Fig 6.1) , the region of disturbed flow will be enclosed by
the Mach cone
(6.78)
where sin a = (6.79)

V2
which in (x , y) system is the unit circle
(6.80)
The shock line ( tan Il

tan a
,0) wI'II be inside or on the cone of disturbance
' tanll
accord mg as - - 1.
tana
Making use of the equations (6.2) and (6.3) this condition becomes
(6.81)
t/)
UJ
UJ
~ 80
UJ
o
~
10
k
u.
o
!::
~ 60
5oL---~-----L-----L----~----~
0.0 0.2 O.G O.S 1.0
SHOCK STRENGTH( 5 -:: P.lp,)
Figure 6.6 Limit on the angle of yaw for different shock strengths. Copyright AIAA
1972. Used with permission. (M. G. Chopra, 1972)
Now the first factor is always positive, therefore for the above condition to be
satisfied we would always have
U-q,
.~
Thus the shock line whose coordinates in (x , y) plane are given by (tan /l ,0)
tan a
will always lie within or on the cone of disturbance according as relative outflow from
the reflected shock is subsonic or sonic and therefore the region of disturbance will be
bounded by the Mach cone , reflected-diffracted shock and the wedge surface . If we
take a section of the configuration normal to the axis of the Mach cone , the surface of
the cone will be represented by the arc AB ; the line of intersection of the Mach cone
and the shock front by the point B ; the wedge portion by straight segment AC and the
shock front by the arc CB . The flow picture in this (x , y) plane is the same as for
Srivastava's (1968) unyawed case, except that here the flow picture grows with space
variable z'. It is important to note that the curvilinear triangle enclosing the region of
disturbance will include, pass through or exclude the leading edge according as the fluid
velocity normal to the leading edge behind the reflected shock is subsonic, sonic or
supersonic i.e.
or M2 cosX = or M 2cosX >
The different configurations are depicted in Figures 6.7 , 6.8 and 6.9
The constant flow in region 2 is governed by equations (4.1) as mentioned in the
introductory part of this section whereas for obtaining the flow in region 3 equation
(6.17) has to be solved within the curvilinear triangle ABC . This is a boundary value
problem and before attempting the solution of equation (6.17) we formulate the
conditions that must hold on the sides of the curvilinear triangular contour.
Boundary condition on the shock front
The equation (6.45) holds on the shock front i.e. we have here also
(k - ycot<\{(k - ycot<\ op + y op}

ox oy
op C-By op C -By::h...
- - Y - + (k - ycot<1 I vp
ox
I
C l - B3 y (}y C 3 - B3 y (}y
IWCIDEIH
SHOCK
U -q2
Figure 6.7 ~
a2
CD
0
UNIT CIRCLE
Q) @
A c w'
U -q2
:s;
Figure 6.8 q2 cosX
a2 a2
C - By dP}
Y{ (k - Ycot q, ) + d + (k - Ycot q, ) C1 - By1
C3- B1y Y C3 - B 3 y
ordP/dp =
dX dy
(6.82)
As the surface of the wedge is inclined at an angle equal to <5 cos X to the plane
y = 0 , at the wall shock junction,
v = - <5cosxseca (6.83)
At the shock and unit circle intersection
v 0
and therefore
f~
dy Y
= 8cosxseca (6.84)
Boundary condition on the Mach cone
The condition on the part of the surface of the Mach cone in (x , y) plane is
represented by AB depend on whether
M2 cosX < or M2 cOSX or M2 cos X > 1
Case (i) M2 cos X :s;
On the ate AB of the unit circle

p 0 (6.85)
Case (ii) M 2 cosX >
P 0 on DB (6.86)
and
m8cosxseca
P = {m 2 _ 1)1/2
(6.87)
On the wedge surface
The condition on the wedge surface also vary according as

M2 cos X 1
Case(i) M2 cos X 2
The boundary condition in y = 0 with the help of equations (6.83) and (6.14)
comes out to be
dp
o (6.88)
dy
Case (ii) M2 cosX <
The condition on y = 0 is given by dp o except at the leading edge where

dy
we have
a
f .::L!x f .dx
-mHa -mH
Lt = -m ~x = m8cosxseca (6.89)
dy
y\ -->0 -m-
-m-I::
In the present problem equation (6. 17) has to be solved under the above
mentioned boundary conditions.
Busemann 's Transformation
Transforming to polar coordinates (r , e ) , with r = 2 RI

II + R-
? equation
(6.17) becomes
a 2p 1 ap
-+--+--
1 2p a = 0 (6.90)
aR 2 R aR R2 as 2
The portion of the Mach cone becomes an arc of the circle
~sin(8+<j = K, K = ksin<j> (6.91)

1+ R
and the wedge surface is given by 8 = 0 and 8 1t

Rotating the axis through ~ - <1> (Fig.6.1O), equation (6.91) becomes
2 R cos e = K (1 + R 2 ) (6.92)
where e is measured from the initial line.
The corners of the curvilinear triangle referred to ( R , e) system are
A(l,1tj2 + <1, B(l,cos- I K) and C(K,-1tj2 + <1.
B
SHOCK
/ II
/ i-
/
I
I
I
/
I
1(9
WALL
A c
Figure 6.10 Boundaries in the s-pJane.

Diffraction Of Oblique Shock By Yawed Wedges
The shock boundary condition under this transformation becomes (refer 6.64)
where dn and ds are elements normal and tangential to the circular arc
2Rcos8 = K(I + R2) respectively towards its centre and away from the initial line
<::> = 0.
The discontinuity condition (6.89) here also transforms and we obtain the
transformed condition as we have obtained (6.65).
Conformal Transformation
With S = R e iH the transformation
z = (K + iK'){i _ 2K' }
s-(K+iK')
(6.94)
K = ksinC\>
converts the region bounded by the curvilinear triangle to quarter plane with circular
K'
cut (Figure 6.11) having centre (0, . cosC\> ) and radius
K' sm C\> + K coslj> K'sinC\> + Kcos<jl
In the Z plane B transforms to and is denoted by B The wall gets tranformed
00 I.
to the part of the circle
X2+(Y_ cosC\> )2 = (6.95)

K' sin C\> + K cos C\> (K'sin<!> + KCOS<!2
The coordinates of A and C are I I
(0 K + sin <\> ) and

, 1+ Ksin<j>-K'cos<j>
B'
Slioe/(
~
"
Figure 6; 11 Boundaries in the Z-plane.

Diffraction qr Oblique Shock By Yawed Wedges 225
Thus in Z - plane shock runs from (sin 2 <1> - K2)V2 j(K' sin <1> + K cos <1 to
the arc of the unit circle becomes B A and the wall segment transforms to a part of
I I
the circle given by equation (6.95)

For the point lying on the shock boundary the imaginary part of Z given by
equation (6.94) vanishes and we are left with real part only i.e.
[cos 2 e - K2]V2
Z =
(K' cose - K sin e)
which readily yields
K'(Z2 -1)
tane = (6.96)
K (Z2 + 1)
Now we introduce the transformation
].J(bZ+
21 bZ -1
1)% +(~)-X)
bZ-l
(6.97)
where
b = [K'K' sinsin <1><1> +- K cos<1>]~

K cos <1>
(6.98)
= (6.99)
convert the shaded region in Z-plane to lower half zl-plane (Figure 6.12) .
The three portions of the real axis is defined by - - 0 0 < XI < - I,
-1 < XI < +1, and +1 < XI < +00 correspond to the wall
segment, the part of the unit circle and the diffracted shock front.
The boundary condition (6.93) transforms to
226 Interaction 9r Shock Waves
-I + ....
WALL UNIT CIRCLE SHOCK
%,. PLANE
Figure 6.12 Boundaries in the zl-plane.
ap
aYI _ K,20 l + (K,2 0l - K 20;) tan e + (K,2E I - K 20;) tan 2 e + (K,2 Fl - K2E; }tan 3 e
ap - (I-K 2 sec 2 e)""[O;+ O;tane+E;tan 2 e]
aX I
Xl> I ,y, = 0
(6.100)
K'(Z2 - 1)
where tane (6.101)
K (Z2 + I)
and Z in turn is written in terms of XI with the help of equation (6.97) . Also condition
(6.47) in the final plane becomes
(6.102)
Diffraction Qr Oblique Shock By Yawed WedRes 227
The wall boundary condition transforms to = 0 for
-00 < Xl < -I except at the leading edge whose correspondence in zl-plane say
Xo is given by
=
_ COSh[;tanh-lj(l- m2)~(sin2 <\> - K2)~ 1] < -1 (6.103)
" mK + sin<\> r
and the discontinuity condition (6.69) at this point becomes
mocosxseca
= (l_m 2 )Yz
(6.104)
The corresponding condition for the case when the fluid velocity normal to the
leading edge is supersonic (M 2 cosx > 1) arises from the fact that p changes
discontinuously by the amount given by equation (6.52), at the point
= - m- {I- ~2 )J.:; of the Mach cone. This point is represented in the zl-plane
by
21tII)
cos (- -
'A
where
[I + m(K
tan -l---,=-=-_ _ _sin
_<\>_
-_K' _
cos<\]
_~,.,
b[(mSin<\>+K)-K'(m _1)Yz]
2
and its value lies between -1 and + 1 . Thus by equation (6.71) we have
mocosx seca
(6.105)
(m -1)~
2
Solution
Now we shall find out a function which satisfies all the boundary conditions on
the xI-axis. The solution is effected by the introduction of a complex function
W(ZI) = ~-i~ (6.106)

dX I dYI
which is regular in the lower half plane. In terms of W(ZI) the discontinuity (6.104) and
(6.105) indicate that near z, =xo
-imo cos Xsec a/

/ rr(m 2 -1)~
(6.107)
(M, cosX < 1) (6.108)
As the value of the imaginary part of log W(ZI) is known on the real axis, an
extension of the Poisson's integral formula gives
= (6.109)
r
where H, is a real consrnnt and rnn+ f~:l} t, means that x, in
Corresponding to the equation (6.76) we obtain here
(6.110)
where
 + il3
{f(x)x~o -13} + 4 {f(x)x~o.25 -13} + 2 {f(X)F050 -13}

1 (I - 0.25x l ) (I - 0.50x l )
<\l = l
121t +4 {f(X)F075 -~} +4Jf(x)X~1 -~} (6.111)
(1- O.75xJ (1- xJ
Equating W(ZI) at ZI = Xo given by th(! equation (6.107) or (6.108) with
(6.110) and simplifying, we get the arbitary constant H, whereas the arbitary constant
N is determined with the help of (6.102) wherein the value of ~p on the shock front is
uX I
subsituted from (6.110). This completes the theoretical solution as W(ZI) is now
completely determined.
Yawed wedge case (U- a2

q2 = 1)
The transformation (6.94) converts the disturbed region to a quarter plane, with
a semi-circular cut with _1_ as the radius and (0,

2~n<\l
_1_)
2~n<1>
as the centre
(Figure6.13).
s'
: - UNIT CIRCLE
- -- WALt...
II
C' B'
Figure 6.13 Boundaries in the Z-plane.
The unit circle and shock front run from to 100 and +00 to 0
sin <1>
respecti vel y .
The transformation
~OSh(-1t
Zsin
) <1>
transforms the shaded region in the Z-plane to the lower half of the z1-plane (Figure
6.14 )
D(ffraction of Ohlique Shock By Yawed WedKes 231
-00 -f +1
WALL U(lIT CIRcLE SHocK
Z,-PLANE
Figure 6.14 Boundaries in the zl-plane.
The three portions of the real axis defined by -00 < Xl < - 1
-I < Xl < +1, and +1 < Xl < +00 correspond to the wall
segment, the part of the unit circle and the diffracted shock respectively. The boundary
condition transforms to ( refer 6.100)
Clp
~ _ K,20 1 +(K,2 DI -K20;)tane+(K,2EI-K2D;}tan2e+(K,2FI-K2E;)tanle
dp - (I-K2sec2efJ2[O;+D;tane+E;tan2e]
dX I
Xl> 1 'Yl =0
(6.112)
where
(Z2 -1)
tane cot <\> (2 (6.113)
Z +1 )
H.ere Z is given in terms of z. from the transformation (6.111). Further we have
to substitute U - q2 = k = in the expression for the constants occurring in the

a2
shock boundary condition (6.112).
Also condition on the shock front in this final plane becomes
ocosx seca (6.114)
The wall boundary condition transforms to
= 0 for - 00 < x. < -I
except at the leading edge whose correspondence in the z.- plane say Xo is given by
z. = Xo = -co{1tcotlj>~~::) > -I (6.115)
and the discontinuity condition (6.104) at this point is
mocosxseca
= (6.116)
(l_m 2 )l'5
The corresponding condition for the case when fluid velocity normal to the
leading edge is supersonic (M 2 cos X > 1) arises from the fact that p changes
discontinuously by the amount given by equation (6.52) at the point
t; - m + i( 1 - ~2 )~ of the Mach cone. This point is represented in the z.-plane

by
= = (6.117)
We have by equation (6.105)
mocosx seca
(6.118)
(m 2 _I);.f
The solution is obtained by introduction of the function
w(zJ = ~ -i~ (6.119)

aX t aYt
which is regular in the lower half plane.
In terms of w(Zt) the discontinuity condition (6.116) and (6.118) indicate that
near Zt = Xu
m8cosxseca
n:(I-m2)Yz
(M2 cosX < 1) (6.120)
(Zt-xo)
m8cosxseca
n:(m 2 -1)g
-1 (6.121 )
(Zt-xo)
Further for determining the pressure distribution the analysis proceeds on the
same lines as for the case of yawed wedges when ..!!..- q2 <
a2
Numerical results for the pressure distribution
A quantitative estimate of the pressure distribution along the wedge surface

behind the reflected - diffracted shock for the case when the relative outflow behind
reflected shock before diffraction is sub-sonic has been obtained. For such a case,
Chopra(l972) has chosen ~ = 0 ; a o = 39.97 ; X = 40. For this data leading edge
lies outside the disturbed region.
In the Figure 6.15, the value of

P2 - P3.4
~~..:....::.:;~ has been plotted for different
8(P2 - Po)
points of the wedge surface. The curve maintains a constant value from the corner to
the point of intersection of the unit circle and the wall and thereafter decreases
monotonically up to the point of intersection of the reflected-diffracted shock and wall.
It may be poined out that a comparative study with the unyawed case has not been made
because here pressure distribution has been plotted on a line perpendicular to the axis of
the Mach cone where as Srivastava(l968) has determined pressure distribution on a line
perpendicular to the leading edge.
This comparison can however, be made for points very close to the leading edge
and it is seen that yaw results in higher pressure deficiency.
4.0
~
~
-
o
o A
t
LEADING
,
c
SHOCK WALL
EDGE JUNCTION
Figure 6.15 Pressure distribution on the wedge surface along section perpendicular to
the cone of disturbance (~ = 0 ; CXo = 39.97 ; X = 40 ; 8 = 0.1 radian). Copyright
AIAA, 1972. Used with permission. (M. G. Chopra, 1972)
REFERENCES
1. Biswas, R.K. & Srivastava, R.S.

On the interaction of oblique shock wave with a yawed wedge. Defence Science
Journal (India), 16, 4 (1966)
2. Busemann, A.
lnfinitesimal Kegelige Uberschallstromung. Luftfahrforschung, 20, 105. (1943)
3. Chopra, M.G.
Journal, 10, 7. (1972)
4. Chopra, M.G. & Srivastava, R. S.

Reflection and diffraction of shocks interacted by yawed wedges. Proc. Roy. Soc. A.
330, 319 - 330. (1972)
5. Lighthill, M.J.
The diffraction of blast I. Proc. Roy .Soc A, 198,454-470. (1949)
6. Srivastava, R.S.
paper No . 1008 . (1968)

Diffraction of blast wave for the oblique case. LFluid Mech. 40, 4, 821-831 . (1970)
CHAPTER - VII
SHOCK INTERACTION WITH MOVING AERO FOIL
Lighthill (1949) investigated the diffraction of a normal shock wave past a small
hend. Chester(1954) extended the work of Lighthill to include infinte wedges at yaw.
The work presented in this chapter is that of Smyrl(1963) and is concerned with a plane
~hock wave meeting a thin two dimensional aerofoil moving in the opposite direction at
~upersonic speed. The effect of yaw has also been included in the analysis.
Mathematical Formulation
We consider first a plane shock, the plane of which coincides at time to t = 0

with the (Y,Z) plane, moving with velocity U in the direction of the X-axis into a
uniform region (0) of still air. A thin wedge of infinite span, whose leading edge
coincides at time t = 0 with the Z-axis and whose plane of symmetry lies
approximately in the (X,Z) plane moves with supersonic velocity W in the direction of
the negative X-axis. When t ::;; 0 the flow pattern consists of three uniform
regiones (0), 0), (2); regions (0) and (1) are seperated by the shock, while regions (0)
and (2) are seperated by weak bow shock-waves attached to the leading edge. A
solution to the problem is to be obtained for t > 0 wherein we note the following
simplifying features -
(i) the flow is independent of Z
(ii) since the flow is at all times supersonic relative to the wedge, the flow patterns
on the two sides of the wedge are independent; it is therefore sufficient to find the
solution for Y > 0
(iii) there is no fundamental length defining the problem.
We denote by p, p, V and c the respective flow variables pressure, density,
flow velocity and sound speed; by virtue of (i) and (iii) these are functions of Xlt, YIt
only. The conservation relations across a strationary shock may be written in the form
(v. n) 2 -1
2
Pb = tip
5 [- c ]
6P.
Pb = (7.1)
[ 1+
. (v. of
5c; 1
where n is the unit normal to the shock front, suffices a,b refer to values ahead of and
behind the shock, respectively, and y has been taken to be 1.4.
Numerical suffices are used with any variable to denote its constant value in the
uniform region of the same number. Thus if E (supposed small) is the angle between
the wedge face and the (X, Z) plane, we have ( Courant and Friedrichs, 1948)
P2 Po + EP o W2 tan <\>0
Po [ 1+E ( r
~ mn~" 1
= {-E Wtan <\>0' EW} (7.2)
= .c o [ 1 + E( ~; )tan <\>0 1
<\>0 = . -I( -CO )
SIn
W
The mach number M( ~) of the shock and the Mach number M'( ~) of the
wedg~ are the fundamental data defining the problem. Writing MI (~II) for the Mach
number of the uniform plane behind the shock, we find from equation (7.1) that
Shock interaction With Moving Aerofoil 239
[(7M2 -1) (M2 + 5))2

(7.3)
t
.C I
[(7M2 -1)(M +5))2
2
=
c~) 6M
The main flow regions for t > 0 are indicated in Figure 7.1.
The leading edge is represented by the point L. I is the intersection of the
shock and bow-wave and the axes are moving with the velocity VI of the tlow in
region (1). The presence of the wedge in region (1) causes a small disturbance; the
limit of spread of the disturbance is a circle, centre 0, radius at t together with the
targent LC and the shock front.
All regions of uniform flow are denoted by numbers (Figure 7.1). Smyrl (1963)
points out that the region (6) exists only when tangents LC, LD intersect and is then a
straight forward superposition in the disturbances in regions (3) and (5) since the
intersection shocks are both weak (Von Mises 1958). In terms of the shock strength A,
'Where
.L
Po
~t is found that LC and ID intereset unless
M' >
-/5 (A - 1)
The tangent ID vanishes completely if the point I falls within the sonic circle. This
cannot happen for shock strenghts up to A ~6 and thereafter only if
[A{5A(6 - A)}Yz + 6(A, -1)(A, + l)Yz]

M' >
[A,2-6]
Figure 7.1 The main flow regions after the moving wedge has penetrated the shock
front. L is the leading edge, I is the intersection of the shock and the original bow
plane, ID is the bridging shock, LC the new bow wave. U is the speed of the
oncoming shock, V, is the speed of flow behind the shock and W is the speed of the
wedge. B, C, D, E all lie on the sonic circle with centre 0 and radius c, t . OX and OY
are the axes of the coordinates. (J. L. Smyrl , 1963)
Slwck Interaction With Movin!!, Aer%il 241
Since 1 < A. < 6 for all real shocks, Figure 7.2 illustrates the range of M' and A.
corresponding to the three cases.
I ,
I
20 I
I
I
I
I
I
16
I
I
I SINGLE
I I
TANGENT
I
I
\
12
I
I
\
M' I
NON-IN
:
TERS~CTING
6
I
TANGENTS
I
I \ I\.
'"
I
r---- I"'-h
I
4 I
I
INTERSECTING .---~~
I i
I I
TANGENTS
o I ! 5 6
f 2 3 4
Figure 7.2 The dependence of M' and A. of the proposed flow pattern in Figure 7.1
The non-uniform region
Since air enters this region across a curved shock we expect rotational motion.
The equation of two-discussions rotational motion are
ap + V.(pV)
at
= 0
aa~ + (v.v)v = -(~)vp (7.4)
(~t + v.v)ppr) 0
Within the disturbed flow we assume Taylor expansion of the form
p = PI +pO\X,Y,t)+lp(l)(X,Y,t)+---
P = PI + p(I)(X, Y,t) + 2 plll(X, Y,t) + - -- (7.5)

V = VIJ)(x, Y, t) + 1 \ill) (X, Y, t) + - - -
where is small.
E
Substituting from equations (7.5) into equations (7.4) and equating coefficients
of now gives
a '
-...+c V.V' = 0
dt I
av'
-+cIVp' = 0 (7.6)
dt
ap' dp'
=
at at
where the results have been expressed in terms of the non-dimensional variables
p'
Shock Interaction With Movinx Aerofoil 243
p' L
PI
(7.7)
VIII
\,:' , = = {u' , v'}
ci
The 'cone-field' property of the problem enables us to reduce the number of
x y
V'
independent variables to two by setting x = , y
ci t
. Since p' ,p',
cit
are functions of x and y only, equations (7.6) may be written as
ap' ap' au' av'

x-+y- -+-
ax dy dx dy
dU' du' dp'
x-+y-
dx dy
= dx
dV' dV' dp'
x-+y-
dx dy
= dy
d' d' dp' dp'
x.... + y....
ax dy
= x-+y-
dx dy
(7.8)
Elimination of u' and v' from the first three of equations (7.8) gives an equation
for p' only viz.
= ad
( x-+y-+l - + ydP-')
)( xdp' (7.9)
dX dy dX dy
In the (x,y) plane the flow pattern appears 'steady' and Fig 7.3, indicates its
main features.
The points B(xo , Yo) ,C(x i 'YI)' D(x 2 ' Y2) and E lie on the circumference
of the unit circle, centre 0 , and the coordinate of B, C, D and I(xo ' Yl) are given by
Figure 7.3 The disturbed region in the (x,y) plane.
= [6M(M + M')]
[(7M2 -1)(M 2 + S)(M,2 -1)]%
Shock Interaction With Movinx Aerqfoil 245
h3 (x~ + y~ _1)l-{ - xol

Xl =
(x~ + yi)
Yl = (1- xn~
Y2 = (1- x;)K
Y3 = (1 - x;)Yz (7.10)
Boundary conditions for p' in the non-uniform region
On the circular are BCDE p' takes constant values with discontinuities at C and
D. We den.ote p~ the value of p' appropriate to the uniform region (i) and, where
required, a similar suffix notation is used with p' , u' , v'. We must have p; = P:
and (see Courant and Friedrichs 1948).
= (7.11)
If region (6) exists we have p~ = p; + p~ so that only p; need now be

determined.
We take the position of the shock front to be given by the equation
x = xo+f(y)+O(l) 0.12)
where fey) is as yet unknown. The shock equations (7.1), after some simplification
give at x=xu
u' = "65[( 1 + M2
1){ f ()
Y-
'()} (
Yf Y + M -1
,2 Co ( M'
)-g- S 1 , 2 M'll]
M2 - '5 M - '5 M)
v' = - M/'(y) + CO M'

cl
p'
(7.13)
These equations imply that
u' = Ap' + cons tan t

dV' B dP' (7.14)
y-
dY dy
where
Finally from the first two of equations (7.8) and from equations (7.14) we
deduce that
at x = Xo (7.15)
This is a differential condition for p' and may be supplemented by the equation
I dp' 1 Yo dV'
Yo
f--dy = -f-dY = -1 ( v, 4 -M 1 --M
Co ')
(7.16)
o y dy B 0 CJy B c1
The results (7.13) may be used on the portion BI of the shock front by setting
f(y) = (y 3 - Y) ~ , cS is shock deflection angle at I in Figure 7. 1.

f
This gives
Shock Interaction With Movinr, Aerofoil 247
2
= -5 y 3 [( 1+ - 1) -0 + -
5M'
- -- 0 - ---2M'2M]
M'M ---
6 M2 f 5M2(M+ M')
v'4 M 1 ~+~M'
f c1
= p~ = 5PoCOY3[M~+ 1 (MM'+..!.M2M'2_~Md)l
3P 1C1 (M + M') 2 10
(7.17)
In the case of weak shock ID, the shok equation (7.1) reduce to
(7.18)
and the condition for no flow across the contact discontinuity between regions (3) and
(4) is that
(7.19)
Conditions in regions (3) and (4) are completely determined by the linear
equations (7.17), (7.18) and (7.19). In particular p~ is determined, and we may also
find the rate of ~ of shock deflection to wedge angle.

f
Along EA the flow must be parallal to the wedge face. This requires
(7.20)
when y = 0 so that, using the third of equation (7.8), we get
op'
o when y = 0 (7.21)
oy
The boundary-value problem in the Busemann Plan~
We shall consier the situation now for the contact discontinuity in the non-
uniform region as it has not been discussed earlier. Let ( r , 8 ) be polar coordinates in
the (x,y) plane of Figure 7.3 so that the approximate position of the contact
248 Interaction Qr Shock Waves
discontinuity is
8 = rnn-l(~:) = 8' (7.22)
say. The second and third of equation (7.8) may now be written as
au' ap' dV' = ap'

r- = - r- (7.23)
ar ax ar dy
and the transverse velocity component v~ (= v' cos e- u' sin e) is seen to satisfy the
equation
(7.24)
In terms of p', the condition that pressure and normal flow velocity be continous
across the conrnct discontiniouty would be that p' and % are continous at e e*.
For o :5: e :5: e*, o and
:5: forr :5:
o :5: r :5: 1, p' satisfies the differential equation (7.9) which become in polar
coordinates
aar2p' +~ap'
2
r ar
+J..c)2p' = (r:r+l)(r~Pr')
r2 a8 u 2 U
(7.25)
From the continuity of p' across the radius e = e* we deduce the continuity
of !
a'
and
a
2 ,
a~ across e = e*. Hence equation (7.22) shows that
a 2 ,
so that a~ is continous and equation (7.25) is satisfied across e = eo. In other
words the conrnct discontinuity does not appear as well as far as the boundary value
problem of p' is concerned.
With the transformation r = ~ [I - (1 - r2)Y5 ] Busemann has shown that

(7.25) reduces to
Shock Interaction With Moving Aer%il 249
a2p' 1 a p' 1 a2p'

-+--+--- = 0 (7.26)
ar2 r vr r2 vff
which is Laplace's equation in polar coordinates (r, e).
C~ _ __
UNIT CIRCLE SHOCK
WALL
Figure 7.4 The non-uniform region in the (r,e) plane.
Figure 7.4 shows the non-uniform region in the (r , e) plane. The arc BCDE
of the unit circle is unchanged and cartesian coordinates at all points thereon are
unchanged. The shock front AB becomes an arc of the circle 2 rcose xI) (I + r2 )011
which, by (7.15) (following Lighthill 1949)
AXil tane - Bcote

(7.27)
(1- x~ sece)!1
ddn ' :s being the differentiation normal and tangential to the arc respectively.
Condition (7.21) may be written as
dP'
= 0 when e = It (7.28)
de
in which form it is unchanged by the transformation.
Solution
We write Z = re iO , Zo = Xo + i Yo . We define a new complex

variable ~ (= ~ + i 11) by the equations
Z = Z
.0
{-1 -
~
Yo-}
2-
- Zo
~ = 1.2 (Z2 + Z-2) Z2 (7.29)
Figure 7.4 represents the complex Z-plane and under the conformal mapping
(7.29) the boundary ABCDEA of the non uniform region becomes the entire real axis
11 = 0 in the ~ plane.
We now introduce a function w(~) defined by
dP' . dP'
= -+1- (7.30)
all dS
so that, by (7.26), w(s) is analytic throughout the upper half plane. Since
p' Im{f w(~)ds} + cons tan t (7.31 )

The circular are BCDE beomes the portion ~ < -Ion the real axis, with C, D
corresponding respectively to the points (Sl ,0), (S2 ,0) where
Shock Interaction With Moving Aerojoil 251
~i (i = 1,2) (7.32)
The conditions on the circular are thus become equivalant to the condition that
w(l;) is real for 11 = 0 , s
< -I together with
w(l;) = (7.33)
at S= ~2 (7.34)
The wedge face EA corresponds to the portion of the real axis where -1 < I; <
I. Here we require that w(l;) be imaginary.
The shock front face AB corresponds to the portion S > 1 of the real axis and
by 0.27) (Lighthill 1949) we have here
arg w(~) 0.35)
where
= -Ii M Xo 1M M2 - 1Yo
(M2 +5) 2
1
The r.equired function is given by
w(s) (7.36)
with suitable constants K, ,K2 ' K3 .

From conditions (7.33) and 0.34) we obtain
n- I p~ [I'I + i(1 - sy;][ I' 2 + i(l- ~Y~](si -I)~ 0.37)
-n- I P;['YI + i(l- sJ 14 ][ 1'2 + i(l- <;2)14](1;; _l),t:; 0.38)

From equations (7.29) we find that, corresponding to the shock front, i.e.
11 =0 , ~ > 1 we have
Y = .
Yo
(~-l)g
S+ 1 (7.39)
Hence equation (7.16) gives

v' - M -
4 I
5l. M' =
c1
f.!.Y op'aS dS
B
I
= ~ ](~-l)Yz[KI(~-~J+K2(1;-~2)+K3(~-~J(~-~2)](YI +Y2)(~_1)75 d~
Yo 1 ~+l (y~+S-1)(y;+S-1)(S-SI)(s-~J(S2-1)!>i
( ) B f"'[KI(x+Yi)+K2(X+Y~)+K3(x+Yi)(x+Y~)]
= 'Y 1 + 'Y 2 - 1.1 dx
Yo 1 x72(x+Yn(x+Y;)(x+Yn(x+Y~)
= 1tB{ K1(YI +Y +Y4) 2 + K2(YI +Y2 +Y3) + K3 }

Yo YY Y4(Y2 + YJ(Y + Y
1 2 4 I) Y1Y2Y3 ( Y2 + YJ( Y3 + YJ Y1Y2
where Y; = 1- SI > 0 , y~ = 1- S2 > 0
(7.40)
The constant K3 is thus determined and equation (7.36) gives w(/;;) uniquely.
Smyrl (1963) has shown that
f w(/;;)ct/;; = - i W(s) (7.41)

where
W(~)
Shock Interaction With Moving Aerojoil 253
't =
{1-C;St}
c~st
C1 = 4 g (Kl
2 2 + 2K2 2 + K3 )
(Y2 -yJ(y~ -2) 2 Y4 -Yl Y3 -Yl
C2 = 4 (Kl
2
K, r)
2 + 2 - 2 + K3
(YI-yJ(y~-2)~ Y4 -Y2 Y3 -Y2
(Y1 + YJ( Y2 + YJ C
C3 =
(Y1 - YJ( Y2 - Y3 ) S
(Y1 + Y4)( Y2 + Y4) C
C4 =
(Yl -Y4)(Y2 -yJ 6
2
Cs ;P5
I
2 (7.42)
C6 = --P3
I
1t
It is found that W(~) is purely real when 11 = 0, - I < ~ < 1 and that
W(~) ~ 0 as ~ ~ -1 . It follows from equation (7.31) that
p' = p~ - Re W(~) (7.43)
and the solution is now complete.
The behaviour of p' on the wedge surface simplifies to
= p; - (-1 < ~ < 1)
r
p' W(~) (7.44)
and the substhution f; = I 2{ !I'~ ~o~ gives p' in tenus of the 'conical'
coordinate x.
The yawed wedge
We consider here the case when the leading edge of the wedge has been yawed
through an angle ~. Figure 7.5 shows the (X,Z) .. plane in which the leading edge of
the wedge is moving with supersonic velocity Wand we again assume the plane of
symmetry of the wedge to lie approximately in this plane.
Figure 7.5 The (X,Z) plane.
The shock front has velocity U and makes an angle ~ with the leading edge. The
point 0 where the leading edge intersects the shock front may be brought to rest by
superimposing on the entire system a velocity Vo whose magnitude is
U cosec~ (u 2 + W2 + 2 U W cos ~)~ and whose direction makes an angle
W = sin -1 ( ~) with the shock front, the flow then becomes a steady one.
Shock Interaction With Mavin:.: Aerofoil 255
The uniform flow behind the shock now has velocity V(' = VI + Vo ; the
direction of Vt' makes an angle 11 with the shock front where
(u - VI)sin~
tan 11 = (7.45)
(w + u cos~)
and the magnitude is given by
= (U _ vy + {(w +.uCOS~)}2
s1o~
(7.46)
Smyrl has shown that Vt' > c i if

~ < ~I + ~2 or ~ > 1t - ~I + ~2 (7.47)
where
~I = . --11
sm -.f6 MM'
(7M 4 + 4M2 - 5)~
1
~J J6 M2
~2 =
tan 1 (M2 _l)Yz (M2 + 5)Yz
)
This means that for any fixed wedge speed the point (M,~) must lie to the left of
the appropriate curve as illustrated in Figure 7.6. (The common asymptote is
~ = tan~l)6 = 67.8 ).
The treatment that now follows depends on supersonic flow behind the shock so
we shall assume that ~ lies within the required range and furthermore that ~ < 1t!2.
The point 0 is taken as origin with the Z axis in the direction of vt', and the Mach
cone with semi-angle (x, where sin (X = ~ _. c 1 sin 11 . d rawn on th

,IS
'
e aXIs
V"I (
U-VI )
with 0 as vertex.
The region of non-uniform flow is bounded below by the wedge face, ahead of
the shock front , and elsewhere by the Mach cone (flow again would be considered
above the wedge as the flow above and below are independent). The tangent plane from
the leading edge of the wedge to the Mach cone is a weak shock front; between this
and the cone is a uniform region (5) in which the flow is parallel to the wedge face. A
similar weak shock front is attached to the portion of the leading edge which lies ahead
feef
I I
\
\ \
\ K~
\ ~ ~ ~~
--- --
~
" -
100
~ ~ r---
~ r----. r---
----- ----- ---- f - - - - 1 - - - - 1-- -- --- I- - - -
-
2 3 5 6
Figure 7:6 The range of ~ for which the flow behind the shock is supersonic.
of the advancing shock; it makes an angle <1>0 with the (X,Z) - plane
(cot <1>0 = (M /2 -1)Vz) and separates the region (2) of the uniform flow parallel to
the wedge face from the main region (0) ahead of the shock. Across this shock, the
equations (7.2) give
p, = P{l + (M~~~:)!l] , p, (7.48)
"2 = Vo -Wk
Shock Interaction With MovinK Aerofoil 257
where k is a unit vector as defined by Smyrl(l963) .

The weak shock between regions (0) and (2) meets the main shock along a line
(named I) through the origin. Smyrl(l963) has pointed out that the tangent plane from I
on the Mach cone is another weak shock front, and the plane containing I and the z-
axis is the approximate position of a contact discontnuity surface. Between the weak
shock, the Mach cone, and the main shock are two uniform regions (3) and (4)
separated by the contact discontinuity.
Within the region of non-uniform flow we use the equation of steady rotational
three dimensional flow i.e. the equations (7.4) omitting time derivatives. We further
assume
p =
P = PI +p l l)(X,Y,Z)+2 pI2)(X,Y,Z)+ __ _ (7.49)
V = V" + V(I)(X, Y,Z) + 2 V(2)(X, Y,Z) + - ---
The lack of a fundamental length in the problem suggests that the flow variables
are functions of the two independent variables x,y defined by
X. Y
x = y (7.50)
Ztana Ztana
We introduce the dimensionless variables
p' L
PIC~
pili
P' = (7.51)
PI
V' = (:JV(l) = {u' cosa, v' cosa,-w' sin a}
From the equations of motion we may introduce the equations (7.8) together
with the additional equation
aw' aw' au' av'

x-+y~ -+- (7.47)
ax ay ax a~
Figure 7.3 may be used to represent the configuration in the (x,y) plane; the
following modifications to the coordinates of the important points are required.
Xo = tanll = (M2 +5)Yz cos {X

tan {X 7M2 - 1 cos 11
tan 11 + tan (/3 - 11)
== -....:..-----.:.:-~ tan <1>0
tan a
6Mcosa(Mcos/3 + M')
=
[cos 2 11 cos 2 (/3 -11)][ (7M2 - 1)(M + 5)(M,2 _1)Yz]
2
I
==
The solution procedure outlined for the case of a normal shock may now be
followed. We find
p~ =
The equations 0.17) become

Shock Interaction With Moving Aerqfoil 259
u'
= ~ cos 11 {cos 21l (M2 + M'2 + 2MM' cos~)Y~
6 cosa cosa M' + Mcos~ .
[cos(W + 11) + ~2 cos(P' -11)] [f(Y) - yf'(y)] +
-(
~:. ~
M-'2-'----_1--""")
[M'COS P
M2
(4 )'
2M'2]}
+"5 cos 11 - cos ~ M - 5"-M
v'
p'
from which, in equation (7.14) we have
7M2 - l)~ M2 cos(P',+ 11) + cos(P' -11)

A = (
M2 + 5 2M- cosacosp'
3(M2 - 1) ,
B = ? ) sec- 11
(
M- +5
All the formulae reduces to the case of unyawed wedge when ~ ~ o.
Numerical Results
The pressure distribution on the wedge face has been calculated in a number of cases
and the results are shown in figures 7.7,7.8 and 7.9 which show respectively the effect
of shock strength, wedge speed, and yaw.
N_ 25
~
..::
..!(
"";l
Po..
I
~
/I
20L-----------------------------------------------~
A
E
Figure 7.7 The pressure distribution on the portion EA of the wedge face when 13 = 0,
M' = 2 with various values of M.
Shock Interaction With Moving Aerofoil 261
}J1' ,.4
p'
30
,
"
',At!,
..... ,2
-........... -... -- _--

__ ':'7
A.J"_ .......
M ... 2
.. -...../.S ........... _
~--~,-
".... "' ..........
/lA'
.... ..... ~
-- .. - -.... -..
- ........... ~___~~:..!.I.:"5~_"_-..:":.:-:.:a_-=_:-::_:-:_ .
........
-
-- ----- ...........
zo E A
Figure 7.S The pressure distribution on the portion EA of the wedge face when 13 = 0,
M = 2 with various values of M' . The corresponding results for M=4 are given by
the broken lines.
...
I
' ... ..... .- ..............
f30
--- -- -'- -- --
"-
fJ. 2865
---- ------
I
................. ,$ ~ 2,'8
, _ '65
I .......
-- ------ ------J
...
I
I
---- ..... ----

20
I
\\
\ I \
I \
f3" 71'62
I " - ___ 11 .. 85'95

I "
I ' ....
\ ........
I ......- - - .! . ?'1'6~'
I --- -------------------------
iI
,
I
1
I
\
,'.. ---------
fJr 8"95
....... _---- - - - - -_ ... - _---------
1.0 1_ _--L_ _-L.._ _l . . . - _ - - L_ _....L._ _L - - _ - - L _ - - - 1
E A
Figure 7.9 The pressure distribution on the portion EA when M' = 2 , M = 2 with ~
= 0, 0.5, 1.25, 1.5 radians respectively. The corresponding results for M=4 are given
by the broken lines.
Shock Interaction With Moving Aer%il 263
REFERENCES
1. Busemann, A.
2. Chester, W.
The diffraction and reflection of shock wave. Quar. Jour!. Mech App\. Maths, 7, 57-
82. (1954)

4. Lighthill, M.J.
5. Smyrl, J. L.
The impact of shock wave on a thin two dimensional aerofoil moving at super sonic
speed. J. Fluid Mech. 15,223-240. (1963)
6. Von Mises, R.
Mathematical theory of comressible fluid flow, Ch 5, 23, New York Acad. Press.
(1958).
CHAPTER VIII
DIFFRACTION OF SHOCK BY FLAT SURFACES
Ting and Ludloff (1952) have obtained the pressure and density fields that
develop behind shocks advancing over arbitrary flat surfaces based on the linearized
theory. The work presented here is more direct and the results obtained are more
general than those of Lighthill (1949). Shocks passing over flat surfaces of arbitrary
shape can be dealt with in such a manner that explicit expressions result for the pressure
and density fields in the whole domain behind the advancing shock. In this way,
comparison with shock tube experiments can be carried out, and interesting details
about the nature of the "slip stream" occurring in Mach reflection can be determined.
Let us assume that an originally plane shock front of given intensity (strong or
weak) advances over the surface f(x') of a given flat structure (or given thin aero-foil)
into still air of density Po and pressure Po . The velocity of the shock may be Uo , the
speed of air behind shock is (Uo-U) and the density and pressure there are p and P
(Figure 8.1).
SHOCK
AIR AT REST
PRESSURE p"
DENSITY po
PRESSURE P
DENSITY P y
'" "nn,," .,," "',hm" n, , ""L. ';";" . " , o" ~,~ ,~'o
I- l ---ooj1
"00 ..
Figure 8.1 Schematic drawing for a normal shock passing over a contour in the wall.
Copyright JAS 1952. Used with permission. (L. Ting & H. F. Lud10ff, 1952).
The length of the wall disturbance (or the chord of the aero-foil) may be 1. If the
inclination of the body surface f'(x') with regard to the direction of propagation of the
shock is small the shock front will end perpendicularly on the surface at any point so
that a curved shock front results as also a shock configuration which may be interpreted
as Mach reflection .
y
Q. ~I
WALL
I ___-;;;;;:t::::::~rn--J(
Figure 8.2 Conditions behind the advancing shock front depending on whether the air
flow behind the shock is subsonic (a) or supersonic (b) relative to the obstacle.
Copyright lAS 1952. Used with permission. (L. Ting & H. F. Ludloff, 1952).
Diffraction Of Shock By Flat Suifaces 267
Figures 8.2(a) and 8.2(b) represent conditions behind the advancing front
depending on whether the airflow behind the shock is subsonic or supersonic. In either
case, the time history of the diffraction is depicted in xyt-space, so that every cross
section of the figure represents the domain of disturbance at a given instant t, after the
incident shock has hit the leading edge of the obstacle, and a disturbance has spread
with sound speed throughout domain II up to the circular reflected shock. The
coordinate system, x, y, t, is to be fixed in the undisturbed flow behind the shock. The
coordinate system x I , y, t is tixed in the wall.
The field in domain II is clearly non-stationary and may be treated as a time
dependent perturbation away from the state of (relative) rest existing in domain I. A
linearized theory can be derived, based on expansion in terms of parameter E, which
can be interpreted as the thickness ratio of the wall disturbance (or of the aerofoi I ).
Linearized differential equations
The differential equation determining the two-dimensional, unsteady, rotational

tlow behind the shock in domain II are:
i) The continuity equation:
dp a(pu) a(pv)
--+--+--
at ax dy
o (8.1)
ii) The equations of motion:
Ou _~ ap
= (8.2)
Ot pax
Ov
(8.3)
Ot
iii) The adiabatic relation:
(8.4)
Now we expand p, p, u, and v in terms of E

268 Interact;on OJ Shock Waves
= p + E P(I) ( X, y, t ) + E2 P(2) ( X, y, t ) + ...

P
P = R+Ep II)( X, y, t )+-
? p-(0)( x, y, t )+ ...
(8.5)
u = U(I)( X, y, t ) + E2 U(2)( X, y, t ) + ...
v = v(1 )(x, y, t) + E2 VI2 \X, y, t)+ ...
Substituting the value of p, p, u, v from (8.5) in equations (8.1), (8.2), (8.3),

(8.4) and comparing the coefficient of , we obtain
dpO) dull) av lll

--+R-+R--
at ax ay
= 0 (8.6)
a (I) _ aplll
R_u_
at
= ax
(8.7)
avlt) _ aplI)
R-
at
= ay
(8.8)
ap'!) c 2 aplI) c 2 yp
at
= at p
(8.9)
Elimination of three out of the four unknown function yields
(8.10)
and
a
-(i1g) = 0 (8.11)
at
where g denotes either u(l), v(l), or p(l).
The boundary and initial conditions
i) On incident shock front

Relative to the undisturbed flow behind the shock, the air in front of the shock
and the wall is moving with the constant velocity - (U o - U) while the undisturbed
shock front moves with velocity U.
The disturbed shock front can be expressed as
x Ut + \jI(I)(y, t) + 0(2) (8.12)
Then the shock inclination is given by
(8.13)
So,
(8.14)
The complete shock velocity, which is directed normal to the shock front at any
point may be split into the x-component Us and a y-component v, (Figure 8.3) where
(1'1
....,....-r.,..,...,~'f"T""1~,.......,-rrr-r.,...,.'7"F-ll--t--- :x.
Figure 8.3 Geometry of curved shock. Copyright lAS 1952. Used with permission.
(L. Ting & H. F. Ludloff, 1952).
Us =
(8.15)
and
Vs = U,tan8 = {U+'I'~I)(y,t)+0(2)}8
(8.16)
= U8(I) +0(2)
The oblique shock condition on the shock front

x = Ut+E'I'~I)+0(E2)
are
pqn = POqnO
p + pq~ = Po + Poq~o
(8.17)
~q~+(Y~l)(:) = ~q~()+(y~I)(::)
where
qn normal component of velocity of flow behind, relative to the shock
( v - v s ) sin 8 + ( u - Us) cos 8

(8.18)
- U - E '1';1) + E u(l) + 0(2)
q, = tangential component of velocity of flow behind, relative to the shock
q, = J
( v - v cos 8 - (u - u J sin 8
(8.19)
= Ev(l) +0(2)
qnO .normal component of velocity of flow in front, relative to the shock

qnO = -v,sin8-[(Uo-U)+U,]cos8
(8.20)
= - Uo - \jf;1I + 0(2)
qtO = tangential component of velocity of flow in front, relative to the shock
q to = -V s cos 8 + [( U 0 - U) + Us] sin e

(8.21 )
- (U o - U) \jf~I) + 0(2)
Substituting the equations (8.18) , (8.19) , (8.20) and (8.21) in (8.17) and (8.5)
the coefficients of like powers can be equated .The relations between the coefficients of
EO are equivalent to the customary normal shock relations.
The coefficients of 1 yield the following
C 2 p(l)
= (1 + QO)p(l) (x =Ut, y~O, t) (8.22)
II (I) Q 1 p(1)
(x =Ut, y ~ 0, t) (8.23)
Rc
-(Uo - U)\jf;I)(y, t) Q 2 p(l)

(x =Ut, Y ~ 0, t) (8.24)
R
v(l)
-(Uo - U)\jf~I)(y, t) = (x =Ut, y ~ 0, t) (8.25)
where
(y _1)(M2 -lr
[M 2 (y-1)+2]M 2
I (3y -OM2 + (3 - y)
=
2M [M 2 (y-1)+2]
(1 - M2)
=
By using (8.10) and (8.11) one can eliminate u(l), v(l), p(l) and \jF1) from the
preceding four equations . In this way a boundary condition for p(1) alone , to be
applied at the shock front x = Ut can be formulated
Interaction Of Shock Waves
272
D(x,t) p(l)(x =Ut,y >O,t) = a (8.26)
where D(x,t) is a linear operato r defined as
On the wall
We have
x'-(U o-U}t = x (8.27)
The equation of wall surface can be written as
(8.28)
y
We know that
(8.29)
Also
v = dy (8.30)
dt
Compa ring (8.29) and (8.30), we have on the wall
(8.31)
and (8.31) as
The bounda ry condition for pO) at y=O can be derived from (8.8)
(8.32)
At the point of intersection of the shock front and the wall, i.e., at x = Vt, Y=0
both (8.26) and (8.32) hold .By taking into consideration (8.32) and the shock relations
one would obtain
Lt
y-->O'
p~l)(x:::: Vt,y ~ O,t) :::: - -4() RVVof"(Vot)
y+1
(8.33)
Also (8.32) implies
Lt p(l)(x ~ Vt,y:::: O,t) :::: - R(V o - V)2 f"(V ot) (8.34)

x-->Ut y
This indicates that in general p/I) has a singularity at this point; but p(l) itself
turns out to be regular. In the case of wedge (f" =0) , this singularity does come into
play.
If (8.33) and (8.34) are equated then we would obtain a pressure ratio for which
singularity does not exist. This pressure ratio comes out to be P/Po =7.3076 or
M=0.5100.
On the Mach circle
pO) -t 0 as Jx
2 + y2 -t 00 (8.35)
Further, the two initial conditions are
p(l)(x~Vt,y~O,t~O) :::: 0 (8.36)
p~[) (x:::; Vt, y ~ 0, t ~ 0) :::: 0 (8.37)
Solution for p(l)
The Lorentz transformation

Introducing the new independent variable (x:,y,'t) related to the old variables
(x,y, t) by the well known Lorentz transformation
(x - Vt) (ct - Mx)

x :::: y :::: y , t (8.38)
:,JI - M2 :'h-M2
The plane x :: 0 corresponds to the plane x = Vt and the wave equation
(8.10) transforms to
P(I) + pill _ (I) :::: 0 (8.39)
n YY Pit
The boundary condition become
p~) (x < 0, y = 0, t) = Rc 2 A o f'1 a(Xo x + i)] (S.40)
D'ltiP (l) (x- -_ 0, -y > 0, -)

-
t = 0 (S.41)
and
(S.42)
Lt p~)
)'->0 y
(0, y, t) = Rc2~f"(a t) (S.43)
where
a =
c41- M2
= ( 1 _ M2 + M~ ~ 0 )
~ = __4_ V oM
(y + 1) C
and
= 1 a 2a
--+2M--+-
a 2 2
M~ aFax at ax 2
The initial conditions are now

pi!) = pi!) = 0 (fort $;0) (S.44)
The Possio integral
Ting and Ludloff (1952) have indicated that the solution of such boundary
initial value problem as the one defined by equations (S.39 ) to (8.44) can be obtained
by the Possio integral
- i)
p (1)(-x,y, (S.45)
D(/fraction of Shock By Flat SUifaces 275
HYPERBOLA
! -r .J(i-e)2+j2
CONE
t-t2J(i-ef+(j _1/)2
Figure 8.4 Domain of integration in the S , 't plane. Copyright J AS 1952. U sed wi th
permission. (L. Ting & H. F. Ludloff, 1952).
in which the numerator denotes the" source strength" and the denominator represents
the pseudo distance between source point ( ~ ,0, 't ) and ( x , y, t ) . The integration
area R in S plane is confined to the hyperbola t - 't

.
,'t
and the straight line 't =

From the Figure 8.4, it is obvious that the method is applicable only if p~ll IS
prescribed on the entire plane y = o.

Actually however, p~iI is given for the plane y 0 (x < 0) while it is
unknown in the right hand plane (x > 0). Hence the next step would be to
determine an equation for p~1 (x> 0, y = 0, t) which will replace condition (8.39)
prescribed on the plane x = 0 and also produce the correct type of singularity for
p~1 at the origin as defined by equations (8.42) and (8.43). Inserting proper integration
limits and using condition (8.40 ) the Possio integral becomes
= Rc 2 Ao 7 0 f"[ a:{ 1: + XoS)]dS

--1t- 0 d1:~_~J),_y,[(t_1:)2 _(X:-S)2 _y2y~
(8.46)
1 H~'+Y' 'X+"/n-tl'-y' p~II(S > O,O,1:)dS
-it fd1: fo [Ct-1: f - (-x- S)2 -y_2]R
Substituting equation (8.46) into equation (8.41) will provide the desired
equation for the unknown function p~)(S > 0,0,1:),
Ting and Ludloff (1952) have shown that
pI(X > O,y = 0, i) = RC 2 { A1f"[ a:{t - Xx)1 + A 2f"[ a{t - X2x)] + A f"[ a:{t - XlX)j}
l 3
(8.4 7)
where the expressions for a, Xi' Ai are given below,
We then have finally
(8.48)
where
a =
c.h - M2
Diffraction pr Shock By Flat Suifaces 277
X2 and X3 are the roots of the equation X2 - 2MX + (~~ ) = 0 and AI and Al
are the solution of the two simultaneous linear equations
= M(_8_ MU o -- A )
(y+1) c 0
The above solution is unique and satisfies the wave equation and all the initial
and boundary conditions.
By using the transformation (8.38) the disturbance pressure pili (x, y, t) can be
obtained from pili (x, y, t). From differential equations (8.7), (8.8), (8,9) and boundary
conditions (8.23 ) , (8.24) and (8.25) the following expression is obtained
pili (x,y,t) = C\plll(X,y,t)+(~2o)pIIl(X,y,t=:~) (8.49)
Application of the theory
The shape of the wall (or the aerofoil ) y = Ef(x') , 0 :s; x' :s; I.
may be approximated by a polynomial
f.{x') = c l + C 2X,2 ..... +cnx'"
While the case of a higher polynomials (a circular arc aerofoil) is treated by
Ferdman (1951), one may consider here the simplest case
f(x') = x'
representing a corner of inclination . Then
f'(x') for x' > 0 and f'(x') = 0 for x' < 0
Furthermore
f"(x / ) = 0 (for x' ;t: 0)
f f"(x/)dx '
o' (8.50)
= 1
Using equations (8.50), pressure integral (8.48) can be evaluated and yields
where
N(x,y,t,A) (for A > 1)
(for A = 1)
(for A < 1)
and
X0 -M
Ao =
l-AoM
a = a-.h - M2 =
Uo
C
5::.;+M
A; (for i = 1,2,3)
1+A2M
Numerical results
As an example, the pressure and density fields have been computed for
= 7.3076 or
u0 -u
= 1.21 and M = 0.5100. The isopycnics and isobars,
c
Diffraction Of Slwck By Flat Su~faces 279
are plotted in Figure 8.5. It is interesting to note how strongly each isopycnic splits off
from the corresponding isobar after traversing the separation line OT between rotational
and irrotational flow (the theoretical details have been disclissed by Ting and
Ludloff(1952) ). Within a thin strip along OT there is a steep gradient. This may he
interpreted as a slip stream of finite width. This slip stream which mllst be expected
with every Mach reflection could be observed in Bleakney and Taub' s (1949)
experimental results.
SOLID L1?It~. P;OP'I'~I('i ~n 1

DASitEP LIN!S. ISOBAR'> {f?
!\loCK HOII, .; :0-51
AIIHOIL SURfAce .l'. =0
Ct
L-E- Qi ti. ~"I'2t
Figure 8.5 Isopycnics and Isobars behind the diffracted shock.
P
= 7.3076 1.21 M 0.51. Copyright lAS 1952.
Po c
Used with permission. (L. Ting & H. F. Ludloff, 1952).
Experimental results of White
As we have seen the numerical result of Ting and Ludloff (1952) is for a
shock strength ~ = 0.l37 which sets up a flow Mach number 1.21. White (1951)
conducted experiments for ~ = 0.137 and ~ = 0.093 and a wedge half -angle = 5.4.
The results for ~ = 0.137 and = 5.4 are shown in Figure 8.6.
~:o---O'26
~ o)3r
---------
Figure 8.6 Isopycnics behind the diffracted shock (~= :~ =0.137, =5.4)-
Copyright <D lAS 1951. Used with permission. (D. R. White, 1951).
D[ffraction C?r Shock By Flat Suifaces 28J
e . 0,093 -
---------
7 hopy on ;cs beh ind the ditl'n>cted shock (I; ~

= = 0.093, c = 3.5'" J
Fi gu ", 8.
(D. R. White, 1951).
Used with permission.
CoPyright lA S 1951.
ted are the region of
dJo ff (1951 , 1952) results to be no
Features of Ting and
Lu on the reflected
din g edg e of the we dge, the singular point
lea
uniform flow near the
shock where the contours of constant density converge, and the separation of the
density and pressure contours in the region where a slip stream would appear if the
reflected shock were not of zero strength at the point where it meets the incident shock.
The separation is also implied by Lighthill (1949) that the Mach stem for strong shocks
has a sharp maximum curvature near the triple point, resulting in different entropies for
adjacent streamlines. The features obtained experimentally are the same as obtained by
Ting and Ludloff (1951 , 1952). The angle I': = 5.40 is such that the shock is not quite
attached, so that one does not observe a region of uniform flow near the leading edge.
The density contours do seem to converge towards a point just behind the reflected
shock, and their behavior near the expected position of the slipstream is similar. Figure
8.7 represents an attempt to obtain a picture qualitatively similar near the leading edge.
To do this it was necessary to use a stronger shock ~ = 0.093 and a smaller angle, but
the same general features again appear.
REFERENCES
1. Bleakney, W. & Taub, A.H

Interaction of shock waves. Revs. Mod. Phys.31 ,589-605. (1949)
2. Ferdman, S.
Master's thesis, New York University, College of Engineering. (1950)
3. Lighthill, M.J.
4. Ting, L. & Ludloff, H.F

Aerodynamics of Blasts. Readers Forum, 1. Aeronaut. Sci., 18,2, 143-144. (1951)
5. Ting, L. & Ludloff, H.F

Aerodynamics of Blasts. 1. Aeronautical Sci., 19, 317-328 . (1952)
6. White, D.R.
Reflection of strong shock at nearly glancing incidence. 1. Aeronaut. Sci. 18, 633-634 .
(1951)
CHAPTER IX
APPROXIMA TE THEORY ON DIFFRACTION OF SHOCKS
Whitham (1957,1959) proposed an approximate theory for a shock diffracting at

a corner of any angle. This theory is not limited to the ease of a corner made up of
plane walls but is applicable to wall of any shape. The shape of the shock may be
obtained for all times, but no information about the flow field behind the shock is
obtained.
--_.
--- ---
_...... --
---
--------
-- -- ---
----
---- --- -- .
Figure 9.1 Sketch showing the successive positions of a curved shock; the full lines
and the broken lines represent the shock positions and rays respectively. (G. B.
Whitham, 1957)
In Figure 9.1 the positions of a shock moving from left to right are shown as full lines
and the rays are shown as broken lines. This network of shock positions and rays may
be used as a basis of orthogonal coordinates in the plane, and accordingly shock
positions are the curves a = constant and the rays are p = constant. Whitham took a
= ~t , ~ being the sound speed in a uniform gas ahead of shock, t is the time for
shock position.
A relationship for area-Mach number for a portion of a shock bounded by a
'ray-tube' has to be established. For establishing this relationship, consider the
curvilinear quadrilateral PQRS with vertices(a,p), (a + oa,p) , (a + oa,p + oP) ,
(a,~ + oP) respectively (Figure 9.2).
-------- s----
--
'" C(
Figure 9.2 Neighbouring a and Pcurves in a region of continuous change in M and e.

Approximate Theory On Diffraction Of Shocks 285
Since the sides PS and QR are A8~ and {A, + oA

oa da}8~ respectively, and the
distance between them is Mda , the change in ray inclination from P to S is
= J.-
QR-PS 8A 8~
88 = PQ Mda
Hence
ae 1 dA
- (9.1)
o~ Mda
Since the inclination of ~ curve is - + e , we would have

1t
2
as 1 dM
= --- (9.2)
aa A a~
We now assume that A = A (M) where A'(M) < O. Then
as _ A'(M) aM
= 0 (9.3)
o~ M aa
as
-+---
1 aM
= 0 (9.4)
aa A(M) a~
Once the function M(a , ~) and S(a ,~) have been found the coordinates (a ,~)
may be related to the Cartesian coordinates x , y through the relations
x = fMcosSda , y = fMsinSda obtained by integrating along a ray.

The equations (9.3) and (9.4) can be written in the characteristic form
( ~C~)(SfdM)
aa d~ Ac
= 0 (9.5)
where c is the function of M given by
c = )- A:'
They show that
(9.6)
f
e + dM
Ac
= cons tan t on d~
da
= c (9.7)
i.e. on a wave moving in the direction of increasing ~ with speed c, and
e -f dM = cons tan t on
d~
= -c (9.8)
Ac da
i.e. on a wave moving in the direction of decreasing ~ with speed c. The expressions
e f dM in (9.7) and (9.8) correspond to the Riemann invariants of gas dynamics.

Ac
Whitham (1957) has stated that the rate of change of ~ with respect to a, is an
increasing function of M so that waves carrying a decrease in the value of M spread out
like expansion waves in gas dynamics. Likewise, the profile of a wave carrying an
increase in M steepens like a compression wave. When the wave steepens it would
eventually break and then to complete the solution a discontinuity in Mach number and
in shock slope must be fitted in. The discontinuity is similar to shock wave in gas
dynamics, Whitham (1957) described such shocks as shock-shock to distinguish it with
the main shock.
N; indicated a relationship between A and M will be required for the
development of the theory. Chester's well known formula connecting a small change in
channel area and the corresponding change in Mach number is given by
dA 2MdM
= (9.9)
A - (M2 -l)K(M)
The function K(M) is given by
K(M) 2[(1+ r!II-/)2~+I+M')r (9.10)
(y_l)M2+2
2yM 2 - (y-1)
K (M) is slowly varying function, decreasing from 0.5 at M=l to 0.3941 (for y=1.4)
as M ~ 0 0 . The graph of K (M) is given in Figure 9.3.
On integration (9.9) gives
A = kf(M) f(M) = (9.11)
where k is an arbitrary constant.

Chisnell(l957) has shown that the integral in (9.11) can be evaluated explicitly;
a graph of 10glO f(M) is given in Figure 9.4
The Riemann variable is given by
Approximate Theory On Diffraction Qf Shocks 287
MdM M{ 2 lJ{
JAc = J (M2 -1)K(M) dM (9.12)
from the equations (9.6) and (9.8). The graph of the Riemann variable is shown in
Figure 9.5.
050
045
O.35+---r--...---r---,,--.....----r--r---.----,r--I11~
2 5 6 7 8 9
I'igure 9.3 Variation of Chester's function K(M) with Mach Number. (G. B. Whitham,
1957)
o+---~----~--~--~----~--~--~~--~--~~~~
I 2 3 4 5 8 9 to .,
Figure 9.4 Graph of function loglo f(M) given by equation (9.11). (G. B. Whitham,
1957)
1
1 2. ~ 4 5 6 T B 9 \0
f dM
M
Figure 9.5 Graph of the function . (G. B. Whitham, 1957)

1 Ac
As M ~ 1, we would have
K(M) 0.5
Ac ( MO -1)Yj
M-l
. (M -1)X
c
2J1(Mo _1)2 Ao
( ~)K'
M-l
(9.13)
Mo is the initial Mach Number and Ao corresponds to Mo' When M ~ 00 , the
corresponding relations are
K(M) 0.3941
I
Ac "" n 2M
-1 Mn+l
c n 2 __
AoM~
A
Ao
"" (~r
MdM
log~
f Ac
Mo
nYj
Mo
2
where n = -- 5.0743
K(oo)
(9.14)
Diffraction of plane shocks
In the case of a simple wave, from equation (9.8)
e _fdM = cons tan t everyw here (9.15)

Ac
Approximate Them) On Diffraction Of Shocks 291
hence 8 and M must be constant on each characteristic. If we impose the condition

that M = M o ' 8 = 0 and M = Mw' 8 = 8w then
(9.16)
Expansion round a convex corner
Now for small bend in the wall, i.e. for 8w small, we can compare the results
with the linear theory of Lighthill (1949). Now the value of Mw would be compared.
For small 8w ' from (9.14), (9.6) and (9.9) we obtain
Mw - Mo = Ac(Mo)Sw
(9.17)
= Sw{~(M~-I)K(Mo)}~
We compare this with Lighthill's value in two extreme cases, Mo ~ I and Mil ~ 00.
For weak shocks, (9.13) gives
(9. 18)
where Lighthill (1949) has ~TC

times this value. For strong shocks (9.14) gives
3
Mw-M o 0.4439M o S w (9.19)
Lighthill's value has to be taken from a graph and it is observed that the numerical
factor in (9.19) is less that 0.5.
We would now consider when 8w is not small. For strong shocks we see frolll
(9.14)
f-
MWdM
Ac
M"
.
n Y2 10g-"
Mo
M
(9.20)
From (9.16) and (9.20) we obtain
MW(!M
fAc
Mo
(9.21 )
This gives
Mw = Mo ex p ( ~) (9.22)
For the simple wave using relations (9.14)
M n +1 _ ~ c Mo
c = C - - and e -->In log-
..... n M~ 0. M
Therefore we would have
=. (~..,rn )n~l
aM 0 (9.23)
e = .In logl.Jn
(n + 1) 0. Mo
OX
Along the shock , - - = - sin e , = cos e; therefore, at time
Ao~
= ~,the shock in term of the parameter ~ is given by

0. 0
x = o.Mwcosew-IIl(M
MO J sined~
+! J Jcosed~
(9.24)
y = o.Mwsine w II(M
The values of x and y in the simple way are calculated from (9.24) with e as the
parameter instead of ~; they are
x {n +gl)Yz e 'Y.rn.
sm (A. - e)
Moo. n 2
ew ::;; e ::;; 0 (9.25)
-y- = (n + l)Yz e'Y.rn cos(A. _ e)
Moo. n Yz .
where tan A = -Jri. The shape of the shock is plotted in Figure 9.6 for the special
TC
case 8 w = Skews (1966) has also obtained the relation (9.25) in a little
2
different way.
Mo
':J
MoQ.
0.6
0.4
0.2
0.2. 04 0.6
Figure 9.6 Diffraction of a strong shock by a right angled corner; shape of shock
calculated from equation (9.25). (G. B. Whitham, 1957)
Compression at a concave corner
The situation arising in the case of concave corner made up of the two plane
walls in shown in Figure 9.7. It will be recognized that this represents Mach reflection
with the reflected shock being ignored. By working out the velocity of shbck shock,
Whitham has established a relation between X (angle between shock shock and wall)
and 8w (Figure 9.7). Comparison between Whitham's (1957) strong shock solution,
the three shock theory and experimental results of Bleakney and Taub (1949) for
Mo=2.42 has been shown in Figure 7.8 .
Figure 9.7 The shock shock.

x
THREE SHOCK THEORY
20
WHITHAM'S THE Y
EXPERIMENT
0
50 60
Figure 9.8 Comparison between Whitham's theory (1957), experimental results of

Bleakney and Taub (1949) and three shock theory. (G. B. Whitham , 1957)
Analogy with two dimensional supersonic flows
The two dimensional supersonic flow equations are
ae = .e.~ (9.26)
a<\> q a",
= q:<\>(p~) (9.27)
<\> is the velocity potential, '" is the stream function, q is the velocity, p is the density
and e is the flow direction.
The correspondence of (9.26) and (9.27) with (9.1) and (9.2) are
1 M
<\>~a,,,,~/3,e~e,q~- ,p~-
M A
It was shown that characteristic form of equations (9.1) and (9.2) are
e f dM -_ cons tan t (9.28)

Ac
on curves d/3 = c
da
where c(M) , the propagation speed in (a , /3) coordinates, is given by (9.6).
We have
(~~ J ~: J =
+(
So from the analogy
q
2 (9.29)
= Ml
(9.30)
Also we have
= tane (9.31)
So from the analogy

Approximate Theory On Diffraction OJ Shocks 297
da
dy tanS (9.32)
da
dx
To write the slope of the characteristics in terms of x and y, we note that
dy + dy (d~)
dy da d~ da (9.33)
=
dx dx + dx (d~)
da d~ da
and
dx
McosS 5!1. Msin8
da da
dx dy
- = - Asin S = AcosS
d~ d~
Therefore the characteristics d~ c becomes

da
dy
tan (8 m) (9.34)
dx
where
Ac
tanm = (9.35)
M
The angle m corresponds to the Mach angle in the supersonic flow.
Skews (1966) has carried out theoretical investigation concerning shocks
diffracting around larger bends based on the theory of Whitham. Skews (1967a)
subsequently has carried out an experimental study of the shape of a shock diffracting
around a corner made up of two plane-walls, for corner angles from 15" to 165" (in 15"
steps) and shock Mach numbers from Mo = 1.0 to 4.0.
The results have been compared with the profiles determined by Whitham
(1957,1959). The behaviour is found to follow the trends established by Lighthill
(1949) in his linearized theory.
For a normal shock diffracting round a corner, if mo is the angle between the
line joining the corner to the point of intersection of Mach circle and shock and the
original wall produced, then Skews (1967a) has shows that
(9.36)
The variation of mo with Mo given by Skews (l967a) ( equation (9.36) ) , the

experimental results of Skews (1967) and Whitham's equation (9.35) (after replacing M
with Mo and m with mo) are shown in Figure 9.9. y has been taken equal to 1.4.
25
20
a:
III
15
~
~
~
o
~ 10
20 3-0 40 50
Mo
Figure 9.9 The starting point of shock curvature. (B. K. Skews, 1967a)
Approximare Theory On Diffracrion Of Shocks 299
The difference between the theoretical curves shown in Figure 9.9 was a reason
(implied by Whitman) for expecting his theory to be inaccurate for Mo < 3 (As M(I~oo
Whitham theory gives mo = 23.94 whereas equation (9.36) gives 22.20" ).
Figure 9.10(a) Schlieren photographs of shock diffraction on plane walled convex

corners. M(I = 2.0 . (B. K. Skews, 1967a)
300 Inreracrion Of Shock Wavcs
The Schieren photographs predicting the profiles are shown in Figures 9.10(a)
and 9.1O(b). Lighthill (1949) has predicted a point of inflexion in the shock profile for
Mo > 2.53l. Skews (l967a) has observed that in Figure 9. 1O(b) such a point of
inflexion is visible. The conclusions drawn by Lighthill regarding the shape of the
shock are thus valid even when corner angle is large.
Figure 9.10(b) Schlieren photographs of shock diffraction on plane walled convex

corners. Mo = 4.0 . (B. K. Skews, 1967a)
Approximate Theory On Dfffraction qr Shocks 301
Bryson and Gross (1961) have carried out theoretical and experimental work on
diffraction by cones, a cylinder and a sphere based on Whitham s (1957, 1959) theory
I
with shock Mach number 3.68. The shock-shock angle was measured and Fig 9.11
shows the agreement between observation and Whitham's theory. The experimental
points tend to fall below the experimental points.
Shock-shock
o
20
x
16 -
~a 12
I
)c::
0
0 \0 lOO 40 50 60" 800
811)
Figure 9.11 Shock-shock angle X versus cone semi-apex angle 8w for shock Mach
number Mo = 3.68 . (Bryson & Gross, 1961)
REFERENCES
1. Bleakney, W. & Taub, A. H.

Interaction of shock waves. Revs. Mod. Phys.31,589-605. (1949)
2. Bryson, A. E. & Gross, R. W. F.

Diffraction of strong shocks by cones, cylinders and spheres. J. Fluid Mech, 10, l.
(1961)
3. Chisnel, R. F.
The motion of a shock wave in a channel with application to cylindrical and spherical
shock waves. 1. Fluid Mech. 2, 286 (1957)
4. Lighthill, M. J.
The diffraction of blast I . Proc. Roy .Soc A, 198,454-470. (1949)
5. S~ews, B. W.
Profiles of diffracting shock waves, University of Witwaterstrand, Department of
Mech. Engg. Rep. No. 35. (1966)
6. Skews, B. W.
The shape of diffracting shock wave, 1.Fluid Mach 29, 2, 297-304 . (1967a)
7. Whitham, G. B.
J.Fluid Mech 2, 145-171 . (1957)
8. Whitham, G.B.
A new approach to problem of shock dynamic Pt. II : Three-dimensional problems.
J. Fluid Meeh., 5, 369-386 . (1959)
SOURCE LIST
1. Arora, N. L.
Integral transforms for shock-shock interaction - Three dimensional planar wll1gs.
ZAMP, 20, 244-260. (1969)
2. Arora, N. L.
An integral transform method for shock-shock interaction studies. J. Fluid Mech. 34,
209-228. (1968)
3. Arutyunyan, G. M.
On interaction of shock waves with a wedge. Dok! Akad Nauk Arm SSSR 46, 160-
167. (1968)
4. Arutyunyan, G. M.
On diffraction of shock waves. Prik! Mat and Mekn, 34, 693-699. (1970)
5. Bargman, V.
On nearly glacing reflection of shocks. AMP report 108-2R NDRC. (1945)
6. Bazhenova, T. V. , Fokeev, V. P. & Grozdeava, L. G.

Regions of various forms of Mach reflection and its transition to regular reflection.
Acta astronaut 3, 131-140 (1976)
7. Bazhenova, T. V. & Gvozdeva, L. G.

The reflection and diffraction of shock waves. Fluid Dyn. Trans., 7-16. (1983)
8. Bazhenova, T. V. , Gvozdeva, L. G. , Komarov, V. S. & Suchov, B. G.

Diffraction of strong shock waves. Proc. 8th Int. Shock Tube Symp. Paper 54
Chapman and Hall. (1971)
9. Bazhenova, T. V. , Gvozdeva, L. G. , Komarov, V. S. & Sukhov, B. G.

Pressure and temperature change on the wall surface in strong shock wave diffraction.
Astro Acta, 17, 559-566. (1972)
10. Bazhenova, T. V. ,Gvozdeva, L. G. , Komarov, V. S. & Sukhov, B. G.

Diffraction of strong shock wave by convex corners. Izv. Akad Nuak SSSR, Mekh. Zh.
Gaza, 4 , 122-134. (1973)
11. Bazhenova, T. V. , Gvozdeva, L. G & Zhillin, Yu. V.

Change in the shape of a diffracting shock wave at a convex corner. Acta Astro., 6,
401-412. (1979)
12. Ben-Dor, G.
Steady, pseudo-steady and unsteady shock wave reflections. Prog. Aero. Sci., 25, 329-
412. (1988)
13. Ben-Dor, G.
Structure of the contact discontinuity of non-stationary Mach reflections. A.I.A.A.1,
28, 1314-1316. (1990)
14. Ben-Dor, G.
Shock wave reflection phenomena. Springer Verlag. (1992)
15. Ben-Dor, G. , Dewey, J. M. & Takayama, K.

The reflection of a planar shock wave over a double wedge. 1. Fluid Mech. 176, 483-
520. (1987)
16. Ben-Dor, G. & Glass, I. I.

Domain and Boundaries of non-stationary oblique shock wave reflections, 1 Diatomic
Gas. 1. Fluid Mech, 92, 459 -496 (1979)
17. Ben-Dor, G. & Glass, I. I.

Domains and Boundaries of non-stationary oblique shock wave reflections, 2 Diatomic
Gas. 1. Fluid Mech, 96, 735-756. (1980)
18. Ben-Dor, G. & Takayama, K.

Application of steady shock polars to unsteady shock wave reflections. A.LA.A.1. ,24,
682-684. (1986)
19. Biswas, R. K.
A note on the interaction of shockwave with a curved boundary. Def. Sci. 1. (India).
20, 1,59-62. (1970)
20. Biswas, R. K. & Srivastava, R. S.

On the interaction of oblique shock wave with a yawed wedge. Defence Science
Journal(India), 16, 4 (1966)
21. Blackburn, D.
Unsteady perturbations of strong shock waves. Ph. D Thesis, Manchester University.
Source List 305
(1953)
22. Blankenship, V. D.
Shock - shock interaction on a slender supersonic cone. J. Fluid Mech. 22, 599-615.
(1965)
23. Blankenship, V. D. & Busemann, A.

Shock-shock interaction inside the Mach reflection region for slender supersonic bodies.
Aerospace Corpn, Report TDR - 669 (S6815 -70) .. 1. (1965)
24. Blankenship, V. D. & Merrit, D. L.

A note on experimental and theoretical comparisons of conical shock-shock interaction.
AIAA J. 4, 2054-2056. (1966)
25. Bleakney, W. & Taub, A. H.

Interaction of shock waves. Revs. Mod. Phys.31 ,589-605. (1949)
26. Bleakney, W. ,Weimer, D. K. & Fletcher, C. H.

The Shock Tube: A facility for investigations in fluid dynamics. Rev. Sci. Instr. 20,
807. (1949)
27. Bleakney, W. ,White, D. R. & Griffith, W. C.

Measurements of diffraction of shock waves and resulting loading of structures. J.
App!. Mech. 17, 439-445. (1950)
28. Bradley, J. N.
Shock waves in Chemistry and Physics. John Wiley, New York. (1962)
29. Brikley, S. R.(Jr) , Kirkwood, J. G. & Richardson, J. M.

Tables of the properties of air along the Hugoniot curve and the adiabatics terminating
in the Hugoniot curve. Office Sci. Res. Develop. Rept. 3550. (1944)
30. Brown, E. A. & Mullany, G. J.

Experiments on the head-on shock-shock interaction. AIAA 1. 3, 2168-2170. (1965)
31. Bryson, A. E. & Gross, R. W. F.

Diffraction of strong shocks by cones, cylinders and spheres. 1. Fluid Mech. 10, l.
(1961)
32. Busemann, A.
33. Chester, W.
The propagation of sound pulse in the presence of a semi-infinite open ended channel.
Phil. Trans. Roy. Sec. A24 2, 527-556. (1950)
34. Chester, W.
The prop'ogation of shock waves in a channel of non-uniform width. Quart. JI. Mech.
Appl. Math. 6, 440. (1953)
35. Chester, W.
The diffraction and reflection of shock wave. Quar. Jour!. Mech Appl. Maths, 7, 57-
82. (1954)
36. Chester, W.
The shock strength in regular reflection of weak shocks. J. Aeronaut. 21, 347. (1954)
37. Chester, W.
The quasi cylindrical shock tube. Phil. Mag. 45, 1293. (1954)
38. Chester, W.
The propogation of shock waves along ducts of varying sross-section. Advances in
App. Mech. 6, 119. (1960)
39. Chisnell, R. F.
The normal motion of a shock wave through a non-uniform, one-dimensional medium.
Proc. Roy. Soc. 232, 350. (1955)
40. Chisnell, R. F.
A note on Whitham's rule. J. Fluid Mech. 22, I, 103-104. (1965)
41. Chisnell, R. F.
The motion of a shock wave in a channel with application to cylindrical and spherical
shock waves. J. Fluid Mech. 2, 286 (1957)
42. Chopra, M. G.
Ph.D.Thesis (Some problems on interaction of shock waves). Delhi University, India.
(1970)
43. Chopra, M. G.
Journal, 10, 7. (1972)
44. Chopra, M. G.
Source List 307
Diffraction and reflection of shocks from corners. AIAA Journal, 11, 10, 1452-1453.
(1973)
45. Chopra, M. G. & Srivastava, R. S.

Interaction of oblique blast wave. Def. Sci. 1. (India) 16,4,217-222. (1966)

Interaction of shock wave with a yawed wedge for the oblique case. Proc. of the 12th
Congo Theort. & Appl. Mech.(India) 224-236. ( 1969)

Reflection and diffraction of oblique shock wave interacting a yawed wedge. ProC. of
14th Congo Theort. App. Mech.(India). (1971)

Reflection and diffraction of shocks interacted by yawed wedges. Proc. Roy. Soc. A,
330,319 - 330. (1972)
49. Clutterham, D. & Taub, A. H.

Numerical solution of Mach reflection configuration. Proc. Symp. in App!. Math. VI.
45. (1955)
50. Colella, P. & Henderson, L. F.

The VonNeumann paradox for the diffraction of weak shock waves. J. Fluid Mech.
213, 71-94. (1990)

52. Deschambault, R. L. & Glass, I. I.

An update on non-stationary oblique shock-wave reflections: actual isopycnics and
numerical experiments. J.Fluid Mech, 133, 27 - 57. (1983)
53. Ehler, F. E. & Shoemaker, E. M.

A linearized analysis of the forces exerted on a rigid wing by a shock wave. J.
Aero/Space Sci. 26, 75-80. (1959)
54. Ehler, F. E. & Shoemaker, E. M.

A three-dimensional linearized analysis of the forces exerted on a rigid wing by a shock
wave. J. Aero./Space Sci. 27, 257. (1960)
55. Emmons, H. W. (Editor)

Fundamental of gas dynamics Vol. 3 of High speed aerodynamics and jet propulsion.
Princeton University Press. (1958)
56. Ferdman, S.
Master's thesis, New York University, College of Engineering. (1950)
57. Freeman, N. C.
A theory for the stability of plane shock waves. Proc. Roy. Soc. A 228, 341-362.
(1955)
58. Freeman, N. C.
On the stability of plane shock wave. 1. Fluid Mech. 2, 397-411. (1957)
59. Fletcher, C. H. , Weimer, D. K. & Bleakney, W.

634 - 635. (1950)
60. Fletcher, C. , Taub, A. H. & Bleakney, W.

The Mach reflection of shock waves at nearly glancing incidence. Rev. Mod. Physics
23, 271. (1951)
61. Friedlander, F. G.
The diffraction of sound pulses I : Diffraction by a semi-infinite plane. Proc. Roy.Soc.
A186, 322-343. (1946)
The diffraction of sound pulses II : Diffraction by an infinite wedge. Proc. Roy. Soc
A186, 344-351. (1946)
The diffraction of sound pulses III : Note on an integral occuring in the theory of
diffraction by a semi- infinite screen. Proc. Roy. Soc. A186, 352-355. (1946)
The diffraction of sound pulses IV On a paradox in the theory of reflection. Proc.
Roy. Soc. A186, 356-367. (1946)
65. Glass, I. I.
Over forty years of continuous research at UTIAS on non-stationary flows and shock
waves. Shock waves, I, 75-86. (1991)
66. Glass, I. I. & Patterson, G. N.

Source List 309
A theoretical and experimental shock-tube flows. J. Aeronaut. Sci. 22, 2, 73-100.

(1955)
67. Griffith, W.
Shock Waves. 1. Fluid Mech. 106,81-101. (1981)
68. Griffith, W. C. & Bleakney, W.

Shock wave in gases American Jour Phys 22, 597. (1954)
69. Griffith, W. & Brickle, D. E.

The diffraction of strong shock waves. The Physical Review, 89,451-453. (1953)
70. Guderley, G.
Starke kugelige und zylindrische Ver dichtungsstosse in der Nahe des
Kugelmittelpunktes bzw der Zylindeachse. Luftfahrtfursh, 19, 302. (1942)
71. Heilig, W. H.
Diffraction of shock wave by a cylinder. Phys. Fluids Sup!. I, 12, 154-157. (1969)
72. Heilig, W. H.
In shock tube and shock wave research. Proc. Eleventh Int Sym Shock Tubes and
Waves, 288-295 Seattle: University of Washington Press. (1978)
73. Henderson, L. F.
On the Whitham theory of shock wave diffracting at concave corners. J. Fluid Mech.
99, 801-811. (1980)
74. Hendersen, L. F. & Gray, P. M.

Experiments on the diffraction of strong blast waves. Proc. Roy. Soc. Land. A371,
363-378. (1981)

Experiments on transition to Mach reflection. J. Fluid Mech. 68, 139-155. (1975)

Further experiments on transition to Mach reflection. J. Fluid Mech 94,541-560.
(1979)
77. Henderson, L. F. & Siegenthaler, A.

Experiments on the diffraction of weak blast waves: The von Neumann paradox. Proc.
Roy. Soc. Lond., Ser. A, 369, 537-555. (1980)
78. Houma, H. & Henderson, L. F.

Irregular reflection of weak shock waves in polyatomic gases. Phy. Fluids A, 1, 597-
599. (1989)
79. Hornung, H. G.
Regular and Mach reflection of shock waves. Ann. Rev. Fluid. Mech., 18, 33-58.
(1986)
80. Hornung, H. G. & Kychakoff, G.

In shock tube and shock wave research. Proc. Eleventh Int. Symp. Shock Tubes, 296-
302 Seattle: University of Washington Press. (1978)
81. Hornung, H. G. , Oertel, H. & Sandeman, R. J.

Transition to Mach reflection of shock waves in steady and pseudosteady flow with and
without relaxation. 1. Fluid Mech 90,541 - 560. (1979)
82. Howard, L. N. & Matthews, D. L.

On the vortices produced in shock diffraction. 1. App. Phys. 27, 223. (1956)
83. Jahn, R. G.
The reflection of shock wave at a gaseous interface. J. Fluid Mech. 1, 457. (1956)
84. Jahn, R. G.
Transition processes in shock wave interaction. J. Fluid Mech. 3, 33. (1957)
85. Jones, D. M. , Martin, P. M. E. & Thornhill, C. K.

A note on the pseudo-stationary flow behind a strong shock diffracted or reflected at a
corner. Proc. Roy. Soc., Series A, 209, 238. (1951)
86. Kawamura, R. & Saito, H.

Reflection of shock Waves - 1. Pseudo stationary case. J. Phys. Soc. Japan, 11, 584-
592. (1956)
87. Klein, E. J.
Interaction of a shock wave and a wedge; An application of the hydraulic analogy.
AIAA J. 3, 801-808. (1965)
88. Law, C. K. & Glass, I. I.

Diffraction of strong shock waves by a sharp compressive corner. CASI Trans., 4, 2-
12. (1971)
89. Lean, G. M.
Source List 311
Experiments on the reflection of inclined shock waves. Brit. Aeronaut . Res. Council
Rep. Aero.7, 495 . (1943)
90. Lean, G. M.
Report on further experiments on the reflection of inclined
shock waves. Brit. Aeronaut. Res. Council Rept Aero. 10, 629. (1946)
91. Liepman, H. W. & Roshko, A

Elements of Gas Dyanamics. New York: John Wiley. (1957)
92. Lighthill, M. J.
The diffraction of blast I. Proc. Roy .Soc A, 198, 454-470. (1949)
The diffraction of blast II. Proc. Roy. Soc A200, 554 - 565. (1950)
A technique for rendering approximate solutions to physical problems uniformly valid.
Phil. Mag. (7),40, 1179-120l. (1949)
The shock strength in supersonic conical fields. Phil. Mag. (7), 40, 202. (1949)
Higher approximations. Sears, W.R. (Editor). General theory of high speed
aerodynamics. 345-487 Princeton University Press. (1954)
97. Ludloff, H. F.
On aerodynamics of blasts. Adv. Appl. Mech. 3, Academic Press, New York. (1953)
98. Ludloff, H. F. & Friedmann, M. B.

Diffraction of blasts by axisymmetric bodies. J. Aero. Sci .19, 425-426 . (1952)
99. LudIoff, H. F. & Friedman, M. B.

Mach reflection of shocks at an arbitrary incidence. J. Appl. Phys., 24, l247-l24R.
11953)
100. Ludloff, H. F. & Friedman, M. B.

Aerodynamics of blasts - Diffraction of blast around finite corners. J. Aero. Sci. 22,
27-34. (1955)
101. Ludloff, H. F. & Friedman, M. B.

Difference solution of shock diffraction problem. J. Aeronaut. Sci. 22, 139-140. (1955)
102. Mach, E.
Uberden verlauf von Funkenwellen in der Ebene und im Raume. Sitzber. Akad. Wiss.
Wien 78,819-838 . (1878)
103. Miles, J. W.
A note on shock -shock diffraction. J. Fluid Mech. 22, 95-102. (1965)
104. Moore, F. K.
Unsteady oblique interaction of a shock wave with a plane disturbance. NACA Report
No: 1165. (1953)
105. Pack, D. C.
The reflection and diffraction of shock waves. J. Fluid Mech. 18, 549-576. (1964)
106. Parks, E. K.
Supersonic flow in a shock tube of divergent cross-section. D.T.LA. Report No: 18.
(1952)
107. Payne, R. B.
A numerical method for a conveying cylindrical shock. 1. Fluid Mech. 2, 185. (1957)
108. Polachek, H. & Seeger, R. J.

Regular reflection ofshock waves in ideal gases. Buro Ord. Explosives Res. Rept. 13 .
(1944)

On the shock-wave phenomena: Interaction of shock waves in gases. Proc. I
symposium Appl. Math. , 119 , American Math. Soc New York. (1949)

On shock wave phenomena; Reflection of shock waves at a gaseous interface. Phys.
Rev. , 84, 922 . (1951)
111. Possio, C.
The aerodynamical action on an oscillating aerofoil at supersonic speed. Translated
from Acta Pointifica Acad. Sci. 1,93-106. A.R.C. 7668. (1937)
112. Rawling, G. & Polachek, H.

On the three shock configuration. Phys. Rev. 1,572-577. (1950)
Source Lis!
113. Reichenbach, H.
Contribution of Ernst Mach to fluid mechanics. Ann. Rev. Fluid Mech. 15, 1-28.
(1983)
114. Ridenour, L. N.
Modern Physics for the Engineer. Mcgraw Hill. (1954)
115. Rott, N.
Diffraction of a weak shock with vortex generation. J. Fluid Mech. 1, Ill. (1958)
116. Sakurai, A.
On the problem of weak Mach relection. J. Phys. Soc. Japan. 19, 1440-1450. (1964)
117. Shapiro, A. H.
The dynamics and thermodynamics of compressible fluid flow. The Ronald Press Co,
New York. (1954)
118. Skews, B. W.
Profiles of diffracting shock waves. University of Witwaterstrand, Department of
Mech. Engg. Rep. No. 35. (1966)
119. Skews, B. W.
The shape of diffracting shock wave. J. Fluid Mech 29, 2, 297-304 . (1967a)
120. Skews, B. W.
The perturbed region behind a diffracting shock wave. J. Fluid Mech 29,4,705-719.
(1967b)
121. Skews, B. W.
Shock -shock reflection. CASI Trans. 4, 16-19. (1971)
122. Skews, B. W.
The flow in the vicinity of the three-shock intersection. CAS I Trans. 4, 99-107. (1972)
123. Skews, B. W.
The shape of a shock in regular reflection from a wedge. CASI Trans. 5, 28-32. (1972)
124. Skews, B. W.
Shock wave shaping. A.LA.A.J. 10, 839-841. (1972)
125. Skews, B. W.
The diffraction of obliquely retlecting shock waves. Recent developments in shock tube
314 interacrion Of Shock Waves
research. Daniel Bershader and Wayland Griffith, Editors Stanford University Press.
(1973)
126. Smith, L. G.
Photographic investigation of the reflection of plane shocks in air. Office Sci. Res. &
Develop. Tech Rept . 6271 . (1945)
127. Smith, W. R.
The mutual reflection of two shock waves of arbitrary strength. Ph. D. dissertation,
Princeton University. (1956)
128. Smith, W. R.
Mutual Reflection of two shock waves of arbitrary strength. Phys. Fluids 2, 533.
(1959)
129. Smith, W. R.
Four shock configuration. Phys. Fluids 5, 993. (1962)
130. Smyrl, J. L.
The impact of shock wave on a thin two dimensional aerofoil moving at super sonic
speed. J. Fluid Mech. 15, 223-240. (1963)
131. Sommerfeld, A.
Math Analysis, 47,317. (1895)
132. Srivastava, R. S.
Ph.D Thesis (Study of diffraction of shock waves) Lucknow University, India. (1962)
Diffraction of oblique shock wave. Brit Aero. Res. Council C.P. No. 612. (1962)
Diffraction of a plane straight shock wave. British Aero. Res. Council, C.P. No. 603.
(1963)
Oblique reflection of shock wave. Def. Sci. Journal (India) 13, 3, 283. (1963)
paper No . 1008 . (1968)
Source List 315
136. Srivastava, R. S. & Ballabh, R.

Diffraction of oblique shock wave past a smal1 bend. Proc. I Congo Theoretical and
137. Srivastava, R. S. & Ballabh, R.

Diffraction of oblique shock wave past a small bend. ProC. Nat Academy of Sciences,
Vol. XXV, Sec A Part III Allahabad (India) . (1956)
138. Srivastava, R. S. & Chopra, M. G.

Diffraction of blast wave for the oblique case. J .Fluid Mech. 40, 4, 821-831 . (19711)
139. Srivastava, R. S. & Deschambault, R. L.

Pressure distribution behind a non stationary reflected diffracted shock wave. AIAA 22,
2, 305 . (1984)
140. Sternberg, J.
Triple shock wave intersection. Phys. Fluids 2, 179. (1959)
141. Taub, A. H.
Refraction of plane shock waves. Physical Review 72, 51 . (1947)
142. Ter-Minnassiants, S. M.
(1969)
143. Ting, L.
The shock strength in a two dimensional non-steady flow. J. Aeronaut. Sci. 19,351.
(1952)
144. Ting, L & Gunzberger, M.

Diffraction of shock wave by moving thin wing. AIAA Paper 69-647. (1969)
145. Ting, L. & Ludloff, H. F

Aerodynamics of Blasts. Readers Forum, J. Aeronautical Sci., 18,2, 143-144. (1951)
146. Ting, L. & Ludloff, H. F.

Aerodynamics of Blasts. 1. Aeronautical Sci., 19,317-328 . (1952)
147. Von Neumann, J.

Proposal and analysis of a new numerical method for the treatment of hydrodynamical
~,hock problems. N.D.R.C.Applied Maths Panel Memo 38.7 M(AppI.M-NYO No.
316 Interact;on Of Shock Waves
18). (1943)

Oblique reflection of shocks. Explos. Res. Rep. Navy Dep., Bureau of Ordanace,
Washington, DC. , U.S.A .. (1943)

Collected works. Vol. 6, 238-308. Pergaman Press. (1963)
150. Von Mises, R.

Mathematical theory of comressible fluid flow. Ch 5, 23, New York Acad. Press.
(1958).
151. Waldro, H. F.
An experimental study of a spiral vortex formed by a shock wave diffraction. U.T.I.A.
Tech. Note No 2. (1954)
152. White, D. R.
Reflection of strong shock at nearly glancing incidence. J. Aeronaut. Sci. 18, 633-634.
(1951)
153. White, D. R.
An experimental survey of the Mach reflection of shock waves. Proc. 2nd Mid-West
Conf. on Fluid Dynamics. (1952)
154. Whitham, G. B.
The propagation of spherical blast. Proc. Roy. Soc. A 203, 571. (1950)
155. Whitham, G. B.
On the propagation of weak shock wave. J. Fluid Mech. 1, 290. (1956)
156. Whitham, G. B.
1.Fluid Mech 2, 145-171 . (1957)
157. Whitham, G. B.
On the propogation of shock wave through regions of non-uniform area. J. Fluid
Mech 4, 337-360 . (1958)
158. Whitham, G. B.
A new approach to problem of shock dynamic Pt. II : Three-dimensional problems.
1. Fluid Mech., 5, 369-386. (1959)
Source List 317
159. Whitham, G. B.
A note on shock dynamics relative to a moving frame. J. Fluid Mech 31, 3, 449-454 .
(1968)
160. Wood, R. W.
The interaction of shock waves. Office Sci. Res. Develop.Progress Rept. 1995 . (1943)
161. Xu D. Q. & Houma, H.

Numerical simulation for non-stationary Mach reflection of a shock wave: A kinetic
model approach. Shock waves 1, 43-50. (1991)
INDEX
Aerofoil, 2, 237, 265, 266, 267, 277

Angle of incidence, 8, 15, 16, 18, 116, 128, 137
Angle of reflection, 8, 15, 16, 18, 116, 128, 137
Angle of yaw, 157, 177, 187,210,233,259
Blast wave, 2
Busemann Transformation, 32, 63, 97, 103, 127, 202, 221, 247, 248
Characteristics, 31, 77, 88, 187
Conduction of heat, 25
Conformal transformation, 33, 64, 122, 168,206,223
Conefield transformation, 2
Contact discontinuty, 10
Convex, 40, 47, 52
Concave, 40, 47, 52
Critical angle of incidence, 8
Differential equation - Hyperbolic, 30, 77, 88
Differential equation - Elliptic, 30, 77, 88
Diffraction of shocks, 1, 2, 187
Diffraction of normal shock, 2, 3, 25, 73, 187
Diffraction of oblique shock, 2, 3, 73, 187
Extreme angle, 16, 78, 214
Elliptic function, 104
Harmonic function, 33, 36, 111, 126, 146
Hilbert problem, 149
Incident shock, 8,10,11, 15, 17,18,73
Infinite fringe interferogram, 120
Isopycnics, 121, 278, 279, 280
Isobars, 278, 279
Laplace's equation, 32, 63, 98, 167,202,249
Linearized, 1,2,25, 187,265,267,297
Lorenz transformation, 273
Mach circle, 47, 121,273,298
Mach cone, 157, 167, 195,216,220,255
Mach reflection, 1, 17,18, 19,20,21,44,205,294
Machstem shock 10, 17, 18
Mach triple point, 2, 18, 19
Monoatomic gases, 51
Normal reflection, 1, 7
Oblique reflection, 1,7
Point of inflexion, 40, 52, 180, 300
320
Poisson's integral formula, 112, 127,209,228

Possio integral, 274
Prandtl Meyer expansion, 27, 48,97, 130, 167, 201
Rays, 283, 284, 285
Reflected shock, 8,9, 11, 13, 14, 15, 17
Regular reflection, 8, 9, 10, 11, 16, 17, 18,78
Riemann - Hilbert type, 2
Riemann invariants, 286
Schlieren photograph, 299, 300
Self similar, 8
Shock curvature, 38, 39, 51, 52,179
Shock Tube, 7, 117, 265
Slip stream, 265
Small perturbations, 2, 25, 287
Sonic angle, 16, 115
Theta functions, 65, 153
Viscous stresses, 25
Yawed wedges, 3, 157, 174, 177, 187,233,253,259
Mechanics
Series Editor: R. Moreau
Aims and Scope of the Series
The purpose of this series is to focus on subjects in which fluid mechanics plays a fundamental
role. As well as the more traditional applications of aeronautics, hydraulics, heat and mass transfer
etc., books will be published dealing with topics which are currently in a state of rapid develop-
ment, such as turbulence, suspensions and multi phase fluids, super and hypersonic flows and
numerical modelling techniques. It is a widely held view that it is the interdisciplinary subjects that
will receive intense scientific attention, bringing them to the forefront of technological advance-
ment. Fluids have the ability to transport matter and its properties as well as transmit force,
therefore fluid mechanics is a subject that is particularly open to cross fertilisation with other
,ciences and disciplines of engineering. The subject of fluid mechanics will be highly relevant in
domains such as chemical, metallurgical, biological and ecological engineering. This series is
particularly open to such new multidisciplinary domains.
1. M. Lesieur: Turbulence in Fluids. 2nd rev. ed., 1990 ISBN 0-7923-0645-7

2. O. Metais and M. Lesieur (eds.): Turbulence and Coherent Structures. 1991
ISBN 0-7923-0646-5
3. R. Moreau: Magnetohydrodynamics. 1990 ISBN 0-7923-0937-5
4. E. Coustols (ed.): Turbulence Control by Passive Means. 1990 ISBN 0-7923-1020-9
5. A.A. Borissov (ed.): Dynamic Structure of Detonation in Gaseous and Dispersed Media. 1991
ISBN 0-7923-1340-2
6. K-S. Choi (ed.): Recent Developments in Turbulence Management. 1991
ISBN 0-7923-1477-8
7. E.P. Evans and B. Coulbeck (eds.): Pipeline Systems. 1992 ISBN 0-7923-1668-1
8. B. Nau (ed.): Fluid Sealing. 1992 ISBN 0-7923-1 669-X
9. T.K.S. Murthy (ed.): Computational Methods in Hypersonic Aerodynamics. 1992
ISBN 0-7923-1673-8
10. R. King (ed.): Fluid Mechanics of Mixing. Modelling, Operations and Experimental Tech-
niques. 1992 ISBN 0-7923-1720-3
II. Z. Han and X. Yin: Shock Dynamics. 1993 ISBN 0-7923-1746-7
12. L. Svarovsky and M.T. Thew (eds.): Hydroclones. Analysis and Applications. 1992
ISBN 0-7923-1876-5
13. A. Lichtarowicz (ed.): Jet Cutting Technology. 1992 ISBN 0-7923-1979-6
14. F.T.M. Nieuwstadt (ed.): Flow Visualization and Image Analysis. 1993 ISBN 0-7923-1994-X
15. A.J. Saul (ed.): Floods and Flood Management. 1992 ISBN 0-7923-2078-6
16. D.E. Ashpis, T.B. Gatski and R. Hirsh (eds.): Instabilities and Turbulence in Engineering
Flows. 1993 ISBN 0-7923-2161-8
17. R.S. Azad: The Atmospheric Boundary Layer for Engineers. 1993 ISBN 0-7923-2187-1
18. F.T.M. Nieuwstadt (ed.): Advances in Turbulence IV. 1993 ISBN 0-7923-2282-7
19. KK Prasad (ed.): Further Developments in Turbulence Management. 1993
ISBN 0-7923-2291-6
20. Y.A. Tatarchenko: Shaped Crystal Growth. 1993 ISBN 0-7923-2419-6
Kluwer Academic Publishers - Dordrecht / Boston / London

Mechanics
Series Editor: R. Moreau
21. J.P. Bonnet and M.N. Glauser (eds.): Eddy Structure Identification is Free Turbulent Shear
Flows. 1993 ISBN 0-7923-2449-8
22. R.S. Srivastava: Interaction of Shock Waves. 1994 ISBN 0-7923-2920-1
Kluwer Academic Publishers - Dordrecht I Boston I London

Mechanics
3. E.B. Magrab: Vibrations of Elastic Structural Members. 1979 ISBN 90-286-0207-0
4. RT. Haftka and M.P. Kamat: Elements of Structural Optimization. 1985
Revised and enlarged edition see under Solid Mechanics and Its Applications, Volume 1
5. J.R. Vinson and RL. Sierakowski: The Behavior of Structures Composed of Composite
Materials. 1986 ISBN Hb 90-247-3125-9; Pb 90-247-3578-5
6. B.E. Gatewood: Virtual Principles in Aircraft Structures. Volume 1: Analysis. 1989
ISBN 90-247-3754-0
7. B.E. Gatewood: Virtual Principles in Aircraft Structures. Volume 2: Design, Plates,
Finite Elements. 1989 ISBN 90-247-3755-9
Set (Gatewood 1 + 2) ISBN 90-247-3753-2
MECHANICS OF ELASTIC AND INELASTIC SOLIDS

Editors: S. Nemat-Nasser and G.LE. Oravas
1. G.M.L. Gladwell: Contact Problems in the Classical Theory of Elasticity. 1980

ISBN Hb 90-286-0440-5; Pb 90-286-0760-9
2. G. Wempner: Mechanics of Solids with Applications to Thin Bodies. 1981
ISBN 90-286-0880-X
3. T. Mura: Micromechanics of Defects in Solids. 2nd revised edition, 1987
ISBN 90-247-3343-X
4. R.G. Payton: Elastic Wave Propagation in Transversely Isotropic Media. 1983
ISBN 90-247-2843-6
5. S. Nemat-Nasser, H. Abe and S. Hirakawa (eds.): Hydraulic Fracturing and Geother-
mal Energy. 1983 ISBN 90-247-2855-X
6. S. Nemat-Nasser, R.I. Asaro and G.A. Hegemier (eds.): Theoretical Foundation for
Large-scale Computations of Nonlinear Material Behavior. 1984 ISBN 90-247 -3092-9
7. N. Cristescu: Rock Rheology. 1988 ISBN 90-247-3660-9
8. G.I.N. Rozvany: Structural Design via Optimality Criteria. The Prager Approach to
Structural Optimization. 1989 ISBN 90-247-3613-7
MECHANICS OF SURFACE STRUCTURES

Editors: W.A. Nash and G.LE. Oravas
1. P. Seide: Small Elastic Deformations of Thin Shells. 1975 ISBN 90-286-0064-7

2. V. Panc: Theories of Elastic Plates. 1975 ISBN 90-286-0104-X
3. J.L. Nowinski: Theory of Thermoelasticity with Applications. 1978
ISBN 90-286-0457-X
4. S. Lukasiewicz: Local Loads in Plates and Shells. 1979 ISBN 90-286-0047-7
5. C. Fift: Statics, Formfinding and Dynamics of Air-supported Membrane Structures.
1983 ISBN 90-247 -2672-7
6. Y. Kai-yuan (ed.): Progress in Applied Mechanics. The Chien Wei-zang Anniversary
Volume. 1987 ISBN 90-247-3249-2
7. R NegruIiu: Elastic Analysis of Slab Structures. 1987 ISBN 90-247 -3367-7
8. J.R Vinson: The Behavior of Thin Walled Structures. Beams, Plates, and Shells. 1988
ISBN Hb 90-247-3663-3; Pb 90-247-3664-1
Mechanics
From 1990, books on the subject of mechanics will be published under two series:
Series Editor: R.I. Moreau
SOLID MECHANICS AND ITS APPLICATIONS
Series Editor: G.M.L. Gladwell
Prior to 1990, the books listed below were published in the respective series indicated below.
MECHANICS: DYNAMICAL SYSTEMS

Editors: L. Meirovitch and G.LE. Oravas
1. E.H. Dowell: Aeroelasticity of Plates and Shells. 1975 ISBN 90-286-0404-9

2. D.G.B. Edelen: Lagrangian Mechanics of Nonconservative Nonholonomic Systems.
1977 ISBN 90-286-0077-9
3. lL. Junkins: An Introduction to Optimal Estimation of Dynamical Systems. 1978
ISBN 90-286-0067-1
4. E.H. Dowell (ed.), H.c. Curtiss Jr., R.H. Scanlan and F. Sisto: A Modern Course in
Aeroelasticity. Revised and enlarged edition see under Volume 11
5. L. Meirovitch: Computational Methods in Structural Dynamics. 1980
ISBN 90-286-0580-0
6. B. Skalmierski and A. Tylikowski: Stochastic Processes in Dynamics. Revised and
enlarged translation. 1982 ISBN 90-247-2686-7
7. P.c. Muller and W.O. Schiehlen: Linear Vibrations. A Theoretical Treatment of Multi-
degree-of-freedom Vibrating Systems. 1985 ISBN 90-247-2983-1
8. Gh. Buzdugan, E. Mihiiilescu and M. Radq: Vibration Measurement. 1986
ISBN 90-247-3111-9
9. G.M.L. Gllidwell: Inverse Problems in Vibration. 1987 ISBN 90-247-3408-8
10. G.I. Schueller and M. Shinozuka: Stochastic Methods in Structural Dynamics. 1987
ISBN 90-247-3611-0
11. E.H. Dowell (ed.), H.C. Curtiss Jr., R.H. Scanlan and F. Sisto: A Modern Course in
Aeroelasticity. Second revised and enlarged edition (of Volume 4).1989
ISBN Hb 0-7923-0062-9; Pb 0-7923-0185-4
12. W. Szemplinska-Stupnicka: The Behavior of Nonlinear Vibrating Systems. Volume I:
Fundamental Concepts and Methods: Applications to Single-Degree-of-Freedom
Systems. 1990 ISBN 0-7923-0368-7
13. W. Szemplinska-Stupnicka: The Behavior of Nonlinear Vibrating Systems. Volume II:
Advanced Concepts and Applications to Multi-Degree-of-Freedom Systems. 1990
ISBN 0-7923-0369-5
Set ISBN (Vols. 12-13) 0-7923-0370-9
MECHANICS OF STRUCTURAL SYSTEMS

Editors: J.S. Przemieniecki and G.LE. Ora vas
1. L. Fryba: Vibration of Solids and Structures under Moving Loads. 1970

ISBN 90-01-32420-2
2. K. Marguerre and K. WOlfel: Mechanics of Vibration. 1979 ISBN 90-286-0086-8

(Fluid Mechanics and Its Applications 22) R. S. Srivastava (Auth.) - Interaction of Shock Waves-Springer Netherlands (1994)

Hochgeladen von

Dokumentinformationen

Originaltitel

Copyright

Verfügbare Formate

Dieses Dokument teilen

Dokument teilen oder einbetten

Freigabeoptionen

Stufen Sie dieses Dokument als nützlich ein?

Sind diese Inhalte unangemessen?

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

(Fluid Mechanics and Its Applications 22) R. S. Srivastava (Auth.) - Interaction of Shock Waves-Springer Netherlands (1994)

Hochgeladen von

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

INTERACTION OF SHOCK WAVES

FLUID MECHANICS AND ITS APPLICATIONS

Series Editor: R. MOREAU

Aims and Scope of the Series

For a list of related mechanics titles, see final pages.

SPRINGER SCIENCE+BUSINESS MEDIA, B.V.

Srivastava, Radhey Shyam, 1931-

Printed on acid-free paper

AlI Rights Reserved

Professor Sir James LighthilJ, F.R.S.

who has been my guide and source of inspiraton

CHAPTER 2 REFLECTION OF SHOCK WAVES 7

CHAPTER 3 DIFFRACTION OF NORMAL SHOCK WAVE 25

CHAPTER 4 DIFFRACTION OF OBLIQUE SHOCK WAVE 73

CHAPTERS DIFFRACTION OF NORMAL SHOCK BY YAWED

CHAPTER 6 DIFFRACTION OF OBLIQUE SHOCK BY YAWED

CHAPTER 7 SHOCK INTERACTION WITH MOVING AEROFOIL 237

CHAPTER 8 DIFFRACTION OF SHOCK BY FLAT SURFACES 265

CHAPTER 9 APPROXIMATE THEORY ON DIFFRACTION OF SHOCKS 283

SOURCE LIST 303

This monograph attempts to give a connected account of the work on interaction

A-3 / 260, Janakpuri

1) American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics

2) Journal of Aeronautical Sciences (J.A.S.)(U.S.A.)

3) Journal of Fluid Mechanics (J.F.M.), (Cambridge

4) Proceedings of the Royal Society (Proc.Roy.Soc.) Series A,London(U.K.)

5) Reviews of Modern Physics (U.S.A.)

6) Physical Review (U.S.A.)

7) British Aeronautical Research Council (A.R.C.) (U.K.)

8) Quarterly Journal of Mechanics and Applied Mathematics (Q.J.M.A.M.)(U.K.)

The problems relating to the behaviour of a shock wave encountering either

first used by Sommerfeld (1895) to solve the problem of diffraction by a semi-infinite

1. Bazhenova, T.V. , Gvozdeva, L.G. , Kamarov, V.S. & Suchov, B.G.

3, Bryson, A. E. & Gross, R. W. F.

Pressure distribution on a yawed wedge interacted by an oblique shock. AIAA

7. Chopra, M.G. & Srivastava, R. S.

8. Fletcher, C.H. , Weimer, D.K. & Bleakney, W.

10. Friedlander, F.G.

11. Friedlander, F.G.

12. Friedlander, F.G.

13. Lighthill, M.J.

14. Lighthill, M.J.

15. Ludloff, H.F. & Friedmann, M.B.

16. Skews, B.W.

19. Srivastava, R.S. & Ballabh, R.

20. Srivastava, R.S. & Ballabh, R.

21. Srivastava, R.S.

22. Srivastava, R.S.

23. Srivastava, R.S.

24. Srivastava, R.S. & Chopra, M.G.

25. Srivastava, R.S. & Deschambault, R.L.

26. Ter-Minnassiants, S.M.

27. Ting; L. & Ludloff, H.F

28. Whitham, G.B.

29. Whitham, G.B.

30. Whitham, G.B.

REFLECTION OF SHOCK WAVES

and it is given by cos 2 acrilical = 'Y -

which for air comes out to be 0.1424.

The Rangine-Hugoniot equations

Putting x = tan 't and y = P'/P in (2.2) we obtain

The two remaining Rankine-Hugoniot equations are taken in the form

(::J cos 2 ('t+O) = _I [(y-1) + (y+ 1)..!.]