1.

INTRODUCTION
Submerged combustion systems have been applied for efficient and fast heating of liquid by
injection of hot combustor exit gases into the surrounding liquid. Such direct contact heating
method offers various applications, including water heaters, evaporators, liquid concentrators,
waste water treatment, sewage digester heater and glass or metal melting systems. Due to
direct contact of hot gases and the liquid very high heat transfer efficiencies can be achieved
with the avoidance of fouling of surfaces. This may result in as much as 30% of energy
savings as compared to conventional indirect contact systems using heat exchangers.
Submerged combustion systems could also be used to generate propulsive power for
autonomous underwater vehicles (AUV). Such vehicles can be useful for naval applications
to monitor coastlines and other traffic communications. For such vehicles, the hot combustion
gases can be used to turn the propeller or propel the vehicle directly. Submerged combustion
has also applications for underwater energy systems wherein the chemical energy of fuel is
converted to electrical energy using a generator. In all the submerged combustion
applications, the exhaust gases are injected into the surrounding liquid that results in two
phase jet instabilities. Coupling of jet instabilities with the pressure fluctuations in the
combustion chamber can excite combustion instabilities from feedback between the heat
release process and pressure oscillations in the combustor based on the Rayleigh criteria.
Combustion instabilities can lead to large scale pressure and velocity oscillations that can
lead to instability, flame blow-off and damage to the combustor hardware. Furthermore, the
noise produced due to the exhaust jet discharge in underwater propulsion systems is of
concern as it not only leads to noise pollution but also makes the autonomous underwater
vehicles more detectable. Hence knowledge of two-phase jet interaction is important in
designing submerged combustors. The knowledge of submerged jet characteristics can also
provide critical insight on the heat transfer and mixing behaviour for heating systems.
1

Unsteady two phase exhaust jet has been investigated previously with two nozzle geometries
having circular cross-section. One of the nozzles was flush mounted in the water tank while
other was projecting inside the water tank. Strouhal number of around 0.002 was obtained for
the jet instability cycle, where Strouhal number is a dimensionless number describing
oscillating flow mechanisms and in defined as St = f* D/Umean, where f is the frequency of
oscillation, D is diameter of the jet and Umean is the average jet velocity. The phenomenon
was found to be fundamentally different from single phase systems that are known to have
Strouhal number of around 0.3. Thus the previous studies clearly show large differences
between airair and airwater cases. Theoretical work of instabilities of liquid surface has
been performed previously, however very little experimental data is available for two phase
systems where gaseous jet is injected in a liquid medium. The focus of this paper is not on
examining the mechanisms of instability for the airair or density discontinuity effects but
rather examine the characteristics of jet signatures that emanate from the gasliquid system
and its coupling with up-stream gas chamber. Such information is critical for the design and
development of submerged combustion systems, in addition to support any future efforts on
model validation and model development.

Based on the momentum of gas jet the two phase region can possess either bubble or jet like
behaviour. For example, under deep water propulsion operation condition the exhaust jet will
have bubbling behaviour which will change to jetting behaviour for shallow water application
due to change in velocity of exhaust gases because of change in pressure. Appropriate jet
regime of operation has also applications in other submerged energy systems used for heating
purposes. Researchers have applied the combined Kelvin Helmholtz and RayleighTaylor
instability analysis to obtain the critical velocity of gas injection for transition from bubbling
to jet-ting regime. Critical velocity was found to depend on surface tension, injection

diameter and gas liquid density ratio. The critical Weber number was given by We =
10.5(*)-0.5, where * is the gas to liquid density ratio. Gravity effects were found to be
insignificant and orientation had little effect on the jetting transition.

Different nozzle exit cross-sections (circular and non-circular) are used in oil drilling, in
addition to its use in heat transfer. The spread at the major axis plane for elliptical nozzle was
observed to be similar to the circular nozzle. The non-circular jets were found to penetrate
more into the water and better mixing was observed as compared to circular jets.

In the present work, five different nozzle exit cross-sections have been investigated to study
the characteristics of exit gas jet in underwater discharge conditions over a range of jet
momentum conditions and their effect on the sound pressure levels and chamber pressure
fluctuations. Air and helium gas is used to examine the role of gas density on the jet
characteristics in submerged systems. For the range of experimental conditions the pressure
in the chamber is close to atmospheric pressure ( about 0.4 psi g).

2. EXPERIMENTAL SETUP AND CONDITIONS

A schematic of the simulated submerged combustor is shown in Fig. 1. The gas chamber has
a square cross-section, with 230 mm sides. Quartz windows, 12.5 mm thick, are positioned
on three sides of the chamber. The fourth side had a steel plate. The pressure sensor is flush
mounted at the centre of this plate. In the gas chamber, nozzle block is installed in the outlet
to constrict the flow. The nozzle block is aluminium, and is fitted with nozzles of different
geometrical cross sections. The nozzle projects in the water chamber and the exit is about 16
mm above the base of water chamber. A water chamber, made of Plexiglas, is fitted over the
gas chamber. It has a square cross section with 230 mm sides and 460 mm length.

Fig. 1. Schematic diagram of the experimental setup (dimensions in mm).

For all the experiments the water level (with gas flow) is about 165 mm. A microphone is
positioned at about 50 mm above the base of water chamber and 25 mm away from the water
tank, in the plane of exit nozzle. It may be noted that the transmission through walls of an
enclosure and reverberation of the chamber will change the acoustic signatures, however the
present investigation provide comparative examination with same impedance of the media.
4

During experiments we sought for any acoustic excitation emanating from any nozzle or
reverberation but none were found for the two different nozzle exit areas. Small change in
magnitude detected in the signal with the presence of additional walls is as expected but their
presence did not change the characteristic frequency. The uncertainly of sound pressure
levels is less than 0.5 dB.

The five nozzle exit cross-sections investigated are shown in Fig. 2. Two elliptical nozzles
with aspect ratio of 2.5 and 1.5 as well as circular, square and equilateral triangular nozzles
are used. All the nozzles have same exit area. High speed images are acquired with the
camera direction as shown in Fig. 2. The camera faces the major axis of elliptical nozzles
and a side of triangular and square nozzles. Microphone direction is normal to the camera
direction and also to the nozzle axis.

Fig. 2. Nozzle exit cross-sections investigated (dimensions mm).

Experimental conditions examined are summarized in Table 1. Two different gases (air, case
14 and helium, case 57) are investigated to study the effect of gas density. Helium gas
density is comparable to high temperature combustion gases and it is used to simulate the hot

combustion gases. Since the cross-sectional area for all the nozzles is same the mean exit
velocities for given flow rate is also same for different nozzle geometries. Reynolds number
(Re) for all the cases is of the order of 10,000 or higher, hence the exit gas flow is turbulent.
Reynolds number is a dimensionless number that gives a measure of the ratio of inertial
forces to viscous forces and for the present case it is defined as Re = - x Umean x D/, where
is the gas phase density, Umean is the average jet velocity, D is the jet diameter and is the
dynamic viscosity of gas phase. For heliumwater system (case 57), the exit gas velocity is
same as that of airwater system (case numbers 24). Flow is incompressible (Mach number
(M) < 0.3) for all cases corresponding to heliumwater system and for case 1 corresponding
to airwater system (Table 1). Mach number is the ratio of speed of fluid relative to the speed
of sound in that fluid and is defined as M = Umean/Uc, where Umean is the jet exit velocity and
Uc is the speed of sound in the gas. For cases 24 corresponding to airwater system the flow
is compressible (Mach number (M) > 0.3). Weber number (We) is used to characterize
different cases and it represents the ratio of momentum of jet coming out of the nozzle and
the restraining surface tension force. Weber number is a measure of the relative importance
of the fluids inertial force compared to its surface tension force and is defined as We = x
U2mean x D/, where is the gas density, Umean is the jet exit velocity, D is the jet diameter
and is the surface tension.
The critical Weber number (Wec) for transition from bubbling to jetting regime is 306 for air
water system and 823 for heliumwater system, hence the airwater system is closer to
jetting regime and the heliumwater system is expected to follow bubbling behaviour.

Table 1
Experimental conditions (SLPM, standard liters per minute, Umean = mean nozzle exit
velocity, M = Mach No., Re = Reynolds No., and We = Weber No.).
Case # (gas)

Gas flow (SLPM)

Umean (m/s)

Re

We

1.

(Air)

236

66

0.19

36,491

611

2.

(Air)

471

132

0.38

72,982

2442

3.

(Air)

589

165

0.47

91,229

3816

4.

(Air)

707

198

0.57

109,513

5499

5.

(He)

471

132

0.13

9817

337

6.

(He)

589

165

0.16

12,271

527

7.

(He)

707

198

0.19

14,731

760

3. RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS

3.1 Sound Pressure Levels
Sound pressure level measured from the microphone is a pressureamplitude spectrum. To
obtain a single value of sound pres-sure level from sound spectrum different types of
weighting functions are generally used, such as A-weighting, B-weighting, and C-weighting.
AC weighting are family of curves or filters that are used to mathematically alter sound
spectrum for measurement purposes to report loudness level. The average sound level
obtained from the modified sound spectrum gives a single loudness level as compared to the
sound spectrum that is obtained from a microphone. A-weighting is used to measure
environmental or industrial noise as well as to assess potential hearing damage from sound
source and this is used in the present work to report loudness level. A-weighting is close to
human ear response wherein it suppresses sound at very low and high frequency (similar to
human ear) and allows maximum sensitivity in frequency range of about 15 kHz. B
weighting network is linear from 300 Hz to 5 kHz and drops of on either side of the
spectrum. C weighting net-work has linear response from about 50 Hz to 5 kHz and is used
for traffic noise surveys in noisy areas.

Most commonly used weighting to entail human response of noise is A-weighting and
loudness level can be obtained from the sound spectrum. A-weighting is used due to its
resemblance in frequency amplitude response characteristics with the human ear. The data on
sound level with A-weighting is presented in Fig. 3.

Fig. 3 A-weighted sound pressure levels for different nozzle exit cross sections as a function
of Weber number.

For airwater system ( Fig. 3a), the sound pressure level increases with increase in jet
momentum (higher Weber number). Higher momentum jets cause violent penetration and
shearing of water to produce more noise. The exit geometry of nozzles also has significant
effect on the sound pressure levels. For airwater system, elliptical nozzle with aspect ratio of

2.5 generates lowest sound level for the range of Weber numbers investigated. Square,
triangular and circular nozzles generate almost same sound levels. Elliptical nozzle with
aspect ratio 1.5 has noise level lower than square, triangular and circular but higher than
elliptical nozzle with aspect ratio 2.5. It may be noted that the mean velocity at the exit of
nozzles is same for all the nozzles. But due to different cross-sections the perimeter and
hence the shearing area is different. Higher shearing area is expected to decrease the jet
velocity faster as compared to circular nozzle. It may be noted that noise emitted from jets
vary as Umean [17]. In contrast the increase in area would linearly affect the sound emission.
Hence the lower noise levels could be because of faster decay for elliptical jets as compared
to circular jets. The jet exiting from elliptical nozzle has higher shearing area for interaction
between the gas and water hence it decays faster than the circular jet and this may be the
reason for lower sound pressure levels for elliptical nozzle. For heliumwater system, similar
trends are observed ( Fig. 3b); the triangular nozzle generates the highest sound level
followed by square, circular, elliptical (AR = 1.5) and elliptical (AR = 2.5). As observed for
airwater system the sound level increases with in-crease in Weber number for heliumwater
system also.

Sound spectrum vs. equivalent Strouhal number for one of the cases (at We = 5499, airwater
system) is shown in Fig. 4. Sound pressure levels from Strouhal number range from 0.001 to
1 (corresponding to frequency of about 101000 Hz) are presented; above 1000 Hz the sound
level is not significant. Predominantly four peaks can be observed at Strouhal number of
around 0.0017, 0.005 and 0.02 (40 Hz, 120 Hz and 480 Hz), although other minor peaks
prevail. The sound in the region of 1 kHz is perceived as being louder than the sound level in
either at low-frequency (say, 50 Hz) or higher frequency (10 kHz) [16]. A-weighting, as
implemented, takes into account the perceived sound level of human hearing hence the sound
level at lower or higher frequency range have less weight while calculating the total sound
10

level. The difference in sound level at the frequency range of around 480 Hz (St = 0.02) is
mostly responsible for the difference in the total sound level. From Fig. 4, it can be observed
that in the frequency range of 400500 Hz (St = 0.0150.025) elliptical nozzle (with AR =
2.5) has the lowest sound level. Circular, square and triangular nozzles have the highest
sound level followed by elliptical nozzle with aspect ratio of 1.5.

Fig. 4. Sound spectrum for airwater system at Weber number of 5499.

3.2 Pressure fluctuations in the gas chamber
Dynamic pressure fluctuations have been measured in the gas (combustion) chamber. The
acquisition rate is 1000 Hz and 10,000 data points are acquired. Pressure is measured in the
time domain and Fast Fourier Transform (FFT) is applied to transfer the signal from time
domain to frequency domain. The pressure fluctuations vs. equivalent Strouhal number
domain for one of the cases (We = 2442, airwater system, circular nozzle) is presented in
Fig. 5. Many peaks are observed for Strouhal number range from 0.0001 to 0.01
(corresponding to a frequency of 1100 Hz) and for frequencies above Strouhal number of
0.01 (frequency of about 100 Hz) the magnitude of fluctuation is found to be insignificant.
11

Peak fluctuating pressure for this case is 0.011 psig and the corresponding Strouhal number is
about 0.0022 (33.6 Hz).

Fig. 5. Pressure fluctuations in the gas chamber for airwater system (We = 2442, circular
nozzle).
The peak magnitude and corresponding Strouhal number is obtained for pressure fluctuation
in the gas (combustion) chamber and is presented in Figs. 6 and 7. The peak pressure
magnitude for airwater system is higher for both low and higher Weber numbers ( Fig. 6a).
The peak magnitudes are lowest at We = 2442. The magnitude is highest for square nozzle
and lowest for elliptical nozzle with aspect ratio of 2.5. The magnitude of pressure
fluctuations are an order of magnitude higher for heliumwater system as compared to air
water system, see Fig. 6b. This may be due to pulse like behaviour as heliumwater
system is in bubbling regime for the flow conditions investigated. The peak fluctuating
pressure is lowest for elliptical nozzle with aspect ratio of 2.5.

12

Fig. 6. Peak pressure fluctuations in the gas chamber.

The Strouhal number corresponding to peak fluctuating pressure is given in Fig. 7. At We =
611 the Strouhal number is around 0.0021 (about 15 Hz) for airwater system while for

13

higher Weber numbers (2442, 3816, and 5499) the Strouhal number is in the range of .0022
0.0016 (about 35 Hz). This can be due to closeness to bubbling regime for We = 611 (Wec for
airwater system is 306). The Strouhal number is not significantly dependent on the nozzle
exit geometry. For heliumwater system the Strouhal number corresponding to peak pressure
fluctuation is around 0.0004 (about 8 Hz) and does not significantly vary with nozzle exit
geometry or with variation in Weber number. It may be noted that even though the Weber
number of 612 and 527 are close for air and helium gas but the frequency corresponding to
peak pressure is significantly different (15 Hz and 8 Hz, respectively). Hence the dynamic
behaviour of gases also depends on the gas properties apart from the jet momentum.

14

Fig. 7. Frequency corresponding to peak fluctuating pressure.

3.3 Global jet behaviour and image processing

The global images are acquired using high speed camera at an acquisition rate of 1000 Hz.
For each case, 1024 images are acquired. Appropriate scaling factor of 45 pixels = 1D, where
D = 8.712 mm is the diameter of nozzle exit for circular nozzle, is applied to scale the
images. The acquired images are processed using Matlab software. In the jet area, the light
intensity is higher than the background light intensity due to scattering of light at the gas
liquid interface. The procedure for estimation of jet boundary is shown in Fig. 8. The images
have 512 pixels in Y-direction and 1024 pixels in X-direction and intensity range from 0 to
256 units.

A sample jet boundary estimation for airwater system at We = 2442 with circular nozzle is
shown in Fig. 8. The intensity variation along the width at Y = 300 pixels is also shown.
Mean intensity of 50 pixels is calculated starting from one of the ends towards the centre. The
mean intensity of last 20 pixels (of the 50 pixels) is subtracted from the mean intensity of 50
15

pixels. If the difference is greater than 10 units (intensity range is from 0 to 256 units) then
the 30th pixel is considered as jet boundary. The estimated jet boundary as shown in Fig. 8
lies at 423rd pixel and 600th pixel. The average of 50 and 20 pixels is used to avoid false
determination of jet boundaries due to the presence of small bubbles in the water which can
have high light intensity values. The numbers (50, 20, and 10) are fixed based on trial results
to deter-mine the correct jet boundary. The jet width is calculated by aver-aging the values
over a span of 1D and 1D length downstream of the nozzle exit. The jet (bubble) cycle can be
characterized by the evolution of jet (bubble) width over the time. The characteristic jet
(bubble) frequency is calculated by counting the number of bubble cycles in 1 s.

Fig. 8. Estimation of jet boundaries.

16

The jet width for different nozzle exit geometries is presented in Fig. 9. For airwater system
the jet width is in the range of 46 jet diameters ( Fig. 9a). Jet width of five jet diameters was
also reported in previous investigation where air jet was injected in water and two phase
instabilities were investigated using different nozzle geometries. For circular and elliptical
(AR = 2.5) nozzle, the jet width is minimum. At lower Weber number (heliumwater system)
the jet is closer to bubble like behaviour and hence has larger width ( Fig. 9b). For helium gas
the jet width is around eight diameters (much higher than air flow). In bubbling regime, the
radial expansion of the jet is observed to be higher. The variation with different nozzle exit
geometries and Weber number is not significant.

17

Fig. 9. Jet width variation with nozzle exit geometry and Weber number.
Equivalent Strouhal number variation with Weber number and nozzle exit geometry is shown
in Fig. 10. For air flow the frequency, increases with increase in Weber number. For Weber
number of 612, the Strouhal number is around 0.0021 (15 Hz), which decreases to about
0.0011 (25 Hz) for We = 5499. Recall that the pressure fluctuations in the chamber ( Fig. 7a)
for We = 612, the jet Strouhal number is about 0.0022 (15 Hz) which decreases to about
0.0016 (35 Hz) for We = 5499. For helium gas ( Fig. 9b), the jet Strouhal number is about
0.0006 (9 Hz). The Strouhal number for helium gas is also about 0.0004 (8 Hz) (see Fig. 7b).

18

Fig. 10. Jet frequency variation with nozzle exit geometry and Weber number.
Strouhal number for air-water system has been reported about 0.002 in previous study. In the
present study the Strouhal number corresponding to frequency of jet fluctuation from circular
nozzle is shown in Fig. 11. Strouhal numbers are calculated based on peak chamber pressure
fluctuation frequency and jet cycle frequency and compared. Strouhal number is in range of
0.001 0.002 for airwater system and around 0.00040.0006 for heliumwater system. The

19

Strouhal number is found to depend on the gas density. The Strouhal number is found to be
lower for heliumwater (low density gas) as compared to airwater system. The Strouhal
numbers obtained are about two orders of magnitude lower than that for single phase (airair)
systems (St = 0.3). Lower Strouhal number for the heliumwater case as compared to air
water case is possibly due to higher density difference for helium water case as compared to
airwater case.

Fig. 11. Strouhal number variation for circular nozzle.

It can be observed from Fig. 11 that the upstream chamber pressure frequency and the
downstream jet frequency are coupled for both airwater and heliumwater systems. Hence
the knowledge of exhaust jet instabilities can be used to characterize the pressure fluctuations
and combustion instabilities in the combustion chamber.

Exhaust jet characteristics for circular nozzle is shown in Figs. 12 and 13. For both air
water and heliumwater systems the exit jet velocity is same (132 m/s). For helium gas, the
Weber number is 337 and for air flow Weber number is 2442. It can be observed that for

20

heliumwater system the jet clearly shows a cycling of the bubble. The variation in minimum
and maximum jet width is also more than that for air. The bubble evolves as inverted U
shape, the jet increases in width gradually, reaches maximum jet width and gradually reduces
to minimum jet width. After that the next cycle starts abruptly due to detachment of the
bubble. For air water system ( Fig. 12b) the magnitude of jet fluctuation is lower than that of
the helium gas. The jet width profile for air is not smooth because of the presence of small
bubbles and the jet boundary is not clearly distinguishable. For lower jet momentum (We =
337) the jet is in bubbling regime, and the width of bubble is larger than that for higher jet
momentum.

Fig. 12. Jet evolution for circular nozzle.

21

The necking and breakup of jet can also be observed for heliumwater system in Fig. 13a.
For higher jet momentum (airwater system), the magnitude of fluctuation decreases and
presence of small bubble can be observed.

Fig. 13. Typical jet cycle for circular nozzle.

22

4. CONCLUSION
Characteristics of gas jet injected in water are examined with respect to exit nozzle crosssection and jet momentum for air water and heliumwater system. Sound pressure level for
elliptical nozzle is found to be lower than that of circular, square and triangular nozzles. The
gas jet follows either bubbling or jetting regime depending on the critical Weber number,
Wec. In bubbling regime (We < Wec) the frequency of fluctuations is much lower than that in
jetting regime (We > Wec), but is independent of nozzle exit geometry. The magnitude of
pressure fluctuations in bubbling regime for heliumwater system is observed to be an order
of magnitude higher than that in jetting regime for airwater system. The pressure fluctuation
in the gas chamber is found to be coupled with the two phase jet instabilities and have been
examined for their role in combustion instabilities. The Strouhal number (St) corresponding
to the airwater system is found to be about 0.002 and for heliumwater system is about
0.0005. Strouhal number is ob-served to be dependent on the gas density and is lower for
heliumwater system as compared to airwater system. The Strouhal number for the two
phase system is considerably lower as compared to the airair system case which is about
0.3. The nozzle jet characteristics examined here provide important insight on critical
parameters of paramount importance in the design and development of submerged
combustion systems. The information provides a path forward for future studies on the heat
transfer characteristics under submerged jet conditions.

23

5. REFERENCES
1. Linck M, Gupta AK, Yu KH (2009), Submerged combustion and two-phase
exhaust jet instabilities. J Propul Power ; Volume 25(2): pp.522532.
2. Vaibhav K. Arghode, Ashwani K. Gupta (2012), Jet Characteristics from a
submerged combustion system. Applied Energy; Volume 89; pp. 246-253.
3. Rue D.(2004), Submerged combustion melting. Am Ceram Soc Bull; Volume 83:
pp.1820.
4. Olabin VM, Pioro LS, Maximuk AB, Khinkis MJ, Abbasi HA.(1996),
Submerged combustion furnace for glass melts. Ceram Eng Sci Proc; Volume 17:
pp. 8492.
5. Williams R, Padley PJ, Knights AJ.(1993), Aspects of submerged combustion as
a heat exchange method. Chem Eng Res Des; Volume 71: pp.3089.
6. Iyer PA, Chu C.(1971), Submerged combustion. ;Volume 9: pp.1931.
7. Raichel DR, The science and applications of acoustics (2000), Springer.

24