15th Australasian Fluid Mechanics Conference

The University of Sydney, Sydney, Australia

13-17 December 2004

Experimental Investigation of a Rectangular Slot-Burner in the presence of

Cross-Flow for different Jet Velocity Ratios
1 1 2 2 2 1
S. Ahmed , J. Naser , J. Nikolov , C. Solnordal , W. Yang , J. Hart
1, 2
Cooperative Research Centre for Clean Power from Lignite
1
School of Engineering & Science, Swinburne University of Technology, VIC, 3122 AUSTRALIA
2
CSIRO Minerals, Clayton, VIC, 3169 AUSTRALIA

Abstract injection-hole jet issuing into a cross flow at low blowing ratio by
In a typical coal-fired power station boiler the ignition and the using PIV technique. It is well-established from all of these
combustion are largely controlled by burner aerodynamics, hence investigations that a circular jet in cross flow produces a
the geometry of the burner and the jet velocity ratio play an multitude of vortical structures and the five most significant ones
important role in achieving stable combustion, high burnout of are the leading edge vortices, lee-side vortices, counter-rotating
fuel, low production of pollutants and control of fouling. Slot- vortex pairs, horseshoe vortices and wake vortices.
burners are used in tangentially fired brown coal boilers in
Victoria. To obtain a better understanding of the overall There are substantially fewer papers dealing with studies of
combustion process, it is important to investigate the multiple round jets in cross flow compared to those dealing with
aerodynamics of the jet development from these burners. The aim a single round jet in the same environment. Examples of the
of this paper is to investigate a rectangular slot burner in the papers dealing with multiple round jets include Isaac & Schetz
presence of cross flow for jet velocity ratios of 1.0 and 3.0. A [10], Makihata & Miyai [13], Isaac & Jakubowski [9] and Savory
simple burner has been considered for investigation where the & Toy [16]. Multi-jet configurations studied include two or three
jets discharge at an angle of 60° to the wall. The burner consists jets aligned in a row transverse to the cross flow direction, two
of three rectangular slots vertically aligned with the centre known jets in tandem and three jets each located at a corner of an
as primary nozzle and the top and bottom ones known as equilateral triangle. Velocity ratios between the jets equal one,
secondary nozzles. The velocity ratio (φ) is defined as the ratio of and between the jet and cross flow range from 2.0 to 10.0. In
secondary to primary jet velocity. Laser Doppler Anemometry recent years, various attempts have been made to improve the
experiments have been carried out at CSIRO Minerals. In the mixing efficiency of a jet in cross flow by using non-circular jet
presence of cross flow, both primary and secondary jets deviated geometry such as an ellipse, square and rectangle. New et al. [14]
significantly from the geometric axis towards the wall. studied the flow structures of an elliptic jet in cross flow in a
water tunnel using laser-induced fluorescence technique and for a
range of jet aspect ratio from 0.3 to 3.0. A similar investigation
Introduction was conducted by Haven & Kurosaka [8] to examine the effect of
A jet in cross flow has been the subject of numerous studies hole exit geometry on the near field characteristics of cross flow
because of its wide variety of applications in engineering. jets. Hole shapes investigated were round, elliptical, square and
Chimney plumes for the dispersion of pollutants in the rectangular. Hart [7] investigated in detail the formation
atmosphere, the cooling of turbine blades, lifting jets for V/STOL mechanism of large-scale coherent structures of multiple
aircraft, fuel injection of burners and jets of oil and gas entering rectangular slot burners without cross flow and for secondary to
the flow in oil wells are just a few important examples. Many primary jet velocity ratio of 1.0. The effect of jet velocity ratio
researchers have studied a circular jet in cross flow extensively. for multiple rectangular slot burners was extensively studied by
Foss [6], Andreopoulos [2,3], Andreopoulos and Rodi [4] Ahmed et al. [1] without cross flow. Yan & Perry [20] first
reported on an extensive investigation of the near field investigated the jet velocity ratio effect for the rectangular slot
aerodynamics of a round jet issuing normal to the surface and to burners in the presence of cross flow. They studied the flow by
the cross flow. Catalano et al. [5] investigated physically and visualization and took measurements for mean velocity by Laser
numerically the development of a system for jet to cross flow Doppler Anemometry (LDA) in the near field region. The flow
velocity ratio equal to 2.0 and 4.0 where the cross flow was pattern in a tangentially fired rectangular slot burner is very
confined between two parallel surfaces. Sherif & Pletcher [17] in complex and needs detailed investigation to understand the mean
surveying numerical and physical modelling studies of jets in and turbulent statistics in near and far field region of the jets. The
cross flow, consider that these systems are, generally, more current work was undertaken to produce more detailed data on
difficult to model numerically than wall boundary-layer flows mean flow and turbulent stresses in such a flow.
primarily because of the curvature of the shear layer and the
complex turbulent flow pattern in the jet wake region. Sykes et The development of the flow field in the near burner region is
al. [19] developed a time marching solution of the influenced by burner geometry, velocity ratio and complex
incompressible Navier-Stokes equations and discretized them on rotational flow in the tangentially fired furnace. In a simple
to a grid using central spatial differencing on a non-uniform grid. isolated burner study it is not possible to faithfully model all of
The model was used to investigate the details of the flow within these influences, particularly the furnace flow field. The cross
the jet in cross flow. Smith and Mungal [18] presented the results flow in this isolated burner investigation is the representation of
from extensive imaging of the concentration field of a jet in cross the burner flow field similar to the tangentially fired furnace.
flow. Lester et al. [11] reported on a series of large-eddy
simulations of a round jet issuing normally into a cross flow. Description of the Burner Model
Simulations were performed at two jet-to-cross flow velocity A simple burner has been considered for investigation where the
ratios, 2.0 and 3.3, and two Reynolds numbers, 1050 and 2100, jets discharge at an angle of 60° to the wall. The burner consists
based on cross flow velocity and jet diameter. The mechanisms of three nozzles vertically aligned with the centre known as
by which large-scale coherent structures form were described in primary nozzle and the outer two known as upper and lower
their investigation. Lim et al. [12] also investigated the secondary nozzles. The burner model is a large box
development of large-scale structures of a jet normal to a cross (1.85mx1.5mx1.6m) made from a frame of aluminium with
flow. Peterson and Plesniak [15] studied the evolution of a short perspex walls. The dimensions of the cross section of the primary
nozzle and the secondary nozzles (upper and lower) in the cold To bag house
flow model are (75mm x 58mm) and (75mm x 34mm) From blower
and fan
respectively. The hydraulic diameter (De) and the nozzle spacing Flow control
were 64mm and 27mm respectively. Upstream of the nozzles, the baffles
duct length was 1.2m, to give a more developed velocity profile
at the exit of the burner. The dimension of the cross section of the Flow C
cross flow nozzle was (75mm x 252mm) and the duct length was
seeding B
1.8m. Figure 1(a) and 1(b) show the dimensions of the flow
containment box, primary and secondary nozzles Cross-flow
respectively. Exit
A

(a) Burner x
jet
Access
y door

1.5 Figure 2. Schematic Diagram of Burner Model and associated ducting

1.8
5
The airflow was seeded with a fine mist of sugar particles
0.5 introduced into the primary, secondary and cross flow jets. The
0 .3 partially dried sugar particles with a mean diameter about 1 µm
60o
were generated by a TSI six-jet Atomizer from a 5% sugar
1.6

Exit
to fan solution. For each position inside the burner model, data was
taken for 60 seconds. The average data rate was 400 Hz giving a
total of around 24,000 particles counted at each position.
1.0

Cross-flow inlet
Results and Discussion
0.075 x 0.252 Burner inlet Figures 3(a) and 3(b) show the velocity vectors for φ= 1.0 at the
centre of the primary nozzle (z/De=0) and lower secondary
nozzle (z/De=1.14) respectively.
(b) Upper
secondary 8

nozzle 0.034
7
0.027 (a)
6
Primary
nozzle 0.058
5
x/De

Lower 0.034
secondary 3

nozzle 2

0.075 1

-1 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
Figure 1. Dimensioned view of flow containment box and burner inlet y /D e
8
detail (all units in m)
7
(b)
Experimental Set-up & Measurement Technique 6

A Schematic diagram of the experimental set up is shown in 5

figure 2. Air passed into the burner model via ducts A (Burner)
x/De

4
and B (cross flow), and exited through duct C. It was driven into
the rig from the blower and extracted through the bag house 3

using a fan. A 2-axis traversing mechanism was suspended 2

within the enclosure from the roof. This traverse was used to 1

automatically position a laser with high precision. The velocity in

-1 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
the primary jet was held constant at 8m/s. The value of the y /D e

secondary jet velocity was 8m/s for φ=1.0 and 24m/s for φ=3.0. Figure 3(a-b). Velocity vectors at the centre of the primary (a) and lower
The velocity of the cross flow jet was 8m/s and was constant secondary (b) nozzles for φ= 1.0
throughout the experiments.
The direction of the cross flow jet was in the same direction as
A TSI-Aerometrics 2D Laser Doppler Anemometer (LDA) was the component of the jet velocity parallel to the furnace wall. The
used to measure the mean and fluctuating component of velocity. cross flow has a profound effect on the developing flow field. For
The system consisted of a two-colour four-beam optical this geometry without cross flow, [7] the three jets were aligned
arrangement utilising the green (with the wavelength of 514.5 almost along the geometric axis of the burner. In the presence of
nm) and blue (with wavelength of 488 nm) lines of a 5W Argon- cross flow, the three jets were pushed towards the wall and
Ion laser. A fibre optic probe had a lens of a 250 mm focal length remained predominantly within the cross flow. The deflection of
and a 40 mm beam separation which produced an ellipsoid the lower secondary jet was slightly greater than the primary jet
shaped measuring volume with dimensions of 0.11 mm × 0.11 as shown in figure 3(a) and 3(b). The centreline of the primary
and lower secondary jet diverged significantly from the
mm × 1.5 mm. A specially designed 2D traversing mechanism
geometric axis towards the wall. Figures 4(a) and 4(b) show the
was used inside the containment box to traverse the fibre optic
probe. velocity vectors for φ= 3.0 in the same planes as figure 3.
 8
Velocity Distribution for Velocity Ratio 1.0
1.2
(a)
7
y/De=0
6 1 (a) y/De=1
0.8 y/De=3
5

U/Uce
y/De=5
0.6
x/De

4 y/De=9
0.4
3
0.2
2
0
1 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
x/De
-1 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
y /D e
8 Velocity Distribution for Velocity Ratio 3.0
1.2
y/De=0
7
(b) 1 (b) y/De=1
6 y/De=3
0.8

U/Uce
y/De=5
5 0.6
y/De=9
x/De

4 0.4

3 0.2

0
2
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14
x/De
1

-1 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
y /D e Figure 6(a-b). Velocity distribution at the centre of the primary nozzle for
Figure 4(a-b). Velocity vectors at the centre of the primary (a) and lower jet velocity ratio 1.0 (a) and 3.0 (b)
secondary (b) nozzles for φ= 3.0
Figure 7(a-b) shows urms at the centre of the primary nozzle for
The flow field changed significantly with the increase in jet jet velocity ratios of 1.0 and 3.0 respectively. At y/De=0, for
velocity ratio. The degree of deflection of primary jet towards the φ=1.0, very near to the wall (x/De=0.31), there is a non-zero
wall was reduced which is clear from figure 4(a). The primary jet value (0.06) of urms. This non-zero value occurred due to
penetrated through the cross flow layer whereas it was almost diffusion transport in the cross-stream directions from regions of
entirely within the cross flow for φ=1.0. Due to the mixing of the peak generation. After that there is a sudden peak of urms due to
secondary jets with the primary jet, the momentum of the primary interaction between the primary jet and the cross flow. The
jet was increased allowing the penetration of the primary jet magnitude then fell, gradually increased and reached the second
through the cross flow. This phenomenon can be understood peak at x/De=2.0. At y/De=1, peak value occurred at x/De=0.31
more clearly in figure 4(b) where the deflection of the lower because of the generation of turbulence due to high velocity
secondary jet was minor from the geometric axis due to its high gradient.
momentum showing that the jet pierced the cross flow layer.
u rms for Velocity Ratio 1.0
Comparisons of the resultant velocity (U) at the centre of the 0.3
primary nozzle are presented in figures 6(a-b) for a number of 0.25 (a)
y/De=0
y/De=1
lines downstream of the primary jet. The lines are y/De=0, 1, 3, 5 y/De=3
u rms /Uce

0.2
and 9. The velocities were measured in two perpendicular y/De=5
directions with u normal and v parallel to the cross-flow. All 0.15 y/De=9

velocities are normalized to the velocity at the exit of the primary 0.1
nozzle (x/De=0, y/De=0, z/De=0). Measurement lines are shown 0.05
in figure 5.
0
0 1 2 3
x/De4 5 6 7 8

y/De=0 y/De=5
x u rms for Velocity Ratio 3.0
0.3
y y/De=0
0.25 (b) y/De=1
y/De=3
0.2 y/De=5
u rms/Uce

y/De=9
0.15

0.1
Figure 5. Schematic diagram showing the measurement lines
0.05

At y/De=0, the peak values are at the exit of the nozzle for both 0
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14
jet velocity ratios. At y/De=1, although the peak values occurred x/De
at the same position (x/De=0.8) for both jet velocity ratios, the
spreading of the jet for φ=3.0 is greater than for φ=1.0. Further
Figure 7(a-b). Comparison of u rms at the centre of the primary nozzle for
downstream (y/De=3, 5 and 9), the peak value for φ=3.0 shifted jet velocity ratio 1.0 (a) and 3.0 (b)
farther from the wall than φ=1.0 and the difference is clear at
y/De=5 where the peak value for φ=1.0 is at around x/De=2.2 and In this region there was a reverse flow. Further downstream
for φ=3.0 is at x/De=3.8. At y/De=9 the difference between the (y/De=3, 5 and 9) the peak values of u rms shifted and occurred
peak values is at a maximum. This clearly indicates more at the centreline of the jet. The peak values at this region
spreading of the primary jet and less deviation from the occurred because of the diffusive redistribution of the normal
geometric axis for φ=3.0. stresses from the cross-stream generation regions. The trend is
similar for φ=3.0 at y/De=0 and 1 but the magnitude of the peak References
values at y/De=3, 5 and 9 are higher than those in φ=1.0. Figure [1] Ahmed S., Hart J., Naser J., The effect of jet velocity ratio on
8(a-b) shows the vrms at the same planes for φ=1.0 and 3.0 aerodynamics of rectangular slot burners in tangentially
respectively. Unlike the urms, there is only one peak at y/De=0 fired furnace, Third International conference on CFD in the
both for φ=1.0 and φ=3.0. At y/De=1, the peak value occurred Minerals and Process Industries, CSIRO, Melbourne,
near to the wall (x/De=0.31) because of high velocity gradient as Australia, 2003.
mentioned earlier. Further downstream the peak values shifted [2] Andreopoulos J., Measurements in a jet-pipe flow issuing
and occurred at the centreline of the jet due to the diffusive perpendicularly in to a cross stream. ASME J. Fluids Eng.,
redistribution from the cross-stream generation regions. 104, 1982, 493-499.
[3] Andreopoulos J. On the structure of jets in a cross flow, J.
Fluid Mech., 157, 1985, 163-197.
0.45
v rms for Velocity Ratio 1.0 [4] Andreopoulos J & Rodi W., Experimental investigation of
0.4
y/De=0
jets in cross flow. J. Fluid Mech., 138, 1984, 93-127.
0.35 (a) y/De=1
[5] Catalano GD, Chang KS & Mathis JA., Investigation of
y/De=3
0.3
turbulent jet impingement in a confined cross flow, AIAA J,
v rms/Uce

y/De=5
0.25
y/De=9 27, 11, 1989, 1530-1535.
0.2
0.15
[6] Foss J. Flow visualization studies of jets in a cross flow, SFB
0.1 80 report/T/161, Karlsruhe University, 1980.
0.05 [7] Hart J., Numerical Investigation of Isothermal Burner Jet
0 Aerodynamics, Thesis, School of Engineering & Science,
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
x/De Swinburne University of Technology, November, 2001
[8] Haven B.A. & Kurosaka M., Kidney & anti-Kidney vortices
v rms for Velocity Ratio 3.0 in crossflow jets, J.Fluid Mech., 352, 1997, 27-64.
0.35
y/De=0 [9] Issac KM & Jakubowski AK., Experimental study of the
0.3
(b) y/De=1 interaction of multiple jets with a cross flow, AIAA J, 23,
0.25 y/De=3 1985, 1679-1683.
v rms/Uce

0.2 y/De=5
[10] Issac KM & Schetz JA., Analysis of multiple jets in cross-
y/De=9
0.15 flow, ASME J. Fluids Eng., 104, 1982, 489-492.
0.1 [11] Lester L. Yuan, Robert L. Street & Joel H. Ferziger., Large-
0.05
eddy simulations of a round jet in crossflow, J. Fluid Mech.,
0
379, 1999, 71-104.
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 [12] Lim T.T., New T. H. & Luo S.C., On the development of
x/De large-scale structure of a jet normal to a crossflow, Physics
of Fluid, 13, 3, 2001, 770-775.
Figure 8(a-b). Comparison of v rms at the centre of the primary nozzle for [13] Makihata T & Miyai Y., Prediction of the trajectory of triple
jet velocity ratio 1.0 (a) and 3.0 (b) jets in a uniform cross flow, ASME J. Fluids Eng., 105,
1983, 91-97.
Conclusions [14] New T. H., Lim T. T. & Luo S.C., Elliptic jets in cross-flow,
The effect of jet velocity ratio on jet development in the presence J. Fluid Mech., 494, 2003, 119-140.
of cross flow has been investigated in this paper. The burner was [15] Peterson S. D. & Plesniak M. W., Evolution of jets
at an angle of 60° to the wall. The experiment was conducted for emanating from short holes into crossflow, J. Fluid Mech.,
jet velocity ratios of 1.0 and 3.0. The LDA technique was used to 503, 2004, 57-91.
measure the mean velocity component and turbulent fluctuation. [16] Savory E & Toy N., Real time video analysis of twin jets in
Cross flow had a significant effect in developing the near field a cross flow, ASME J. Fluids Eng., 113, 1991, 68-72.
region. In the presence of cross flow both the primary jet and the [17] Sherif SA & Pletcher RH., Measurements in the flow and
secondary jet deviated from the geometric axis towards the wall turbulence characteristics of round jets in crossflow, ASME
and remained within the cross flow for velocity ratio 1.0. For J. Fluids Eng., 111, 1989, 165-171.
φ=3.0, the primary jet penetrated the cross flow layer due to [18] Smith S. H. & Mungal M. G., Mixing, structure and scaling
higher momentum of the secondary jets. The deviation of the jet of the jet in crossflow, J. Fluid Mech., 357, 1998, 83-122.
centreline from the geometric axis was less for φ=3.0. The [19] Sykes RI, Lewellyn WS & Parker SF., On the vorticity
spreading of the jets for φ=3.0 was more than for φ=1.0. There dynamics of a turbulent jet in a cross flow, J. Fluid Mech.,
were two peaks for urms at y/De=0 both for jet velocity ratios of 168, 1986, 993-413.
1.0 and 3.0. At y/De=1, near to the wall (x/De=0.3), urms was [20] Yan H., Perry J.H., Two–Phase Flow Development in Slot
high because of high velocity gradient. This investigation of the Burners - Part 2 Detailed Flow Measurement and Numerical
effect of jet velocity ratio indicates that simple small-scale Model Validation, ESAA Report No. ES/94/01, August,
isothermal models can be a major aid in the interpretation of 1994.
observations in more complex flow environments.

Acknowledgments
The authors gratefully acknowledge the financial and other
support received for this research from the Cooperative Research
Centre (CRC) for Clean Power from Lignite, which is established
and supported under the Australian Government’s Cooperative
Research Centres program.