4.7 Article

Numerical simulations of shocks encountering clumpy regions

Journal

MONTHLY NOTICES OF THE ROYAL ASTRONOMICAL SOCIETY
Volume 425, Issue 3, Pages 2212-2227

Publisher

OXFORD UNIV PRESS
DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2012.21598.x

Keywords

hydrodynamics; shock waves; turbulence; ISM: clouds; ISM: kinematics and dynamics; galaxies: starburst

Funding

  1. Royal Society
  2. Science and Technology Facilities Council [ST/I001557/1, ST/I505772/1, ST/F002092/1, ST/H008802/1] Funding Source: researchfish
  3. STFC [ST/I001557/1, ST/F002092/1, ST/I505772/1, ST/H008802/1] Funding Source: UKRI

Ask authors/readers for more resources

We present numerical simulations of the adiabatic interaction of a shock with a clumpy region containing many individual clouds. Our work incorporates a sub-grid turbulence model which for the first time makes this investigation feasible. We vary the Mach number of the shock, the density contrast of the clouds and the ratio of total cloud mass to intercloud mass within the clumpy region. Cloud material becomes incorporated into the flow. This mass loading reduces the Mach number of the shock and leads to the formation of a dense shell. In cases in which the mass loading is sufficient the flow slows enough that the shock degenerates into a wave. The interaction evolves through up to four stages: initially the shock decelerates; then its speed is nearly constant; next the shock accelerates as it leaves the clumpy region; finally, it moves at a constant speed close to its initial speed. Turbulence is generated in the post-shock flow as the shock sweeps through the clumpy region. Clouds exposed to turbulence can be destroyed more rapidly than a similar cloud in an isolated environment. The lifetime of a downstream cloud decreases with increasing cloud-to-intercloud mass ratio. We briefly discuss the significance of these results for starburst superwinds and galaxy evolution.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available