Flame downwash behavior in horizontal jet fires with

crossflow: Experiment and physical model

Jiang Lva, Longhua Hua,*, Xin Lia, Hongyu Lua, Yuxuan Maa,
Xiepeng Suna, Suk Ho Chungb
a
State Key Laboratory of Fire Science, University of Science and Technology of China, Hefei, Anhui, 230026, China
b
Clean Combustion Research Center, King Abdullah University of Science and Technology, Thuwal, Saudi Arabia
______________________________________________________________
Abstract

A flame downwash phenomenon was investigated for horizontal jet fire with crossflow perpendicular to the fuel
discharge direction. Such a jet fire configuration involves complex flow and air-fuel mixing interactions due to
relatively different directions of the fuel jet, buoyant flow, and cross-flow, for which a systematic data does not
exist yet. Experiments were conducted with various nozzle diameters (8 ~ 20 mm) with propane fuel and varying
fuel flow rate. The crossflow air speed, generated by a wind tunnel, varied from 1.76 to 4.56 m/s. Results showed
that the length of flame downwash first increased and then decreased with the increase in the fuel supply flow rate.
The flame downwash length became smaller with the increase in the crossflow air speed at relatively small fuel
flow rate and became larger with the increase in the crossflow air speed at relatively large fuel flow rate. A
dimensional analysis was performed on flame downwash behavior of the horizontal jet fires based on the analysis
of controlling mechanisms, from which three characteristic parameters were identified. First, the dimensionless
mass flow rate (𝑆𝑚̇f⁄𝜌∞ )/ [𝑈c × (𝑈c2 ⁄𝐺 )2 ] represents the fuel flow rate normalized by the characteristic air
entrainment, which influences the total flame length. Second, the momentum flux ratio of jet to crossflow R
represents the relative drag force of negative pressure zone in the leeward side, which determines the amount of
fuel or total flame length trapped along the leeward side to produce the downwash flame. Third, the competition
of the jet momentum to flame buoyancy flux (𝑚̇f 𝑈j /𝜌∞ )3⁄4 ⁄(𝑚̇f 𝐺/𝜌∞ )1⁄2 represents the characteristic length in
the jet discharged direction where the flame motion turns from horizontal (jet momentum controlled) to vertical
(buoyancy controlled) direction. The measured length of flame downwash considering the nozzle diameter, fuel
flow rate, and crossflow air speed was satisfactorily correlated by the proposed mechanisms/parameters.

Keywords: Horizontal jet fire; Crossflow; Flame downwash length; Momentum flux ratio of jet-to-crossflow; Dimensionless fuel
flow rate
______________________________________________________________

*Corresponding author: hlh@ustc.edu.cn

1
1. Introduction
Jet fire is an important subject in combustion
science and fire research related to risk assessment of
thermal hazard. Numerous studies have been
conducted to investigate flame geometry for vertical
[1-3] and inclined [4-9] jets in still air.
In practical environments, there frequently exists
wind or crossflow [10]. When the jet momentum is
relatively small under a crossflow, a fundamental
phenomenon called downwash flame [11-15] was
observed with the flame attached on the nozzle
leeward side in a vertically upward jet fire.
There are still very limited studies [12, 13, 15] in
quantifying the flame downwash length. Majeski et al.
[12] measured the flame downwash lengths by
employing a vertical cylindrical nozzle with the
diameter D = 22.1 mm at a constant velocity of fuel
jet Uj under the crossflow speed Uc varying from 2.0
to 10.0 m/s, and proposed a non-dimensional
correlation:
𝐿d
= 13.6ln (
1
) − 1.29
𝐷 𝑅0.5
where R is the momentum flux ratio of jet to crossflow
𝜌f 𝑈j2
defined by 𝑅 = , 𝜌f and 𝜌∞ are the fuel density
𝜌∞ 𝑈c2
and ambient air density, respectively. Shang et al. [13]
conducted experiments with varying fuel jet velocity.
Later, Li et al. [15] found that the length of flame
downwash first increased to a maximum value then
declined with increasing initial velocity of fuel jet due
to the competition between pressure difference and jet
momentum. In summary, the momentum flux ratio of
jet to crossflow, which determines the relative drag
force in the leeward negative pressure zone, is
important in controlling the flame downwash length.
However, there is another basic jet-crossflow
configuration, which has not been studied yet, that is,
a horizontal jet with a crossflow. One can expect that,
similar to flame downwash in a vertical jet, a negative
Honeycomb structures
· Nozzle
Crossflow Uc ·
1.3 m
1.76 - 4.56 m/s
15 cm
·
Wind tunnel: Total length 72 m
Fig. 1. Schematic of experimental setup.
pressure zone will also be formed on the leeward side
when a horizontal jet encounters a crossflow and the
injected fuel can be trapped to the leeward side of the
nozzle, having a downwash flame. Note that for a
vertical upward jet-crossflow configuration, the flame
downwash length can be appreciably influenced by
the buoyant force (opposite to the orientation of
downwash) generated by the entire flame, acting on
the flame body attached to the nozzle (downwash part)
and inducing upward draft by air entrainment, such
that the relative importance of buoyancy is varied
along with the fuel flow rate/momentum. However,
for a horizontal jet-crossflow configuration, the effect
of gravity on flame downwash can be appreciably
suppressed (buoyancy is perpendicular to the
downwash direction) in controlling the downwash
length, in contrast to that in a vertical jet. It involves
more complex flow and air-fuel mixing interactions
due to relatively different directions of the fuel jet,
buoyant flow, and cross-flow, for which a systematic
data does not exist yet. This kind of configuration
could be encountered practically in a flare with
(1) horizontal fuel injection experiencing a strong wind at
the offshore drilling platform. In such a case, a flame
downwash could cause excessive temperature near the
nozzle and potentially damaging the nozzle.
In this work, experiments were performed to
explore flame downwash length influenced by nozzle
diameter, fuel flow rate, and crossflow air speed for
horizontal jets. A physical model on the flame
downwash behavior in horizontal jet fires was
proposed to interpret the evolution of flame
downwash length combining the interaction between
crossflow momentum, fuel jet momentum, and
buoyancy.
2. Experiment
Experiments were performed in a wind tunnel (72
m (L) × 1.5 m (W) × 1.3 m (H)), as shown in Fig. 1.
The crossflow velocity (Uc: 1.76 ~ 4.56 m/s) was
measured by an anemometer (±0.01 m/s accuracy)
3.0
2.9 Probe 1
Probe 2
Wind speed (m/s)
2.8
Probe 3
2.7
2.6
2.5
2.4
Probe 2.3
2.2 Uc=2.58 m/s
2.1
2.0
0 10 20 30 40 50 60
Time (s)
Ld
L
d
Image processing
procedure
Upward view
Propane
2
Table 1.
Summary of experimental conditions.
Momentum flux
Nozzle diameter, Fuel flow rate Fuel jet velocity, Jet exit Reynolds Crossflow
ratio of jet to
D [mm] [L/min] Uj [m/s] number, ReD velocity, Uc [m/s]
crossflow, R
8 0.27 - 6.63 470.0 - 11750.0 0.0051 - 21.3169
12 0.8, 1.5, 2.5, 5.0, 0.12 - 2.95 313.3 - 7833.3 1.76, 2.58, 0.0010 - 4.2107
16 0.07 - 1.66 235.0 - 5875.0 0.0003 - 1.3323
10.0, 15.0, 20.0 3.57, 4.56
20 0.04 -1.06 188.0 - 4700.0 0.0001 - 0.5457

installed at the wind tunnel portal. The turbulence 3. Results and discussion
fluctuations (u'rms/Uc) of local crossflow was less than
5%. 3.1 Flame downwash variation for horizontal
Four 60 cm long stainless-steel cylindrical tubes jet fires
having diameters of 8, 12, 16, and 20 mm were used Figure 2 depicts a sequence of typical flame
as the fuel nozzle to ensure the fully developed
turbulent pipe flows. The distance between the nozzle Cross- Jet exit
and wind tunnel outlet was 0.4 m to reduce the flow
complex effect of wall constraint. At this position, the

·
mf = 2.45 × 10-5 kg/s
flow characteristics were confirmed to be the same as
that at the wind tunnel outlet. The nozzle was
positioned horizontally along the center of the wind
tunnel. Ld =17.08cm
Propane was used as fuel and its flow rates were
·
-5
regulated by a mass flow meter (precision: 0.01 L/min) mf = 4.60 × 10 kg/s
in the range of 0.8 ~ 20.0 SLPM (0.245 ~ 6.13 × 10−4
kg/s), corresponding to Uj ranged from 0.04 to 6.63
m/s. The Reynolds number (ReD = fUjD/f) of the Nozzle Ld =22.08cm
fuel jet ranged from 188 to 11,750, where f is the
·

mf = 7.67 × 10-5 kg/s

dynamic viscosity. The flame downwash behavior
occurs when the momentum flux ratio of jet to

Increasing fuel flow rates

crossflow R ranges from 0.000457 to 2.37. Table 1
provides all the test conditions involving nozzle Ld =27.88cm
diameter, fuel flow rate, fuel jet velocity, jet exit
·

Reynolds number, crossflow velocity and momentum mf = 1.53 × 10-4 kg/s

flux ratio of jet to crossflow. The ambient temperature
𝑇∞ during the experiments was 293 ~ 295 K. Each
condition was repeated three times and reproducibility Ld =34.11cm
was satisfactory.
·

The CCD camera (25 fps, 3 megapixels) was mf = 3.06 × 10-4 kg/s
located below the nozzle zone with vertically upward
view to record flame images for 30 s with total 750
frames. Each image was converted into grayscales to
Ld =36.73cm
extract the luminosity information based on the RGB
value of the image. Then, a program based on the
·

mf = 4.60 × 10-4 kg/s

OTSU algorithm [16], ensuring the maximum
likelihood of local contrast between the flame and the
background, provided the optimal criterion to
distinguish the flame from the background, that is, Ld =26.77cm
“flame” (binary value of 1) or “no-flame” (binary
·

value of 0) for each pixel point of the image, such that mf = 6.13 × 10-4 kg/s
a binary image can be obtained for each image. The
flame image probability distribution contours (the
bottom inset contour in Fig. 1) can be achieved by Ld =21.11cm
averaging 750 binary images, to determine the
averaged presence probability value for each pixel
point. The flame dimension (Ld) is defined as the 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 [cm]
contour at 50% presence probability value level, as Fig. 2. Flame images showing flame downwash behaviors
applied in previous studies [6-9, 17-19]. with increasing fuel flow rates (D = 20 mm, Uc = 1.76 m/s).

3
pictures showing the flame downwash behavior at
various fuel flow rates 𝑚̇f (fuel jet velocities) for
fixed Uc = 1.76 m/s and D = 20 mm. Due to the
negative pressure zone and the generated recirculation
vortex at the leeward side, the flame edge crawls
toward the upstream region from the nozzle exit. The
presence of a recirculation vortex transports part of
the fuel to the leeward side and the fuel burns in the
wake zone, producing a flame attached on the cylinder
wall, called the downwash flame. It is obvious that the
length of flame downwash first increased and then
declined with the increase in the fuel supply flow rate,
as illustrated in Fig. 2.
The data of flame downwash length (Ld) in the
present horizontal jet fires is shown in Fig. 3 against
fuel flow rate under several crossflow air speeds for
various nozzle diameters. For a specified Uc, Ld
presents a non-monotonic trend with increasing fuel
flow rate (or fuel jet velocity), which first increases
and then declines. For relatively low jet velocities, as
the fuel flow rate increases, more fuel can be brought
into the leeward side of the recirculation vortex and
thus the length of flame downwash could extend.
However, as the fuel flow rate increases to a relatively
large level, the fuel jet momentum counteracts the
crossflow momentum (the momentum flux ratio of jet
to crossflow increases). Note that the crossflow
momentum generates the “reverse flow effect” at the
leeward side by forming a negative pressure region,
trapping fuel in this region. Hence, the length of flame
downwash declines as the fuel flow rate is further
increased.
0.6
D = 8 mm
Re=2300
0.5
0.4 laminar turbulent
0.3
Flame downwash length (Ld) [m]
For a specified fuel flow rate (fuel jet velocity), Ld
first extends and then declines with increasing Uc.
Firstly, as Uc increases, the effect of negative pressure
will be stronger that the reverse vortex becomes
intensive, which can bring more fuel to the leeward
side of the nozzle as such Ld increases. However, as
Uc is relatively strong, the flame/flow turbulence
increases, which enhances entrainment/mixing of air
with fuel hence Ld decreases.
Based on the flame downwash length and fuel jet
velocity, the fuel residence time for available fuel-
preheating to be only 0.008 - 4.02 s. Meanwhile, the
contact area between the downwash flame with the
circular nozzle can be regarded as a very thin line and
the cross flow would cool the nozzle wall. Therefore,
the effect of heating may be negligible. Concerning
the non-monotonic behavior of the flame downwash
length with fuel flow rate, the laminar to turbulent
transition Re of 2300 is marked in Fig. 3. Considering
the effect of nozzle diameter and crossflow air speed,
the increasing and then declining behavior cannot be
fully explained based on the transition of the fuel flow
through the nozzle. The effect of Richardson number
Ri will be explained later.
To better understand the flow/combustion
mechanisms controlling the flame downwash
behavior in the horizontal jets, CFD simulations were
performed using the commercial code of Fluent 6.3.26
for D = 12 mm. The modified standard k-ε turbulence
model, eddy-dissipation-concept (EDC) model along
with a one-step reaction model for the species and the
discrete ordinate radiation model were adopted, which
have been successfully applied to the simulations of
100
Re=2300 D = 12 mm
Crossflow
laminar turbulent 10
speed (Uc)
1.76 m/s
1
2.58 m/s

3.57 m/s
0.2 4.56 m/s 0.1
Richardson number

Ri
0.1 0.01

0.0 0.001
0.6
Re=2300 D = 16 mm D = 20 mm 100
0.5
laminar turbulent
10
0.4
1
0.3

0.2 0.1
Re=2300
0.1 laminar turbulent 0.01

0.0 0.001
0.0000 0.0002 0.0004 0.0006 0.0000 0.0002 0.0004 0.0006
Fuel flow rate mf [kg/s]
Fig. 3. Flame downwash length with fuel flow rate under several crossflow air speeds and nozzle diameters.

4
Fig. 4. CFD simulation results of flow field for flame downwash behavior of horizontal jet fires in crossflow for D = 12 mm.

5
 35
Experimental
30 range in [12] Nozzle
diameter(D)
25 8 mm
12 mm
Ld
20 16 mm
20 mm
D could not describe the data of Ld for the present
15
10
y = 13.6x - 1.29
5 diameter of D = 22.1 mm and a specified fuel flow
0 ln(1/R0.5)), the trends of the present data and Majeski
-1 0 1 2 3 4
ln(1/ R0.5)
Fig. 5. Comparison of experimental data for the length of
flame downwash in horizontal jet fires with model by
Majeski [12] for D = 22.1 mm (Eq. (1)).
jet fires [20-25]. For the grid dependence check,
26,795,096 grid cells having the largest cell size of 2
× 2 × 2 mm and the smallest cell size of 0.5 × 0.5 ×
0.5 mm, 3,337,000 grid cells with the largest cell size
of 4 × 4 × 4 mm and the smallest cell size of 1 × 1 ×
1 mm, together with 975,982 grid cells with the
largest cell size of 6 × 6 × 6 mm and the smallest cell
size of 1.5 ×1.5 ×1.5 mm were tested. The simulation
results of the most drastic change of the velocity in the
entire region for 3,337,000 and 26,795,096 grid cells
are similar. Therefore, the 3,337,000 grid cells were
used for every simulation cases, ensuring the accuracy
of simulation. Note that the refinement region
includes 0.06 × 0.06 m square area around the outlet
of the horizontal jet. More information about the
simulation can be found in the Supplementary
material.
The simulation results of flow field for flame
downwash behavior are shown as Fig. 4 at various
fuel flow rates and crossflow air speeds. In the
increasing regime for the length of flame downwash
with fuel flow rate (corresponding to the relatively
small momentum flux ratio of jet to crossflow), the
flow field patterns change slightly with the
momentum ratio and the streamlines deflected a large
angle from the nozzle exit to the leeward side, which
implies that the fuel is carried to the leeward side right
after it comes out of the nozzle. Therefore, the flame
downwash length gets longer with the increase in the
fuel flow rate. In this regime, it exists a critical state
as shown in the inset in Fig. 4, where the clockwise
vortex is observed near the nozzle exit.
In the decreasing regime for the flame downwash
length with fuel flow rate (relatively large momentum
ratio), a stagnation point appears in the near jet wake,
as shown in the inset figure. The deflection angle of
streamlines from the nozzle exit decreases with
increasing momentum flux ratio of jet to crossflow.
This implies that it is more difficult for the fuel to be
trapped to the leeward side, leading the decrease of
6
the downwash length as the momentum flux ratio of
jet to crossflow increases.
Figure 5 compares the measured data of the flame
downwash length for the present horizontal jets with
the proposed model for vertical jets by Majeski (Eq.
(1)), where R was the controlling parameter [12]. It
shows that the model developed for the vertical jets
horizontal jets, which exhibits the non-monotonic
behavior. Note that Majeski model was derived from
R ranging from 0.0157 to 1.574 for a specified
rate. For large fuel flow rates (corresponding to small
model are consistent, while the effect of the nozzle
diameter cannot be captured since only one diameter
was tested in developing the model. Note that the
model under-predicted for the present data, which can
be understood based on the buoyancy effect for the
vertical jet experiment, even though the effect of the
buoyancy was not considered in the model. For small
fuel flow rates (large ln(1/R0.5)), the trends are
reversed.
As mentioned previously, the non-monotonic
behavior of Ld with fuel flow rate cannot be fully
explained based on the laminar to turbulent transition
of the fuel flow in the nozzle. Although the buoyancy
effect can be suppressed for the present horizontal jet,
the buoyancy effect cannot be ruled out for small fuel
flow rate (Reynolds number). In this regard, 𝑅𝑖 =
(𝜌∞ −𝜌b )𝑔𝐷 (𝑇 −𝑇 )𝜌 𝑔𝐷
2 ≈ f ∞ ∞2 is considered based on the
𝜌f 𝑈𝑗 𝑇∞ 𝜌f 𝑈𝑗
𝜌∞ −𝜌𝑏 𝑇𝑓 −𝑇∞
approximation ( ≈ ), which represents the
𝜌∞ 𝑇∞
relative importance of jet momentum to buoyancy.
The mean flame temperature Tf for propane of 1200K
[7] is used here. Note that the Richardson number
(logarithmic plot in Fig. 3) decreases very rapidly
(since proportional to 𝑈j−2 ). This implies that
although the effect of buoyancy (gravity) can be small
for large fuel flow rate regime in the horizontal jet, the
buoyancy effect could be pronounced in the small fuel
flow rate regime.
Based on above experimental observation and the
discussion on the effect of Ri, a new physical model
is required to describe the flame downwash behavior
in horizontal jets.
3.2 Dimensional analysis on flame downwash
behavior in horizontal jet fires
Figure 6 depicts a physical model of flame
downwash phenomenon for the horizontal jets in
crossflow, which involves a three-dimensional
complex flow-interaction behavior. The fuel first
ejected along the jet (x-) direction due to initial jet
momentum and the crossflow (perpendicular to jet in
y-direction) would carry the fuel to the downstream
toward the leeward side, meanwhile the buoyancy in
z-direction drives flame to upward positive z-
direction, washing away from the flame attached base
zone. Due to the negative pressure zone at the nozzle
leeward side induced by the crossflow, the fuel is
trapped into the nozzle leeward side and forming a
downwash flame. In these processes, the flame
downwash length is expected to be controlled by the
following physical mechanisms/parameters:
First, the initial fuel flow rate 𝑚̇f characterizes the
magnitude of combustion and determines the total
flame length. When the fuel is completely consumed
at flame tip, the total amount of air entrainment should
be proportional to S𝑚̇f , where S is the stoichiometric
ratio of entrained air to fuel mass. And the
characteristic flow rate of air entrainment 𝜌∞ 𝑈c ×
(𝑈c2 ⁄𝐺 )2 can be applied to normalize 𝑚̇f [26], where
𝐺 = (𝑇f − 𝑇∞ )𝑔⁄𝑇∞ represents the overall flame
buoyancy induced by average flame temperature rise.
Second, the relative magnitude of the characteristic
momentum in each direction determines the behavior
of flame. There are two characteristic momenta that
control the flame downwash length: jet momentum
𝜌f 𝑈j2 and the crossflow momentum 𝜌∞ 𝑈c2 . The
negative pressure generated by the crossflow tends to
induce the fuel to the leeward side to form a
downwash flame. While the jet momentum carries the
fuel to move along the nozzle axis direction, which
makes the length of flame downwash to decline.
Therefore, the relative drag force at negative pressure
zone of the leeward side can be represented by their
momentum flux ratio, determining how much (ratio)
of the total flame length could be dragged along the
leeward side to produce the downwash flame.
Finally, the competition of jet momentum flux
𝐺0 = 𝑚̇f 𝑈j with flame buoyancy flux 𝐵0 =
𝑄̇ 𝑔⁄𝑐𝑝 𝑇∞ ~𝑚̇f ∆𝑇⁄𝑇∞ 𝑔 = 𝑚̇f 𝐺 [27], which decides
the characteristic horizontal length in the jet
discharged direction where the flame motion majorly
turns from horizontal (jet momentum controlled) to
vertical (buoyancy controlled). Here, 𝑄̇ is heat release
rate related to 𝑐𝑝 𝑚̇f ∆𝑇. This competition could be
3⁄4
(𝑚̇f 𝑈j ⁄𝜌∞ )
represented by 𝐿m = , which represents
(𝑚̇f 𝐺 ⁄𝜌∞ )1⁄2
the length scale for the horizontal distance a flame can
reach under no crossflow condition [6, 28] and is
related to the inverse of the square root of Ri.
Therefore, based on the above physical analysis,
the following relations can be proposed for Ld:
𝐿d 𝑆𝑚̇f⁄𝜌∞
~fn { , 𝑅} (2)
𝐿m 𝑈c ×(𝑈c2 ⁄𝐺 )2
We normalize the flame downwash length by the
parameter 𝐿m , because it is a horizontal characteristic
flame length in the jet direction, in a same horizontal
direction as the flame downwash. Ld should increase
with the increasing normalized fuel mass flow rate
(𝑆𝑚̇f ⁄𝜌∞ )/ [𝑈c × (𝑈c2 ⁄𝐺 )2 ] and the decreasing R.
For correlating the flame downwash length and
decoupling this problem, it is verified that the
normalized flame length has a power function relation
with the normalized fuel mass flow rate
(𝑆𝑚̇f ⁄𝜌∞ )/ [𝑈c × (𝑈c2 ⁄𝐺 )2 ]. Then, the exponent of
(𝑆𝑚̇f ⁄𝜌∞ )/ [𝑈c × (𝑈c2 ⁄𝐺 )2 ] can be found by
plotting the normalized flame downwash length
versus normalized fuel mass flow rate for the similar
R. It is found that the exponential of the normalized
fuel mass flow rate is 0.21 for best fit. Then, the power
function relation of R is further proposed where the
best power value is found to be −0.42. Finally, the best
fit function, found as shown in Fig. 7, well represents

Flame buoyancy
f U j2

Ld
Plume mass flow rate
when the fuel is
·
completely burned Smf

Characteristic air Relative dragging force at z

entrainment flow2 x
negative pressure zone
rate U c (U c G )  U c2
2
f U j2
R=
 U c2 y
Fig. 6. Physical model of flame downwash behavior in horizontal jet fires with crossflow.

7
 160 4. Concluding remarks
140
This work explored the flame downwash behavior
120 R2 = 0.97 in horizontal jet fires under crossflow. The
y = 17.6 x dimensional analysis was derived from the
100
dominating physical mechanisms of flame downwash
Ld 80 Nozzle behavior. Major findings include:
Lm 60
diameter (D)
8 mm (1) The flame downwash length exhibits a non-
40 12 mm monotonic behavior, which first increases then
16 mm decreases with the increase of the fuel flow rate.
20
20 mm (2) A dimensional analysis was performed on
0 flame downwash behavior of the horizontal jet
0 1 2 3 4 5 0.216 7 8 9 fires based on the analysis of dominating
  mechanisms, from which three characteristic
 Smf    R −0.42 parameters were identified. First, the
(
U U 2 G  )
2

 c c  dimensionless mass flow rate

Fig. 7. Representation of flame downwash length in
horizontal jet fires at various conditions based on the
proposed physical model and controlling non-dimensional
parameters.
the data of flame downwash length in horizontal jet
fires under various conditions:
𝐿d 𝑆𝑚̇f⁄𝜌∞ 0.21
= 17.6 [ ] 𝑅−0.42
𝐿m 𝑈c ×(𝑈c2 ⁄𝐺 )2
Note that the non-monotonic behavior shown in
Fig. 3 disappears by using the physical parameters
discussed above. The correlation for the flame
downwash behavior of the horizontal jet fires (Eq. (3))
shows that LHS ~ Ld ×g0.5 (with the power of g of 0.5
from Lm ∝ G−0.5) and RHS ~ g0.42 and thus Ld ~ g−0.08;
while Shang’s correlation for the vertical jet fires
shows that Ld ~ g−0.75 [13]. This implies that the effect
of the buoyancy on flame downwash behavior for the
vertical jet fires is much greater than the horizontal jet
fires. For vertical jet fires under crossflow, the
buoyancy is in the same direction as the fuel jet. The
buoyancy is driving the flow upward, suppressing the
negative pressure zone. For the horizontal jet fires, we
can also anticipate an upward flow induced by
buoyancy, however, passing around the nozzle. Such
flow could also interact complicatedly with the vortex
induced by crossflow at the leeward side.
Nevertheless, such flow interaction in the negative
pressure zone should be essentially different from that
of vertical jet fires with crossflow. As the nozzle
diameter is relatively small, we can expect that such
buoyancy effect could be less important than that for
a vertical jet, as also verified by the correlation power
dependence on the gravity. Note that even though the
power dependence of Ld on the gravity is much
smaller in the present horizontal jets as compared to
the vertical jets, the consideration of buoyance
(gravity) is still important in predicting the non-
monotonic behavior with the fuel flow rate.
(𝑆𝑚̇f⁄𝜌∞ )/ [𝑈c × (𝑈c2 ⁄𝐺 )2 ] represents the
fuel flow rate normalized by the characteristic
air entrainment, which influences the total
flame length. Second, the momentum flux ratio
of jet to crossflow R represents the relative drag
force of negative pressure zone in the leeward
side, which determines the amount of fuel or
total flame length trapped along the leeward
(3) side to produce the downwash flame. Third, the
competition of the jet momentum to flame
buoyancy flux (𝑚̇f 𝑈j /𝜌∞ )3⁄4 ⁄(𝑚̇f 𝐺/𝜌∞ )1⁄2
represents the characteristic length in the jet
discharged direction where the flame motion
turns from horizontal (jet momentum
controlled) to vertical (buoyancy controlled)
direction.
(3) The proposed non-dimensional formula
represents the experimental results of flame
downwash lengths well based on the derived
characteristic parameters. The buoyancy effect
on flame downwash shows relatively weaker
dependence on the gravity for the horizontal jet
than that of the vertical jet in crossflow.
However, the consideration of buoyancy for
the horizontal jets is still important in
predicting the non-monotonic behavior of the
flame downwash length.
Acknowledgements
This work was supported by key international
(regional) cooperative research project of National
Natural Science Foundation of China (NSFC)
(52020105008). SHC was supported by King
Abdullah University of Science and Technology
(KAUST).
Supplementary material
Supplementary material associated with this article
can be found, in the following link,
https://www.editorialmanager.com/proci/download.a

8
spx?id=289736&guid=09079d7e-c247-4cfe-a8c2-
baad107d53b5&scheme=1.
References
[1] M.A. Delichatsios, Air entrainment into buoyant jet
flames and pool fires, Combust. Flame 70(1) (1987) 33-
46.
[2] M.A. Delichatsios, Transition from momentum to
buoyancy-controlled turbulent jet diffusion flames and
flame height relationships, Combust. Flame 92 (4) (1993)
349-364.
[3] J.G. Quintiere, B.S. Grove, A unified analysis for fire
plumes. Proc. Combust. Inst. 27(2) (1998) 2757-2766.
[4] H.A. Becker, D. Liang, Effect of burner orientation and
ambient airflow on geometry of turbulent free diffusion
flames, Proc. Combust. Inst. 18 (1981) 1061-1071.
[5] N. Peters, J. Göttgens, Scaling of buoyant turbulent jet
diffusion flames, Combust. Flame 85 (1-2) (1991) 206-
214.
[6] X.L. Zhang, L.H. Hu, X.C. Zhang, F. Tang, Y. Jiang, Y.J.
Lin, Flame projection distance of horizontally oriented
buoyant turbulent rectangular jet fires, Combust. Flame
176 (2017) 370-376.
[7] S.X. Liu, M.A. Delichatsios, L.H. Hu, Flame profile
parameters of horizontal turbulent jets: Experiments,
similarity analysis and an integral model, Combust.
Flame 207 (2019) 1-9.
[8] J. Lv, X.L. Zhang, S.X. Liu, H.Y. Lu, Y.X. Ma, L.H. Hu,
Flame morphology of horizontal jets under sub-
atmospheric pressures: Experiment, dimensional analysis
and an integral model, Fuel 307 (2022) 121891.
[9] S.X. Liu, L.H. Hu, An experimental study on flame
envelope morphologic characteristics of downward-
orientated buoyant turbulent jet fires, Proc. Combust. Inst.
37 (2019) 3935-3942.
[10] L.H. Hu, A review of physics and correlations of pool
fire behaviour in wind and future challenges, Fire Saf. J.
91 (2017) 41-55.
[11] R.F. Huang, J. M. Chang, The stability and visualized
flame and flow structures of a combusting jet in cross
flow, Combust. Flame 98(3) (1994) 267-278.
[12] A.J. Majeski, D.J. Wilson, L.W. Kostiuk, Predicting the
length of low-momentum jet diffusion flames in
crossflow, Combust. Sci. Technol. 176 (2004) 2001-
2025.
[13] F.J. Shang, L.H. Hu, X.P. Sun, Q. Wang, A. Palacios,
Flame downwash length evolution of non-premixed
gaseous fuel jets in crossflow: Experiments and a new
correlation, Appl. Energy 198 (2017) 99-107.
[14] D.B. Mosiria, R.F. Huang, C.M. Hsu, Characteristics of
backward-inclined non-premixed jet flames in
crossflow, Exp. Therm. Fluid Sci. 98 (2018) 429-444.
[15] X. Li, L.H. Hu, F.J. Shang, Flame downwash transition
and its maximum length with increasing fuel supply of
non-premixed jet in cross flow, Energy 164 (2018) 298-
305.
[16] N. Otsu, A threshold selection method from gray-level
histograms, IEEE Trans. Syst. Man. Cybern. Syst. 9
(1979) 62-66.
[17] E.E. Zukoski, B.M. Cetegen, T. Kubota, Visible
structure of buoyant diffusion flames, Proc. Combust.
Inst. 20 (1985) 361-366.
[18] C.C. Liu, L.Y. Huang, T.D. Deng, H. Jiang, P.Z. Wu, B.
Liu, J. Deng, Z.M. Luo, Influence of bottom wall on
characteristics of jet diffusion flames under cross-wind,
Fuel 288 (2021) 119661.
[19] Z.H. Wang, K.B. Zhou, L. Zhang, X. Nie, Y.Q. Wu, J.C.
Jiang, A.S. Dederichs, L. He, Flame extension area and
temperature profile of horizontal jet fire impinging on a
vertical plate, Process. Saf. Environ. Protect. 147 (2021)
547-558.
[20] C.C. Liu, L.Y. Huang, T.D. Deng, H. Jiang, P.Z. Wu, B.
Liu, J. Deng, Z.M. Luo, Influence of bottom wall on
characteristics of jet diffusion flames under cross-wind,
Fuel 288 (2021) 119661.
[21] J. Ju, X.J. Duan, B. Sarkodie, Y.J. Hu, H. Jiang, C.Z. Li,
Numerical simulation of flow field and residence time
of nanoparticles in a 1000-ton industrial multi-jet
combustion reactor, Chin. J. Chem. Eng.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cjche.2021.12.008.
[22] C.B. Jang, S.W. Choi, J.B. Baek, CFD modeling and
fire damage analysis of jet fire on hydrogen pipeline in
a pipe rack structure, Int. J. Hydrogen Energ. 40 (2015)
15760-15772.
[23] H. Mashhadimoslem, A. Ghaemi, A. Palacios, A.H.
Behroozi, A new method for comparison thermal
radiation on large-scale hydrogen and propane jet fires
based on experimental and computational studies, Fuel
282 (2020) 118864.
[24] C. David, F.E. Thomas, CFD for simulation of
crosswind on the efficiency of high momentum jet
turbulent combustion flames, J. Environ. Eng. 134
(2008) 561-571.
[25] H. Mashhadimoslem, A. Ghaemi, A.H. Behroozi, A.
Palacios, A new simplified calculation model of
geometric thermal features of a vertical propane jet fire
based on experimental and computational studies,
Process. Saf. Environ. Protect. 135 (2020) 303-314.
[26] H.Y. Lu, M.A. Delichatsios, X. Li, S.X. Liu, J. Lv, L.H.
Hu, Flame geometry of downward buoyant turbulent jet
fires under cross flows: Experiments, dimensional
analysis and an integral model, Proc. Combust. Inst.
38(3) (2021) 4917-4925.
[27] M.A. Delichatsios, J.P. Zhang, Ground wind generated
near the base by the massive convective column of very
large-scale mass fires. Fire Saf. J. 111 (2020) 102914.
[28] P.N. Papanicolaou, E.J. List, Statistical and spectral
properties of tracer concentration in round buoyant jets,
Int. J. Heat Mass Transf. 30 (1987) 2059-2071.