Research Papers: Fundamental Issues and Canonical Flows

Pressure Distribution in Confined Jet Flow

[+] Author and Article Information
D. Liberzon

Faculty of Civil and Environmental Engineering,
Technion—Israel Institute of Technology,
Haifa 32000, Israel

H. J. S. Fernando

Civil and Environmental Engineering
and Earth Sciences,
University of Notre Dame,
Notre Dame, IN 46556

Contributed by the Fluids Engineering Division of ASME for publication in the JOURNAL OF FLUIDS ENGINEERING. Manuscript received August 10, 2012; final manuscript received December 31, 2013; published online January 24, 2014. Assoc. Editor: Michael G. Olsen.

J. Fluids Eng 136(3), 031202 (Jan 24, 2014) (4 pages) Paper No: FE-12-1382; doi: 10.1115/1.4026438 History: Received August 10, 2012; Revised December 31, 2013

A momentum jet injected into a confined container breaks up to “diffusive turbulence” after traveling a critical distance. It has been argued that an adverse pressure gradient developing within the container, acting against the jet momentum flux, is responsible for this break up (Risso and Fabre, 1997,“Diffusive Turbulence in a Confined Jet Experiment,” J. Fluid Mech., 337, pp. 233–261; Voropayev et al., 2011, “Evolution of a Confined Turbulent Jet in a Long Cylindrical Cavity: Homogeneous Fluids,” Phys. Fluids, 23, 115106). Experimental evidence for this adverse pressure gradient is presented in this paper, supplemented by a control-volume analysis to explain the results. The rise of pressure from the jet-injection level to a location beyond the jet break up xb is shown to be proportional to the jet momentum flux. The overall (integrated) sidewall friction on a control volume is negligible, compared to the increase of pressure, if the flow control volume extends beyond xb. For smaller lengths of the control volume, the side wall drag is not negligible compared to the pressure rise. The Reynolds number similarity was evident for jet Reynolds numbers above 6000. This work was motivated by its applications to degassing of crude oil stored in the U.S. Strategic Petroleum Reserves, which are slender salt caverns. To improve its quality, periodically oil is cycled through a degassing plant and injected back to the cavern as a jet, and the degassing time is critically dependent on jet dynamics.

Copyright © 2014 by ASME
Your Session has timed out. Please sign back in to continue.


Voropayev, S. I., Sanchez, X., Nath, C., Webb, S., and Fernando, H. J. S., 2011, “Evolution of a Confined Turbulent Jet in a Long Cylindrical Cavity: Homogeneous Fluids,” Phys. Fluids, 23, 115106. [CrossRef]
Ehgartner, B., Webb, S., and Lord, D., 2005, “Future Degas Behaviour at Big Hill,” Sandia National Laboratories Technical Memo, Albuquerque, NM.
Risso, F., and Fabre, J., 1997, “Diffusive Turbulence in a Confined Jet Experiment,” J. Fluid Mech., 337, pp 233–261. [CrossRef]
Risso, F., 1999, “Experimental Investigation of the Motion of a Bubble in a Gradient of Turbulence,” Phys. Fluids, 11, pp 3567–3569. [CrossRef]
Villermaux, E., and Hopfinger, E. J., 1994, “Self-Sustained Oscillations of a Confined Jet: A Case Study for the Non-Linear Delayed Saturation Model,” Phys. D, 72, pp. 230–243. [CrossRef]
Khoo, B. C., Chew, T. C., Heng, P. S., and Kong, H. K., 1992, “Turbulence Characterization of a Confined Jet Using PIV,” Exp. Fluids, 13, pp 350–356. [CrossRef]
Liu, H., Winoto, S. H., and Shah, D. A., 1997, “Velocity Measurements Within Confined Turbulent Jets: Application to Cardiovalvular Regurgitation,” Ann. Biomed. Eng., 25, pp. 939–948. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
Mataouia, A., and Schiestelb, R., 2009, “Unsteady Phenomena of an Oscillating Turbulent Jet Flow Inside a Cavity: Effect of Aspect Ratio,” J. Fluids Struct., 25, pp. 60–79. [CrossRef]
Billant, P., Chomaz, J. M., and Huerre, P., 1998, “Experimental Study of Vortex Breakdown in Swirling Jets,” J. Fluid. Mech., 376, pp. 183–219. [CrossRef]
Mourtazin, D., and Cohen, J., 2007, “The Effect of Buoyancy on Vortex Breakdown in a Swirling Jet,” J. Fluid. Mech., 571, pp. 177–189. [CrossRef]


Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 3

Pressure distribution as function of distance from the jet inlet nozzle

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 2

Experimental setup

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 1

A schematic of the experimental configuration. The dashed line indicates the boundaries of the control volume (CV). The origin of the coordinate system is at the center of the top boundary.

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 4

Normalized pressure distribution as a function of the distance from the jet inlet. Dashed line is the theoretical value for CD = 0, 1.6 × 10−3, from Eq. (7).

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 5

Drag coefficient distribution as a function of the distance from the jet inlet for xc/D < 3.7



Some tools below are only available to our subscribers or users with an online account.

Related Content

Customize your page view by dragging and repositioning the boxes below.

Related Journal Articles
Related eBook Content
Topic Collections

Sorry! You do not have access to this content. For assistance or to subscribe, please contact us:

  • TELEPHONE: 1-800-843-2763 (Toll-free in the USA)
  • EMAIL: asmedigitalcollection@asme.org
Sign In