Ocean Engineering 285 (2023) 115220

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Ocean Engineering
journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/oceaneng

Study on sediment erosion generated by a deep-sea polymetallic-nodule

collector based on double-row jet
Xixi Liu a, Xuguang Chen a, b, *, Jiakang Wei c, Shuai Jin a, Xingzheng Gao a, Guodong Sun a,
Jiahao Yan a, Qingqing Lu a
a
College of Engineering, Ocean University of China, 238 Songling Road, Qingdao, 266000, China
b
Shandong Province Key Laboratory of Ocean Engineering, Ocean University of China, 238 Songling Road, Qingdao, 266100, China
c
China Merchants Marine Equipment Research Institute, Co., Ltd., 1089 Nanhai Road, Shenzhen, 518000, China

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

Handling Editor: Prof. A.I. Incecik The hydraulic double-row jet collector is widely used due to its high collection efficiency. Deep-sea sediments are
usually characterized by high water content and semi-fluid dynamics, and there are few studies on the erosion
Keywords: properties of such sediments under jets. Resulting in the failure to accurately assess the efficiency and distur­
Double-row jet bance of a two-row jet collector. In this paper, the flow field characteristics are simulated for different double-
Deep-sea
row jet parameters (jet outlet pressure, nozzle-to-seabed height, target distance and number of nozzles). The
Sediment erosion
erosion of a high water content, semi-fluid dynamic sediment layer (similar to the deep sea) under a double-row
Polymetallic-nodule collector
jet is experimentally investigated. According to the results from study, the jet flow field had a powerful central
flow field, and decayed to both sides gradually. The formulas of flow field attenuation distribution in the upper
jet zone and the maximum axial pressure are proposed. Moreover, the experiments showed that the erosion holes
on the surface layer was mainly a "bowl" shape with a flat bottom and concave side, which had self-similarity.
The erosion depth grew with the increase of jet outlet pressure, decreased with the increase of the nozzle height
to the seabed. With the increase of target distance, the erosion depth first increased and then decreased. A new
model of the erosion depth-time and erosion depth prediction are proposed. These results can provide theoretical
reference for flow field calculation in nodule mining operation with double-row jet collector. It may have po­
tential benefits on melioration of the collection efficiency and reduction of the jet disturbance.

1. Introduction mining of polymetallic nodules will directly or indirectly destroy the

Deep-sea polymetallic nodules exist in the depths of the ocean
4000–6000m. Due to their huge reserves and economic value, they have
become the focus of attention in the world. Polymetallic nodules are rich
in manganese, cobalt, nickel, iron, copper and other elements, which are
important raw materials for the production of new energy vehicle bat­
teries and the development of other emerging industries. Among them,
the CCZ seabed polymetallic nodules contain about ten times more
nickel than the global land reserves (TMC, 2021). Polymetallic nodules
were buried in the surface deep-sea sediments of the seabed. Due to its
special physical properties, its mining mode has gradually matured after
years of development. At present, the mainstream mining system is a
mining system with hydraulic ore collection and lifting as the core
(Oebius et al., 2001).
Due to the rich diversity of organisms in the collection area, the
seabed ecological research. In addition to verifying the feasibility of jet
collection system, it is also an important topic to explore the impact of
deep-sea mining jet system on the seabed surface soil and the environ­
mental impact brought by deep-sea polymetallic nodules mining
behavior (Fan et al., 2023). Oebius et al. (2001) based on ATESEPP
project, studied and compared the suspension and settlement charac­
teristics of the surface soft soil in the Peruvian basin and the polymetallic
nodules mining area of CCZ. The study pointed out that during the
mining process, sediments with a wet weight of about 7000-10,000 tons
per square kilometer would be recovered together with nodules and 16%
of that sediment is suspended by the impact. In addition, through the
theoretical estimates, the German mining car production process will
cause a high concentration plume of 1.6 g/L（Becker et al., (2001);
Grupe et al., (2001); Oebius et al., (2001)）, causing severe submarine
plume pollution. In recent years, Fan et al. (2020) obtained the revised

* Corresponding author. College of Engineering, Ocean University of China, 238 Songling Road, Qingdao, 266000, China.
E-mail address: chenxuguang1984@ouc.edu.cn (X. Chen).

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.oceaneng.2023.115220
Received 12 May 2023; Received in revised form 11 June 2023; Accepted 21 June 2023
Available online 10 July 2023
0029-8018/© 2023 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
X. Liu et al.
Froude number under soft soil based on the vertical jet erosion theory
(Aderibigbe and Rajaratnam, 1996). When it is less than 0.5, the sedi­
ment suspension will not be triggered. These two different research
methods provide some inspirations for the study of erosion character­
istics of soft soil under the action of jet. However, previous studies still
lack the flow field distribution under the double row jet and the erosion
amount of soft soil under the action of double row jet, which still cannot
accurately estimate the collection efficiency of deep-sea polymetallic
nodules and the plume environmental pollution caused by jet flow
operation.
Through the water jet jetted by the hydraulic collector, the water jet
cuts into the surface sediment layer, strip the polymetallic nodules from
the sediment layer and lift them. Nodules enter the interior of the mining
vehicle through the collecting pipe, then, lifted to the sea surface by the
lifting system to supporting vessel. In general, the double-row jet hy­
draulic collector completes the collection of nodules in the upwelling
field formed by the contra-jet(Lee et al., 2012, Yue et al., 2021).
Moreover, the double-row jet hydraulic collector has higher collection
efficiency than other collection methods (single-jet and Coanda-effect
collector), but its disturbance on the surface seabed was still serious.
In order to reach fewer disturbance and maximum collection efficiency,
the reasonable jet parameter still need to be further studied (Yue et al.,
2021)
The hydraulic collector in the nodule mining operation was devel­
oped from the vertical jet impact theory. Beltaos and Rajaratnam (1977)
provided a relatively complete vertical jet impact theory, quantified the
basic flow field of the water jet impact, also, gave the parametric
equation. However, the influence between jet and substrate has not been
discussed. Subsequently, through vertical impact experiments under
sand sediment, Aderibigbe and Rajaratnam (1996) gave the factors Ec,
describing the relationship between jet energy and sediment layer,
divided the jet strength and crater morphology into four types. Based on
the sediment slope incipient motion theory (Chiew and Parker, 1994),
the function of erosion depth under vertical jet impact was derived. This
classical theory became footstone of the development of sea trencher
and hydraulic nodule collector in the future. Mazurek et al. (2001)
discussed the erosion performance under vertical jet impact by con­
ducting vertical jet impact experiments on cohesive soil. They pointed
out that the crater size was a function of jet momentum flux, impact
height (for "large" impact height), viscosity and density of jet medium as
well as critical shear stress of soil. The observation was consistent with
the shape of erosion holes reported by Aderibigbe and Rajaratnam
(1996). However, the erosion process of clay is different from that of
sand. According to the difference in jet strength, three types of sheet
erosion, large-scale erosion and rapid surface erosion appear. Although
there are great differences in composition, water content and formation
conditions between the terrestrial clay and the soft sediment on the
seafloor surface, there is a certain similarity between the two according
to the results of the in-situ test in CCFZ (Oebius et al., 2001). As Mazurek
et al. (2001) reported, the erosion behavior of cohesive sediment, under
water jet impact, could be described with a function consisting of jet
flow, height above ground, fluid density and other parameters. Due to
the complex characteristics of deep-sea sediment, the erosion studies
considering the influence of sediment still remained to be done.
The jet impact can produce obvious reflected flow, and the final
shape of the erosion holes is related to the jet parameters, such as in­
fluence of jet angle, velocity at nozzle and target distance, which should
be further discussed (Gao et al., 2022). Besides, the double-row jet
collector mainly depends on the jet nozzle pressure, the moving speed of
the vehicle and the nozzle height to the ground. The efficient collection
of nodules should be ensured by the unified combination of all param­
eters (Hong et al., 1999). Nevertheless, the mathematical calculation in
the flow field of the double-row jet remained to be advanced that the
pressure distribution of the double-row jet would be further studied.
In this paper, the simulation and experimental tests were carried out
for jet erosion on the deep-sea sediment with double-row hydraulic
2
Ocean Engineering 285 (2023) 115220
water jets. Firstly, the pressure distribution characteristics of jet flow
field under different jet pressure, jet height, jet target distance and the
number of jet nozzles were analyzed. Then, the attenuation distribution
of the flow field and the function of the maximum axial pressure in the
upper jet zone under different situations are presented. Moreover, the
influence of different jet parameters on the erosion hole morphology was
analyzed and a prediction model of erosion on the deep-sea sediment
with jet parameters was established. Finally, the optimization scheme of
double-row jet collector considering fluid-solid-sediment coupling was
proposed, which provided scientific basis for practical commercial
mining.
2. The double-row hydraulic jet collector and its flow field
Collector is mounted on the front of self-propelled mining vehicle
system and collects mineral resources from the ocean floor. The con­
ceptual design of pick-up device should consider the economical, tech­
nical, and environmental aspects. Mechanical, hydraulic, and hybrid-
collecting methods have been proposed so far. Mechanical collecting
type uses only mechanical system such as groom, shovel, and fork to pick
up manganese nodule. This collecting mechanism has high pick-up ef­
ficiency. But this method has poor power efficiency and brings a bad
influence on deep-sea ecosystem. Hydraulic collecting type is based on
the Coanda nozzle effect; an object is apt to attach to a nearby surface
when a free jet emerges from a nozzle. This collection method has simple
structure, but there is a possibility of internal clogging up the ducts.
Hybrid-collecting method, otherwise, can lift manganese nodules by a
water jet and then move toward the conveyor with scrappers. It is
fundamentally compromising method of above two types Lee et al.
(2012).
According to the theoretical analysis of impact jets given by Ader­
ibigbe and Rajaratnam (1996), Dong (1997), the flow field of
double-row jets is shown in Fig. 1. In this paper, the dynamic charac­
teristics of the double-row jets, at the lifting stage of nodule, were the
core point, so the pressure distribution in the impact zone and the for­
mation zone of the upper jet would be analyzed.
In order to investigate the influence of different jet parameters on the
collection efficiency and determine the optimization design of the col­
lector, the dimensional analysis was given with π theory. Then, the
relationship between impact pressure and main jet parameters was ob­
tained by equation transformation. Impact pressure at the jet impact
area P mainly depends on the parameters of jet nozzle (Fig. 2), as well as
the fluid density and viscous coefficient. Due to the oblique angle of jet
nozzles remains the same as 45◦ , also, Re is large, the consideration of
viscous coefficient and angle change can be ignored.
The function which describes the impact pressure at jet impact area P
was defined as:
Fig. 1. The double-row hydraulic collector, which designed by Lee
et al. (2012).
X. Liu et al. Ocean Engineering 285 (2023) 115220

1
Pd = ρv2 (10)
2

Where, v is the velocity of the fluid at this point. In the process of fluid
flow, static pressure and dynamic pressure will convert to each other
after deducting energy loss (Wu, 2008).

3. Numerical simulation analysis

3.1. Mathematical model

The k − ω SST model was chosen for the limitation effect of the wall
surface on water jet impact. This model combined the advantages of the
k − ω model in the near wall region and the advantages of the k − ω
model in the far field.
The equation of turbulent kinetic energy k is defined as:
( )
∂k ∂(kui ) ∂ ∂k
+ρ = Tk + Gk − Yk (11)
∂t ∂xi ∂xj ∂xj
Fig. 2. Flow field and main parameters of double-row water jet.
The transport equation of specific dissipation rate is defined as:
( )
P = f (ρ, μ, v0 , d, B, H, n) (1) ∂ω ∂(ωui ) ∂ ∂ω
+ρ = Tω + Gω − Yω + Dω (12)
∂t ∂xi ∂xj ∂xj
According to π theory, ρ, v0 and d were chosen as the basic physical
quantities. The variables in Eq. (1) could be then expressed by five Where, Gk is turbulent kinetic energy generated by laminar flow velocity
dimensionless equations: gradient; Gω is the turbulent kinetic energy generated by the specific
P dissipation rate transport equation; Tk is the diffusivity of k, and, Tω is
π=1 (2) the diffusivity of ω. Yk and Yω are turbulent currents due to diffusion; Dω
2
ρv0 2
is the orthogonal divergent term.
μ 1
π1 = = (3)
ρv0 d Re 3.2. Simulation setup

π2 =
B
(4) In order to improve the calculation accuracy and reduce the calcu­
d lation time, the computational domain is divided into an encrypted grid
region and a sparse grid region. The height Hm of the computational
H
π3 = (5) domain of the encrypted grid is taken as the height H of the nozzle from
d
the bottom in this condition, the length Lm=2H + B, the width Bm = 2n
π4 = n (6) (d + D); the total computational domain (mm) is Hw = Hm+200, the
length Lw = Lm+100, the width Bw = Bm+100. Establish Oxyz right
Next, Eq. (1) can be transformed into another formation: angle coordinate system, the coordinate origin O is set in the center of
π = f (π 1 , π 2 , π 3 , π 4 ) (7) the bottom, x, z and y correspond to the horizontal, vertical and vertical
directions respectively.
( )
P 1 B H Three groups of nozzles were set, the diameter of nozzle is 10 mm,
= f , , , n (8)
1
ρv0 2 Re d d and the spacing between each nozzle is 1.5 times the aperture. The
2
double-row nozzles were arranged sympathetically on the X-Z plane,
Where, 12 ρv0 2 is the axial dynamic pressure at the jet exit section, Re is where the center line of the calculation domain was located. The height
the Reynolds number of the water jet. Mazurek et al. (2001) reported from nozzle to the bottom is 100 mm and the target distance is 50 mm.
that Re has faint effect on the jet impact area, therefore, this study The boundary conditions were set as follows: each nozzle was set as
ignored the influence of Re on the water jet impact pressure per unit the velocity inlet with a value of 8 m/s. The bottom surface was the
mining area. impact plane that was set as wall with no slip. Due to there were fluid
For further simplification, Eq. (8) can be simplified as: moving outward on the top surface other surfaces, these surfaces were
( ) set as the pressure outlet.
B H
ξ=f , ,n (9) The grid was generated in Meshing which divided the computing
d d domain into hexahedron mesh. The gird size was controlled by function
Curvature, and the maximum mesh control size is 0.008m, normal angle
Where, ξ is a dimensionless pressure attenuation coefficient relative to of curvature is 3◦ ; In the total computing domain, the number of grids is
the initial dynamic pressure of the jet, ξ = 1 ρPv 2 . 1949749. k-ω SST model was chosen as the turbulence model for flow
2 0

The total pressure Pt at any point in the flow field is equal to the sum
of static pressure Ps and dynamic pressure Pd. Among them, the total
pressure reflects the work capacity of the fluid, static pressure refers to
the compressive energy generated by moving fluid impacting the wall,
and dynamic pressure is the compressive energy generated by fluid
momentum.
As is shown in Eq. (10), dynamic pressure Pd is defined as:
field calculation, and the Smoothing & Remeshing methods for dynamic
mesh were selected. Coupled algorithm was selected and the calculated
time step is 0.001s and the number of time step is 150.
3.3. Conditions
As the design given by Yue et al. (2021) and Wang (2015), nozzle
angle θ was set as 45◦ with a nozzle diameter d of 10 mm. The velocity at
jet nozzle was set at 6–14 m/s. The height between the nozzle and

3
X. Liu et al.
bottom H ranged from 80 to 160 mm. Depending on the nodule diam­
eter, the target distance B was set at 20, 30, 40, 50, 60 mm. besides, the
number of nozzles n from 1 to 9 were selected. The conditions are
summarized in Table 1.
3.4. Simulation results
3.4.1. The analysis of flow field and pressure field
The simulation showed similar flow field in different conditions.
Fig. 3 showed that the flow field evolved rapidly in the initial phase of jet
flow and became stable after T = 0.2s. The water jet impact can be
divided into two phases: water hammer pressure and stagnation pres­
sure (Zheng, et al., 2019). Due to the propagation velocity of shock wave
is larger than the impact velocity of water jet, the impact effect will
produce a temporary water hammer pressure at the impact center. Once
a stable impact jet is formed, the pressure at the center of the jet will
decrease and a stable Bernoulli stagnation pressure will be formed. Two
impacts occur in the process of double-row impingement jets. The first
impact occurs when the jets from each nozzle reach the target on the
bottom surface and the second impact occurs at the center of the two
opposite wall impact jets.
Fig. 4 showed the pressure variation of impact on the target and
center point. The jet pressure on target and center point increased and
then decreases with time, finally, became stable. During water hammer
pressure, the static pressure attenuation coefficient ξ increased, also, it
reached the peak earlier with the increase of v0. However, the ξ stay
stable in stagnation pressure. Compared with the time scale in two
phases, the first phase lasted only about 0.15s which can be ignored.
Therefore, the static pressure, in this paper, was the stagnation pressure.
As was shown in Fig. 5 and Fig. 6, the bottom pressure at different
nozzle velocity conditions all formed three peaks at the target and center
point. There is a transition point at the bottom on each side. Peak 1 is at
the center of the two jet nozzles. Peak2 and peak3 are usually sym­
metrical. Peak2 and peak3 are usually located on the outside of the jet
axis, which is due to the fluid flow bias hysteresis. These indicated that
the size of ξ in the flow field have no relation to the velocity at jet nozzle,
which was consistent with the Eq. (9).
3.4.2. The effect of H and B on the pressure field
Fig. 7 showed the comparison of static pressure attenuation coeffi­
cient ξ on the bottom X-axis direction at different nozzle height H from
bottom. With the increase of H, the peak value at the target gradually
disappeared, the static pressure distribution on the bottom X-axis tended
to form a single peak, and the peak value of pressure at the center was
not much different from the pressure values on both sides. The influence
range of pressure on the bottom surface increased from 5d (H = 80 mm)
Fig. 3. Velocity distribution at different time in X–Y plane.
4
Ocean Engineering 285 (2023) 115220
Fig. 4. Variation of ξ at target and central point.
to 8d (H = 160 mm), indicating that the higher the height of the nozzle
from the bottom, the longer the distance of free jet and the wider the
range of diffusion and entrainment as well as the more energy
dissipation.
The image in Fig. 8 illustrated that the static pressure distribution on
the bottom X-axis is a single peak curve with a large peak value, when B
= 20 mm. Due to the shorter target distance, the half-width of the impact
zone b1 and the upper jet formation zone b2 were both smaller. With the
increase of B, b2 increased slightly, while b1 increased significantly.
However, the peak pressure at the center and the target point are
respectively stable at a certain value, indicating that the target distance
mainly affected the range of impact zone.
3.4.3. The effect of n on the flow field
Fig. 9 and Fig. 10 illustrated that the outer impact water flow
diffused along the z axis to both sides of the wall and the adjacent impact
water flow in the inner group could only diffuse upward after inter­
secting. Thus, the intensity of the jet flow in upper jet zone was
strengthened. When n = 1, due to lack of strengthening effect from
adjacent jet, the pressure was much smaller than other conditions. When
n ≥ 3, with the increase of n, upper jet strengthening range becomes
wider on z axis direction, the maximum static pressure value of the
bottom surface is stable after increasing to a certain value, and the upper
jet flow pressure peak value and the location of the peak value keep
increasing and there is a tendency to converge. In fact, the nodule col­
lector has much more than 9 nozzles, the bottom pressure in the main
collection width will not change with the number of nozzle and main­
tains a fixed multiple relationship with the peak pressure of a single
X. Liu et al. Ocean Engineering 285 (2023) 115220

Fig. 5. The static pressure distribution at different time.

Fig. 6. The profile of distribution ξ in X-axis direction.

Fig. 8. The axial pressure attenuation coefficient ξ under different B (H =

100 mm).

group of nozzles.

3.5. Flow field calculation

3.5.1. The function of ξ on H, B and n

Fig. 11 showed that H/d and ln ξ have a significant linear relation­
ship which was simplified to Eq. (13).
ln ξ = C1 x + C2 (13)

Where, C1 and C2 are related to parameters B/d. ξ decreases exponen­

tially with the increase of H/d. Therefore, H is a key parameter in the
design of nodule collector that appropriate reduction of H/d can
significantly reduce energy cost.
Mathematically, the relationship of C1, C2 and B/d was shown in Eqs.
14 and 15.
[( ) / ]
B
C1 = 1.133 exp 20.331 − 1.563 (14)
Fig. 7. Distribution of ξ under different H (B = 30 mm). d
( )− 0.136
B
C2 = − 0.295 (15)
d
For further simplification, Eqs. (14) and (15) are substituted into Eq.

5
X. Liu et al. Ocean Engineering 285 (2023) 115220

Fig. 9. The static pressure under different nozzles group number n in Y-Z plane.

(13). The relationship among ξ1 (ξ1 indicates the value of the pressure
decay coefficient ξ when n = 1), H/d and B/d was defined as:
()
[ ( )− 0.136 ( ) ]
0.049 Bd
B H
ξ1 = exp − 0.295 + 1.133e − 1.563 (16)
d d

From Fig. 12, the exponential relationship was obtained in Eq. (17).
When n was large, the function tended to converge. Namely, when the
number of actual nozzles was large, the value of ξn /ξ1 was approxi­
mately equal to 4.041. Therefore, the value of ξ of the nodule collector
can be calculated as Eq. (17).

ξn /ξ1 = 4.041 − 4.538e− 0.405n

(17)

3.5.2. Pressure distribution in upper jet zone from x direction

Fig. 10. Distribution of axial pressure attenuation coefficient under different
nozzles number n (B = 30 mm, H = 100 mm).
As shown in Fig. 13, when r = 0, the pressure at the center of the jet is
the extreme point of the maximum (peak 1). When r = b, the pressure at
the center of the jet axis is about the extreme point of the minimum
(between peak 1 and peak 2).There is an extreme turning point from the
core area to the non-core area. The pressure in central upwelling area is
the maximum, and the pressure distribution in this region is close to
circular Here, the rising area of the flow field with the maximum jet
pressure Pm is taken as the critical jet pressure analysis area.
The pressure Pr at each point within the impact range can be
expressed by dimensional analysis in the following equations:
Pr = Pm f (η) (18)

Fig. 11. Influence of different H/d and B/d on ln ξ and its fitting curves.

6
X. Liu et al. Ocean Engineering 285 (2023) 115220

( ) ( )
ξb 2 ξ
f (η) = 1 − 3− 3 η + 2 − 2 b |η|3 (20)
ξm ξm
Eq. (20) was substituted into Eq. (18):
( ) ( )
ξr ξ ( r )2 ξ ⃒⃒ r ⃒⃒3
=1− 3− 3 b + 2− 2 b ⃒ ⃒ (21)
ξm ξm b ξm b
Therefore, the calculated pressure decay curve of the flow field in the
rising zone can be obtained according to Eq. (21) and the value of ξb/ξm
taken through numerical simulation ( see Table 1 ), as shown in Fig. 14.

4. Experiment analysis

4.1. Design of experiment

4.1.1. Experimental set-up

Fig. 12. The relationship between ξn /ξ1 and n.
The experimental investigation of the jet erosion characteristics of
deep-sea sediments was conducted in a specialized seabed simulation
tank at the College of Engineering, Ocean University of China. As
illustrated in Fig. 15, The major frame of the flume is 9.5m in length,
1.5m in width and 1.9m in depth, in the middle of which a soil-box of
6.0 m (length) × 0.7m (depth) was constructed for the sand-bed prep­
aration, with a water storage reservoir on one side of the tank.
The double-row jet system used in this experiment includes: double-
row jet nozzles (3 nozzles on each side), double-row jet nozzle con­
nectors, water supply pipes, and a turbine flow meter connected to a
water pump. The double-row jet nozzles are secured by two symmetri­
cally arranged movable connectors, and the nozzle’s height to seabed H
and the target distance B can be manually adjusted by rotating screws.
The turbine flow meter, with measurement range of 4–40 m3 /h and
accuracy of 0.5%, controls the intensity of the water flow.

Fig. 13. The calculation area of the pressure in the upper jet zone.

where, η = r/b, is the radial distance. The function f(η) should satisfy
the following boundary conditions:
⎧
′
⎨ η = 0；f (0) = 1，f (0) = 0
⎪
ξ (19)
⎩ η = 1；f (1) = b ，f ′(1) = 0
⎪
ξm
According to Taylor’s formula and boundary condition Eq. (19), it
can be obtained:
Fig. 15. The water tank of large-scale experiment with water jet impact.

Fig. 14. Theoretical calculation results of ξr in the jet central junction direction (x axis).

7
X. Liu et al. Ocean Engineering 285 (2023) 115220

4.1.2. Sediment substitutes Table 2

After decades of in-situ and laboratory experiments, the properties of
the deep-sea sediment in the potential mining section were clarified.
Generally, the deep-sea sediment is consisted of clay and silt with an
average grain size d50 about 10 μm or less (Grupe et al., 2001; Gillard
et al., 2019). The high water content (182.7～329.9%, Wei et al., 2021)
and the semi-fluid state of the sediments in this region are the main
mechanical properties of the sediments, which are the main factors
influencing sediment erosionability. Amoug the previous large-scale
experiments, the sediment substitutes (mixture of water-bentonite,
water-sand, and water-loam) were extensively used to restored the
original seafloor (Global Sea Mineral Resources, 2018; TMC, 2021;
Oebius et al., 2001; Sudarvelazhagan et al., 2022). From the similar
micro-characteristics and marco-characteristics, such as particle diam­
eter, composition, feel, stickiness etc.
In this paper, the sediment substitute was chosen as a mixture of
bentonite and water. The main mineral component of this bentonite
powder is montmorillonite and kaolinite, with 80% content of particle
size less than 10 μm, and the mass fraction of particle size at each level is
shown in Table 2. The liquid limit meter was used to measure the
bentonite liquid limit, plastic limit, plasticity index, and liquidity index
when the water content is 300%. The sediment is bentonite and water in
the ratio of 1:3 fully mixed, and the use of cone liquid limit meter and
other equipment for field testing. The water content of the soil at the
experiment site was judged to be about 300% according to the cone
sinking depth, the shear strength was less than 2 kPa, and the sediment
was in a semi-fluid state.
It is important to note that the 300% water content is the property of
similar materials. It is intended to conform similar materials to the semi-
fluid state of deep-sea sediments, and does not refer to the actual water
content of deep-sea sediments.
4.1.3. Experiment procedure
The model experiment was carried out in the following steps.
Mass fraction of particle size at each level of simulated sediment.
Diameter(mm) 0.25–0.075 0.075–0.050 0.050–0.010 <0.010
Percentage 1.6% 1.2% 12.5% 84.7%
Step 2: During the seabed was rested, the double-row jet system
would be adjusted, so that the nozzle height to the seabed H and
target distance B could be set as the experiment conditions described.
Step 3: After the seabed has rested, added water to the storage
reservoir. When the water level in the tank reaches 1.0m above the
seabed, stopped adding water.
Step 4: Open the jet pump and start timer. When the time reached the
set duration for the experiment condition, turn off the jet pump.
Step 5: After the jet impact, the system would be rested until the
suspended sediment has mostly settled. Open the drainage valve, and
drained the water from the soil surface. The experimental site after
jetting is shown in Fig. 16.
Step 6: Measure the jet erosion hole, and photograph the hole shape.
The erosion hole measurement points were arranged as shown in
Fig. 17. In the x and y directions, three values were taken at each
center and each side. The measurement points at sides were 2 cm
from the erosion hole edge. In the z direction, the depth measure­
ments were taken with 9 points: point 1 at the hole center, point 2 to
5 on the central axis 2 cm from the hole edge, and point 6 to 9 on the
central axis 6 cm from the hole edge.
Step 7: After the accomplishment of the measurements, proceed to
the next experiment condition.
It should be noted that the experiments were conducted using pure
water. According to the research of Han (2020), after the water content
of such clay is greater than the liquid limit, the difference of its shear

Step 1: The sediment substitutes would be completely mixed in

several buckets, the sediment was then filled the tank with a thick­
ness of 0.3m. The seabed would be ensuring a smooth surface, then
slowly added water into the tank. The seabed would be covered wtih
a 2 cm water layer and rested for 12 h (It should be noted that a
consolidation time of 12 h is far from sufficient for complete
consolidation of soft soils. The reason for choosing 12 h as the
consolidation time is that 12 h is sufficient to meet the required
conditions for the experiment.) Fig. 16. The double-row jet system and its sketch.

Table 1
Simulation conditions.
Conditions n H(mm) B(mm) v0 (m/s) b(mm) ξb ξm ξb
ξm

1 1 100 30 8 1.285 0.140 0.193 0.725

2 10 1.269 0.142 0.192 0.740
3 12 1.277 0.144 0.196 0.735
4 14 1.269 0.146 0.194 0.753
5 1 80 30 8 1.071 0.157 0.304 0.516
6 100 1.209 0.140 0.194 0.722
7 120 1.138 0.110 0.142 0.775
8 140 1.088 0.082 0.099 0.828
9 160 1.138 0.061 0.072 0.847
10 100 20 1.193 0.176 0.220 0.800
11 30 1.216 0.141 0.193 0.731
12 40 1.204 0.111 0.185 0.600
13 50 1.315 0.086 0.193 0.446
14 60 1.503 0.064 0.182 0.352
15 1 100 50 8 1.375 0.122 0.194 0.629
16 3 1.128 0.240 0.280 0.857
17 5 1.320 0.257 0.281 0.915
18 7 1.001 0.275 0.286 0.962
19 9 0.985 0.278 0.284 0.979

8
X. Liu et al. Ocean Engineering 285 (2023) 115220

Fig. 17. Water jet impact experiment and erosion hole measuring point map.
strength under salt and pure water is not obvious. Therefore, since the
water content of the sediments in the experiments was much greater
than the limiting water content, the injection experiments were per­
formed in pure water. The effect of salinity should be considered in the
follow-up experiment.
4.1.4. Experiment conditions
In this section, the parameter of the water jet was same as the
simulation cases. The nozzle inclination angle θ is 45◦ ; the nozzle
diameter d is 10 mm; the nozzle height to the seabed H for the water jet
impact experiment was chosen from 100 to 200 mm, five experiment
conditions. The number of nozzle groups n was 3, with the nozzle
spacing set to 1d (d is the nozzle diameter). The velocity at jet nozzle v0
was chosen within the range of 1–5 m/s, three experiment conditions.
With the same nozzle parameters, the jet impact experiments lasted for
30s, 60s, and 90s. The conditions are summarized in Table 3.
4.2. Experimental results
hydrodynamic energy from the water jet acting on the bottom of the
hole gradually weakened. Finally, the water flow was no longer able to
carry away the sediment pieces or lumps from the erosion hole. This
leaded to a transition from two erosion types to single-particle erosion,
ultimately reaching a certain equilibrium state. The velocity at jet nozzle
directly affected the hydrodynamic energy of water jet, therefore, the
erosion on the seabed was also influenced. As shown Fig. 18, under
different velocity at jet nozzle situations, the average erosion depth Za
increased with time went by.
4.2.2. The characteristics of erosion hole induced by water jet
Comparing the profile sections of the erosion holes under different
jet parameters, these holes exhibited similarities in shape, characterized
by a wider "bowl-shaped" bottom, and even the erosion holes had a
narrower top and wider bottom. As shown in Fig. 19b and e, cracks may
appear on one side of the erosion hole surface, with a downward
collapsing trend, indicating that the bottom of the soil layer has been
hollowed out.
Furthermore, Fig. 20 showed the dimensionless topographic map of
the erosion hole along the jet axis cross-section. The profile sections of
the erosion holes also display similarities, with consistent erosion hole
shapes and profile sectional slope angles of approximately 90◦ . Ac­
cording to the comparison of the horizontal and vertical ranges of the
average width (xa ) and average depth (ya ) in Fig. 21, the erosion holes’
aspect ratios under different jet outlet velocities can be maintained at
approximately 1:1. Therefore, the velocity at jet nozzle was the main
factor that affected the size of the erosion hole, but it would not change
the hole’s shape.

4.2.1. Time development characteristics of jet erosion 4.2.3. Influence of water flow parameters on jet erosion
The erosion is mainly concentrated in the first 30 s, and the devel­ Fig. 22 showed the relationship between the average erosion depth
opment of the erosion hole slowed down at later 30 s. Compared to the za and the nozzle height to the seabed H. As H increased, the average
development in depth, the width of the erosion hole changed little. This erosion depth decreased significantly. An inverse relationship was
indicated that, after the erosion hole has developed to a certain level, the observed between the two variables under different erosion time.
Therefore, the higher the nozzle height, the greater the energy dissipa­
Table 3 tion in the free outflow zone, resulting in a smaller hydrodynamic en­
experiment conditions and parameters. ergy impact on the seabed, producing shallower erosion holes.
No. H (mm) B (mm) Q (m3/s) v0 (m/s) t (s) Fig. 22 also illustrated the relationship between the average erosion
depth za and the target distance B. As the B increased, the average
1 100 50 2.947 1.74 30
2 60 erosion depth initially grew up and then reduced. A peak appeared at B
3 90 = 50 mm. If B was too small, the impact points of the two water streams
4 6.094 3.59 30 were too close, resulting in excessive energy consumption. The collision
5 60
of the water streams leaded to weakened hydrodynamic impact on the
6 90
7 8.393 4.95 30
seabed and affected the collection efficiency. Conversely, If B was too
8 60
9 90
10 125 50 6.094 3.59 30
11 60
12 90
13 150 50 6.094 3.59 30
14 60
15 90
16 175 50 6.094 3.59 30
17 60
18 90
19 200 50 6.094 3.59 30
20 60
21 90
22 150 10 6.094 3.59 30
23 60
24 90
25 150 30 6.094 3.59 30
26 60
27 90
28 150 60 6.094 3.59 30
29 60
30 90
31 150 90 6.094 3.59 30
32 60
33 90
Fig. 18. The relationship between average erosion depth and time.

9
X. Liu et al. Ocean Engineering 285 (2023) 115220

indicated a good fitting result. The fitting curve equation is shown in Eq.
(22). Here, the dependent variable is chosen as the average erosion
depth at an erosion time of 30 s, because the jet operation in actual
engineering projects is moving forward, and the prediction of erosion
depth in a short time has more research value. Moreover, the erosion
depth develops rapidly within 30 s (as shown in Fig. 23), and it can be
assumed that the average erosion depth at this moment is equal to the
erosion depth during the operation of the nodule collector vehicle.
Substitute Eq. (16) into Eq. (9), the prediction function of average
erosion depth in the mining operation was obtained:
za = a + b ln(Pm + c) (t = 30) (22)

4.3.2. Time course development characteristics（t > te ）

Within the first 30 s, the jet erosion is rapid and significant, while the
development of the erosion hole slowed down after 30 s while t=30s, it

Fig. 19. Top view of erosion hole under different working conditions（H/B/
v0/t）.

large, the impact points of the two water streams were far away,
consuming a substantial amount of kinetic energy. This resulted in a
longer wall-attachment flow distance before the formation of the upper
and down jets, similarly affecting the collection efficiency.
Particularly, during the design of the target distance B for double-
row jet nozzles, the influence of the average diameter of nodules on
collection efficiency need be considered. The target distance B should be
larger than average diameter of nodules to ensure efficient collection.

4.3. Calculation method of erosion depth with double-row jet impact

4.3.1. Erosion depth prediction function（t = te ）

In Fig. 23, the fitting curve between the average erosion depth and
Fig. 21. Comparison of horizontal and vertical ranges of erosion holes.
the dynamic pressure of the upper jet is obtained, with R2 ≈ 0.93, which

Fig. 20. Erosion hole profile similarity (H/B/v0/t).

10
X. Liu et al.
Fig. 22. The relationship among za , H, and B.
Fig. 23. The relationship curve between the average erosion depth and the
upper jet flow pressure.
was defined as the extensive development time te for the erosion hole.
According to Eq. (23), the curves fit well with the experiment results
(Fig. 24), when t > te . The fitting coefficient of variance is greater than
0.99.
za (t) = a + b ln(t + c) (t > 30)
Fig. 24. Average erosion depth map at different times.
Ocean Engineering 285 (2023) 115220
In fact, the mining vehicle drove on the seabed which has eroded by
collector. The actual bearing capacity of deep-sea sediment was quite
different. According to the prediction of the average erosion depth and
seabed shear strength at various depths from the geology investigation,
the actual bearing capacity of the deep-sea sediment can be evaluated.
This allows for an accurate assessment of the vehicle’s driving condi­
tions, contributing to the safe and efficient operation of the nodule
collector vehicle.
5. Discussion
Due to the unique environment, it is difficult to observe the benthic
plume triggered by the hydraulic disturbance, which hinders the
development of plume control technology. As shown in Fig. 25, the
clumped sediments existed around the erosion holes, which indicated
that only a portion of the sediments were converted into plumes.
Therefore, the plume volume of erosion can be predicted by calculating
the volume of erosion and deposition, as shown in Eqs. (24) and (25).
mp = ρs Ve × η (24)
Ve = za Lvm (25)
where, ρs is the density of deep-sea sediment particles, Ve is the volume
of the erosion hole per unit time, η is the sediment mass factor for
conversion to plume, Becker et al. (2001 indicated η = 16%, za is the
average erosion depth, L is the width of the collector (the effect of
erosion on both sides of the collector is negligible relative to the width of
(23) the mining head), and vm is the driving speed of the mining vehicle, the
distance traveled per unit time.
Fig. 25. Relationship between sediment suspension and deposition under the
effect of jet.
11
X. Liu et al.
In Fig. 25, the sediment suspension procedure and the key factors of
this procedure are discussed. The coefficient η, describes suspended
quality of the sediment, was not only effected by the coefficient η, but
also effected by the sediment mechanical properties. The stronger
cementation between the sediment grains weakens the coefficient η.
Additionally, the water content, sediment component and erosion abil­
ity etc. also effect the coefficient η. All in all, further works will be
promoted on them.
6. Conclusion
In this study, numerical simulations and model experiments were
conducted to analyze the characteristics of double-row jet flow fields
under different jet heights, target distances, and nozzle numbers. The
main conclusions regarding the flow field characteristics are as follows.
1. The double-row jet flow field can be divided into upper jet formation
zone and impact zone. The bottom pressure in the upper jet forma­
tion zone has a "three-peak, two-valley" distribution feature, with the
maximum area (peak 1) at the axis center. Peak2 and peak3 are
usually located on the outside of the jet axis, which is due to the fluid
flow bias hysteresis
2. The pressure value at the bottom of the jet is more significantly
influenced by the jet height H and the target distance B. When the H
is too large, the energy loss due to the free jet zone is large. When the
B is too small, the water collision consumes too much energy. When
the B is too large, the energy dissipation of the fluid above the bottom
surface is increased.
3. The new calculation formulas for the maximum bottom pressure at
the center of the jet (Eq. (13)) and its distribution in the x-direction
(Eq. (18)) are proposed.
Base on the experiments, the effects of double-row jets on the erosion
depth and erosion hole morphology of high water content, semi-fluid
dynamic sediments were investigated. The main conclusions are as
follows.
1. The dimensions of the erosion holes are positively correlated with
the jet velocity and the morphology is independent of the jet velocity.
The erosion holes exhibit similar shapes with wide bottoms and
slightly concave sides, resembling a "bowl" shape. The slope angle of
the cross-section is approximately 90◦ , and the ratio of width in the
horizontal and vertical directions is almost always maintained at 1:1.
2. Jet erosion morphology is mainly influenced by the jet parameters
(height to the seabed and target distance). As the nozzle height H
increased, the average erosion depth decreased, and the erosion
range expanded, resulting in wider and shallower erosion holes. As
Notation
B The target distance of the jet impact
bm The maximum half width of the section in the x direction
Dω The orthogonal divergent term
d The diameter of the jet nozzles
d50 The diameter of the sediment
Gk The turbulent kinetic energy generated by laminar flow velocity gradient
Gω The turbulent kinetic energy generated by the specific dissipation rate transport equation
g The gravity, g = 9.81 m/s2
H The height of the nozzle to the seabed
L The width of the collector
n The nozzles group number
Pd The dynamic pressure
Pm the maximum pressure on the center of the target distance
Ps The static pressure
12
Ocean Engineering 285 (2023) 115220
the target distance of the double-row jet increased, the average
erosion depth first increased and then decreased, with the optimal jet
erosion peak occurring at a target distance of B/d = 5.
3. The erosion depth of semi-fluid seabed under double-row jets de­
velops rapidly in the initial stage and then slows down. Equations for
predicting the erosion depth at different time stages under jet action
are presented(Eq. (22) and Eq. (23)) These formulas offer theoretical
reference for estimating erosion depth under different hydraulic jet
parameters.
This research can provide a reference basis for deep-sea mining jet
operations. The erosion depth prediction model can be used to estimate
plume-triggered and diffusion volumes, and it provides a reference for
assessing the environmental impact of hydraulic jet operations and
plume management. It should be noted that there are limitations to the
deep-sea seabed simulation materials used in this study. There is some
error estimation between the fixed-point jet and the moving jet, and
future studies should consider the travel speed of the mining vehicles.
However, the interaction rules between the jet and soft soil are similar
and still have potential application value.
CRediT authorship contribution statement
Xixi Liu: Methodology, Experiment, Writing – original draft.
Xuguang Chen: Conceptualization, Writing – review & editing, Super­
vision. Jiakang Wei: Methodology, Experiment. Shuai Jin: Experiment,
Writing – review & editing. Xingzheng Gao: Experiment. Guodong
Sun: Writing – review & editing. Jiahao Yan: Experiment. Qingqing
Lu: Writing – review & editing.
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.
Acknowledgment
The authors gratefully acknowledge the financial support from Na­
tional Natural Science Foundation of China (grant 52225107,
U1906234), the National Key Research and Development Program of
China (grant 2021YFC2801503), the Fundamental Research Funds for
the Central Universities (grant 202041004) for this research.
X. Liu et al. Ocean Engineering 285 (2023) 115220

Pt The total pressure

Q The jet flow
Re the Reynold number
S lag point offset
Tk The diffusivity of k
Tω The diffusivity of ω
t The water jet impact time.
te The extensive development time
Ve The volume of the erosion hole per unit time
Vm : The driving speed of the mining vehicle, the distance traveled per unit time.
v0 The velocity at the jet nozzle
xa The average width of the erosion holes
Yk and Yω The turbulent currents due to diffusion
ya The average depth of the erosion holes
za The average erosion depth
zm The maximum erosion depth of the center
ξ The dimensionless pressure attenuation coefficient relative to the initial dynamic pressure of the jet.
ξ1 The value of the pressure decay coefficient ξ when n = 1
θ The nozzle inclination angle
μ the dynamic viscosity
ρs the density of deep-sea sediment particles

References Basin[J]. Deep-Sea. Res. Pt. 48 (17–18), 3593–3608. https://doi.org/10.1016/

S0967-0645(01)00058-3.
Han, Wenxia, 2020. Study on Physical and Mechanical Properties of Soft Clay
Aderibigbe, O.O., Rajaratnam, N., 1996. Erosion of loose beds by submerged circular
Considering the Influence of Salinity. Jiangsu University, China, pp. 1–81.
impinging vertical turbulent jets[J]. J. Hydraul. Res. 34 (1), 19–33. https://doi.org/
Hong, Sup, et al., 1999. Experimental Study on Hydraulic Performance of Hybrid Pick-Up
10.1080/00221689609498762.
Device of Manganese Nodule Collector. Third ISOPE Ocean Mining Symposium,
Becker, Hermann J., et al., 2001. The behaviour of deep-sea sediments under the impact
OnePetro.
of nodule mining processes [J]. Deep-Sea. Res. Pt. 48 (17–18), 3609–3627. https://
Lee, Minuk, et al., 2012. Metamodel-based multidisciplinary design optimization of a
doi.org/10.1016/S0967-0645(01)00059-5.
deep-sea manganese nodules test miner[J]. J. Appl. Math. 1–18 https://doi.org/
Beltaos, S., Rajaratnam, N., 1977. Impingement of axisymmetric developing jets [J].
10.1155/2012/326954.
J. Hydraul. Res. 15 (4), 311–326. https://doi.org/10.1080/00221687709499637.
Mazurek, K.A., Rajaratnam, N., C, D., 2001. Scour of cohesive soil by submerged circular
Chiew, Yee-Meng, Parker, Gary, 1994. Incipient sediment motion on non-horizontal
turbulent impinging jets[J]. J. Hydraul. Eng-Asce. 127 (7), 598–606. https://doi.
slopes[J]. J. Hydraul. Res. 32 (5), 649–660. https://doi.org/10.1080/
org/10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9429(2001)127:7(598).
00221689409498706.
Oebius, Horst U., et al., 2001. Parametrization and evaluation of marine environmental
Dong, Zhiyong, 1997. Jet Impingement[M]. China Ocean Press, Beijing.
impacts produced by deep-sea manganese nodule mining[J]. Deep-Sea.Res.Pt. 48
Fan, Zhihan, et al., 2023. A new method for long-term in situ monitoring of seabed
(17–18), 3453–3467. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0967-0645(01)00052-2.
interface evolution: A self-potential probe. Ocean Eng. 280, 114917.
Sudarvelazhagan, K., et al., 2022. Experimental investigation and optimization of
Fan, W., Bao, W., Cai, Y., Xiao, et al., 2020. Experimental study on the effects of a vertical
polymetallic nodule mining by mechanical pick-up device on deep-sea using RSM[J].
jet impinging on soft bottom sediments[J]. Sustainability-Basel 12 (9), 3775.
Mar.Georesour.Geotecm. 1–15 https://doi.org/10.1080/1064119X.2022.2028949.
https://doi.org/10.3390/su12093775.
The Metal Company, 2021. The Metals Company Analyst Day Presentation.
Gao, Y., Xiang, X., Li, Z., et al., 2022. An experimental and simulation study of the flow
Wang, Minhe, 2015. The Development of Deep Seafloor Solid Mineral Resources. Central
pattern characteristics of water jet impingements in boreholes[J]. Energy Explor.
south university press, Chang Sha.
Exploit. 40 (2), 852–872. https://doi.org/10.1177/01445987211052063.
Wei, Dingbang, Yang, Qiang, Xia, Jianxin, 2021. Factors influencing shear strength of
Gillard, Benjamin, et al., 2019. Physical and hydrodynamic properties of deep sea
deep sea sediment and its variation law. Mar. Geology Front. 37 (8), 28–33. https://
mining-generated, abyssal sediment plumes in the Clarion Clipperton Fracture Zone
10.16028/j.1009-2722.2020.161.
(eastern-central Pacific)[J]. Elem. Sci. Anth. 7, 5. https://doi.org/10.1525/
Wu, Chigong, 2008. Hydraulics. High education press, Beijing.
elementa.343.
Yue, Ziyu, et al., 2021. Comparative study on collection performance of three nodule
Global Sea Mineral Resources, N.V., 2018. Environmental impact statement: SmallScale
collection methods in seawater and sediment-seawater mixture. Appl. Ocean Res.
testing of nodule collector components on the seafloor of the clarion-clipperton
110, 102606 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apor.2021.102606.
fracture zone and its environmental impact. Tech. rep. (Global Sea Mineral
Zheng, Jian, Lai, Xianghua, Chen, Xiaolin, Dong, Li, 2019. Experimental research on
Resources NV).
mechanism of soil breaking by submerged jets in clay. J. Mar. Sci. 37 (1), 67–74. http
Grupe, Bernd, Becker, Hermann J., Horst, U., 2001. Geotechnical and sedimentological
://hyxyj.sio.org.cn/EN/10.3969/j.issn.1001-909X.2019.01.009.
investigations of deep-sea sediments from a manganese nodule field of the Peru

13