Journal of Wind Engineering & Industrial Aerodynamics 228 (2022) 105088

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Journal of Wind Engineering & Industrial Aerodynamics

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/jweia

Optimal pitch angle of jet fans based on air age evaluation for highway
tunnel ventilation
Shanshan Zhao a, b, Peng Xue a, b, *, Jingchao Xie a, b, Yining Wang a, b, Zhenxiong Jiang c,
Jiaping Liu a, b, d
a
Beijing Key Laboratory of Green Building Environment and Energy Saving Technology, Beijing University of Technology, Beijing, 100124, China
b
Faculty of Architecture, Civil and Transportation Engineering, Beijing University of Technology, Beijing, 100124, China
c
Jiangsu Provincial Transport Engineering Construction Bureau, Nanjing, 210004, China
d
State Key Laboratory of Green Building in Western China, Xi’an University of Architecture and Technology, Xi’an, 710055, China

A R T I C L E I N F O A B S T R A C T

Keywords: The Coandă effect on jet flow can be solved effectively using the jet fan with a pitch angle in highway tunnels. In
Pitch angle this study, the ventilation efficiency of the jet fan with a pitch angle in the range 0–12◦ is tested using the
Jet fan computational fluid dynamics (CFD) method with experimental validation. The mean air age in volume (MAA-V)
Air age
is applied to evaluate the ventilation effectiveness in the full space and clearance space of tunnel. The results
Clearance space
Ventilation effectiveness
show that the jet fan with a pitch angle can significantly alleviate vortices caused by the jet flow. The pitch angle
of 7◦ can provide a desirable compromise for MAA-V, found to be 13.62% and 20.67% younger than that of 0◦ for
the full and clearance spaces, respectively. Furthermore, the pressure-rise coefficient at different pitch angles is
also investigated, and the maximum is obtained at the pitch angle of 7◦ as well. Finally, the pitch angle of 7◦ is
determined as the optimal angle for the jet fan, which is of great benefit for improving ventilation effectiveness
and saving installed power in highway tunnels.

on the Coandă effect, the required installed power could be reduced by

1. Introduction
Highway tunnels are undergoing rapid development because they
offer the advantages of overcoming terrain obstacles and shortening
transportation time. However, tunnels are semi-enclosed spaces, prone
to the accumulation of pollutants and fire smoke (Zhang et al., 2016;
Yang et al., 2020; Zhao et al., 2020). Therefore, ventilation systems are
essential for maintaining a clean and safe tunnel environment (Liu et al.,
2020; Peng et al., 2020). Currently, longitudinal ventilation systems,
induced by jet fans, are commonly adopted because of their installation
simplicity and low operating costs (PIARC, 2016; Long et al., 2020).
However, it is assumed that as much as 30–40% of jet thrust is lost due to
the Coandă effect (Rohne, 1991; Jacques and Wauters, 1999), because
jet fans are generally installed along the ceiling of tunnel with their
clearance limitation in structure. The jet fan with a pitch angle directed
towards the ground has proven to be effective in overcoming the Coandă
effect (PIARC, 2017), known as the alternative or Banana® jet fan (Witt
and Schütze, 2006). Due to the influence of the jet fan with a pitch angle
30–50%, resulting in significant energy reduction in the ventilation
system (Witt and Schütze, 2008). Eftekharian et al. (2014) compared the
ventilation effectiveness of Banana® and traditional straight jet fans in
reducing vehicle emissions. The results indicated that the Banana® jet
fans could provide 12.4% more flow rate than traditional fans, and had a
more desirable performance for diluting carbon monoxide concentra­
tions. In addition, the advantage of the jet fan with a pitch angle in
reducing the fire smoke temperature has also been recognized (Musto
and Rotondo, 2014). A lower temperature is vital because it can extend
the available time to complete a rescue operation (He et al., 2020; Zhou
et al., 2019; Zhu et al., 2020).
In order to investigate the optimal pitch angle of the jet fan, Cory
et al. (1997) conducted experiments on a tunnel model with a scale of
1:15, finding that the optimal pitch angle was between 5◦ and 10◦ .
Jacques and Wauters (1999) established a similar model to narrow the
optimal range to 7–8◦ and proposed that the flow rate could provide a
gain of approximately 30%. There are several difficulties involved in
using experimental methods to study flow characteristics in tunnels.

* Corresponding author. Beijing Key Laboratory of Green Building Environment and Energy Saving Technology, Beijing University of Technology, Room 303,
Green Building, No.100 Pingleyuan, Chaoyang District, Beijing, 100124, China.xp@bjut.edu.cn
E-mail addresses: zhao191015@emails.bjut.edu.cn, zhao191015@163.com (S. Zhao), kimisains@126.com (P. Xue), xiejc@bjut.edu.cn (J. Xie), wyn@emails.bjut.
edu.cn (Y. Wang), jzxwhjxy@163.com (Z. Jiang), liujiaping@bjut.edu.cn (J. Liu).

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jweia.2022.105088
Received 4 March 2022; Received in revised form 11 July 2022; Accepted 11 July 2022
Available online 16 July 2022
0167-6105/© 2022 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
S. Zhao et al.
Nomenclature
Δpt Theoretical pressure-rise, Pa
Aj Area of jet fan outlet, m2
Ar Area of tunnel cross-section, m2
N Number of jet fans
L Longitudinal distance downstream jet fans, m
Djet Diameter of jet fan, mm
vr Average velocity in tunnel, m/s
vj Velocity of jet fan, m/s
Γ Diffusion coefficient
S Area of location, m2
V Volume of location, m3
ui Time-average velocity, m/s
ui
′
Fluctuating velocity, m/s
xi, xj, xk Coordinates, m
ui, uj, uk Velocity in x, y, z direction, m/s
Fortunately, the computational fluid dynamics (CFD) numerical method
has been demonstrated to be reliable for research on tunnel ventilation
systems (Xue et al., 2014; Zhang et al., 2017). Betta et al. (2009) used the
CFD method to calculate the pressure loss and recommended 6◦ as the
optimal pitch angle for free tunnels and 2–4◦ for tunnels with traffic
jams. Considering pressure loss and flow rate, Lee et al. (2014) provided
the same suggestion for a free tunnel. Chen et al. (2019) investigated the
optimal pitch angle by analyzing the pressure-rise coefficient and wall
shear stress. Taking the outlet area of the jet fans as the primary influ­
encing factor, they found that the optimal pitch angle is 8◦ for jet fans
with diameters ≤900 mm, and 6◦ for jet fans with diameters >900 mm.
In general, previous studies use pressure parameters as the evaluation
criteria for pitch angle optimization. These criteria mainly reflect the
installation efficiency (Armstrong et al., 1995), affecting the number of
fans and installation power but neglects ventilation effectiveness.
However, the high-speed airflow induced by jet fans causes tangent
velocity discontinuity in the lower region of the tunnel, reducing the air
supply effectiveness and making it harmful to humans (Chen et al.,
1998). An adequate ventilation system inside a tunnel should include
two aspects: optimized installation efficiency and ventilation effective­
ness. Therefore, only the angle that meets the above two aspects can be
considered as the optimal angle.
For evaluating the ventilation effectiveness, a lot of indices have
been proposed, such as air exchange rate, air change efficiency and air
change index, and these parameters are associated directly with the air
age. The air age is defined as the time elapsed after the air enters a room
(Sandberg and Sjöberg, 1983), directly reflecting the flow pattern and
the ventilation effectiveness. The air age can be obtained experimentally
by tracer gas techniques, or determined numerically using CFD methods.
For the tracer gas technique, a tracer gas is released in a predefined
mode and the change of tracer gas concentration with time is measured
to obtain the air age (Sandberg and Sjöberg, 1983). There are four types
of tracer gas measurement techniques, i.e. constant injection, pulse in­
jection, concentration decay and constant concentration. The most
commonly used tracer gas are nitrous oxide (N2O) and sulfur hexaflu­
oride (SF6), and carbon dioxide (CO2) is usually employed if the back­
ground concentration is constant (Mundt et al., 2004). In order to
discuss the thermal comfort for a postgraduate study office room, Dag­
high et al. (2009) adopted the tracer gas technique based on concen­
tration decay measurement to determine the air age and air exchange
effectiveness. Tian et al. (2019) established a chamber with dimensions
of 4 m length, 3.5 m width and 3.5 m height, and used CO2 as the tracer
gas to conducted experiments to study the performances of air distri­
bution methods. In addition, they applied these results to answer the
question of which indicator (contaminant removal effectiveness or air
2
Journal of Wind Engineering & Industrial Aerodynamics 228 (2022) 105088
yi y Data and mean of population
Ci Model constant, i = 1, 2, 1ε, 3ε, μ
σk Turbulent Prandtl number, 1.0
σε Turbulent Prandtl number, 1.2
Ai Model constant, i = 0, s
p Static pressure, Pa
t Time variable, s
ρ Mass density of air, kg/m3
μ Dynamic viscosity of air, kg/(m•s)
τ Air age, s
Sc Molecular Schmidt numbers
Sct Turbulent Schmidt numbers
ν kinetic viscosity of air, m2/s
k Turbulence kinetic energy, J
ε Turbulence dissipation rate, J/s
σ Standard deviation
n Number of data in population
change effectiveness) can best characterize the ventilation effectiveness,
and these indicators were calculated based on the age of air (Tian et al.,
2020). Although the value obtained from the tracer gas technique is
accurate, it is time-consuming and expensive. The CFD numerical
method is promising to study air age in ventilation space, because the
transport equation and boundary conditions for air age is relatively easy
to be defined (Hang et al., 2009). At the same time, the CFD code of air
age can be write into the commercial software through a user-defined
function. Moreover, the accuracy of results calculated by CFD numeri­
cal methods is acceptable. Kwon et al. (2011) designed a chamber to
perform a tracer gas experiment for validation of CFD simulation result,
and the average error of mean air age between the two methods was 9%.
Qin and Lu (2021) used a CFD numerical model to investigate the effects
of ceiling exhaust location on thermal comfort and mean air age under
impinging jet cooling pattern. In addition to general architectural
buildings, the air age can be applied in space where it is hard to carry out
experiments, such as deep mines (Park et al., 2018; Yi et al., 2020) and
large open space (Hang et al., 2009; Padilla-Marcos and Alberto, 2018).
In this study, the air age is obtained using a CFD numerical method to
evaluate the ventilation effectiveness in a free tunnel. The air age is
assumed to be zero at the inlet supply, so it can quantify the time that
takes for ambient air to reach a particular location within the tunnel.
The younger the air age, the better the ventilation effectiveness (Li et al.,
2003). As the air age is calculated based on air components, the mean
value of air age is more commonly used in analysis (Mundt et al., 2004).
The mean air age is a statistical concept based the age distribution of air
components, which is equal to spatial average of air age at given areas.
Hence, the mean air age in section (MAA-S) and mean air age in volume
(MAA-V) is used to quantify the ventilation effectiveness of jet fans,
which are oriented with pitch angles in the range of 0–12◦ . Moreover,
the ventilation system serves the full space of tunnel, but all activities of
vehicles and pedestrians are in the clearance space. The clearance space
is the area with the largest accumulation of pollutants (Eftekharian
et al., 2014), and the focus must be on ventilation effectiveness in the
clearance space. Finally, the optimal pitch angle is determined by
considering the mean air age and pressure-rise coefficient simulta­
neously, which is of great significance to improve the ventilation
effectiveness and reduce the installation power of the jet fans in tunnels.
2. Methodology
2.1. Numerical model and boundary conditions
The tunnel model for CFD simulation was built with a length of 500
m, and two jet fans (diameter of 1000 mm) were located 100 m from the
S. Zhao et al. Journal of Wind Engineering & Industrial Aerodynamics 228 (2022) 105088

Fig. 1. Sketch of CFD numerical model.

tunnel entrance, which could satisfy a fully developed distance for jet
∂(ρui )
flow (Wang et al., 2010). The structure of tunnel model for simulation =0 (1)
was based on the Yingtian Street Yangtze River Tunnel in Nanjing,
∂xi
China, and underwater tunnels are generally straight tunnels, so the Momentum equation:
influence of winding wall was not considered in this study, as shown in ( ) [ ]
Fig. 1 (a). The area of cross-section was 96.04 m2 with a hydraulic ∂(ρui ) ∂ ρui uj
+ =−
∂p ∂
+
∂u
μ i − ρu′i u′j + Si (2)
diameter of 10 m, and the height of the clearance space was 5 m. The ∂t ∂xj ∂xi ∂xj ∂xj
horizontal spacing of the jet fans was 4 m. Two jet fans were installed at The transport equations for the turbulence kinetic energy k and its
a height of 7 m above the ground. The detailed parameters of rate of dissipation ε are given by Eqs. (3) and (4), respectively:
cross-section with jet fans was shown in Fig. 1 (b). In addition, the pitch [( ) ]
angle of the jet fans varied from 0 to 12◦ , as shown in Fig. 1 (c). ∂
(ρk) +
∂ ( ) ∂
ρkuj =
μ ∂k
μ+ t + Gk + Gb − ρε − YM + Sk (3)
The airflow in the tunnel was assumed to be steady and incom­ ∂t ∂xj ∂xj σk ∂xj
pressible. The boundary conditions of the CFD numerical models were [( ) ]
set as follows: ∂ ∂ ( ) ∂ μ ∂ε
(ρε) + ρεuj = μ+ t
∂t ∂xj ∂xj σε ∂xj
(4)
(1) The entrance and exit portals of the tunnel were set as the pres­ +ρC1 Sε − ρC2
ε2 ε
√̅̅̅̅̅ + C1ε C3ε Gb + Sε
sure inlet and pressure outlet, respectively, and the static pressure k + νε k
was 0 Pa. The eddy viscosity μt is computed from Eq. (5):
(2) The jet fans were assumed to be a simple momentum source with
a pressure jump to obtain a jet velocity of 30 m/s. Meanwhile, the k2
μt = ρCμ (5)
swirl component owing to the fan wheels was negligible. ε
(3) A non-slip stationary wall boundary condition was applied to the Cμ can be obtained by Eq. (6):
tunnel walls and silencers of the jet fans. The equivalent rough­
ness heights of the tunnel walls and silencers were 0.003 m and 0 Cμ =
1
(6)
*
m, respectively. A0 + As kUε

The realizable k-ε model, which has shown substantial improve­ where ρ is the mass density of air; ui anduj are the velocities in the x and
ments on round jet simulation (Shih et al., 1995), was applied to solve y directions; ui andui are the time-average and fluctuating velocities,
′

the momentum equations. The governing equations of the realizable k-ε respectively; p is the static pressure; μ andν are the dynamic and kinetic
model are as follows. viscosities of air, respectively; σk andσ ε are the turbulent Prandtl
Continuity equation: numbers. Additionally, Gk represents the generation of turbulence

3
S. Zhao et al. Journal of Wind Engineering & Industrial Aerodynamics 228 (2022) 105088

Table 1 √̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅ /
∑n
Detailed information for three types of mesh sizes. σ i=1 (yi − y)
2
CV = = y (11)
Mesh Size near jet fans Size in other Parts Total elements y n− 1
Coarse 0.4 m 0.6 m 2.2 million
Medium 0.2 m 0.4 m 4.3 million where σ is the standard deviation; yi is data in population, andy is the
Refined 0.2 m 0.2 m 7.9 million mean value; n is the number of data items in the population.
CV is useful as it is dimensionless; thus, it is comparable between
data sets with different means. The higher the CV, the greater the
kinetic energy due to mean velocity gradients.Gb is the generation of
dispersion. In this study, CV was applied to analyze the uniformity of air
turbulence kinetic energy due to buoyancy.YM represents the contribu­
age at various locations.
tion of the fluctuating dilatation in compressible turbulence to the
overall dissipation rate.Si , Sk andSε are user-defined source terms. For­
mulas to calculate the other parameters can be found in Theory Guide 2.2. Mesh independence
(ANSYS, 15.0).
The air age can be calculated by solving the following transport The mesh used to discretize numerical domain included surface
equation of the user-defined function (UDF) in ANSYS Fluent, and the mesh, volume mesh and boundary mesh, as shown in Fig. 1 (a). The
user-defined scalar was set as zero at the inlets of the tunnel model: surface mesh type was triangular mesh, and prism mesh was generated
( ) ( ) inside the boundary layer. For the volume mesh, the tetrahedral mesh
∂
(ρui τ) +
∂ ( )
ρuj τ +
∂
(ρuk τ) =
∂
Γ
∂τ
+
∂
Γ
∂τ was generated at first, and then the hexa-core option was activated. The
∂xi ∂xj ∂xk
(
∂x
) i
∂xi ∂xj ∂xj
(7) hexa-core option could remain the triangular mesh on surfaces and
+
∂
Γ
∂τ
+ρ prism mesh in boundary layer, delete the existing tetrahedral mesh in­
∂xk ∂xk side the volume, and then regenerate the hexahedral mesh inside the
volume. For the model with large internal volume space, the hexa-core
Γ is the diffusion coefficient, which can be calculated by Eq. (8):
mesh can reduce the mesh elements while ensuring the mesh quality.
μ μt Three types of mesh size (coarse, medium, and refined) were established
Γ= + (8)
Sc Sct for comparison to ensure that the simulation results were independent of
the mesh size. The detailed mesh information is listed in Table 1. The
where τ is the air age; Sc andSct are the molecular and turbulent Schmidt
first layer height of the mesh was set as 0.004 m to guarantee that y+ (a
numbers.
dimensionless parameter reflecting the distance to the wall) fell between
As the air age is calculated based on air elements, the mean value of
30 and 300. Fig. 2 shows the vertical velocity at different distances
air age is mainly used for analysis, i.e., the mean air age in section (MAA-
downstream of the jet fans to compare the difference in the simulation
S) and mean air age in volume (MAA-V). MAA-S and MAA-V are the
results obtained from the three types of mesh size.
area-weighted and volume-weighted average values of air age at the
Fig. 2 (a) illustrates the vertical velocity at 30 m downstream of the
corresponding location and can be obtained from Eqs. (9) and (10),
jet fans. The relative error of velocity calculated by the coarse and me­
respectively:
dium mesh was 11.28%, and that of the refined and medium mesh was
∑
τi Si ( ∑ ) 2.92%. At 60 m downstream of the jet fans, as shown in Fig. 2 (b), the
MAA − S = S= Si , ​ i = 1, 2, 3, ...... (9)
S relative errors between the three mesh sizes were smaller. The relative
∑ error between the coarse and medium mesh was 1.63%, and that of the
τ i Vi ( ∑ )
refined and medium mesh was 0.41%. As a compromise between the
MAA − V = V= Vi , ​ i = 1, 2, 3, ...... (10)
V computational efficiency and accuracy, the medium mesh was selected
for further study.
where S andV are the area and volume of corresponding location.
Furthermore, the coefficient of variation (CV) was employed to
compare the extent of dispersion of the air age at different locations. CV 2.3. Model validation
is defined as the ratio of the standard deviation to the mean value of the
population; it is computed from Eq. (11): An appropriate turbulence model is very important for solving RANS
equations, and the following aspects should be taken into account for the
selection of turbulence models (Chen et al., 2020):

Fig. 2. Vertical velocity at different distances downstream of the jet fans: (a) 30 m; (b) 60 m.

4
S. Zhao et al.
Fig. 3. Arrangement of field tests in the Yingtian Street Yangtze River Tunnel.
Fig. 4. Vertical velocity of simulation and tests at different test sections: (a) 0 m; (b) 20 m; (c) 60 m; (d) 100 m; (e) 120 m; (f) 160 m.
(1) Characteristics and application scope of the turbulent model;
(2) Computational cost and modelling accuracy;
(3) Indispensable model validation through the comparison between
experimental and numerical results;
(4) The proved turbulence model in previous studies regarding
similar problems.
Considering the characteristics of tunnel ventilation and computa­
tional cost, the realizable k-ε model was selected in this study. To vali­
date the accuracy of turbulence model, field tests in the Yingtian Street
Yangtze River Tunnel in Nanjing, China, were conducted in this study.
The length of the Yangtze River Tunnel is approximately 3.5 km, with six
unidirectional lanes in two lines (left and right). The maximum height of
the tunnel is 8.45 m, and the height of the clearance space is 4.5 m. Five
groups and four groups of jet fans (diameter of 1000 mm) were installed
near the entrance and exit of the tunnel, respectively. Each group
comprised three jet fans with a horizontal spacing of 2.7 m, and the
5
Journal of Wind Engineering & Industrial Aerodynamics 228 (2022) 105088
longitudinal distance between neighboring groups of jet fans was 100 m.
Field tests were carried out at the entrance of the right line, and the
outlets of the jet fans in group 2 (300 m from the entrance) were selected
as the reference position. The cross-sections at 0, 20, 60, 100, 120, and
160 m downstream of the reference position were the test sections. Five
test poles (4.5 m in height) were equally spaced in the test sections, and
five anemometers were placed at each pole with equal vertical spacing
of 0.9 m. All test poles were arranged in the left two lanes, as the
rightmost lane was reserved for the normal traffic. The arrangement of
the field tests is shown in Fig. 3. The anemometer was Testo 435i with a
measuring range of 0–30 m/s and an accuracy of 0.1 m/s (±5%). The
sampling time of each test section was 6 min; the sampling interval was
set to 2 s. All tests were carried out during the maintenance period of the
Yangtze River Tunnel on the night of September 17, 2021. Fig. 4 com­
pares the vertical velocity of the numerical simulation and field tests,
taking pole No. 2 (shown in Fig. 3) as an example.
As shown in Fig. 4, the simulation values exhibited less fluctuation
S. Zhao et al. Journal of Wind Engineering & Industrial Aerodynamics 228 (2022) 105088

Fig. 5. Velocity contours and streamline distribution in longitudinal section through axis of right jet fan.

Fig. 6. Velocity contours and streamline distribution in the symmetrical longitudinal section of the tunnel.

than the test values. The reason was that all test poles were placed in the
two lanes on the left, reserving the rightmost lane for normal traffic.
Although the test poles kept a certain distance from the vehicles, the
passing traffic would still affect the stability of the whole flow field.
However, this influence factor was not taken into account in the simu­
lation process, so the field test values fluctuated more than the simula­
tion results. Considering all five test poles, the relative error of the
simulation and measurement was less than 12%. What is more, a large
number of previous studies have proved the feasibility of realizable k-ε
model on tunnel ventilation (Chen et al., 2019; Xu et al., 2021).
Therefore, the selected turbulence model was reliable for further study.
3. Results
3.1. Flow characteristics
The full development distance of the jet flow was approximately 100
m; thus, the flow characteristics in the range of 0–120 m downstream of
the jet fans were analyzed. Fig. 5 illustrates the velocity contours and
streamline distribution in the longitudinal section through the axis of the

6
S. Zhao et al.
Fig. 7. Vertical velocity variation in the symmetrical longitudinal section of tunnel: (a) 0◦ ; (b) 2◦ ; (c) 4◦ ; (d) 6◦ ; (e) 8◦ ; (f) 10◦ ; (g) 12◦ . (L is the longitudinal distance
downstream of the jet fans).
right jet fan.
It was found that the jet flow in the tunnel space caused vortices,
either near the ground or ceiling. When there was no pitch angle, the
Coandă effect caused the jet flow to adhere to the ceiling, with
entrainment leading to a vortex near the floor. The jet flow moved
downwards gradually at pitch angles of 2◦ and 4◦ ; however, the influ­
ence of the Coandă effect persisted. Pitch angles ≥6◦ overcame the
Coandă effect completely, but jet flow impacted the ground at pitch
angles >8◦ . Although the jet flow was distributed in the middle space of
the tunnel at both 6◦ and 8◦ , the distribution characteristics were quite
different. As shown in Fig. 5, when the pitch angle was 6◦ , the vortex
caused by the jet flow appeared above the ground approximately 40 m
downstream of the jet fan, while the vortex transferred from the ground
to the ceiling at a pitch angle of 8◦ . The flow characteristics in the
symmetrical longitudinal section of the tunnel were similar to those in
the longitudinal section through the axis of the right jet fan, as shown in
Fig. 6.
The high-speed area was the intersection of two jet flows, gradually
approaching the ground with the increase in pitch angle, with the vortex
area appearing opposite to the intersection of the jet flow. The farther
the intersection from the wall, regardless of the ceiling or floor, the
7
Journal of Wind Engineering & Industrial Aerodynamics 228 (2022) 105088
smaller the vortex area. From Fig. 6, the vortex area was the smallest
when the pitch angle was 6◦ , but the flow field was more uniform in the
clearance space at pitch angles larger than 6◦ . Fig. 7 shows the corre­
sponding velocity values in the symmetrical longitudinal section of the
tunnel.
As shown in Fig. 7, the peak velocity values in the tunnel were all
lower than 6.5 m/s and were closer to the ground with an increase in
pitch angle. The vertical distribution characteristics of velocity values at
different pitch angles can be divided into two types. When the pitch
angles were <6◦ , the peak values downstream of the jet fans were always
maintained above the clearance space, and the maximum peak values
appeared 40 m downstream of the fan, as shown in Fig. 7 (a)–(c). When
the pitch angles were ≥6◦ , the peak values began to fall within the
clearance space, and the maximum peak values appeared 20 m down­
stream of the fan, as shown in Fig. 7 (d)–(g). The velocity distribution 40
m downstream of the jet fans was quite different from that at other
positions because the velocity discontinuity caused by the vortex existed
near the 40 m downstream jet fans; the velocity discontinuity became
clearer when the pitch angles were large or small. Therefore, it is
assumed that there must be a specific pitch angle that can achieve the
optimal effect of alleviating this phenomenon.
S. Zhao et al. Journal of Wind Engineering & Industrial Aerodynamics 228 (2022) 105088

Fig. 8. Air age contours and streamline distribution in the longitudinal section near the sidewall.

Fig. 9. Air age contours and MAA-S in cross-sections downstream of the jet fans (with an interval of 20 m).

3.2. Air age in the tunnel space
3.2.1. Application of air age in tunnel
Although the theory of air age is mature and is widely used in the air
distribution evaluation of air-conditioned rooms, it is rarely used in
highway tunnels. Therefore, its applicability in tunnel environments
should first be analyzed. As unstable flow often occurs in the region
within 0.17 tunnel diameters from the sidewall (Mutama and Hall,
1996), the air age in the section near the sidewall was adopted to
analyze the applicability of the method. Fig. 8 shows the air age contours
and streamline in the longitudinal section near the sidewall.
It was found that the air age can accurately reflect the flow

8
S. Zhao et al. Journal of Wind Engineering & Industrial Aerodynamics 228 (2022) 105088

Fig. 10. Air age contours in longitudinal sections at three different widths under various pitch angles.

characteristics. The air age in the vortex was clearly older than that in
other areas, especially in the backflow part opposite the mainstream
direction, indicating that the air supply in the vortex was futile. As
shown in Fig. 8, there was no vortex at 10◦ and 12◦ , but the air age still
revealed the loss of ventilation effectiveness caused by the airflow
impacting the ground. Thus, air age can be used to evaluate the effec­
tiveness of the air supply inside the tunnel.
3.2.2. Distribution of air age
Fig. 9 shows the air age contours and MAA-S in the cross-sections
downstream of the jet fans.
As shown in Fig. 9, the MAA-S in the cross-sections varied in the
range of 50–100 s. MAA-S increased with the distance from the jet fans
along the longitudinal direction of the tunnel. MAA-S at 0◦ exhibited
unique characteristics compared with other pitch angles, and the MAA-S
in the cross-section 40 m downstream of the jet fans was older than that
at 60 m. This is because when the pitch angle was 0◦ , the strong
entrainment effect adhered to the ceiling produced a larger low-speed
area and vortex in the clearance space than that at other angles, indi­
cating that traditional straight jet fans caused a significant loss of
ventilation effectiveness. Jet fans with pitch angles can reduce the air
age, implying that the effectiveness of the air supply is improved. When
the pitch angles were between 6◦ and 8◦ , the improvement was more
significant. It can also be observed that the air age was distributed
symmetrically along the tunnel width. Fig. 10 shows the air age contours
in the longitudinal sections at three different widths under various pitch
angles to illustrate the detailed characteristics of the air age along the
tunnel width.
It was demonstrated that the air age distributions in different lon­
gitudinal sections under the same pitch angle had similar characteristics.

Table 2
MAA-S and CV of air age in longitudinal sections.

Pitch angles
Longitudinal sections
0◦ 2◦ 4◦ 6◦ 8◦ 10◦ 12◦

Z=0m MAA-S (s) 70.75 66.38 64.14 62.09 64.08 67.85 73.20
CV 24% 21% 21% 20% 21% 21% 22%
Z=2m MAA-S (s) 72.34 67.09 64.90 62.53 64.24 67.90 72.70
CV 24% 21% 21% 20% 21% 21% 21%
Z=-4m MAA-S (s) 76.69 72.99 67.92 64.78 65.18 67.47 71.56
CV 21% 19% 19% 18% 19% 19% 18%

9
S. Zhao et al.
Fig. 11. MAA-V of typical volumes at different pitch angles.
The area near the jet fans had a younger air age, while the area with a
vortex had an older age, which caused poor uniformity of the air age
distribution. Table 2 lists the detailed MAA-S and CV of the air age in the
longitudinal sections under various pitch angles.
For the longitudinal section Z = 0 m, the minimum values of MAA-S
and CV of the air age (62.09 s and 20%) appeared at a pitch angle of 6◦ ,
and the other two longitudinal sections exhibited similar trends. It is
clear that the CV of the air age lies at a high level, revealing a significant
dispersion of the air age distribution, mainly caused by the complexity of
the flow characteristics in the tunnel. Therefore, the MAA-V of a certain
volume is assumed to be a more objective index to evaluate ventilation
effectiveness in tunnels as a volume can contain a more complete flow
pattern than a section.
3.3. Analysis of optimal pitch angle
Based on the results in Section 3.2, the MAA-V of a certain volume
was employed as the criterion for the optimal pitch angle. The full
development distance of the jet flow and the ventilation requirements in
the tunnel are two key points for determining a reasonable volume.
Finally, the volumes covering the full and clearance spaces were selected
as the typical volume, which had a length of 120 m downstream of the
jet fans. Fig. 11 shows the MAA-V of typical volumes at different pitch
angles.
The variation in MAA-V at different pitch angles showed a parabolic
trend, and the MAA-V of the flow field with pitch angles was much
smaller than that of the 0◦ pitch angle. The minimum MAA-V in the full
space appeared at a pitch angle of 6◦ , and MAA-V was 13.55% smaller
than that at a pitch angle of 0◦ . Meanwhile, the minimum MAA-V in the
clearance space appeared at a pitch angle of 8◦ , an improvement of
20.76% compared to that at a pitch angle of 0◦ . The MAA-V at a pitch
Fig. 12. Air age contour and streamline distribution in symmetrical longitudinal section of tunnel.
10
Journal of Wind Engineering & Industrial Aerodynamics 228 (2022) 105088
angle of 7◦ was added to determine a more accurate value; a pitch angle
of 7◦ obtained a desirable compromise of MAA-V in both the full and
clearance spaces. Under the condition of a pitch angle of 7◦ , the MAA-V
was 64.25 s in the full space and 64.20 s in the clearance space, 13.62%
and 20.67% smaller than that at pitch angle of 0◦ , respectively.
Fig. 12 shows the air age contour and streamline distribution in the
symmetrical longitudinal section of the tunnel at pitch angles of 6, 7, and
8◦ .
As shown in Fig. 12, the vortex area of the 6◦ pitch angle was smaller
than that of 8◦ , which is the reason why a 6◦ pitch angle can ensure a
younger MAA-V in the full space. However, the vortex with an 8◦ pitch
angle was located near the ceiling and did not affect the clearance space;
therefore, the ventilation effectiveness in the clearance space of 8◦ pitch
angle was better than that of the 6◦ pitch angle. A pitch angle of 7◦
dispersed two small vortices to the ground and ceiling to minimize the
influence on ventilation effectiveness in both the full and clearance
spaces. Therefore, a pitch angle of 7◦ was determined to be the optimal
angle of the jet fans in highway tunnels.
4. Discussion
Previous studies have evaluated the optimal pitch angle of jet fans in
tunnels. Table 3 summarizes the results of these studies and the corre­
sponding evaluation criteria.
As shown in Table 3, previous studies have generally considered
pressure parameters as evaluation criteria. Cory et al. (1997) conducted
experiments on a simplified rectangular vehicle model with a scale of
1:15, and indicated the maximum installation efficiency occurred when
the jet fan was inclined between 5 and 10◦ . The range of the optimal
angle was relatively large, because only 0◦ , 5◦ , 10◦ and 15◦ were tested
in their experiments. Betta et al. (2009) defined the optimal pitch angle
as the one which would minimize the pressure losses, and carried out
numerical simulation for two configurations: without vehicles and with
traffic jam. The results showed the optimal pitch angle was 6◦ and 2–4◦
for free tunnel and tunnel with traffic jam, respectively. Similarly, Lee
et al. (2014) also used pressure loss to evaluate the ventilation charac­
teristics of jet fans, and the optimal pitch angle for free tunnel was the
same as that of Betta et al. (2009). Chen et al. (2019) set 210 simulation
Table 3
Previous studies on the optimal pitch angle.
Authors Optimal angle of jet fans Evaluation criterion
Cory et al. (1997) 5–10◦ Installation efficiency
Betta et al. (2009) Tunnel with traffic: Pressure loss
2–4◦
Free tunnel: 6◦
Lee et al. (2014) 6◦ Pressure loss
Chen et al. (2019) Djet ≤ 900 mm, 8◦ Pressure-rise coefficient
Djet > 900 mm, 6◦
This study Free tunnel: 7◦ Air age and Pressure-rise
coefficient
S. Zhao et al.
Fig. 13. Pressure-rise coefficient at different pitch angles.
cases to investigate the influence of the outlet area and velocity of the jet
fan on the optimal pitch angle. When the diameter of jet fan was 1000
mm and the jet velocity was 30 m/s (similar to the case in this study), the
pitch angle of 6◦ was determined as the optimal one because of the
maximum pressure-rise coefficient. The pressure-rise coefficient is the
ratio of the actual rise pressure to the theoretical rise pressure, and the
theoretical rise pressure is calculated by Eq. (12):
( )
Aj
Δpt = N ⋅ ρ ⋅ v2j ⋅ ⋅ 1 −
vr
(12)
Ar vj
where N is the number of jet fan; vj is the velocity of jet fan; vr the
average velocity in tunnel; Aj andAr is the area of jet fan outlet and
tunnel cross-section.
A higher pressure-rise coefficient indicates less pressure loss and
higher installation efficiency. Fig. 13 shows a comparison of the
pressure-rise coefficients at different pitch angles in this study.
As shown in Fig. 13, the maximum pressure-rise coefficient was 0.84,
achieved at both 6◦ and 7◦ . In terms of the pressure rise performance, 6◦
could achieve the best effect in this study, which is consistent with the
previous ones. However, combined with the results in Section 3.3, the
pitch angle of 7◦ can simultaneously reduce the pressure loss and
improve the ventilation effectiveness. Therefore, it is more appropriate
to determine 7◦ as the optimal pitch angle.
It must be noted that there are still some factors that can affect the
flow field, such as the diameter of the jet fan and geometry of the tunnel.
All these influence factors will be investigated in our further studies.
5. Conclusions
This study aimed to the apply air age as a novel evaluation criterion
for obtaining the optimal pitch angle of the jet fan in highway tunnels.
The main conclusions are as follows:
(1) Jet flow caused vortices in the tunnel space, complicating the
characteristics of the flow field. The vortex area was the smallest
at the pitch angle of 6◦ , but the flow field was more uniform in the
clearance space when the angles were larger than 6◦ .
(2) The air age can be used to evaluate the ventilation effectiveness
inside the tunnel. The air age distribution had a poor uniformity
in tunnel space. MAA-S increased with the distance from the jet
fans and was distributed symmetrically along the tunnel width.
(3) MAA-V were selected as the criterion for the optimal pitch angle.
The minimum MAA-V in the full space and clearance space
appeared at the pitch angle of 6◦ and 8◦ , respectively, while the
pitch angle of 7◦ could obtain a desirable compromise for them.
11
Journal of Wind Engineering & Industrial Aerodynamics 228 (2022) 105088
(4) Due to the better ventilation efficiency and lower pressure loss,
the pitch angle of 7◦ was determined as the optimal angle for jet
fans in highway tunnels.
This study mainly provides a method for the evaluation and opti­
mization of ventilation system in highway tunnels. Although the struc­
ture and ventilation system designs of different tunnels are various, the
method can still be applicable.
CRediT authorship contribution statement
Shanshan Zhao: Conceptualization, Formal analysis, Investigation,
Methodology, Software, Writing – original draft. Peng Xue: Writing –
review & editing, Supervision. Jingchao Xie: Funding acquisition.
Yining Wang: Data curation, Investigation, Validation. Zhenxiong
Jiang: Resources, Supervision. Jiaping Liu: Project administration,
Supervision.
Declaration of competing interest
The authors declare that they have no known competing financial
interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence
the work reported in this paper.
Data availability
Data will be made available on request.
Acknowledgements
This study was sponsored by the Jiangsu Provincial Transport En­
gineering Construction Bureau. The field tests were supported by the
Nanjing Communications Operation Management Group and Jiangsu
Sinoroad Transportation Science and Technology Co. Ltd. The authors
would like to thank Prof. Zhengtao Ai from Hunan University for his
valuable advice.
References
Armstrong, J., Tabarra, M., Bennett, E.C., Matthews, R.D., Smith, T.W., 1995. Energy
savings in longitudinal tunnel ventilation systems. In: Proceedings of Seminar on
“Energy Savings in the Design and Operation of Fans, pp. 37–47.
Betta, V., Cascetta, F., Musto, M., Rotondo, G., 2009. Numerical study of the optimization
of the pitch angle of an alternative jet fan in a longitudinal tunnel ventilation system.
Tunn. Undergr. Space Technol. 24 (2), 164–172.
Chen, T.Y., Lee, Y.T., Hsu, C.C., 1998. Investigations of piston-effect and jet fan-effect in
model vehicle tunnels. J. Wind Eng. Ind. Aerod. 73 (2), 99–110.
Chen, T., Li, Y., Xu, Z., Kong, J., Liang, Y., Wang, B., Fan, C., 2019. Study of the optimal
pitch angle of jet fans in road tunnels based on turbulent jet theory and numerical
simulation. Build. Environ. 106390.
Chen, T., Li, Y., Luan, D., Jiao, A., Yang, L., Fan, C., Shi, L., 2020. Study of flow
characteristics in tunnels induced by canyon wind. J. Wind Eng. Ind. Aerod. 202,
104236.
Cory, W., Matthews, R.D., Tabarra, M., Kenrick, B., 1997. The effects of jet plume
configuration on the installation efficiency of jet fans. In: 9th International
Symposium on Aerodynamics and Ventilation of Vehicle Tunnels, pp. 57–76. BHR
Group.
Daghigh, R., Adam, N.M., Sahari, B.B., 2009. Ventilation parameters and thermal
comfort of naturally and mechanically ventilated offices. Indoor Built Environ. 18
(2), 113–122.
Eftekharian, E., Dastan, A., Abouali, O., Meigolinedjad, J., Ahmadi, G., 2014.
A numerical investigation into the performance of two types of jet fans in ventilation
of an urban tunnel under traffic jam condition. Tunn. Undergr. Space Technol. 44,
56–67.
Hang, J., Sandberg, M., Li, Y., 2009. Age of air and air exchange efficiency in idealized
city models. Build. Environ. 44 (8), 1714–1723.
He, L., Xu, Z., Markert, F., Zhao, J., Liu, Q., Tao, H., Wang, Z., Fan, C., 2020.
Experimental study of heat exhaust efficiency with natural ventilation in tunnel fire:
impact of shaft height and heat release rate. J. Wind Eng. Ind. Aerod. 201, 104173.
Jacques, E., Wauters, P., 1999. Improving the ventilation efficiency of jet fans in
longitudinally ventilated rectangular ducts. In: Proceedings of the U.S Mine
Ventilation Symposium, pp. 503–507.
S. Zhao et al.
Kwon, K.-S., Lee, I.-B., Han, H.-T., Shin, C.-Y., Hwang, H.-S., Hong, S.-W., Han, C.-P.,
2011. Analysing ventilation efficiency in a test chamber using age-of-air concept and
CFD technology. Biosyst. Eng. 110 (4), 421–433.
Lee, S.C., Lee, S., Lee, J., 2014. CFD analysis on ventilation characteristics of jet fan with
different pitch angle. KSCE J. Civ. Eng. 18 (3), 812–818.
Li, X., Li, D., Yang, X., Yang, J., 2003. Total air age: an extension of the air age concept.
Build. Environ. 38 (11), 1263–1269.
Liu, K., Guo, J., Wan, L., Xu, C., 2020. A model test study to optimize the ventilation
system of a long expressway tunnel. J. Wind Eng. Ind. Aerod. 207, 104393.
Long, Z., Yang, Y., Liu, C., Zhong, M., 2020. Study on the optimal operation mode of
ventilation system during metro double-island platform fire. Build. Simulat. 14 (3),
779–792.
Mundt, E., Mathisen, H.M., Nielsen, P.V., Moser, A., 2004. Ventilation Effectiveness:
Rehva Guidebook No 2, vol. 29. Rehva.
Musto, M., Rotondo, G., 2014. Numerical comparison of performance between
traditional and alternative jet fans in tiled tunnel in emergency ventilation. Tunn.
Undergr. Space Technol. 42, 52–58.
Mutama, K.R., Hall, A.E., 1996. The experimental investigation of jet fan aerodynamics
using wind tunnel modeling. J. Fluid Eng. 118 (2), 322–328.
Padilla-Marcos, M., Alberto, M., 2018. Assessment for the age of the air and ventilation
efficiency in confined outdoor spaces through computational fluid dynamics
techniques. Energies 11 (8), 1932.
Park, J., Jo, Y., Park, G., 2018. Flow characteristics of fresh air discharged from a
ventilation duct for mine ventilation. J. Mech. Sci. Technol. 32 (3), 1187–1194.
Peng, M., Zhang, S., Yang, H., He, K., Cong, W., Cheng, X., Zhang, H., 2020. Experimental
study on confinement velocity in tunnel fires with longitudinal ventilation. J. Wind
Eng. Ind. Aerod. 201, 104157.
PIARC, 2016. Road Tunnels: Complex Underground Road Networks. Paris.
PIARC, 2017. Road Tunnels: First Steps towards a Sustainable Approach. Paris.
Qin, C., Lu, W.-Z., 2021. Effects of ceiling exhaust location on thermal comfort and age of
air in room under impinging jet supply scheme. J. Build. Eng. 35, 101966.
Rohne, E., 1991. Friction losses of a single jet due to its contact with a vaulted ceiling. In:
7th International Symposium on Aerodynamics and Ventilation of Vehicle Tunnels,
pp. 679–687.
Sandberg, M., Sjöberg, M., 1983. The use of moments for assessing air quality in
ventilated rooms. Build. Environ. 18 (4), 181–197.
Shih, T.H., Liou, W.W., Shabbir, A., Yang, Z., Zhu, J., 1995. A new k-ε eddy viscosity
model for high Reynolds number turbulent flows. Comput. Fluids 24 (3), 227–238.
12
Journal of Wind Engineering & Industrial Aerodynamics 228 (2022) 105088
Tian, X., Li, B., Ma, Y., Liu, D., Li, Y., Cheng, Y., 2019. Experimental study of local
thermal comfort and ventilation performance for mixing, displacement and stratum
ventilation in an office. Sustain. Cities Soc. 101630.
Tian, X., Zhang, S., Awbi, H.B., Liao, C., Cheng, Y., Lin, Z., 2020. Multi-indicator
evaluation on ventilation effectiveness of three ventilation methods: an experimental
study. Build. Environ., 107015
Wang, F., Wang, M., He, S., Zhang, J., Deng, Y., 2010. Computational study of effects of
jet fans on the ventilation of a highway curved tunnel. Tunn. Undergr. Space
Technol. 25 (4), 382–390.
Witt, K.C., Schütze, J., 2006. Bend it like a Banana. 12th International Symposium on
Aerodynamics and Ventilation of Vehicle Tunnels. BHR Group, pp. 683–693.
Witt, K.C., Schütze, J., 2008. Effective Thrust Transformation inside Tunnels with Jet
Fans (Banana Jet), 4th International Conference “Tunnel Safety and Ventilation”,
pp. 74–81.
Xu, Z., Wang, B., Kong, J., Chen, T., Liang, Y., 2021. Study on the influence of ceiling
tunnel angle on the gas shunting efficiency of urban highway tunnel. Case Stud.
Therm. Eng. 25, 100888.
Xue, P., You, S., Chao, J., Ye, T., 2014. Numerical investigation of unsteady airflow in
subway influenced by piston effect based on dynamic mesh. Tunn. Undergr. Space
Technol. 40, 174–181.
Yang, Q., Shen, H., Liang, Z., 2020. Analysis of particulate matter and carbon monoxide
emission rates from vehicles in a Shanghai tunnel. Sustain. Cities Soc. 56, 102104.
Yi, H., Park, J., Kim, M.S., 2020. Characteristics of mine ventilation air flow using both
blowing and exhaust ducts at the mining face. J. Mech. Sci. Technol. 34 (3),
1167–1174.
Zhang, H., Zhu, C., Zheng, W., You, S., Ye, T., Xue, P., 2016. Experimental and numerical
investigation of braking energy on thermal environment of underground subway
station in China’s northern severe cold regions. Energy 116, 880–893.
Zhang, H., Zhu, C., Liu, M., Zheng, W., You, S., Li, B., Xue, P., 2017. Mathematical
modeling and sensitive analysis of the train-induced unsteady airflow in subway
tunnel. J. Wind Eng. Ind. Aerod. 171, 67–78.
Zhao, W., Liang, Y., Xu, Z., Kong, J., Chen, T., Wang, B., 2020. Study on the influence of
bypass tunnel angle on gas shunting efficiency of urban road tunnels. J. Wind Eng.
Ind. Aerod. 205, 104229.
Zhou, T., Wang, X., He, J., Chen, Q., Wang, J., 2019. The effect of forced ventilation by
using two movable fans on thermal smoke movement in a tunnel fire. J. Wind Eng.
Ind. Aerod. 184, 321–328.
Zhu, Y., Tang, F., Chen, L., Wang, Q., Xu, X., 2020. Effect of lateral concentrated smoke
extraction on the smoke back-layering length and critical velocity in a longitudinal
ventilation tunnel. J. Wind Eng. Ind. Aerod. 207, 104403.