Mixing of Multiple Buoyant Jets

Joseph H. W. Lee, F.ASCE1

Abstract: Multiple buoyant jets are found in the natural and artificial environment: thermal discharges from fossil and nuclear-fueled elec-
tricity generation, domestic and industrial wastewater discharges, brine disposal from desalination plants, and various heat sources in the built
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by Univ. of Alabama At Birmingham on 11/30/12. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

environment. An overview of theoretical and experimental modeling of multiple buoyant jets over the past three decades is presented. Basic
measurements of the structure of buoyant jet flows, integral jet modeling and three-dimensional numerical solutions of the Reynolds-averaged
equations are reviewed. A semianalytical model is proposed to predict the dynamic interaction of multiple buoyant jets in stagnant fluid.
The unknown jet trajectories are obtained from an iterative solution of an integral jet model and the irrotational external flow. Predictions
are in good agreement with experiments of clustered jet groups, turbulent plume pairs, alternating diffusers, and rosette buoyant jet groups;
the approach can also be extended to multiple jets in cross-flow. The mixing of a rosette buoyant jet group in a cross-flow is reviewed. The
use of jet theory in solving two unconventional urban environment problems are highlighted: (1) the unraveling of the cause of the severe
acute respiratory syndrome (SARS) outbreak in Hong Kong in 2003; and (2) design of a complex river junction for flood control under
tight space constraints. It is suggested that experiments will remain a source of new theoretical ideas and the need for a civil engineer to
solve complex problems with tractable models and analytical clarity will prevail. DOI: 10.1061/(ASCE)HY.1943-7900.0000560. © 2012
American Society of Civil Engineers.
CE Database subject headings: Buoyancy; Jets (fluid).
Author keywords: Jets; Plumes; Water quality; Turbulent flow; Mixing and transport; Environmental hydraulics; Multiport diffuser.

Introduction The experiments of Liseth (1970, 1976) showed that for

I am grateful to the American Society of Civil Engineers for the
opportunity to give this Hunter Rouse Lecture. It is indeed a great
honor to be linked, even in a small way, with this historic name.
I am very thankful for this appreciation of my work; this honor
no doubt should also be shared with my postgraduate research
students. I have never met Dr. Rouse in person; nevertheless I have
seen him in action in the classic fluid mechanics films of the Iowa
Institute of Hydraulic Research—which I use in my undergraduate
teaching. His book Elementary mechanics of fluids (Rouse 1946)
has always been on my bookshelf. And his classic papers on tur-
bulent plumes have shed an important insight—that engineering
is concerned with the art of approximation, and relatively simple
and scientifically sound models can be combined with laboratory
experiments to solve complex hydraulic engineering problems.
Today I would like to discuss our latest work on the mixing of
multiple buoyant jets. My interest in jets started in 1973, when the
late Professor Harleman of the Massachusetts Institute of Technol-
ogy (MIT) assigned me to work on a physical model study of the
condenser cooling water discharge of the Setubal power station in
Portugal. In so doing, I observed multiple jet interaction in many
experiments—like this experiment (Lee and Jirka 1980), showing
the outer jets bending inward toward the center of the jet group
(Fig. 1).
1
Professor, Dept. of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Hong Kong
Univ. of Science and Technology, Clear Water Bay, Hong Kong SAR,
China; formerly, The Univ. of Hong Kong, Pokfulam, HKSAR, China.
E-mail: jhwlee@ust.hk
Note. This manuscript was submitted on August 1, 2011; approved on
January 13, 2012; published online on January 20, 2012. Discussion period
open until May 1, 2013; separate discussions must be submitted for indi-
vidual papers. This paper is part of the Journal of Hydraulic Engineering,
Vol. 138, No. 12, December 1, 2012. © ASCE, ISSN 0733-9429/2012/12-
1008-1021/$25.00.
horizontal buoyant jets discharged alternately from both sides
of the diffuser, the plumes tend to bend backward because of
pressure interaction (Fig. 2). The plumes would merge at a height
Zm above the diffuser; the merging height is found to increase
with portpffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
spacing and the jet densimetric Froude number
(F ¼ uo = ðΔρ=ρa ÞgD; uo = jet initial velocity; D = jet diameter;
Δρ=ρa = relative density difference between jet and ambient; and
g = gravitational acceleration):
Zm
∼F ð1Þ
L
where L = spacing between alternating nozzles. The mixing above
Zm can be approximated by a line source of buoyancy (line plume);
however, there was no theoretical model for the merging, which af-
fects the mixing and dilution of the discharge, even in stagnant water.
The subject of jet merging returned around 1989 in connection
with the design of the ocean outfall for the Hong Kong Strategic
Sewage Disposal Scheme (SSDS); a flow of 20–40 m3 =s had to be
discharged from a number of (N ¼ 20) rosette risers in shallow
depth of 10–20 m (Fig. 3). A model was desired to optimize
the outfall design—a model that can (1) predict jets aligned in
any direction to a current; and (2) account for the dilution of
merging jets. Only then can mixing zones and environmental risks
be meaningfully defined. In addition, there was a need to develop
an effective visualization tool to look at the merging problem; but
the theoretical models and tools were not available then.
Over the past two decades many investigators have looked into
the multiple jet interaction problem; few attempts have been satis-
factory and some are too problem specific. In fact, ocean outfall
design has been primarily based on physical model studies. In a
1983 paper (Issacson et al. 1983) it is remarked: “The general
subject of buoyant jets and plumes has been studied for several
decades. This has yielded an understanding of the physical mixing

1008 / JOURNAL OF HYDRAULIC ENGINEERING © ASCE / DECEMBER 2012

J. Hydraul. Eng. 2012.138:1008-1021.

Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by Univ. of Alabama At Birmingham on 11/30/12. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

Fig. 1. Merging of horizontal three-dimensional jets from a submerged

multiport diffuser; top view (jet nozzle spacing 19.5 cm, water depth
6.1 cm, and floor grid size 30.5 cm) (Lee and Jirka 1980, with permis-
sion from the American Geophysical Union)

processes in simple cases. To date, however, no mathematical

model is available which can predict the dilution under all combi-
nations of diffuser geometry and ambient ocean conditions.” There
have also been very few studies of the external flow outside of jets.
Multiple jet interaction needs to be placed in the context of a
single turbulent buoyant jet in cross-flow (Fig. 4). Near the source,
or in a weak cross-flow, the jet mixes by shear entrainment; the
cross section concentration profile is symmetric and Gaussian
[Fig. 4(a)]. Dynamic jet interaction primarily occurs in this near
field. When the jet is bent over by the cross-flow, the mixing in
the bent-over phase is attributable to the large scale vortex pair flow
(Chu 1996; Chu and Lee 1996; Chu et al. 1999) and vortex entrain-
ment dominates [Fig. 4(b)].

Dynamic Jet Interaction in Near Field Fig. 3. (Color) Mixing of a rosette jet group from an ocean outfall—
with complex merging and dilution of multiple buoyant jets in coflow,
Let us first consider a round turbulent jet in stagnant fluid. Batch-
cross-flow, and counterflow (Lai et al. 2011, © ASCE): (a) top view of
elor (1967) and Squire (1951) have earlier given an exact analytical
an eight-jet-rosette-jet group; (b) rosette risers used in an ocean outfall;
solution of a round laminar jet using a constant molecular viscosity.
(c) cross-sectional view of a six-jet-rosette-jet group
The field solution of the full Navier-Stokes equations covers both

Fig. 2. Discharge from an alternating diffuser Qo, Bo , and M o = volume flux, buoyancy flux, and momentum flux of an individual jet, respectively;
L = spacing between alternating nozzles; D = nozzle diameter; and DD = diffuser pipe diameter

JOURNAL OF HYDRAULIC ENGINEERING © ASCE / DECEMBER 2012 / 1009

J. Hydraul. Eng. 2012.138:1008-1021.

 the jet and the external flow. It can be shown that the solution is also
valid for a turbulent round jet of constant eddy viscosity (which is
to first order valid). More often, boundary layer approximations
have been used for the jet flow, resulting in integral jet models
that solve for the characteristic jet properties; on the other hand,
the flow outside of the jet can be treated as irrotational by using
the inviscid approximation (Taylor 1958).
As far as the outside irrotational flow is concerned, the jet acts as
a distributed entrainment sink. Taylor’s concept is attractive as it
lends itself readily for general application (Lai and Lee 2008;
Lai 2009). Suppose we can predict the buoyant jet trajectory
and the entrainment flow of every “jet element,” and then the out-
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by Univ. of Alabama At Birmingham on 11/30/12. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

side entrainment flow induced at a given point ðxp ; yp ; zp Þ attrib-

utable to one jet can be predicted as the sum of the velocities
induced by the point sinks (with known strength) in all the jet
elements (Fig. 5); and the induced velocity attributable to all the
jets can be similarly summed. Bottom and free surface boundaries
can be accounted for using the method of images. Mathematically
X
NJ X
N
mi ðxp − xi ÞΔs
uxi jxp ;yp ;zp ¼  
j¼1 i¼1
4π ðxp − xi Þ þ ðyp − yi Þ2 þ ðzp − zi Þ2 3=2
2

ð2Þ

X
NJ X
N
mi ðyp − yi ÞΔs
uyi jxp ;yp ;zp ¼  
j¼1 i¼1
4π ðxp − xi Þ þ ðyp − yi Þ2 þ ðzp − zi Þ2 3=2
2

ð3Þ

X
NJ X
N
mi ðzp − zi ÞΔs
uzi jxp ;yp ;zp ¼  
Fig. 4. (Color) Single turbulent buoyant jet in cross-flow (Lee and j¼1 i¼1
4π ðxp − xi Þ þ ðyp − yi Þ2 þ ðzp − zi Þ2 3=2
2

Chu 2003, reprinted with permission from Springer and Kluwer.

Lee, J. H. W., and Chu, V. H. (2003). Turbulent Jets and Plumes— ð4Þ
A Lagrangian Approach, Kluwer Academic Publishers, Boston.)
where N = number of jet element; and NJ = number of jets.

NJ 3
NJ 4

NJ 2
Turbulent NJ 5
m i (x i,yi,zi) entrainment

g ρ
a
H

(xp,yp,zp) z NJ 1

D r y uo c o ρo
uo c o ρo φ
θ x θo
NJ 6

Plan view of
rosette jet group
discharges
(a) (b)
Fig. 5. Modeling of the external irrotational flow induced by a multiple buoyant jet group; each jet represented as distributed point sinks

1010 / JOURNAL OF HYDRAULIC ENGINEERING © ASCE / DECEMBER 2012

J. Hydraul. Eng. 2012.138:1008-1021.

Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by Univ. of Alabama At Birmingham on 11/30/12. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

Fig. 6. External flow at centerline plane induced by a turbulent single free jet; D ¼ 0.1 m; uo ¼ 1.75 m=s; Qo ¼ 0.0138 m3 =s; Mo ¼ 0.0242 m4 =s2 ;
Δx ¼ 12D; tabulated velocities are comparison of the computed velocity magnitude by Taylor’s solution and by the distributed point sink approach
(mean deviation ¼ 0.60%)

1.5 m

p=0

p=0
Jet nozzle
y
1.5 m

0.8 m

p=0 x p=0
0.3 m
u o=1.0 m/s u o=1.0 m/s
z
x
p=0
Side view

p=0
Top view

Fig. 7. Computational domain of the 3D RANS numerical computation for twin jet—induced flow (D ¼ 0.01 m; uo = initial jet velocity)

JOURNAL OF HYDRAULIC ENGINEERING © ASCE / DECEMBER 2012 / 1011

J. Hydraul. Eng. 2012.138:1008-1021.

 0.06 0.06
FLUENT FLUENT
Pt. Sink Pt. Sink
0.05 Reichardt 0.04

0.04 0.02
uz/uo

ux/uo
0.03 0

0.02 -0.02

0.01 -0.04
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by Univ. of Alabama At Birmingham on 11/30/12. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

0 -0.06
-60 -40 -20 0 20 40 60 -60 -40 -20 0 20 40 60
x/D x/D

Fig. 8. Comparison between model predictions and FLUENT computations for twin jet discharges at z ¼ 10D (D ¼ 0.01 m, uo ¼ 1 m=s, nozzle
spacing s ¼ 30D)

If we apply this concept for a simple jet (Lai 2009), the induced boundary condition is used in all six faces of the domain (Fig. 7). It
entrainment velocity field in the plane of symmetry agrees very is found that the external flow agrees with the CFD solution
well with Taylor’s analytical solution that shows a set of confocal for both single and wide-separated twin jets. Fig. 8 shows the com-
parabolas with the curvature decreasing downstream, even at a parison of predicted velocities with the FLUENT solution in the
coarse discretization (Δx ¼ 0.02H ¼ 12D) of the jet element plane of symmetry (vertical and lateral velocity) for two widely
(Fig. 6). The predicted velocity magnitude by the two approaches separated jets; the velocity inside the jet after merging is treated
are also in excellent agreement. by superposition of momentum (u2z ) in accordance with the induc-
The predicted flow can also be compared with a 3D solution tive Reichardt hypothesis (Knystautas 1964; Pani and Dugad
of the Reynolds-averaged Navier-Stokes (RANS) equations in 2002). The FLUENT solution serves as a reference, as the numeri-
Cartesian coordinates using FLUENT (D ¼ 0.01 m, and uo ¼ cal solution has its own limitations: the jet spreading rate is greater
1 m=s) using a standard k − ϵ model (Launder and Spalding than the observed value, with db=ds of 0.137 versus 0.114 (where
1974) for turbulent closure. The jet nozzle area is resolved by b is the Gaussian jet-width); the external flow depends somewhat
218 cells; a total of 472,240 cells is used (Lai 2009). Zero-pressure on the boundary conditions imposed; and intrinsic difficulties occur
in the modeling of the scalar field (a constant turbulent Schmidt
number).
Given that the outside entrainment flow of multiple jets in stag-
Initialization nant fluid can be simulated, the dynamic jet interaction can then be
(free jet computation) solved by choosing a suitable control volume and performing an
exact momentum balance (Lai 2009; Lai and Lee 2012). The jet
properties can then be obtained by an iterative solution. Starting
by assuming pressure p ¼ 0, the jet trajectory is computed by
Solve
solving the integral governing equations for each individual jet in-
jet integral model dependent of other jets. The entrainment flow of each individual
for jet trajectory and buoyant jet is computed using a well-accepted shear entrainment
mixing characteristics hypothesis (e.g., Fischer et al. 1979; Lee and Chu 2003). On
the basis of this, the outside entrainment flow is computed, which
gives the pressure field via the Bernoulli equation. Then the up-
dated pressure field is incorporated in the jet model to compute
Yes
the relevant pressure force on the control volume; the jet model
Solution Final jet mixing
converges? characteristics is solved to give a revised jet trajectory, and so on until convergence
(Fig. 9).
No We test this simple model on several complex problems
described next.
External flow field
and
pressure field Coalescing Plumes
computation
First, we test the model on some recent experiments on the merging
of two axisymmetric plumes in connection with ventilation prob-
lems in the built environment. Kaye and Linden (2004) performed
experiments with two plumes of equal and nonequal buoyancy
Fig. 9. Iterative scheme used in the dynamic jet interaction model (Lai flux; they studied the drawing together of two plumes caused by
2009, with permission from the University of Hong Kong) the respective entrainment fields. It is seen from the predicted

1012 / JOURNAL OF HYDRAULIC ENGINEERING © ASCE / DECEMBER 2012

J. Hydraul. Eng. 2012.138:1008-1021.

 concentration fields that because of the interaction of the entrain-
ment fields the plumes are deflected toward one another; it is shown
that the predicted merging heights agree well with data. When one
plume has more buoyancy flux than the other, the weaker plume is
drawn much more to the stronger plume. This is also in accord with
observations (Fig. 10).
Rosette Buoyant Jet Group
For a rosette jet group discharging in stagnant ambient conditions,
previous studies have observed that the jets tend to deflect toward
one another, merging earlier than if they were independent, and
form a single rising column. In this paper, the control volume is
chosen with two planes of symmetry and a circular arc far from

7
70
Observed
Predicted (0.8b)
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by Univ. of Alabama At Birmingham on 11/30/12. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

60 6 Predicted (1.0b)
Kaye and Linden (2004) =0.09

Merging height/plume initial spacing

50 5

40 4
z/D

30
3

20
2

10
1

0
−20 −10 0 10 20
0
x/D 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1
Buoyancy x ratio
(a) (b)

Fig. 10. Predicted and observed concentration field and merging height of an unequal plume pair (Lai and Lee 2012, with permission from
Cambridge University Press): (a) plume pair with buoyancy flux ratio 0.1; (b) merging height as a function of the buoyancy flux ratio

80 80
Model Model
Expt (NJ=2) Expt (NJ=6)
Expt (SJ) Expt (SJ)
70 70
k=1

60 60 k=2 SJ calculation
SJ calculation (k=0)

50 (k=0)
50
z/D

z/D

40 40

Final iteration
30 (k=1) 30
Final iteration
(k=3)
20 20

10 10

0 0
0 10 20 30 40 0 10 20 30 40
x/D x/D
(a) (b)

Fig. 11. Predicted and observed jet trajectory of a rosette buoyant jet group (D ¼ 0.0044 m; uo ¼ 0.365 m=s; F ¼ 4.9); iterative calculations start
from a single jet (SJ)

JOURNAL OF HYDRAULIC ENGINEERING © ASCE / DECEMBER 2012 / 1013

J. Hydraul. Eng. 2012.138:1008-1021.

 the jet. The jet trajectory is computed (typically three to four iter-
ations are required) until the outer edges of adjacent jets (defined by
the Gaussian velocity half-width) intersect. Both the free surface
and bottom have been accounted for using the method of images.
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by Univ. of Alabama At Birmingham on 11/30/12. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.
The comparison of predicted versus observed jet trajectory shows
that for the two-jet case, the jet interaction appears rather weak
[Fig. 11(a)]; with six jets, the interaction is shown to be stronger.
In general, the predicted jet trajectory is in good agreement with

Fig. 12. Rosette jet group-induced velocities at centerline plane (NJ ¼ 6; D ¼ 0.0044 m; uo ¼ 0.365 m=s; F ¼ 4.9)

Fig. 13. Rosette jet group–induced velocity and pressure field at a horizontal cross section (NJ ¼ 6; D ¼ 0.0044 m; uo ¼ 0.365 m=s; F ¼ 4.9)

1014 / JOURNAL OF HYDRAULIC ENGINEERING © ASCE / DECEMBER 2012

J. Hydraul. Eng. 2012.138:1008-1021.

 data [Fig. 11(b)]. Fig. 12 shows the induced velocities at the center-
line plane (NJ ¼ 6); it is shown that if the interaction is not taken
into account, the merging would occur much later. The pressure
and entrainment fields at z ¼ 20D show that jets would be well-
separated if jet interaction is not taken into account (Fig. 13).
Similar agreement has been obtained with the data of other inves-
tigators (e.g., Roberts and Snyder 1993b; Kwon 2005).
We have tried this approach successfully for clustered jet groups
(Baines and Keffer 1974), alternating diffusers, and have also
extended the method to tandem jets in cross-flow (Yu et al.
2006); in general, the interaction occurs in the near field.
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by Univ. of Alabama At Birmingham on 11/30/12. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.
data (Fig. 14), considering the cavity flow in the middle is not
exactly irrotational (Kuang et al. 2006; Lai and Lee 2010a).
Tandem Jets
We have also extended this approach to model multiple tandem jets
in a cross-flow. The action of the jet on the external flow is modeled
by a distribution of point sinks and doublets; the flow is treated
like the flow past a cylinder with uniform suction. The most upwind
jet is deflected most, and all the sheltered downwind jets are
deflected less, and all the same way (Fig. 15). The predicted jet
trajectories are all in good agreement with data (Lai 2009; Lai

and Lee 2010b).

Alternating Diffuser
Fig. 14 shows the observed and computed jet trajectories of jets
discharging in opposite directions from an alternating diffuser as
defined in Fig. 2. Initially, the jets on each side act independently
as if there is no dynamic interaction; a buoyant surface layer is
formed, and the fluid in the middle descends quite a bit, nearly
reaching the diffuser. The jets from the two sides then gradually
bend toward one another; there is reentrainment of the descended
fluid and eventually the final quasi-steady pattern of jet merging is
formed. The predicted trajectory is in reasonable agreement with
Merging and Composite Dilution of Rosette Jet
Groups in Cross-Flow
For multiple rosette buoyant jet groups, both theory and experi-
ments show that even in a weak cross-flow the starved plume
condition does not exist except in very confined surroundings.
In a cross-flow, in the bent-over phase, u ¼ U a ; the plumes will
merge, and the overlapping of plumes will lead to a reduction
of cross section area and hence entrainment (Lai et al. 2011).

Fig. 14. (Color) Predicted and observed jet trajectory from an alternating diffuser (D ¼ 0.325 cm; L ¼ 2 cm; F ≈ 10) (Lai 2009, with permission
from the University of Hong Kong)

JOURNAL OF HYDRAULIC ENGINEERING © ASCE / DECEMBER 2012 / 1015

J. Hydraul. Eng. 2012.138:1008-1021.


Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by Univ. of Alabama At Birmingham on 11/30/12. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.
Fig. 15. Multiple tandem jet discharges (D ¼ 1 cm); (a) observed jet
trajectory (NJ ¼ 4, s ¼ 5D, uo =Ua ¼ 5.8) (Yu et al. 2006, © ASCE);
(b) predicted jet trajectory (NJ ¼ 3, s ¼ 5D, uo =Ua ¼ 15.0)
To compute the kinematic interaction, we use a validated simple
Lagrangian model (JETLAG) that follows the jet as a series of
Lagrangian elements (Lee and Cheung 1990; Cheung 1991).
Fig. 16. Lagrangian model for horizontal buoyant jet in cross-flow (Lee and Chu 2003, reprinted with permission from Springer and Kluwer. Lee,
J. H. W., and Chu, V. H. (2003). Turbulent Jets and Plumes—A Lagrangian Approach, Kluwer Academic Publishers, Boston.)
1016 / JOURNAL OF HYDRAULIC ENGINEERING © ASCE / DECEMBER 2012
J. Hydraul. Eng. 2012.138:1008-1021.
At each step the turbulent entrainment is computed, and then
the conservation equations can be written. The key to this model
is the general evaluation of jet entrainment and the ability to cal-
culate buoyant jets with 3D trajectories. In the near field, the shear
entrainment dominates. In the bent-over phase, the vortex mixing
is computed by assuming that all of the flow facing the element is
entrained (Fig. 16). This projected area entrainment hypothesis is
actually borne out by 2D/3D computations of advected line ther-
mals and puffs (Lee et al. 1996; Lee and Chen 2002). For example,
it is found that the flow outside of the line puff is like a doublet, and
particle tracks confirm that practically all of the ambient fluid
normal to the puff (presented to the puff) ends up being entrained
into the vortex pair (jet element) (Fig. 17).
The initial (near field) dilution and jet trajectory predicted by the
general JETLAG model has been extensively validated against
laboratory data. Predicted dilutions by JETLAG have been
validated by field data of many operating outfalls (Fig. 18) (Lee
and Chu 2003).
It is useful to define a composite dilution that measures the mix-
ing of a rosette buoyant jet group from an ocean outfall. Consider a
jet group clustered around the circumference of an outfall riser, dis-
charing into a horizontal ambient current U a in the x-direction. The
individual jets discharge at different angles relative to the ambient
current; e.g., as jets in coflow, cross-flow, and counterflow. In the
bent-over phase of a jet in cross-flow, experiments have shown that
the jet horizontal excess-momentum is dissipated within a short
distance, and the x-velocity of the jet group will be approximately
the same as the cross-flow velocity U a. Consider two plumes with
cross section area A1 and A2 ; if they overlap, the same mass flux
will be advected through a reduced area: Am ¼ A1 þ A2 − Ao
(Fig. 19), and hence the concentration is higher than without merg-
ing. The average concentration would then be given by the total
mass flux divided by the merged area of the bent-over jets (Lai
et al. 2011).
Jet interaction can be studied in the laboratory, by looking
at single jets discharging separately one at a time and then the
multiple jets discharging together. It turns out that for typical jet
to riser diameter ratios of 0.1 or less, the fanned out jet arrangement
does not result in significant dynamic interaction; the observed
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by Univ. of Alabama At Birmingham on 11/30/12. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.
Fig. 17. Line momentum puff calculation: (a) predicted pathlines of particles being entrained into half of the puff; (b) equivalent doublet-induced
flow representing the puff (Lee et al. 1996, © ASCE)
individual jet trajectories are almost the same as the multiple jet
group. Fig. 20 shows the measured individual jet trajectories for
a two-jet group (60 and 120°) for three jet to ambient current ratios
(K ¼ uo =U a ), and for a three-jet group (30, 90, and 150°). The
circles are the measured trajectory for the single jet discharging
separately, and the crosses are the observed corresponding jet
trajectory in the multiple jet group. It is shown that they are very
similar and almost indistinguishable.
Using VISJET (Lee et al. 2000), the trajectories and the
composite dilution of the multiple jet group can hence be deter-
mined; this is confirmed by extensive LIF experiments that show
dilution will be significantly overestimated if merging is not taken
into account (Lai et al. 2011).
The general model has also been tested against other experi-
ments (Isaacson et al. 1983; Roberts et al. 1989a, b, c; Roberts
and Snyder 1993a): e.g., the eight-jet rosette jet group in a nonli-
nearly stratified flow; here we see the significant merging and
the complex kinematic merging of the buoyant jets of the jet group
(movie link: http://www.waterman.hku.hk/education/slide.aspx?
code=u6iq8).
The model predictions of dilution are also in good agreement
with independent data; for uniform ambient, linearly stratified,
and nonlinearly stratified ambient cross-flow, over a wide range
of F and K. Viewed against the complexity of the phenomenon,
the agreement is most satisfactory (Lai et al. 2011).
We can also use the model to look at outfall design, in this
case if we keep the jet velocity the same and we look at the changes
in near field mixing as we increase the number of jets on a riser. The
dilution increases initially as the number of jets per riser increases
up to NJ ¼ 6; beyond this point, the extensive plume merging with
a larger number of jets actually results in decrease of plume dilution
(Lai et al. 2011). The previous model studies can to a large extent
be explained by kinematic interaction. Similarly, the model can
also be used to design the optimal number of ocean outfall risers
(for given discharge and momentum flux/length and NJ).
JOURNAL OF HYDRAULIC ENGINEERING © ASCE / DECEMBER 2012 / 1017
J. Hydraul. Eng. 2012.138:1008-1021.
The Lagrangian formulation is essentially a convenient explicit
solution scheme and offers several advantages: no need for
Boussinesq approximation of small density differences and easy
coupling with 3D far field models. By looking at the action of
the jets on the outside flow as distributed sinks, we have also
developed a dynamic coupling of the near field and intermediate
field—by embedding the jet action—as entrainment sinks and
sources—seamlessly into a 3D circulation model (Choi and Lee
2007). This results in satisfactory prediction of the buoyant spread
and mixing in the intermediate field.
This completes my discussion on multiple buoyant jets. The
theoretical modeling and basic experiments, along with the VISJET
code and 3D circulation code can give reasonable predictions
all the way from the near to intermediate field. They help with pre-
liminary design and answer many planning questions effectively.
Jets for Sustainable Urban Environment
Simple ideas of buoyant jets can be amazingly useful, and I would
like to share brief highlights of two unconventional applications
that I find personally very satisfying.
Hong Kong SARS Epidemic
Example 1: You have probably heard about the severe acute
respiratory syndrome (SARS) outbreak in 2003. Hong Kong
was the hardest hit area with 1,755 cases and 299 deaths. And
it started with an outbreak in Amoy Gardens, a private residential
estate that provides living space to 20,000 people. The estate con-
tains 19 tower blocks; each block is a 33-story-high building with
eight living areas (flats) on each floor (Fig. 21). It was a very large
outbreak, with 99 infected in Block E, and 70% of the cases are in
flats 7 and 8. Why? During a period of severe panic in the whole
society, nobody knew what could have caused this epidemic, and
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by Univ. of Alabama At Birmingham on 11/30/12. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.
Fig. 18. JETLAG prediction of initial mixing of buoyant jet discharge
in a tidal current (Lee and Chu 2003, reprinted with permission from
Springer and Kluwer. Lee, J. H. W., and Chu, V. H. (2003). Turbulent
Jets and Plumes—A Lagrangian Approach, Kluwer Academic Publish-
ers, Boston.)
hence there was no clear solution to combat the spread of the deadly
disease.
The whole society searched for an answer; World Health
Organization (WHO) sent a special task force, and different sectors
looked at different aspects of the problem. It turned out that the
spread had something to do with plumes. It was generally believed
that the outbreak started with a SARS patient visiting a relative on
14 March and 19 March in flat 7 on a middle level floor of Block E,
and used the toilet because of diarrhea. The index patient was be-
lieved to have first started a small wave of infections in units 7 and 8
(Block E). It was suggested that in the case of a running exhaust
fan and a closed door, virus-laden aerosol droplets would have
been drawn from the soil stack into the bathroom through the
floor drain and contaminated the bathroom. The virus-laden drop-
lets can be discharged into the narrow reentrant space (1.5–2.3 m
wide) in the form of a warm moist air plume (Fig. 21). The reality is
that the dilution one gets in such a narrow space is extremely
limited, of the order of 10 or less. The airborne infection can
then rise to the rooftop and spread to other blocks by wind (Yu
et al. 2004). On the basis of collective evidence, this airborne
spread of the virus was eventually accepted by the WHO as a
hypothesis of the massive epidemic and stimulated much debate
on implementing emergency measures and improving the building
environment.
1018 / JOURNAL OF HYDRAULIC ENGINEERING © ASCE / DECEMBER 2012
J. Hydraul. Eng. 2012.138:1008-1021.
Fig. 19. (Color) Merging of jets downstream of a rosette jet group from
an ocean outfall (Lai et al. 2011, © ASCE): (a) merging of a rosette jet
group in a cross-flow; (b) cross section of two overlapping plumes in
bent-over phase
River Junction Design for Flood Diversion
Example 2: The Yuen Long Bypass Floodway was constructed to
divert flood flow into a floodway as shown in Fig. 22. This protects
a town of 300,000 from flooding. The success of the scheme is
controlled by what happens at a critical river junction. The subcriti-
cal flow (Q ¼ 92 m3 =s) in the floodway is joined by a large super-
critical flow (Q ¼ 188 m3 =ms) from the San Hui River; in an urban
setting land is extremely limited, and the 60° river junction results
in significant backwater, rendering the entire floodway useless.
The solution is to use the jet principle to design a junction so
that flow is critical locally, thus creating the minimum depth. As
the pressure across a jet is continuous (velocity can be discontinu-
ous) (Fig. 22), this can bring down the water level of the entire
upstream flow by as much as 0.6 m and enhance the flood protec-
tion capacity of the floodway from a 1∶10-year to a 1∶100-year
flood. The concept has also been confirmed using a high-resolution
shock-capturing shallow water equation solver recently (Lee et al.
1999; Arega et al. 2008); the scheme was commissioned in 2004
and has performed successfully.
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by Univ. of Alabama At Birmingham on 11/30/12. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

Fig. 20. Measured centerline trajectories of various discharge configurations (top view); multiple jets are indicated by asterisks and single jets by
circles joined by solid line (Lai et al. 2011, © ASCE)

Fig. 21. (Color) Spread of virus-laden moist buoyant plume in the reentrant space of a Hong Kong high-rise building during the SARS epidemic

JOURNAL OF HYDRAULIC ENGINEERING © ASCE / DECEMBER 2012 / 1019

J. Hydraul. Eng. 2012.138:1008-1021.

Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by Univ. of Alabama At Birmingham on 11/30/12. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

Fig. 22. Hydraulic jet control for river junction design of Yuen Long Bypass Floodway, Hong Kong (Lee, J. H. W., Tang, H. W., Chan, W. C.,
and Wilson, G. (1999). “River junction design for urban flood control: A Case Study.” Proc. 2nd Int. Symp. on Environmental Hydraulics, J. H. W.
Lee, A. W. Jayawardena, and Z. Y. Wang, eds., Balkema, Rotterdam, Netherlands, 877–882, with permission from Taylor and Francis. Arega et al.
2008, © ASCE); observed flow backup in Yuen Long Bypass Floodway model (viewed from San Hui-Floodway junction toward upstream):
(a) without jet control; (b) with jet control; (c) observed water level along Yuen Long Bypass Floodway; backwater upstream of San Hui river
junction (case 2—without San Hui control) has dramatic drop using jet control (case 5)

Conclusion cross-flow, or the mixing of dense brine discharges from desalina-

tion plants. In this age of ever-increasing computing power,
In conclusion, over the past 30 years, we have seen much progress efficient and powerful numerical methods will continue to be
in our ability to predict the mixing of multiple buoyant jets. Many developed. However, experiments will always remain a source
difficult problems remain—e.g., the transition from weak to strong of new theoretical ideas, and the need for a civil engineer to solve

1020 / JOURNAL OF HYDRAULIC ENGINEERING © ASCE / DECEMBER 2012

J. Hydraul. Eng. 2012.138:1008-1021.

 complex problems with tractable models and analytical clarity will
most likely prevail.
References
Arega, F., Lee, J. H. W., and Tang, H. W. (2008). “Hydraulic jet control
for river junction design of Yuen Long Bypass Floodway, Hong Kong.”
J. Hydraul. Eng., 134(1), 23–33.
Baines, W. D., and Keffer, K. F. (1974). “Entrainment by a multiple source
turbulent jet.” Adv. Geophys., 18(B), 289–298.
Batchelor, G. K. (1967). An introduction to fluid dynamics, Cambridge
Univ. Press, London.
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by Univ. of Alabama At Birmingham on 11/30/12. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.
Cheung, V. (1991). “Mixing of a round buoyant jet in a current.” Ph.D.
thesis, The Univ. of Hong Kong, Hong Kong.
Choi, K. W., and Lee, J. H. W. (2007). “Distributed entrainment sink
approach for modeling mixing and transport in the intermediate field.”
J. Hydraul. Eng., 133(7), 804–815.
Chu, P. C. K. (1996). “Mixing of turbulent advected line puffs.” Ph.D.
thesis, The Univ. of Hong Kong, Hong Kong.
Chu, P. C. K., Lee, J. H. W., and Chu, V. H. (1999). “Spreading of turbulent
round jet in coflow.” J. Hydraul. Eng., 125(2), 193–204.
Chu, V. H., and Lee, J. H. W. (1996). “A general integral formulation
of turbulent buoyant jets in crossflow.” J. Hydraul. Eng., 122(1),
27–34.
Fischer, H. B., List, E. J., Koh, R. C. Y., Imberger, J., and Brooks, N. H.
(1979). Mixing in inland and coastal waters, Academic Press,
New York.
Isaacson, M. S., Koh, R. C. Y., and Brooks, N. H. (1983). “Plume dilution
for diffusers with multiport risers.” J. Hydraul. Eng., 109(2),
199–220.
Kaye, N. B., and Linden, P. F. (2004). “Coalescing axisymmetric turbulent
plumes.” J. Fluid Mech., 502, 41–63.
Knystautas, R. (1964). “The turbulent jet from a series of holes in line.”
Aeronautical Quarterly, 15(1), 1–28.
Kuang, C. P., Lee, J. H. W., Liu, S. G., and Gu, J. (2006). “Numerical study
on plume interaction above an alternating diffuser in stagnant water.”
China Ocean Eng., 20(2), 289–302.
Kwon, S. J. (2005). “Behavior of buoyant discharges from a Rosette-type
diffuser.” Ph.D. thesis, Seoul National Univ., Korea.
Lai, A. C. H. (2009). “Mixing of a rosette buoyant jet group.” Ph.D. thesis,
The Univ. of Hong Kong, Hong Kong.
Lai, A. C. H., and Lee, J. H. W. (2008). “Dynamic interaction in a rosette
buoyant jet group.” Proc. 2nd Int. Symp. on Shallow Water Flows
(CD-ROM), Dept. of Civil Engineering, Hong Kong Univ. of Science
and Technology, Hong Kong.
Lai, A. C. H., and Lee, J. H. W. (2010a). “Buoyant jet interaction above an
alternating diffuser.” 17th Congress of APD-IAHR, International Asso-
ciation of Hydraulic Research, Asian and Pacific Regional Division
(APD-IAHR), Beijing.
Lai, A. C. H., and Lee, J. H. W. (2010b). “Multiple tandem jet interaction in
a crossflow.” J. Hydrodyn. Ser. B, 22(5), 639–643.
Lai, A. C. H., and Lee, J. H. W. (2012). “Dynamic interaction of multiple
buoyant jets.” J. Fluid Mech., 708, 539–575.
Lai, A. C. H., Yu, D., and Lee, J. H. W. (2011). “Mixing of a rosette jet
group in a crossflow.” J. Hydraul. Eng., 137(8), 787–803.
JOURNAL OF HYDRAULIC ENGINEERING © ASCE / DECEMBER 2012 / 1021
J. Hydraul. Eng. 2012.138:1008-1021.
Launder, B. E., and Spalding, D. B. (1974). “The numerical computation of
turbulent flows.” Comput. Methods Appl. Mech. Eng., 3(2), 269–289.
Lee, J. H. W., and Chen, G. Q. (2002). “Numerical experiment on two-
dimensional line thermal.” China Ocean Eng., 16(4), 453–467.
Lee, J. H. W., and Cheung, V. (1990). “Generalized Lagrangian model for
buoyant jets in current.” J. Environ. Eng., 116(6), 1085–1105.
Lee, J. H. W., Cheung, V., Wang, W. P., and Cheung, S. K. B. (2000).
“Lagrangian modeling and visualization of rosette outfall plumes.”
Proc. of the Hydroinformatics 2000 (CD-ROM), American Geophysi-
cal Union (AGU), Washington, DC.
Lee, J. H. W., and Chu, V. H. (2003). Turbulent jets and plumes—
A Lagrangian approach, Kluwer Academic Publishers, Boston.
Lee, J. H. W., and Jirka, G. H. (1980). “Multiport diffuser as line source
of momentum in shallow water.” Water Resour. Res., 16(4), 695–708.
Lee, J. H. W., Rodi, W., and Wong, C. F. (1996). “Turbulent line momen-
tum puffs.” J. Eng. Mech., 122(1), 19–29.
Lee, J. H. W., Tang, H. W., Chan, W. C., and Wilson, G. (1999).“River
junction design for urban flood control: A case study.” Environmental
Hydraulics: Proc., 2nd Int. Symp. on Environmental Hydraulics,
J. H. W. Lee, A. W. Jayawardena, and Z. Y. Wang, eds., Balkema,
Rotterdam, The Netherlands, 877–882.
Liseth, P. (1970). “Mixing of merging buoyant jets from a manifold in
stagnant receiving water of uniform density.” Ph D. thesis, Univ. of
California, Berkeley, CA.
Liseth, P. (1976). “Wastewater disposal by submerged manifolds.” J. Hydr.
Div., 102(1), 1–14.
Pani, B. S., and Dugad, S. B. (2002). “Turbulent jets: Application of point
source concept.” Research persepctives in hydraulics and water resour-
ces engineering, World Scientific, Hackensack, NJ, 1–37.
Roberts, P. J. W., and Snyder, W. H. (1993a). “Hydraulic model study
for Boston outfall. I. Riser configuration.” J. Hydraul. Eng., 119(9),
970–987.
Roberts, P. J. W., and Snyder, W. H. (1993b). “Hydraulic model study
for Boston outfall. II. Environmental performance.” J. Hydraul.
Eng., 119(9), 988–1002.
Roberts, P. J. W., Snyder, W. H., and Baumgartner, D. J. (1989a). “Ocean
outfalls. I: Submerged wastefield formation.” J. Hydraul. Eng., 115(1),
1–25.
Roberts, P. J. W., Snyder, W. H., and Baumgartner, D. J. (1989b). “Ocean
outfalls. II: Spatial evolution of submerged wastefield.” J. Hydraul.
Eng., 115(1), 26–48.
Roberts, P. J. W., Snyder, W. H., and Baumgartner, D. J. (1989c). “Ocean
outfalls. III: Effect of diffuser design on submerged wastefield.”
J. Hydraul. Eng., 115(1), 49–70.
Rouse, H. (1946). Elementary mechanics of fluids, J. Wiley & Sons,
Chapman & Hall, New York, London.
Squire, H. B. (1951). “The round laminar jet.” Q. J. Mech. Appl. Math.,
4(3), 321–329.
Taylor, G. I. (1958). “Flow induced by jets.” J. Aero/Space Sci., 25,
464–465.
Yu, D., Ali, M. S., and Lee, J. W. W. (2006). “Multiple tandem jets in cross-
flow.” J. Hydraul. Eng., 132(9), 971–982.
Yu, I. T. S, (2004). “Evidence of airborne transmission of the severe acute
respiratory syndrome virus.” N. Engl. J. Med., 350(17), 1731–1739.