Experiments in Fluids

, Volume 52, Issue 5, pp 1307–1318 | Cite as

Estimating void fraction in a hydraulic jump by measurements of pixel intensity

  • J. Leandro
  • R. Carvalho
  • Y. Chachereau
  • H. Chanson
Research Article


A hydraulic jump is a sudden transition from supercritical to subcritical flow. It is characterized by a highly turbulent roller region with a bubbly two-phase flow structure. The present study aims to estimate the void fraction in a hydraulic jump using a flow visualization technique. The assumption that the void fraction in a hydraulic jump could be estimated based on images’ pixel intensity was first proposed by Mossa and Tolve (J Fluids Eng 120:160–165, 1998). While Mossa and Tolve (J Fluids Eng 120:160–165, 1998) obtained vertically averaged air concentration values along the hydraulic jump, herein we propose a new visualization technique that provides air concentration values in a vertical 2-D matrix covering the whole area of the jump roller. The results obtained are found to be consistent with new measurements using a dual-tip conductivity probe and show that the image processing procedure (IPP) can be a powerful tool to complement intrusive probe measurements. Advantages of the new IPP include the ability to determine instantaneous and average void fractions simultaneously at different locations along the hydraulic jump without perturbing the flow, although it is acknowledged that the results are likely to be more representative in the vicinity of sidewall than at the center of the flume.


Void Fraction Pixel Intensity Hydraulic Jump Conductivity Probe Image Editing 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


a, b

Parameters of the Fuzzy logic S function


Void fraction defined as the volume of air per unit volume of air and water; it is also called air concentration


Averaged pixel intensity matrix (pi)


Time average matrix (pi)


Froude number


Acceleration due to gravity: g = 9.81 m2/s


Upstream water depth (m)

i, j

Matrix indexes

IT1, IT2, IT3

Thresholding functions


Water surface upper limit (i)


Water surface lower limit (i)


Fuzzy logic linear function

n, m

Matrix dimensions

p, q

Factors of m and n


Pixel intensity defined as a single point in a gray scale image; pi = 0 for a black pixel and pi = 255 for a white pixel

\( PI_{i,j} \), \( PI_{i,j}^{1 \ldots 4} \)

Matrices of pixel intensity (pi)

\( PI_{i,j}^{f} \)

Transformed matrix (pi)

Ptr, Ptr2

Threshold values (pi)


Flow rate (l/s)


Reynolds number


Resized pixel intensity matrix (pi)

\( RPI(:,:)_{i,j} \)

(i, j)th submatrix of RPI (pi)


Fuzzy logic S function


Upstream mean velocity (m/s)


Horizontal distance between the gate and the jump toe (m)

x − x1

Horizontal distance between the jump toe and the conductivity probe (m)

x, y

Horizontal and vertical coordinates (m)

y1, y2

Parameters of the Fuzzy logic linear function


Characteristic depth (m) where air concentration is 90%


Weber number

Greek symbols

Δx, Δy

Horizontal and vertical grid resolution (pi)


Boundary layer thickness (m)


Diameter (m)



The first and second authors acknowledge the support of the Foundation for Science and Technology, the Operacional Temático Factores de Competitividade (COMPETE) program, and the Fundo Europeu de Desenvolvimento Regional (FEDER) through project PTDC/AAC-AMB/101197/2008. The authors wish to acknowledge the anonymous reviewers for their helpful comments.


  1. Bezdek JC, Keller J, Krisnapuram R, Pal NR (1999) Fuzzy models and algorithms for pattern recognition and image processing. Kluwer Academic Publishers, USAMATHGoogle Scholar
  2. Carvalho RF (2002) Hydrodynamic actions in hydraulic structures: numerical model of the hydraulic jump. PhD thesis, University of Coimbra, Portugal (in Portuguese)Google Scholar
  3. Carvalho RF, Lemos CM, Ramos CM (2008) Numerical computation of the flow in hydraulic jump stilling basins. J Hydraul Res IAHR 46:739–775Google Scholar
  4. Chachereau Y, Chanson H (2011) Bubbly flow measurements in hydraulic jumps with small inflow Froude numbers. Int J Multiph Flow 37:555–564. doi: 10.1016/j.ijmultiphaseflow.2011.03.012 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Chanson H (1997) Air bubble entrainment in free-surface turbulent shear flows. Academic Press, London, p 401Google Scholar
  6. Chanson H (2007) Bubbly flow structure in hydraulic jump. Eur J Mech B/Fluids 26:367–384MATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Chanson H, Brattberg T (2000) Experimental study of the air-water shear flow in a hydraulic jump. Int J Multiph Flow 26:583–607MATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Chanson H, Carosi G (2007) Turbulent time and length scale measurements in high-velocity open channel flows. Exp Fluids 42:385–401CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Davoust L, Achard JL, Hammoumi ME (2002) Air entrainment by a plunging jet: the dynamical roughness concept and its estimation by a light absorption technique. Int J Multiph Flow 28:1541–1564MATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Kucukali S, Chanson H (2008) Turbulence measurements in hydraulic jumps with partially-developed inflow conditions. Exp Therm Fluid Sci 33:41–53CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Lennon JM, Hill DF (2006) Particle image velocity measurements of undular and hydraulic jumps. J Hydraul Eng ASCE 132:1283–1294CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Long D, Steffler P, Rajaratnam N (1990) LDA study of flow structure in submerged hydraulic jump. J Hydraul Res IAHR 28:437–460CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Mccorquodale JA, Khalifa A (1983) Internal flow in hydraulic jumps. J Hydraul Eng ASCE 109:684–701CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Misra SK, Thomas M, Kambhamettu C, Kirby JT, Veron F, Brocchini M (2006) Estimation of complex air–water interfaces from particle image velocimetry images. Exp Fluids 40:764–775CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Mossa M, Tolve U (1998) Flow visualization in bubbly two-phase hydraulic jump. J Fluids Eng 120:160–165CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Mouaze D, Murzyn F, Chaplin JR (2005) Free surface length scale estimation in hydraulic jumps. J Fluids Eng 127:1191–1193CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Murzyn F, Chanson H (2008) Experimental assessment of scale effects affecting two-phase flow properties in hydraulic jumps. Exp Fluids 45:513–521CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Murzyn F, Chanson H (2009) Free-surface fluctuations in hydraulic jumps: experimental observations. J Fluids Eng 33:1055–1064Google Scholar
  19. Murzyn F, Mouaze D, Chaplin J (2005) Optical fibre probe measurements of bubbly flow in hydraulic jumps. Int J Multiph Flow 31:141–154MATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Qingchao L, Drewes U (1994) Turbulence characteristics in free and forced hydraulic jumps. J Hydraul Res IAHR 32:877–898CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Rajaratnam N (1962) An experimental study of air entrainment characteristics of the hydraulic jump. J Inst Eng India 42:247–273Google Scholar
  22. Resch FJ, Leutheusser HJ (1972) Reynolds stress measurements in hydraulic jumps. J Hydraul Res IAHR 10:409–430CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Resch F, Leutheusser H, Alemum S (1974) Bubbly two-phase flow in hydraulic jump. J Hydraul Div ASCE 100:137–149Google Scholar
  24. Ryu Y, Chang K-A, Lim H-J (2005) Use of bubble image velocimetry for measurement of plunging wave impinging on structure and associated greenwater. Meas Sci Technol 16:1945–1953CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Sarode MV, Ladhake SA, Deshmukh PR (2008) Fuzzy system for color image enhancement. World Acad Sci Eng Tech 48:311–316Google Scholar
  26. Takahashi M, Ohtsu I (2009) Effect of inflow condition on air entrainment characteristics in hydraulic jump. In: 33rd IAHR congress, Vancouver, BC, Canada, 9–14, August, 2009Google Scholar
  27. Vorobel R, Berehulyak O (2006) Gray image contrast enhancement by optimal fuzzy transformation, vol 4029. Springer, Berlin, pp 860–869. doi: 10.1007/11785231 Google Scholar
  28. Wood I (1991) Air entrainment in free-surface flows. IAHR hydraulic structures design manual no. 4, hydraulic design considerations. Balkema, Rotterdam, p 149Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  • J. Leandro
    • 1
  • R. Carvalho
    • 1
  • Y. Chachereau
    • 2
  • H. Chanson
    • 2
  1. 1.IMAR-CMA, Department of Civil Engineering, Faculty of Science and TechnologyUniversity of CoimbraCoimbraPortugal
  2. 2.School of Civil EngineeringThe University of QueenslandBrisbaneAustralia

Personalised recommendations