water

Article
An Improved Integral Model for a Non-Buoyant
Turbulent Jet in Wave Environment
Shuqiao Fang 1,2 , Yongping Chen 1,2, *, Zhenshan Xu 1,2 , Ebenezer Otoo 2 and Shiqiang Lu 3
1 State Key Laboratory of Hydrology-Water Resources and Hydraulic Engineering, Hohai University,
Nanjing 210098, China; fsq@hhu.edu.cn (S.F.); zsxu2006@hhu.edu.cn (Z.X.)
2 College of Harbor, Coastal and Offshore Engineering, Hohai University, Nanjing 210098, China;
ebenezerotoo@hhu.edu.cn
3 Shanghai Academy of Environmental Sciences, Shanghai 200233, China; lusq@saes.sh.cn
* Correspondence: ypchen@hhu.edu.cn




Received: 24 February 2019; Accepted: 10 April 2019; Published: 12 April 2019


Abstract: The integral model developed by Chin (1988) for modelling a non-buoyant turbulent jet in
wave environment is improved by introducing two new parameters, i.e., the jet spreading rate c1 and
the shortening rate pe . The parameter c1 is used to simplify the model by explicitly describing the
radial velocity and scalar profiles under the assumption of “instantaneous” Gaussian distribution. By
doing so, the governing equations can be easily solved by simultaneously integrating the conservation
laws of momentum and scalars across the jet cross-section. The parameter pe is used to shorten the
initial length of zone of flow establishment (ZFE), so as to more accurately account for the wave effect
on the jet initial dilution near the jet nozzle. The parameters are calibrated by the particle image
velocimetry (PIV)-measured data from three groups of jet experiments, i.e., the group of vertical jet
towards the wave direction (vertical jet), the group of horizontal jet along the wave direction (co-wave
jet) and the group of horizontal jet opposing to the wave direction (op-wave jet). The results show
that both parameters are well related to the ratio of jet and wave characteristic velocities in the same
group, but it is not able to be generalized among different groups. Under the same wave condition,
the value of c1 in the vertical jet is larger than that of the horizontal jets; while the value of pe in the
vertical jet is smaller than that of the horizontal jets, which indicates that the jet has a faster decay
rate of centerline velocity and a wider width of jet cross-section profile in the near field when it is
vertically discharged into the wave environment. With the well-calibrated parameters, the improved
model can achieve a higher accuracy than the original model developed by Chin (1988).

Keywords: turbulent jet; regular waves; integral model; hydrodynamic characteristics; jet dilution

1. Introduction
Submarine outfalls play an important role in the disposal of treated wastewater to eliminate
water pollution in the urban area of coastal cities. However, these outfalls are considered to be a kind
of pollution source to the coastal waters, posing a high risk to the coastal and oceanic environment
and ecological system [1–3]. In order to mitigate their influence, the outfall locations should be
carefully determined so that the wastewater can be effectively diluted by the surrounding waters.
To this end, it is essential to accurately predict the dilution processes of discharged wastewater in the
coastal environment.
The movement of discharged wastewater from outfalls behaves typically like a turbulent jet.
Under the effect of initial momentum and/or buoyancy, the surrounding waters are continuously
entrained into the jet body, resulting in a significant reduction in the jet concentration during its initial
mixing processes [4]. In coastal waters, due to the existence of waves, this mechanism becomes more

Water 2019, 11, 765; doi:10.3390/w11040765 www.mdpi.com/journal/water

Water 2019, 11, 765 2 of 20

complicated. The experimental measurements by Chyan and Hwung [5] showed the existence of
“twin peak” distribution of the jet mean velocity and concentration on the cross-sectional profiles
when the jet is discharged into a regular wave environment. Mossa [6,7] measured both the mean
velocity and the turbulent intensity using a Laser Doppler Anemometer (LDA) system and found a
larger lateral spreading and a higher turbulence level of the jet in the wave environment than those
in the stagnant ambience. Ryu et al. [8] measured the instantaneous velocity field using the particle
image velocimetry (PIV) technique and revealed that the influence of wave amplitude on the rate of jet
diffusion is significant while the influence of wave phase is relatively small. Chang et al. [9] found
the wave-to-jet momentum ratio is the most important parameter to characterize the effect of waves
on the jet initial dilution. Hsiao et al. [10] used a PIV technique to measure the mean and turbulence
structure of a horizontal jet in the wave environment and obtained similar findings from the studies by
Mossa [6,7] and Mossa and Davies [11]. Although the findings from the experimental studies could
provide a good physical insight into the jet initial mixing processes in the wave environment, it is
difficult to obtain the entire mixing processes of jet due to the limitation of measurement techniques as
well as the high experimental costs.
The numerical model provides an alternative approach to investigate the jet in the wave
environment. In literature, there are two main types of numerical models that can be used to
study jet behaviors in the initial mixing zone. The first type is based on the solution of differential
equations, which is costly in the computation, but has the ability to provide a detailed description of
the jet mixing processes [12,13]. The second type is based on the solution of integral equations, which
is efficient in the computation, but aims to describe the mean properties of the jet. In fact, the integral
model can achieve fairly good results, while the computational costs are only with the order of minutes.
That is the reason why the integral approach is increasingly popular for research purposes [14–22].
The general concept of the integral model is to integrate the governing equations by introducing
some essential assumptions, such as the Gaussian distribution of the profiles of mean axial velocity
and mean concentration. The integral model can be well developed for the jet in stagnant water and
the jet in crossflow. For the jet in wave environment, some more assumptions are necessary to be
introduced as the wave motion poses an unsteady environment. To tackle this problem, Chin [23]
introduced the assumption of “instantaneous steadiness” to overcome the difficulty in dealing with
the unsteady state and then developed an integral model to simulate the behavior of a buoyant jet
in the wave environment. With the assumptions of Gaussian distribution and entrainment closure,
the governing equations are solved by integrating the conservation laws of mass, momentum and
scalars across the jet cross-section. The model was validated by his previous experimental data [24].
As the governing equation was simplified by using the assumption that the vertical velocity is much
less than the horizontal velocity in his model, which implies that his model is confined to some specific
ambient conditions and further modifications are necessary to fit for more general conditions. Later,
similar to that proposed by Chin [23], Koole and Swan [25] developed another integral model which is
based on the time-averaging of lateral displacement of Gaussian profile, with the pace of wave periodic
movement. Both the momentum integral model and the related empirical formulas did not account for
the changing effect of “zone of flow establishment”, but there has been proof that the “zone of flow
establishment” can be considerably shortened by the wave motion. This makes Koole and Swan’s [25]
model less accurate. By introducing the dynamic pressure gradient term into the equation of motion,
which is zero for the traditional jet theory, Lin and Hsu [26] developed a new integral model, in which
the action of waves is incorporated into the equations of motion as an external force. The model can
be used to predict the trajectory, velocity distribution and boundary thickness of a buoyant jet over
an arbitrary lateral cross section. However, because only the opposing averaged wave momentum
induced by the radiation stress over a wave period was taken into account, this model can only be
applied for simulating the cases of jet opposing to the direction of the wave propagation.
This study aims to develop a more generic and accurate model to simulate the turbulent jet in
wave environment. For simplicity, this study will focus on the non-buoyant jet so that the buoyancy
Water 2019, 11, 765 3 of 20

This study aims to develop a more generic and accurate model to simulate the turbulent jet in
wave environment. For simplicity, this study will focus on the non-buoyant jet so that the buoyancy
Water
effect2019, neglected. Two new parameters, i.e., the jet spreading rate c1 and the shortening3 of
can11,be765 20
rate
pe are introduced. The parameter c1 is used to simplify the model by explicitly describing the
radialcan
effect velocity & scalar profiles
be neglected. Two new under the assumption
parameters, of “instantaneous”
i.e., the jet spreading rate c1Gaussian distribution.rate
and the shortening By
pdoing
e are so, the
introduced. governing
The equations
parameter c1 is can
used easily
to simplifybe solved
the modelby by simultaneously
explicitly integrating
describing the the
radial
conservation
velocity laws
& scalar of momentum
profiles under theand scalars across
assumption the jet cross-section.
of “instantaneous” GaussianThe parameterBypedoing
distribution. is used
so,
the governing
to shorten the equations canof
initial length easily
zonebe of solved by simultaneously
flow establishment (ZFE), integrating
in order to the conservation
accurately analyze laws
the
of momentum
wave effect onand scalars
the jet across
initial the near
dilution jet cross-section.
the jet nozzle. The
The presence pof
parameter e is used
two to shortencthe
parameters 1 and pe
initial
length of zoneisof
in the model flow
the keyestablishment
innovation in (ZFE), in order
the present to accurately
study. The modelanalyze
could bethe wave
easily effect ontothe
extended jet
more
initial dilution near the jet nozzle. The presence of two
complicated cases such as an inclined jet discharged into the wave andparameters c and p
1 current
e in the model
environment. is the key
innovation in the present study. The model could be easily extended to more complicated cases such
as
2. an inclined
Model jet discharged into the wave and current environment.
Descriptions

2. Model
2.1. GlobalDescriptions
and Local Coordinate Systems
The definition
2.1. Global diagram for
and Local Coordinate a non-buoyant jet discharged into wave environment is given in a
Systems
global Cartesian coordinate system, as shown in Figure 1, in which x represents the direction of
The definition diagram for a non-buoyant jet discharged into wave environment  is given in a
wave propagation and z represents the direction upward against gravity g . The ambient velocity
global Cartesian coordinate system, as shown in Figure 1, in which x represents the direction of wave
is given by and
propagation U ; zVcrepresents
is the centerline velocity
the direction upward jet; vc gravity
of the against →
is the centerline velocity
g . The ambient of the is
velocity jetgiven
relative
by
to V
U;
e the
e c isambient;
the centerline δ isvelocity
the angle of theof the vjet
jet; e c isaxis with respect
the centerline to the
velocity x axis;
of the γ is to
jet relative thetheangle δ
of the
ambient;
is the angle
relative of the jet
velocity withaxisrespect
with respect
to thetojetthe axis; andγ isb the
x axis; angle
is the jet of the relative
width. velocity has
The ambient witharespect to
constant
the
density ρ a . and
jet axis; Thebturbulent
is the jet width.
round The ambient
jet with diameter D is located
has a constant density ρa . 0,
at (0, Theh0 )turbulent
where h0round is thejetheight
with
diameter D is located at (0, 0, h ) where h is the height above the x
above the x − y plane. It is oriented with a vertical angle δ 0 between the jet center line and the
0 0 − y plane. It is oriented with a
vertical angle
horizontal x axis. δ 0 between the jet center line and the horizontal x axis. The jet has
The jet has an un-sheared efflux velocity u0 , an efflux density ρ 0 , which is the an un-sheared efflux
velocity u0 , an efflux density ρ0 , which is the same as ρa , and an initial concentration c0 , representing
same as ρ a , and an initial concentration c0 , representing the tracer or pollutant mass of interest. A
the tracer or pollutant mass of interest. A local cylindrical coordinate system (Figure 1) with axial
local cylindrical
distance coordinate
s, radial distance r andsystem
azimuthal (Figure
angle1)φ iswith axialalong
defined distance s , radial distance r and
the trajectory.
azimuthal angle φ is defined along the trajectory.

Figure 1. Definition diagram for a turbulent jet discharge into ambient flow with global and local
Figure 1. Definition diagram for a turbulent jet discharge into ambient flow with global and local
coordinate system, respectively.
coordinate system, respectively.
The motion of wave-induced ambient fluid is given according to the linear wave theory [27],
The motion of wave-induced ambient fluid is given according to the linear wave theory [27],
πH cosh(kz) 2π
u= π H cosh ( kz ) sin kx − 2π t 
 
(1)
u = T sinh(kh) sin  kx − T t 
e
(1)
T sinh ( kh )  T 
πH sinh(kz) 2π
 
e=
w cos kx − t (2)
T sinh(kh) T
Water 2019, 11, 765 4 of 20

where eu and w e are the horizontal and vertical components of the wave induced velocity; H is the wave
height; k is the wave number (=2π/L); L is the wave length; T is the wave period; h is the water depth;
x and z are the horizontal and vertical coordinates, respectively; and t is the time.

2.2. Introduction of Chin’s [23] Model

2.2.1. Governing Equations

In Chin’s [23] model, the governing equations are given as follows,
Continuity equation:

∂ ∞ βvc b sin γ
Z
v cos γrdr = αvc b cos γ + (3)
∂s 0 π

s-momentum equation:
∂ ∞ ∞ ∆ρ
Z Z
2 2
v cos γrdr = g sin δ rdr (4)
∂s 0 0 ρ0
x-momentum equation:
∞
∂
Z
v2 cos γ cos(δ + γ)rdr = 0 (5)
∂s 0

Assume that v cos(δ + γ) ≈ v cos δ cos γ, the x-momentum equation can be simplified as,
∞
∂
Z
v2 cos2 γ cos δrdr = 0 (6)
∂s 0

Density deficit equation:

∞
∂
Z
v cos γ∆ρrdr = 0 (7)
∂s 0
Concentration equation:
∞
∂
Z
v cos γcrdr = 0 (8)
∂s 0
where α is the radial entrainment coefficient; β is the forced entrainment coefficient; v is the velocity
of the jet relative to the wave; ∆ρ is the density deficit between the jet and ambient flow; and c is the
concentration.

2.2.2. The Assumption of Radial Velocity and Scalar Profiles

In Chin’s [23] model, velocities, the radial profiles of velocity and scalar along the cross-sections
are assumed to follow the Gaussian distribution,
2
v = vc exp(− br2 )




 2
∆ρ = ∆ρc exp(− br2 ) (9)



 c = c exp(− r2 )


c b2
The subscript c indicates the physical quantities of the jet element at the centerline.

2.2.3. Initial Conditions

The initial conditions for the solution of Chin’s [23] model are specified at the end of the ZFE. The
non-dimensional length of the ZFE se ∗ is given as,

2.8F2/3 F<2




 0.113F2 + 4

2 ≤ F ≤ 3.2
se ∗ =  (10)
 5.6F2 / F4 + 18 1/2
  
F > 3.2


Water 2019, 11, 765 5 of 20

where F = (u0 − us cos δ0 )/((ρa − ρ0 ) gD/ρ0 )1/2 , us is the wave-induced horizontal velocity near the
jet nozzle. For the buoyant jet, as us varies in a sinusoidal form, the actual length of the ZFE se ∗ is
subject to the changing wave conditions. For the non-buoyant jet, F approaches infinity and se ∗ is a
constant which is equal to 5.6. From the conservation relations between the initial top-hat and Gaussian
profiles, the initial condition for the concentration is given as,

λ2 + 1
ce ∗ = (11)
2λ2
in which λ is the spreading ratio of concentration to velocity. Its typical value is equal to 1.20.

2.3. Modification of Chin’s [23] Model

2.3.1. Simplification of the Model for the Non-Buoyant Jet

As the non-buoyant jet can be considered as a special type of buoyant jet, the Chin’s [23] model is
still applicable, but with the density difference equal to zero everywhere. Therefore, Equation (4) can
be simplified as,
∂ ∞ 2
Z
v cos2 γrdr = 0 (12)
∂s 0
and Equation (7) can be neglected.

2.3.2. Modification of x-Momentum Equation

In order to make the model more generic, the hypothesis v cos(δ + γ) ≈ v cos δ cos γ is not used in
this study. Thus the x-momentum equation in the modified model is using Equation (5) rather than
Equation (6).

2.3.3. Modification of the Radial Profiles of Velocity and Scalar

The momentum integral model is developed based on the assumptions of radial profiles of velocity
and scalar. However, a detailed description of the radial profiles of the jet is still missing. Chin [23]
suggested an assumption of “instantaneous steadiness”, which means the “instantaneous” radial
profiles of jet velocity and scalar will follow the Gaussian distribution along the jet cross-sections during
its oscillation with the wave motion. We follow Chin’s [23] assumption, but introduce a parameter c1
into the “instantaneous” Gaussian distribution along the jet lateral profile,
 2

 v = vc exp(− r2 2 )
 2c1 s
(13)

2
 c = cc exp(− 2λ2rc2 s2 )



1

By doing so, the governing equations can be easily solved by simultaneously integrating the
conservation laws of momentum and scalars across the jet cross-section. How to determine the value
of parameter c1 will be discussed in the following sections.

2.3.4. Modification of the Length of the ZFE

The experimental measurements presented by Chyan and Hwung [5] and Koole and Swan [25]
clearly showed that the length of the ZFE can be considerably shortened by the wave motion. Therefore,
on the solution of the present model, the coefficient pe , which represents the ratio of the length of the
ZFE shortened by the wave motion to se ∗, is introduced. The non-dimensional length of the ZFE pe × se ∗
is used in the solution of the model. For the non-buoyant jet in wave environment, the non-dimensional
length of the ZFE is equal to pe × se ∗ = 5.6pe . How to determine the value of parameter pe will be
discussed in the following sections.
Water 2019, 11, 765 6 of 20

2.4. Normalized Governing Equations

In order to make the model more generic, the governing equations are normalized by three
dimensional parameters, that is: (1) the effluent uniform velocity u0 , (2) the diameter of jet outlet
D, and (3) the effluent concentration c0 . For convenience of expression, the axial component of the
relative velocity vc cos γ is replaced by the symbol u and the superscript, *, is taken to indicate the
non-dimensional quantities. Hence the normalized variables can be expressed as follows:

u∗ = uu0 c∗ = cc0c




 F = √u0 e

 u e w
0 u∗ = ue 0
w∗ = e
u0 (14)


 gD
 s∗ = s x∗ = x z∗ = z


D D D

With the dimensionless quantities specified above, the normalized governing equations can be
expressed as

dγ
2u∗c21 s∗2 (cos δ − tan γ sin δ) du∗
ds∗ − u∗ c1 s∗ sin δ sec γ ds∗
2 2 2 2
(15)
−u∗ c1 s∗ (sin δ + tan γ cos δ) ds∗ + 2u∗ c1 s∗(cos δ − tan γ sin δ) = 0
2 2 2 dδ 2 2

du∗
2u∗c21 s∗2 + 2u∗2 c21 s∗ = 0 (16)
ds∗
du∗ dc∗
c∗s∗2
+ u∗s∗2 + 2u∗c∗s∗ = 0 (17)
ds∗ ds∗
Based on the calculation of the jet trajectory, from the geometric relationships as shown in Figure 2,
the normalized trajectory equations can be derived as follows
Water 2019, 11, 765 7 of 20
dx∗ u∗
+ cos δ − sin δ tan γ
e
= (18)
ds∗ u∗
The above equation can be derived as follows
du* dz∗ w
e∗ dγ
sin γ + ( u*cos γ=
+ u*sin δ+ γ −w
sinsin δ*cos
+ δcossin γδ) tan γ (19)
ds* ds∗ u∗ ds*
d δ du* *
dw (21)
As shown in Figure 2, there− ( u*cosexists
δ cos γ + a
w*sin δ cos γ )
geometric − sin δ cos γ + between
cos δ cos γ angles
=0 δ and γ. Rearranging
ds* relationship
ds* ds*
and normalizing the geometric relationship, it yields
Thus, six ordinary differential equations, i.e., Equations (15)–(19) and (21), can be used to solve
six variables: x*, z*, γ, δ, u* and u∗ c*.sin γ − (e u∗ sin δ − w e∗ cos δ) cos γ = 0 (20)

Figure 2. Geometric relationships between velocities.

Figure 2. Geometric relationships between velocities.

2.5. Computational Setup and Solving Procedures

The Lagrangian approach is used to simulate the movement and dilution of jet elements. At
t = 0 , the first jet element is located at the end of the ZFE with Gaussian distributions of relative
Water 2019, 11, 765 7 of 20

The above equation can be derived as follows

dγ
ds∗ + u∗ cos γ + u∗ sin δ sin γ − w∗ cos δ sin γ ds∗
sin γ du∗ ( e e )
(21)
−(eu∗ cos δ cos γ + w
e∗ sin δ cos γ) ds∗ − de
dδ u∗
ds∗ sin δ cos γ ds∗ cos δ cos γ = 0
+ de
w∗

Thus, six ordinary differential equations, i.e., Equations (15)–(19) and (21), can be used to solve six
variables: x*, z*, γ, δ, u* and c*.

2.5. Computational Setup and Solving Procedures

The Lagrangian approach is used to simulate the movement and dilution of jet elements. At t = 0,
the first jet element is located at the end of the ZFE with Gaussian distributions of relative velocity ue ∗
and concentration ce ∗. The variables δe and γe are determined by the jet discharge angle, herein the
subscript e indicates the variable values of the jet element at the end of the ZFE. As for the non-buoyant
jet in the regular wave environment,
 2 1/2
ue ∗ = 1 − e e∗2
u∗ + w cos(δ − ϕ) (22)

where ϕ is the angle of the wave-induced velocity direction with respect to the horizontal direction.
Given increments along the instantaneous plume axis, ∆s, the six ordinary differential equations
dγ
of du∗ dδ dc∗ dx∗ dz∗
ds∗ , ds∗ , ds∗ , ds∗ , ds∗ and ds∗ can be solved simultaneously by using the fourth-order Runge-Kutta
algorithm. The model contains two variable parameters c1 and pe , which should be calibrated by
the field or experimental data. To fit for the convergence criteria, the Lagrangian time increment is
given by ∆t = ∆s/u, where ∆s is the marching step. The comparative studies by using ∆s = 0.1D and
∆s = 0.01D have been carried out, and the results are not much different. To save the computational
costs, ∆s = 0.1D is used for the following studies. The solving procedure is repeated until the jet
element reaches the axial distance s = 300D, where the jet further dilution is very little.

3. Experimental Setup
In order to calibrate the parameters c1 and pe in the modified model, a series of laboratory
experiments on the hydrodynamic behaviors of non-buoyant jets in the wave environment, were
conducted in a 46.0 m long, 0.5 m wide and 1.0 m deep wave flume at the laboratory of College of
Harbor, Coastal and Offshore Engineering, Hohai University. A round acrylic pipe, with the diameter
(D) of 0.01 m, was installed at the mid-section of the flume. The jet was discharged vertically or
horizontally through the pipe, with the jet nozzle 0.20 m above the bottom. The jet source is supplied
from a constant head tank above the wave flume with an adjustable valve to control the volume flow
rate. The waves are generated by a piston-type paddle movement. After propagating through the test
section, the wave energy was dissipated by a wave absorber installed at the end of the flume. The
reflection coefficients under the present experimental wave conditions were less than 6%. The sketch
of the experimental setup is shown in Figure 3.
vertically or horizontally through the pipe, with the jet nozzle 0.20 m above the bottom. The jet
source is supplied from a constant head tank above the wave flume with an adjustable valve to
control the volume flow rate. The waves are generated by a piston-type paddle movement. After
propagating through the test section, the wave energy was dissipated by a wave absorber installed
at the2019,
Water end11,of765
the flume. The reflection coefficients under the present experimental wave conditions
8 of 20
were less than 6%. The sketch of the experimental setup is shown in Figure 3.

Figure 3. Schematic design of the experimental setup (modified from the diagram of Xu et al. [28]).
Figure 3. Schematic design of the experimental setup (modified from the diagram of Xu et al. [28]).
The stagnant water depth in the flume was 0.6 m in all experiments. The Particle Image Velocimetry
(PIV)The systemstagnant
was used water depth in
to measure thethe flume of
velocities wasthe 0.6 m inthe
jet along alltransverse
experiments.center TheplaneParticle
of the Image
flume.
Velocimetry (PIV) system was used to measure the velocities of the
The PIV system used in this study includes a dual-head pulsed laser, laser light sheet optics (Beamtechjet along the transverse center
plane of the
Optronics Co., flume. The PIVChina),
Ltd., Beijing, systemaused CCD in this study
camera, and aincludes a dual-head
synchronizer (TSI Inc.,pulsed laser, MN,
Shoreview, laserUSA).
light
sheetdual-head
The optics (Beamtech
pulsed laserOptronics
is a Nd:YAGCo., Ltd.,
laserBeijing,
(Beamtech China), a CCDCo.,
Optronics camera, and a synchronizer
Ltd, Beijing, China) that has (TSI
a
Inc., Shoreview, MN, USA). The dual-head pulsed laser is a Nd:YAG
15 Hz repetition rate and 380 mJ pulse maximum energy output. The PIV images were recorded using laser (Beamtech Optronics Co.,
aLtd, Beijing,
14-bit CCDChina)camerathat withhas a 15 Hz
a 2048 repetition
× 2048 rate and 380
pixel resolution and mJ15pulse
frames maximum
per second energy(fps)output.
maximum The
PIV images were recorded using a 14-bit CCD camera with a 2048
framing rate. The sampling frequency was set as 7.25 Hz, the time interval was 1000 µs and the total × 2048 pixel resolution and 15
frames per second (fps) maximum framing rate. The sampling frequency
sampling time was about 30 s. The field of view of PIV system was 38 cm × 31 cm. For data analysis, was set as 7.25 Hz, the
atime interval was
commercial 1000package
software μs and the total sampling
INSIGHT developed time wasInc.
by TSI about 30 s. TheMN,
(Shoreview, fieldUSA),
of view wasofused.
PIV
system was 38 cm × 31 cm. For data analysis, a commercial software
Since the tracer’s density was almost the same as that of the surrounding water, the effect of buoyancy package INSIGHT developed
by TSI
was Inc. (Shoreview,
ignored for simplicity. MN, USA), was used. Since the tracer’s density was almost the same as that
of theAs surrounding
shown in Table water, theexperimental
1, 30 effect of buoyancy cases of wasjet ignored
in the wavefor simplicity.
environment, specified with three
As shown in Table 1, 30 experimental
◦ cases of
◦
different discharge angles, i.e., 90 (vertical jet), 0 (horizontal jet, alongjet in the wave environment,
the wavespecified
direction)with andthree
180◦
different discharge
(horizontal angles,
jet, opposing toi.e.,
the 90°
wave (vertical jet), 0°
direction); two (horizontal
different jet jet,initial
alongvelocities,
the wave direction)
i.e., 0.707 m/sand and180°
(horizontal jet, opposing to the wave direction); two different jet initial
0.884 m/s; two different wave heights, i.e., 20 mm and 40 mm; three different wave periods, i.e., 1.0 s, velocities, i.e., 0.707 m/s and
0.884
1.2 m/s;1.4
s and two different
s were wave heights,
conducted i.e., 20 mm and
in the experimental study. 40 mm; three different
The letters VW(90◦ ),wave
WC(0periods, i.e., 1.0◦s,)
◦ ) and WO(180
1.2 s and
denote the1.4 s were conducted
discharge angles of jet in relative
the experimental study. The
to the propagating letters
wave VW(90°),
direction, WC(0°)1~10
numbers anddenote
WO(180°) 10
denote the discharge angles of jet relative to the propagating wave direction,
different jet & wave conditions. In addition, six experimental cases of jet in stagnant water environment, numbers 1~10 denote
10 different
specified with jettwo
& wave
differentconditions.
jet initialInvelocities,
addition, i.e.,six 0.707
experimental
m/s and cases0.884 of m/sjetwere
in stagnant
conducted water
for
environment, specified with two
◦ different
◦ jet initial ◦ velocities, i.e.,
comparison. The letters VS(90 ), SC(0 ) and SO(180 ) denote the discharge angles of jet relative to 0.707 m/s and 0.884 m/s were
conducted
the propagating for comparison.
wave direction, The numbers
letters VS(90°),
0~1 denoteSC(0°) theand SO(180°)
difference ofdenote thevelocity.
jet initial discharge angles
In the above of
jet relative tocases,
experimental the propagating wave direction,
the jet to characteristic numbers
wave velocity 0~1
ratio R jwdenote
= u0 /uthe difference of jet initial
w and R jwV = u0 /vw varies
velocity. In the above experimental cases, the jet to characteristic
between 16~60 and 30~90 for the vertical jet and the horizontal jet respectively. Herein wave velocity ratiouwRand jw = v
uw0 are
uw
defined as =the
and R jwV u0 maximum
vw varieshorizontal
between and vertical
16~60 and velocities
30~90 foratthe
the vertical
jet exit. jet and the horizontal jet
Water 2019, 11, 765 9 of 20

Table 1. List of experimental cases for the jet in stagnant water and wave environments.

Jet Initial
Wave Wave
Case Angle Velocity, Rjw RjwV
Period, T/s Height, H/m
u0 /m/s
VS0 90◦ (vertical) 0.707 — — — —
VS1 90◦ (vertical) 0.884 — — — —
VW1 90◦ (vertical) 0.707 1.0 0.020 47.9659 —
VW2 90◦ (vertical) 0.707 1.0 0.040 23.9829 —
VW3 90◦ (vertical) 0.707 1.2 0.020 32.8500 —
VW4 90◦ (vertical) 0.707 1.2 0.040 16.4250 —
VW5 90◦ (vertical) 0.884 1.0 0.020 59.9743 —
VW6 90◦ (vertical) 0.884 1.0 0.040 29.9872 —
VW7 90◦ (vertical) 0.884 1.2 0.020 41.0742 —
VW8 90◦ (vertical) 0.884 1.2 0.040 20.5371 —
VW9 90◦ (vertical) 0.884 1.4 0.020 33.5891 —
VW10 90◦ (vertical) 0.884 1.4 0.040 16.7946 —
SC0 0◦ (horizontal) 0.707 — — — —
SC1 0◦ (horizontal) 0.884 — — — —
WC1 0◦ (horizontal) 0.707 1.0 0.020 — 71.1857
WC2 0◦ (horizontal) 0.707 1.0 0.040 — 35.5928
WC3 0◦ (horizontal) 0.707 1.2 0.020 — 61.7892
WC4 0◦ (horizontal) 0.707 1.2 0.040 — 30.8946
WC5 0◦ (horizontal) 0.884 1.0 0.020 — 89.0072
WC6 0◦ (horizontal) 0.884 1.0 0.040 — 44.5036
WC7 0◦ (horizontal) 0.884 1.2 0.020 — 77.2584
WC8 0◦ (horizontal) 0.884 1.2 0.040 — 38.6292
WC9 0◦ (horizontal) 0.884 1.4 0.020 — 77.3822
WC10 0◦ (horizontal) 0.884 1.4 0.040 — 38.6911
SO0 180◦ (horizontal) 0.707 — — — —
SO1 180◦ (horizontal) 0.884 — — — —
WO1 180◦ (horizontal) 0.707 1.0 0.020 — 71.1857
WO2 180◦ (horizontal) 0.707 1.0 0.040 — 35.5928
WO3 180◦ (horizontal) 0.707 1.2 0.020 — 61.7892
WO4 180◦ (horizontal) 0.707 1.2 0.040 — 30.8946
WO5 180◦ (horizontal) 0.884 1.0 0.020 — 89.0072
WO6 180◦ (horizontal) 0.884 1.0 0.040 — 44.5036
WO7 180◦ (horizontal) 0.884 1.2 0.020 — 77.2584
WO8 180◦ (horizontal) 0.884 1.2 0.040 — 38.6292
WO9 180◦ (horizontal) 0.884 1.4 0.020 — 77.3822
WO10 180◦ (horizontal) 0.884 1.4 0.040 — 38.6911

In this study, the PIV measurement data of 20 consecutive waves are used to describe the average
condition of jet behaviors under wave environment. After averaging the data for 20 wave periods,
the time averaged velocity field and concentration field of the jet are obtained. Figure 4 shows the
values of the normalized mean axial velocity wc of the 6 cases of the jet in stagnant water environment
along the distance away from the nozzle. It can be seen that the measured data from the present study
fits well with the classic relationships suggested by Albertson et al. [29]. It illustrates that the data
measured using the PIV system should be reliable to be used to for the further study.
Water 2019, 11, 765 10 of 20
Water 2019,11,
Water2019, 11,765
765 10 of
10 of 20
20

1.0
1.0
VS0
0.8 VS1
VS0
0.8 SC0
VS1
SC1
SC0
0.6 SO0
SC1
SO1
0.6 SO0
/uc0/u0

Albertson
SO1 et al.(1950)
Theoretical
Albertson etformula
wcw

al.(1950)
0.4 Theoretical formula
0.4
−1
wc s
0.2 = 6.2   −1
0.2 uw0 c = 6.2Ds 
 
u0 D
0.0
0.05 10 15 20 25 30 35
5 10 15 20 25 30 35
s/D
s/D
Figure 4. Values of wc u0 along the jet mean axis.
Figure 4. Values of w /u along the jet mean axis.
Figure 4. Values of wcc u00 along the jet mean axis.
4.
4. Results
Results and
and Discussion
Discussion
4. Results and Discussion
4.1. Model Calibration
4.1. Model Calibration
For the model calibration, all the jet and wave conditions specified in the integral model are
identical thethe
For to ones measured
model calibration,inall
thethe
experiments.
jet and wave According to the
conditions numerical
specified results,
in the regardless
integral of
model are
the anglesto
identical ofthe
injection (taking VW9
ones measured andexperiments.
in the WC8 as the examples),
Accordingthe jet in
to the the waveresults,
numerical environment sways
regardless of
due to the wave
the angles effect,(taking
of injection with a VW9
faster decay
fasterand
decay
WC8 of the
of as jet
thethe centerline
jetexamples), concentration,
centerline the
concentration, as shown
jet in the wave in Figures
environment 5
sways
and
due6.toThese
These findings
findings
the wave are consistent
arewith
effect, consistent
a fasterwith
with the
decay conclusions
theof
conclusions made
madeby
the jet centerline byother
otherresearchers
researchers
concentration, [5,30].
[5,30].
as shown in Figures 5
and 6. These findings are consistent with the conclusions made by other researchers [5,30].

Figure 5.
Figure Concentration distributions
5. Concentration distributions at
at different
different phase
phase moments
moments of
of the
the vertical
vertical jet
jet (VW9)
(VW9) in
in the
the
wave environment.
Figure 5. Concentration distributions at different phase moments of the vertical jet (VW9) in the
wave environment.
wave environment.
Water 2019, 11,
Water 2019, 11, 765
765 11 of
11 of 20
20
Water 2019, 11, 765 11 of 20

Figure 6. Concentration distributions at different phase moments of the horizontal jet (WC8) in the
Figure 6. Concentration
Concentration distributions
distributions at
at different
different phase
phase moments
moments of
of the
the horizontal
horizontal jet (WC8) in the
wave environment.
wave environment.
wave environment.
Figure 77 shows
Figure shows the the comparison
comparison of of the
the experimental
experimental and and numerical
numerical (marked
(marked as as NVW7–NVW10,
NVW7–NVW10,
Figure
NWC1–NWC4, 7 showsNWO5 the comparison
and NWO6) of the experimental
centerline profiles and
of numerical
mean axial (marked
velocity as
for NVW7–NVW10,
10 experimental
NWC1–NWC4, NWO5 and NWO6) centerline profiles of mean axial velocity for 10 experimental cases
NWC1–NWC4,
cases (VW7–VW10, NWO5 and NWO6)
WC1–WC4, WO5 centerline
and WO6). profiles
It can of seen
be meanthat,axial velocity
despite fordifferences
small 10 experimental
at the
(VW7–VW10, WC1–WC4, WO5 and WO6). It can be seen that, despite small differences at the initial
cases
initial(VW7–VW10,
stage, WC1–WC4,
the numerical WO5 and
theWO6). It can be seen that, despite small differences at the
stage, the numerical resultsresults
from the from
modifiedmodified
integral integral
modelmodel(shown (shown in line)
in black black line) generally
generally agree
initial
agree stage,
well the
with numerical
the results
experimental from
data. the
The modified
results integral
calculated model
from (shown
the in black
original line)
Chin’s generally
[23] model
well with the experimental data. The results calculated from the original Chin’s [23] model (shown in
agree
(shown well red
withline)the have
experimental data. The results calculated from the original Chin’s [23] model
red line)inhave quite quite large
large differences differences
from from
the measured the measured
data. Although data.
theAlthough
change ofthe change
length of
of the
(shown
length in red
of the ZFE line) have quite large differences from the measured data. Although the change of
ZFE (identical to the(identical
length of tothethe
ZFE length
used inof the
themodified
ZFE used in themodel)
integral modifiedmayintegral
improvemodel)
Chin’smay
[23]
length
improve ofChin’s
the ZFE [23](identical
model to the length
behavior (shown ofinthe
blueZFE used
line), the inmodified
the modified integral
integral model model)
proposed may
in
model behavior (shown in blue line), the modified integral model proposed in this study still shows
improve
this study Chin’s
still [23] model
shows behavior
superiority to (shown[23]
Chin’s in blue
model.line), the modified
Similar results integral
are model
observed forproposed
other in
cases
superiority to Chin’s [23] model. Similar results are observed for other cases but are not shown here
this
butthestudy
are notstill
shown showsheresuperiority
for the sake toofChin’s [23] model. Similar results are observed for other cases
brevity.
for sake of brevity.
but are not shown here for the sake of brevity.
a 1.2
b 1.2
a 1.2 VW7
b 1.2 VW8
1.0 1.0
NVW7
VW7 NVW8
VW8
1.0 Chin(1988) 1.0 Chin(1988)
0.8 NVW7 0.8 NVW8
Chin(1988) Pe=0.83
Chin(1988) Chin(1988) Pe=0.71
0.8 0.8 Chin(1988)
0.6 Chin(1988) Pe=0.83 0.6 Chin(1988) Pe=0.71
wc/uw0c/u0
wc/uw0c/u0

0.6 0.6
0.4 0.4
0.4 0.4
0.2 0.2
0.2 0.2
0.0 0.0
25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60
0.0 0.0
25 30 35 40 z/D 45 50 55 60 25 30 35 40 z/D 45 50 55 60
z/D z/D
c 1.2
d 1.2
c 1.2 VW9
d 1.2 VW10
1.0 1.0
NVW9
VW9 NVW10
VW10
1.0 Chin(1988)
NVW9 1.0 Chin(1988)
0.8 0.8 NVW10
Chin(1988) Pe=0.80
Chin(1988) Chin(1988) Pe=0.70
0.8 0.8 Chin(1988)
0.6 Chin(1988) Pe=0.80 0.6 Chin(1988) Pe=0.70
wc/uw0c/u0

wc/uw0c/u0

0.6 0.6
0.4 0.4
0.4 0.4
0.2 0.2
0.2 0.2
0.0 0.0
25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60
0.0 0.0
25 30 35 40 z/D 45 50 55 60 25 30 35 40 z/D 45 50 55 60
z/D z/D
Figure 7. Cont.
Water 2019, 11, 765 12 of 20
Water 2019, 11, x FOR PEER REVIEW 12 of 20

e 1.2
f 1.2
WC1 WC2
1.0 1.0
NWC1 NWC2
Chin(1988) Chin(1988)
0.8 0.8
Chin(1988) Pe=0.88 Chin(1988) Pe=0.76
0.6 0.6

wc/u0
wc/u0

0.4 0.4

0.2 0.2

0.0 0.0
5 10 15 20 25 30 35 5 10 15 20 25 30 35
x/D x/D

g 1.2
h 1.2
WC3 WC4
1.0 1.0
NWC3 NWC4
Chin(1988) Chin(1988)
0.8 0.8
Chin(1988) Pe=0.87 Chin(1988) Pe=0.72
0.6 0.6

wc/u0
wc/u0

0.4 0.4

0.2 0.2

0.0 0.0
5 10 15 20 25 30 35 5 10 15 20 25 30 35
x/D x/D

i 0.0
j 0.0

-0.2 -0.2

-0.4 -0.4

-0.6 -0.6
wc/u0
wc/u0

WO5 WO6
-0.8 -0.8
NWO5 NWO6
-1.0 Chin(1988) -1.0 Chin(1988)
Chin(1988) Pe=1.00 Chin(1988) Pe=0.90
-1.2 -1.2
-35 -30 -25 -20 -15 -10 -5 -35 -30 -25 -20 -15 -10 -5
x/D x/D

Figure 7.
Figure Comparison of
7. Comparison of jet
jet axial
axial velocity
velocity along
along the
the centerline
centerline for
for the
the experimental
experimental cases
cases of
of (a)
(a) VW7
VW7
& NVW7, (b) VW8 & NVW8, (c) VW9 & NVW9, (d) VW10 & NVW10, (e) WC1 & NWC1, (f) WC2 &
& NVW7, (b) VW8 & NVW8, (c) VW9 & NVW9, (d) VW10 & NVW10, (e) WC1 & NWC1, (f) WC2 &
NWC2, (g) WC3 & NWC3, (h) WC4 & NWC4, (i) WO5 & NWO5, and (j) WO6 & NWO6.
NWC2, (g) WC3 & NWC3, (h) WC4 & NWC4, (i) WO5 & NWO5,and (j) WO6 & NWO6.
Figure 8 shows the experimental and numerical lateral profiles of jet axial velocity at three different
levelsFigure
for the8 vertical
shows the jet (taking VW1, VW3,
experimental VW5 and lateral
and numerical VW7 for examples),
profiles of jetthe horizontal
axial velocity jet
at along
three
the wave levels
different direction
for (taking WC6jet
the vertical and WC8 VW1,
(taking for examples)
VW3, VW5 and and
the horizontal jet opposing
VW7 for examples), thetohorizontal
the wave
direction
jet (taking
along the waveWO2, WO4,
direction WO9 and
(taking WC6WO10 for examples).
and WC8 It can
for examples) andbethe
observed thatjet
horizontal the numerical
opposing to
results
the wavearedirection
in good agreement
(taking WO2,withWO4,
the experimental
WO9 and WO10 data, which indicates the
for examples). robustness
It can and accuracy
be observed that the
of the model
numerical we developed
results are in good in agreement
this study. with the experimental data, which indicates the robustness
and accuracy of the model we developed in this study.

 
Water 2019, 11, 765 13 of 20
Water 2019, 11, 765 13 of 20

a 0.8
b 0.8
Exp._VW1(z/D=30) Num._VW1(z/D=30) Exp._VW3(z/D=30) Num._VW3(z/D=30)
Exp._VW1(z/D=40) Num._VW1(z/D=40) Exp._VW3(z/D=40) Num._VW3(z/D=40)
Exp._VW1(z/D=50) Num._VW1(z/D=50) Exp._VW3(z/D=50) Num._VW3(z/D=50)
0.6 0.6

0.4 0.4

wc/u0
wc/u0

0.2 0.2

0.0 0.0
-9 -6 -3 0 3 6 9 -9 -6 -3 0 3 6 9

x/D x/D
c 0.8
d 0.8
Exp._VW5(z/D=30) Num._VW5(z/D=30) Exp._VW7(z/D=30) Num._VW7(z/D=30)
Exp._VW5(z/D=40) Num._VW5(z/D=40) Exp._VW7(z/D=40) Num._VW7(z/D=40)
Exp._VW5(z/D=50) Num._VW5(z/D=50) Exp._VW7(z/D=50) Num._VW7(z/D=50)
0.6 0.6

0.4 0.4
wc/u0

wc/u0

0.2 0.2

0.0 0.0
-9 -6 -3 0 3 6 9 -9 -6 -3 0 3 6 9

x/D x/D
e 30 f 30
Exp._WC6(x/D=10) Num._WC6(x/D=10) Exp._WC8(x/D=10) Num._WC8(x/D=10)
Exp._WC6(x/D=20) Num._WC6(x/D=20) Exp._WC8(x/D=20) Num._WC8(x/D=20)
Exp._WC6(x/D=30) Num._WC6(x/D=30) Exp._WC8(x/D=30) Num._WC8(x/D=30)
25 25

20 20
z/D

z/D

15 15

10 10
0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6

wc/u0 wc/u0

Figure 8. Cont.
Water 2019, 11, 765 14 of 20
Water 2019, 11, 765 14 of 20

g 30 h 30
Exp._WO2(x/D=-10) Num._WO2(x/D=-10) Exp._WO4(x/D=-10) Num._WO4(x/D=-10)
Exp._WO2(x/D=-20) Num._WO2(x/D=-20) Exp._WO4(x/D=-20) Num._WO4(x/D=-20)
Exp._WO2(x/D=-30) Num._WO2(x/D=-30) Exp._WO4(x/D=-30) Num._WO4(x/D=-30)
25 25

20 20
z/D

z/D
15 15

10 10
-0.6 -0.4 -0.2 0.0 -0.6 -0.4 -0.2 0.0

wc/u0 wc/u0
i 30 j 30
Exp._WO9(x/D=-10) Num._WO9(x/D=-10) Exp._WO10(x/D=-10) Num._WO10(x/D=-10)
Exp._WO9(x/D=-20) Num._WO9(x/D=-20) Exp._WO10(x/D=-20) Num._WO10(x/D=-20)
Exp._WO9(x/D=-30) Num._WO9(x/D=-30) Exp._WO10(x/D=-30) Num._WO10(x/D=-30)
25 25

20 20
z/D

z/D

15 15

10 10
-0.8 -0.6 -0.4 -0.2 0.0 -0.6 -0.4 -0.2 0.0

wc/u0 wc/u0

Thetime-averaged
Figure 8. The time-averagedvertical
verticalvelocity
velocity distributions
distributions forfor
thethe experimental
experimental cases
cases of VW1,
of (a) (a) VW1,
(b)
(b) VW3, (c) VW5 and (d) VW7; and the time-averaged horizontal velocity distributions for the
VW3, (c) VW5 and (d) VW7; and the time-averaged horizontal velocity distributions for the
experimental cases of (e) WC6, (f) WC8, (g)WO2, (h) WO4, (i) WO9, (j) WO10.
experimental cases of (e) WC6, (f) WC8, (g)WO2, (h) WO4, (i) WO9, (j) WO10.
It should be noted that the parameters c1 and pe for each case are different. They vary with the jet
It should
and wave be noted
conditions, andthat thevalues
their parameters c1 and
have been pe forand
calibrated each case are
shown different.
in Table They
2. It can bevary
seenwith
that
the length of the ZFE is considerably shortened by the wave motion. The stronger the wave
jet and wave conditions, and their values have been calibrated and shown in Table 2. It can be motion,
the shorter
seen thelength
that the lengthofofthe
theZFE
ZFE.isThis observation
considerably is consistent
shortened with
by the the motion.
wave findingsThefrom Koole and
stronger the
Swan [25].
wave motion, the shorter the length of the ZFE. This observation is consistent with the findings
from Koole and Swan [25].

Table 2. Calibrated values of c1 and pe for the non-buoyant jet in wave environments.

Jet Initial Velocity,

Case Wave Period, T/s Wave Height, H/m Rjw(RjwV) c1 pe
u0/m/s
VW1 0.707 1.0 0.020 47.9659 0.115 0.86
VW2 0.707 1.0 0.040 23.9829 0.125 0.72
VW3 0.707 1.2 0.020 32.8500 0.120 0.78
VW4 0.707 1.2 0.040 16.4250 0.135 0.70
VW5 0.884 1.0 0.020 59.9743 0.110 0.89
VW6 0.884 1.0 0.040 29.9872 0.120 0.75
VW7 0.884 1.2 0.020 41.0742 0.115 0.83
VW8 0.884 1.2 0.040 20.5371 0.130 0.71
VW9 0.884 1.4 0.020 33.5891 0.115 0.80
VW10 0.884 1.4 0.040 16.7946 0.140 0.70
WC1 0.707 1.0 0.020 71.1857 0.100 0.88
Water 2019, 11, 765 15 of 20

Table 2. Calibrated values of c1 and pe for the non-buoyant jet in wave environments.

Jet Initial
Wave Wave
Case Velocity, Rjw (RjwV ) c1 pe
Period, T/s Height, H/m
u0 /m/s
VW1 0.707 1.0 0.020 47.9659 0.115 0.86
VW2 0.707 1.0 0.040 23.9829 0.125 0.72
VW3 0.707 1.2 0.020 32.8500 0.120 0.78
VW4 0.707 1.2 0.040 16.4250 0.135 0.70
VW5 0.884 1.0 0.020 59.9743 0.110 0.89
VW6 0.884 1.0 0.040 29.9872 0.120 0.75
VW7 0.884 1.2 0.020 41.0742 0.115 0.83
VW8 0.884 1.2 0.040 20.5371 0.130 0.71
VW9 0.884 1.4 0.020 33.5891 0.115 0.80
VW10 0.884 1.4 0.040 16.7946 0.140 0.70
WC1 0.707 1.0 0.020 71.1857 0.100 0.88
WC2 0.707 1.0 0.040 35.5928 0.120 0.76
WC3 0.707 1.2 0.020 61.7892 0.105 0.87
WC4 0.707 1.2 0.040 30.8946 0.125 0.72
WC5 0.884 1.0 0.020 89.0072 0.095 0.93
WC6 0.884 1.0 0.040 44.5036 0.110 0.80
WC7 0.884 1.2 0.020 77.2584 0.090 0.90
WC8 0.884 1.2 0.040 38.6292 0.115 0.77
WC9 0.884 1.4 0.020 77.3822 0.090 0.91
WC10 0.884 1.4 0.040 38.6911 0.115 0.78
WO1 0.707 1.0 0.020 71.1857 0.095 0.97
WO2 0.707 1.0 0.040 35.5928 0.110 0.88
WO3 0.707 1.2 0.020 61.7892 0.095 0.94
WO4 0.707 1.2 0.040 30.8946 0.110 0.86
WO5 0.884 1.0 0.020 89.0072 0.090 1.00
WO6 0.884 1.0 0.040 44.5036 0.100 0.90
WO7 0.884 1.2 0.020 77.2584 0.090 1.00
WO8 0.884 1.2 0.040 38.6292 0.105 0.90
WO9 0.884 1.4 0.020 77.3822 0.090 0.99
WO10 0.884 1.4 0.040 38.6911 0.105 0.91

In order to generalize the variations of c1 and pe for the vertical jet, a dimensionless parameter R jw
is introduced,
u0
R jw = (23)
uw
which represents the ratio of the jet characteristic velocity u0 (initial velocity at the vertical jet exit)
and the wave characteristic velocity uw . As the wave force near the vertical jet orifice (as shown in
Figure 5) has a critical influence on the jet fluctuation, following Xu et al. [31], the maximum horizontal
particle velocity at the jet exit position is used as the wave characteristic velocity. Following the
small-amplitude wave theory, this velocity can be expressed as

πH cosh(kh0 )
uw = (24)
T sinh(kh)

where h is the stagnant water depth; h0 is the height of jet nozzle above the bottom. According to the
experimental settings, h is equal to 0.6 m and h0 is equal to 0.2 m.
However, for the horizontal jet, the wave-induced vertical motion plays a more important role
near the nozzle (as shown in Figure 6), the jet-to-wave velocity ratio R jwV for the horizontal jet in
co-wave and op-wave environment is introduced,
u0
R jwV = (25)
vw
Water 2019, 11, 765 16 of 20

where vw is the maximum wave-induced vertical velocity at the jet exit position. It can be expressed as,

πH sinh(kh0 )
vw = (26)
T sinh(kh)

For illustration, the values of pe for the vertical jet, the horizontal jet (co-wave) and horizontal jet
(op-wave) are plotted in Figure 9 against R jw or R jwV . The result shows that pe increases linearly with
respect to R jw or R jwV and can be well expressed by the following regression equations,

Water 2019, 11, 765 pe = 0.004826R jw + 0.6180 16 < R jw < 60 for the vertical jet 16 of(27)
20

pe = = 0.003446jwV
pe 0.003446R 0.6373 3030<<RRjwV
R jwV++0.6373 jwV <
< 90
90 for
forthe
thehorizontal
horizontaljetjet(co-wave)
(co-wave) (28)
(28)
pe =
pe 0.002404R
= 0.002404jwV 0.7992 3030<<RRjwV
R jwV++0.7992 < 90 for
jwV < 90
forthe
thehorizontal (op-wave)
horizontaljetjet(op-wave) (29)
(29)
These equations
These equations clearly
clearly show
show that
that under
under the
the same
same jet
jet initial
initial velocity,
velocity, with
with an
an increase
increase in
in wave
wave
height and wave period, the length of the ZFE becomes shorter; while under the
height and wave period, the length of the ZFE becomes shorter; while under the same wave same wave conditions,
with an increase
conditions, in the
with an jet initial
increase velocity,
in the thevelocity,
jet initial length ofthe
thelength
ZFE increases.
of the ZFE increases.

1.2

1.0

0.8
VW1–VW10
pe

0.6 Pe=0.004826Rjw+0.6180 R-square: 0.9671

WC1–WC10
Pe=0.003446RjwV+0.6373 R-square: 0.9720
0.4 WO1–WO10
Pe=0.002404RjwV+0.7992 R-square: 0.9548
0.2
20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90
Rjw or RjwV
Figure
Figure 9. The regression equationsof
regression equations ofpe pversus R jw orRR
e versus orfor
jw jwV Rthe for the jet
jwV vertical vertical
(shown jet in
(shown in black
black line), the
line), the horizontal
horizontal jet along jet
thealong
wavethe wave direction
direction (shown in(shown
red line)in and
red line) and the horizontal
the horizontal jet opposing jet opposing
the wave
the wave direction
direction (shown in(shown in blue line).
blue line).

As for
As for the parameter cc11,, ititisisfound
theparameter foundtotobebe reverse
reverse to to change
change R jwR jwororRR
of of . The
. The
jwVjwV of cof
values
values 1
c1 for the vertical jet, the horizontal jet (co-wave) and horizontal jet (op-wave) are plotted against −1
for the−1vertical jet, the −1horizontal jet (co-wave) and horizontal jet (op-wave) are plotted against Rjw
R−1
jw
(R jw = 1/R jw ) or R jwV (R−1jwV
= 1/R jwV ) in Figure 10. It shows that c1 increases linearly with respect
−1 −1
(toRR
jw =
−1 1 R
or Rjw )
−1 or R −1
( R = 1 R jwV ) in Figure
can bejwVwell expressed
and jwV by the 10. It shows
following that c1 equations,
regression increases linearly with respect
jw jwV
−1
to Rjw or R −jwV
1
and can be well expressed by the following regression equations,
c1 = 0.6161R−1jw + 0.09994 16 < R jw < 60 for the vertical jet (30)
c1 = 0.6161R −jw1 + 0.09994 16 < R jw < 60 for the vertical jet (30)
c1 = 1.587R−1 −1 + 0.07444 30 < R jwV < 90 for the horizontal jet (co-wave) (31)
c1 = 1.587 RjwV
jwV + 0.07444 30 < R jwV < 90 for the horizontal jet (co-wave) (31)
c1 = 1.045R−1 −1 + 0.07789 30 < R jwV < 90 for the horizontal jet (op-wave) (32)
c1 = 1.045 RjwV
jwV + 0.07789 30 < R jwV < 90 for the horizontal jet (op-wave) (32)
These equations clearly show that under the same jet initial velocity, with an increase in wave
These
height and equations clearly
wave period, show thatrate
the spreading under the samelarger;
c1 becomes jet initial
whilevelocity, with
under the an increase
same in wave
wave conditions,
height and wave period, the spreading rate c1 becomes
with an increase in the jet initial velocity, the spreading larger; while
rate c1 becomes smaller.under the same wave
conditions, with an increase in the jet initial velocity, the spreading rate c1 becomes smaller.
 0.10

Water 2019, 11, 765 VW1–VW10 17 of 20

c1
Water 2019, 11, 765 c1=0.6161R–1
jw
+0.09994 R-square: 0.9589 17 of 20
0.05 WC1–WC10
0.15 c1=1.587R–1
jwV
+0.07444 R-square: 0.9335
WO1–WO10
c1=1.045R–1
jwV
+0.07789 R-square: 0.9621
0.00
0.100.00 0.01 0.02 0.03 0.04 0.05 0.06

R −1 or R −1
jw jwV
VW1–VW10
c1

–1
c1=0.6161R
−1 +0.09994
−1 R-square: 0.9589
Figure 10. The regression equations of c1 versus R jw or R jwV for the vertical jet (shown in black
jw

0.05 WC1–WC10
line), the horizontal jet along the wave direction (shown in red line) and the horizontal jet opposing
c1=1.587R–1
jwV
+0.07444 R-square: 0.9335
the wave direction (shown in blue line). WO1–WO10
c1=1.045R–1
jwV
+0.07789 R-square: 0.9621
4.2. Comparative Study of Vertical and Horizontal Round Jets in Wave Environment
0.00
0.00 0.01 0.02 0.03 0.04 0.05 0.06
Figure 11a,b shows the comparison of pe and c1 for the jets with different angles in the same
wave environment. It can be seen from Figure 11a R −jw1that
or Rthe −1
jwV
length of the ZFE of the vertical jet is
smaller than that of the horizontal jet in the co-wave environment, and the length of the ZFE of the
Figure10.
horizontal
Figure 10.The
jet The
in regression
the co-wave
regression equations
environment
equations of cc11 versus
of R−1
is smaller
versus R −jwor
jw
1
R−1
than
or jwV
−1
Rthat
for the
jwV for of vertical
the jet (shown
horizontal
the vertical jetininblack
jet (shown the line),
op-wave
in black
the horizontal
line),
environment. the horizontal
As thejet along theof
jet along
length wave
the direction
wave (shown(shown
direction
ZFE determines inthered position
line)
in red and the
line) horizontal
and
at which thethe jet opposing
horizontal
velocity the wave
jetstarts
opposing
to decay,
direction
if thethelength (shown
wave direction
of the ZFE in blue
(shown line).
in blue the
is shorter, line).jet centerline velocity starts to decay earlier and thus decays
faster. It can be seen
4.2. Comparative Study from Figureand
of Vertical 11bHorizontal
that the jet spreading
Round Jets inrateWave ofEnvironment
the vertical jet is greater than that
4.2. Comparative Study of Vertical and Horizontal Round Jets
of the horizontal jet in the co-wave environment; the jet spreading rate of the horizontal jet in the in Wave Environment
co-waveFigure 11a,b shows
environment is the
larger comparison
than thatof of pe and c1 for thejet jets with different environment.
angles in the same wave
Figure 11a,b shows the comparison ofthe horizontal
pe and c1 for the in jets thewith
op-wavedifferent angles in the Therefore,
same
environment.
the radial It can
velocity profiles be seen from
of seen Figure
the vertical 11a that the
jet is flatter length(orthe of
wider)the ZFE
than of the vertical jet is smaller than
wave environment. It can be from Figure 11a that length of those
the ZFE of the horizontal
of the vertical jets
jet isat
that of
the same the horizontal
position jet in the co-wave environment, and the length of the ZFE of the horizontal jet in
smaller than that ofaway from the jet
the horizontal nozzle;
jet in the radial
the co-wave velocity profiles
environment, and the of length
the horizontal
of the ZFE jet of
in the
the
the co-wave
co-wave environmentenvironment is smaller
is flatter than
(or wider)that of the horizontal
than those jet
of the in the op-wave
horizontal environment. As the
horizontal jet in the co-wave environment is smaller than that of the horizontaljetjetin in the op-wave
the op-wave
length of the ZFE
environment at thedetermines
same position the position
from the atnozzle.
which the velocity starts to decay, if the length of the ZFE
environment. As the length of the ZFE determines the position at which the velocity starts to decay,
is shorter, the jet centerline velocity starts to decay earlier and thus decays forfaster. It can andbe seen from
if the Figure
length 12 of shows
the ZFEthe is experimental
shorter, the jettime-averaged
centerline velocity velocity starts vectors
to decay VW1,
earlierWC1 and thus WO1 decays as
Figure
shown 11b
in that
Table the1. jet
The spreading
comparison rate of the
highlightsvertical the jet is greater
differences than
betweenthat of the
these horizontal
three jet jet in the
groups.
faster. It can be seen from Figure 11b that the jet spreading rate of the vertical jet is greater than that
co-wave environment;
Particularly, the figure the
shows jet spreading
that the rate of the
velocity horizontal
profiles thejetvertical
in the co-wave environment is of
larger
of the horizontal jet in the co-wave environment; the jetofspreading ratejetofisthe
flatter than those
horizontal jet in the
the
than that
horizontal of the horizontal
jet, the velocity jet in the op-wave environment. Therefore, the radial velocity profiles of the
co-wave environment is largerprofiles than that of ofthethehorizontal
horizontal jet jet in(co-wave)
the op-wave is flatter than those
environment. of the
Therefore,
vertical
horizontal jet is flatter
jet (opposing (or wider) than those of the horizontal jets at the same position away from the jet
the radial velocity profileswave). of theThe spatial
vertical jet distributions
is flatter (or wider) of velocity than profile
those ofare theconsistent
horizontal with
jets the
at
nozzle; the
varying radial velocity profiles of the horizontal jet in thejet co-wavehorizontal
environment is as flatter (or wider)
the same decayposition rateawayalong from thethe centerline
jet nozzle; forthetheradialvertical velocityand profiles of the jets, horizontal it have
jet inbeenthe
than those
discussed of
above. the horizontal jet in the op-wave environment at the same position from the nozzle.
co-wave environment is flatter (or wider) than those of the horizontal jet in the op-wave
environment at the same position from the nozzle.
a 1.6 b 0.20
Figure 12 shows the experimental time-averaged velocity vectors for VW1, WC1 and WO1 as
0 0 0 0 0 0
1.4 90 0 180 90 0 180
shown in Table 1. The comparison highlights the 0.16 differences between these three jet groups.
1.2
Particularly, the figure shows that the velocity profiles of the vertical jet is flatter than those of the
1.0
horizontal jet, the velocity profiles of the horizontal 0.12 jet (co-wave) is flatter than those of the
pe

c1

0.8
horizontal jet (opposing wave). The spatial distributions of velocity profile are consistent with the
0.6 0.08
varying decay rate along the centerline for the vertical jet and horizontal jets, as it have been
0.4
discussed above. 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12
Cases Cases
a 1.6 b 0.20
Figure 11. Comparison 0
of 0(a) pe and0
(b) c1 for the vertical jet and0 horizontal jets in the same
90 0 180 90 00 jets in
Figure 11. Comparison of (a) pe and (b) c1 for the vertical jet and horizontal
1.4
0
180the same wave
wave environments. 0.16
1.2
environments.
Figure
1.0 12 shows the experimental time-averaged velocity vectors for VW1, WC1 and WO1 as
0.12
pe

c1

shown in Table
0.8 1. The comparison highlights the differences between these three jet groups. Particularly,
the figure 0.6
shows that the velocity profiles of the vertical 0.08 jet is flatter than those of the horizontal jet,
the velocity
0.4 profiles of the horizontal jet (co-wave) is flatter than those of the horizontal jet (opposing
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12
wave). The spatial distributions Casesof velocity profile are consistent with theCasesvarying decay rate along the
centerline for the vertical jet and horizontal jets, as it have been discussed above.
Figure 11. Comparison of (a) pe and (b) c1 for the vertical jet and horizontal jets in the same wave
environments.
Water 2019, 11, 765 18 of 20
Water 2019, 11, 765 18 of 20

Figure
Figure 12.12. Time-averaged
Time-averaged velocity
velocity vectors
vectors forfor VW1,
VW1, WC1WC1
andand
WO1WO1 in Table
in Table 1. 1.

5. Conclusions
5. Conclusions
The Chin [23] integral model for the simulation of a non-buoyant turbulent jet in wave environment
The Chin [23] integral model for the simulation of a non-buoyant turbulent jet in wave
has been improved by introducing two new parameters, c1 and pe , which represent the radial spreading
environment has been improved by introducing two new parameters, c1 and pe, which represent the
rate and the ratio of shortened ZFE length, respectively. A series of experiments were conducted
radial spreading rate and the ratio of shortened ZFE length, respectively. A series of experiments
to determine the parameters c1 and pe . Based on the comparison of velocity profiles along the jet
were conducted to determine the parameters c1 and pe. Based on the comparison of velocity profiles
centerline and the cross-sections, it is shown that the model developed in this study performs better
along the jet centerline and the cross-sections, it is shown that the model developed in this study
than the Chin [23] model.
performs better than the Chin [23] model.
With careful calibration for each experimental case, the relationships between c1 , pe and the
With careful calibration for each experimental case, the relationships between c1, pe and the
jet-wave parameter R jw or R jwV are well established. Based on the regression analysis, it is found that
jet-wave parameter R jw or R jwV are well established. Based on the regression analysis, it −1 is found
pe has a good linear relationship with R jw (R jwV ), while c1 has a good linear relationship with R jw (R−1 jwV
).
This e has a good
that pindicates that linear
with therelationship waveRaction
increase ofwith jw ( R jwVrelative
), whiletoc1the
hasjeta initial
good linear relationship
momentum, with
the length
−1
R−jwthe
of 1
( RZEF becomes shorter and the spreading rate becomes larger, resulting in a faster decay rate of
jwV ). This indicates that with the increase of wave action relative to the jet initial momentum,
velocity along the jet centerline and a flatter (or wider) velocity profiles at the given cross-sections.
the length of the ZEF becomes shorter and the spreading rate becomes larger, resulting in a faster
This is consistent with other research findings.
decay rate of velocity along the jet centerline and a flatter (or wider) velocity profiles at the given
By quantitative comparison of c1 and pe for the vertical and horizontal round jets in wave
cross-sections. This is consistent with other research findings.
environment, it is found that the length of the ZFE of the vertical jet is shorter than those of the
By quantitative comparison of c1 and pe for the vertical and horizontal round jets in wave
horizontal jets, while the spreading rate for the vertical jet is larger than those of the horizontal jets.
environment, it is found that the length of the ZFE of the vertical jet is shorter than those of the
This is mainly due to the fact that the wave action becomes stronger towards the free surface. It is
horizontal jets, while the spreading rate for the vertical jet is larger than those of the horizontal jets.
also found that the velocity profile of the horizontal jet along the wave direction is slightly wider and
This is mainly due to the fact that the wave action becomes stronger towards the free surface. It is
flatter than that of the horizontal jet opposing to the wave direction, which indicates the non-linear
also found that the velocity profile of the horizontal jet along the wave direction is slightly wider
wave-current interaction may also alter the jet dilution processes in the near field. It should be
and flatter than that of the horizontal jet opposing to the wave direction, which indicates the
addressed that this paper mainly focuses on the simulation of non-buoyant jet by using the improved
non-linear wave-current interaction may also alter the jet dilution processes in the near field. It
integral model. Further study is necessary for the buoyant jet as the buoyancy may significantly change
should be addressed that this paper mainly focuses on the simulation of non-buoyant jet by using
the jet centerline, particularly for the horizontal jets. This will be discussed in our next paper.
the improved integral model. Further study is necessary for the buoyant jet as the buoyancy may
significantly
Author change the
Contributions: jet centerline, Y.C.;
Conceptualization, particularly
methodology, for the
S.F.;horizontal jets. This
validation, formal will be
analysis, datadiscussed in
curation, S.F.
our Y.C.;
and next writing—original
paper. draft preparation, S.F.; writing—review and editing, Y.C., Z.X., E.O. and S.L.
Funding: This work was partly supported by the National Key R&D Program of China (2017YFC0405401),
Author
the Contributions:
National Conceptualization,
Natural Science Y.C.; methodology,
Foundation of China (51709078), the S.F.; validation,
Natural formal analysis,
Science Foundation data curation,
of Jiangsu Province
S.F. and Y.C.; writing—original draft preparation, S.F.; writing—review and editing, Y.C., Z.X., E.O. and S.L.

Funding: This work was partly supported by the National Key R&D Program of China (2017YFC0405401), the
National Natural Science Foundation of China (51709078), the Natural Science Foundation of Jiangsu Province
Water 2019, 11, 765 19 of 20

(BK20170882), the Fundamental Research Funds for the Central Universities of China (2017B20214) and the
program of Guangxi Government Special expert (S.L.).
Acknowledgments: The authors thank the anonymous reviewers, Associate Editor and Editor for their
constructive comments.
Conflicts of Interest: The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References
1. Roberts, D.A.; Johnston, E.L.; Knott, N.A. Impacts of desalination plant discharges on the marine environment:
A critical review of published studies. Water Res. 2010, 44, 5117–5128. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
2. Mendonça, A.; Losada, M.; Reis, M.T.; Neves, M.G. Risk assessment in submarine outfall projects: The case
of Portugal. J. Environ. Manag. 2013, 116, 186–195. [CrossRef]
3. Stark, J.S.; Corbett, P.A.; Dunshea, G.; Johnstone, G.; King, C.; Mondon, J.A.; Power, M.L.; Samuel, A.;
Snape, A.; Riddle, M. The environmental impact of sewage and wastewater outfalls in Antarctica: An example
from Davis station, East Antarctica. Water Res. 2016, 105, 602–614. [CrossRef]
4. Roberts, P.J.W. Modeling Mamala Bay outfall plumes. I: Near field. J. Hydraul. Eng. 1999, 125, 564–573.
[CrossRef]
5. Chyan, J.M.; Hwung, H.H. On the interaction of a turbulent jet with waves. J. Hydraul. Res. 1993, 31, 791–810.
[CrossRef]
6. Mossa, M. Experimental study on the interaction of non-buoyant jets and waves. J. Hydraul. Res. 2004, 42,
13–28. [CrossRef]
7. Mossa, M. Behavior of non-buoyant jets in a wave environment. J. Hydraul. Eng. 2004, 130, 704–717.
[CrossRef]
8. Ryu, Y.; Chang, K.A.; Mori, N. Dispersion of neutrally buoyant horizontal round jet in wave environment.
J. Hydraul. Eng. 2005, 131, 1088–1097. [CrossRef]
9. Chang, K.A.; Ryu, Y.; Mori, N. Parameterization of neutrally buoyant horizontal round jet in wave
environment. J. Waterw. Port Coast. Ocean Eng. 2009, 135, 100–107. [CrossRef]
10. Hsiao, S.C.; Hsu, T.W.; Lin, J.F.; Chang, K.A. Mean and turbulence properties of a neutrally buoyant round
jet in a wave environment. J. Waterw. Port Coast. Ocean Eng. 2011, 137, 109–122. [CrossRef]
11. Mossa, M.; Davies, P. Some aspects of turbulent mixing of jets in the marine environment. Water 2018, 10,
522. [CrossRef]
12. Chen, Y.; Hsiao, S. Numerical modeling of a buoyant round jet under regular waves. Ocean Eng. 2018, 161,
154–167. [CrossRef]
13. Xiao, Y.; Huai, W.; Ji, B.; Yang, Z. Verification and validation of urans simulations of the round buoyant jet in
counterflow. Water 2018, 10, 1509. [CrossRef]
14. Lee, J.H.W.; Cheung, V. Generalized Lagrangian Model for Buoyant Jets in Current. J. Environ. Eng. 1990,
116, 1085–1106. [CrossRef]
15. Jirka, G.H.; Doneker, R.L.; Barnwell, T.O. CORMIX: An expert system for mixing-zone analysis.
Waterence Technol. 1991, 24, 267–274. [CrossRef]
16. Cheung, S.K.B.; Leung, D.Y.L.; Wang, W.; Lee, J.H.W.; Cheung, V. VISJET—A Computer Ocean Outfall
Modeling System. In Proceedings of the International Conference on Computer Graphics, Geneva,
Switzerland, 19–24 June 2000; pp. 75–80.
17. Jirka, G.H. Integral Model for Turbulent Buoyant Jets in Unbounded Stratified Flows. Part I: Single Round
Jet. Environ. Fluid Mech. 2004, 4, 1–56. [CrossRef]
18. Palomar, P.; Lara, J.L.; Losada, I.J.; Rodrigo, M.; Alvárez, A. Near field brine discharge modelling part 1:
Analysis of commercial tools. Desalination 2012, 290, 14–27. [CrossRef]
19. Palomar, P.; Lara, J.L.; Losada, I.J. Near field brine discharge modeling part 2: Validation of commercial tools.
Desalination 2012, 290, 28–42. [CrossRef]
20. Stamou, A.I.; Nikiforakis, I.K. Integrated modelling of single port, steady-state thermal discharges in
unstratified coastal waters. Environ. Fluid Mech. 2013, 13, 309–336. [CrossRef]
21. Bloutsos, A.A.; Yannopoulos, P.C. Curvilinear coordinate system for mathematical analysis of inclined
buoyant jets using the integral method. Math. Probl. Eng. 2018, 2018, 3058425. [CrossRef]
Water 2019, 11, 765 20 of 20

22. Dissanayake, A.L.; Gros, J.; Socolofsky, S.A. Integral models for bubble, droplet, and multiphase plume
dynamics in stratification and crossflow. Environ. Fluid Mech. 2018, 18, 1167–1202. [CrossRef]
23. Chin, D.A. Model of buoyant-jet-surface-wave interaction. J. Waterw. Port Coast. Ocean Eng. 1988, 114,
331–345. [CrossRef]
24. Chin, D.A. Influence of surface wave on outfall dilution. J. Hydraul. Eng. 1987, 113, 1006–1018. [CrossRef]
25. Koole, R.; Swan, C. Measurements of a 2-D non-buoyant jet in a wave environment. Coast. Eng. 1994, 24,
151–169. [CrossRef]
26. Lin, Y.P.; Hsu, H.C.; Chen, Y.Y. Theoretical analysis of a buoyant jet interacting with small amplitude waves.
China Ocean Eng. 2009, 23, 73–84.
27. Ippen, A.T. Estuary and Coastline Hydrodynamics; McGraw-Hill Book Co.: New York, NY, USA, 1966.
28. Xu, Z.S.; Chen, Y.P.; Zhang, C.K.; Li, C.W.; Wang, Y.N.; Hu, F. Comparative study of a vertical round jet in
regular and random waves. Ocean Eng. 2014, 89, 200–210. [CrossRef]
29. Albertson, M.L.; Dai, Y.B.; Jensen, R.A.; Rouse, H. Diffusion of submerged jets. Trans. ASCE 1950, 115,
639–664.
30. Xu, Z.S.; Chen, Y.P.; Tao, J.F.; Pan, Y.; Zhang, C.K.; Li, C.W. Modelling of a non-buoyant vertical jet in waves
and currents. J. Hydrodyn. 2016, 28, 778–793. [CrossRef]
31. Xu, Z.S.; Chen, Y.P.; Wang, Y.N.; Zhang, C.K. Near-field dilution of a turbulent jet discharged into coastal
waters: Effect of regular waves. Ocean Eng. 2017, 140, 29–42. [CrossRef]

© 2019 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access
article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution
(CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).