DESALINATION

ELSEVIER Desalination 167 (2004) 459-468

www.elsevier.com/locate/desal

Dense jet modelling applied to the design of

dense effluent diffusers
Andrea Cipollina*, Angelo Bonfiglio, Giorgio Micale, Alberto Brucato
Dipartimento di Ingegneria Chimica dei Processi e dei Materiali, Universitgl di Palermo,
Viale delle Seienze, 90128 Palermo, Italy
Tel. +39 (091) 656-7281; Fax. +39 (090 656-7280; email cipollina@diepm.unipa.it

Received 23 February 2004; accepted 3 March 2004

Abstract
A model aimed at predicting the behavior of inclined dense jets in a stagnant environment was proposed. The model
takes into account four jet parameters (flow rate, density, inclination and diameter) and results in a set of algebraic and
ordinary differential equations, which are easily solved by simple (standard) numerical methods. Model results include
information on the trajectory, spreading and dilution of the inclined dense jets. Model predictions were compared with
experimental data obtained with different nozzle diameters, jet flow rates, j et densities and nozzle inclinations. Despite
the wide range encompassed by the experimental data analyzed, model predictions were always found to agree very
well with all other available data. The model may be therefore considered as well validated. Lastly, a sample
application to the design of a dense effluent diffuser is presented.

Keywords: Inclined dense jet model; Dense jet dilution; Dense effluents diffuser design

1. Introduction
In a wide range o f situations, effluents denser
than the environment have to be discharged into
it as harmlessly as possible. They typically origi-
nate from desalination plants, mineral salts indus-
tries, wastewater treatment processes, etc. Proper
*Corresponding author.
dilution of such dense effluents can be achieved
by means o f diffusers similar to those employed
for discharging waste into the ocean. However,
the behavior of a dense effluent is significantly
different from the buoyant jet case since a dense
effluent is characterized by a sinking tendency
that may give rise to the formation of a "salty
desert" on the sea floor [ t ].

Presented at the EuroMed 2004 conference on Desalination Strategies in South Mediterranean Countries: Cooperation
between Mediterranean Countries of Europe and the Southern Rim of the Mediterranean. Sponsored by the European
Desalination Society and Office National de l 'Eau Potable, Marrakech, Morocco, 30 May-2 June, 2004.
0011-9164/04/$- See front matter © 2004 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved
doi; 10.1016/j.desal.2004.06.161
460 A. Cipollina et al. / Desalination 167 (2004) 459-468

Much information is available on buoyant jets

and buoyant effluent diffusers, whereas little in-
formation can be found on dense jets. A few
works concem the case of dense jets issued in a
vertical direction [2-5], and in the presence of a
crosscurrent [4,6,7]. Even fewer works deal with
the case of inclined dense jets, i.e, dense jets at an
angle with the horizontal [4,7,8].
Although the above quoted works do provide
important information on the behavior of dense
jets, the need exists for predictive models able to
provide richer information on a wider range of
cases. Models for the case of vertical dense jets
were proposed by Abraham [9], who found as a
model result a proportionality law relating maxi-
mum jet rise level and a non-dimensional para-
meter called the densimetric Froude number. On
the other side, the scientific literature is lacking
models for inclined dense jets, despite the fact
that these last give rise to larger dilution levels [8]
than vertical jets and are therefore better suited
for designing actual effluent diffusers.
The present work is actually devoted to devel-
oping a fully predictive model for inclined dense
jets, which is possibly able to give information on
fundamental parameters such as jet trajectory and
dilution levels, as well as on the velocity of the
plume at its impact on the sea floor. This is, in
fact, a very important parameter for design pur-
poses as it provides precious information in order
to decide whether special measures are needed to
protect the sea floor against erosion.
2. Experimental
Experimental data on the geometry of inclined
dense jets were collected in a glass rectangular
tank (1.4x0.45×0.6 m) where dense jets were put
through a nozzle variously inclined above the
horizontal. Details on the experimental apparatus
and data treatment procedures employed can be
found in Cipollina et al. [10]. It may be worth
recalling here that nozzle inclination was either
G/
Fig. 1. Inclined dense jet.
30 ° , 45 ° or 60°; nozzle diameter varied from
1.12 mm to 4 ram; the jet flow rate varied from
0.14 1/min to 1.8 1/min; jet density varied from
1054 to 1178 kg/m 3, hence encompassing a fairly
wide range of values for the densimetric Froude
number (15+120).
Jet geometry was made visible by means of a
colored tracer. For each experiment, several
instantaneous jet pictures were superimposed,
thus resulting in time-averaged colored maps that
were finally analyzed in order to extract the
required information on jet geometry. This last
regarded four parameters, namely the trajectory
maximum co-ordinates (X and Y), the maximum
rise level (Z) and the impact point distance (G)
(as shown in Fig. 1).
3. Model description
With reference to Fig. 1, the main model
assumptions are:
1. Velocity and concentration distributions
around the jet axis are assumed to be Gaussian:
u(r) = Umaxe
(2)
where R is the jet conventional radius defined as
twice the distance at which the local fluid
 A. Cipollina et al. / Desalination 167 (2004) 459-468 461

velocity is 50% o f the velocity at the axis, r is the ° Momentum flux, y-direction:
punctual distance from the axis, A and B are two
non-dimensional coefficients and Ca is the am-
bient salt concentration.
2. The entrainment velocity is supposed to be
= rcR 2.(pro _ p~)g.d / (7)
proportional to the local jet velocities, i.e.:

Ue = E" Umax = I" u m rn/s (3) • Integral solute mass balance:

where Ue is the entrainment velocity defined as (Um'C'7~R2), = Qo'Co + ( ~ R 2 ' R m - Q o ) ' c a (8)
the ratio dQJdS (dS is the infinitesimal lateral
surface), E is the entrainment coefficient that
relates Ue to the axial velocity Umax, and I (=E" After simple manipulation (whose details are
umJu,,) relates Ue to the local mean velocity u,,. reported herein in the Appendix) Eqs. (5)-(7)
3. The fluid density is assumed to be propor- may be written as:
tional to salt concentration:
dO _ -k'Qo'M'(Co-C,,)'g'cosO
P = Pk + kC (4) dl 2 3
)~v " n R "p " um (9)

where Pk is the density of pure water (kg/m 3) and

C is the concentration of the salt solution (kg/m3). dum dO 2Pa "I" u
Regarding the first assumption, it may be dl - - ~ " um'tanO p'R
worth noting that, among the various bell-shaped (to)
curves, the Gauss curve is universally adopted in -k'Qo'M'(Co-Ca)'g'sinO 29 "I'u m
jet dispersion studies [1 I]. Here the value forA is 2
Xv. Tz.p.u~.R 2 p'R
practically imposed by the fact that for r -- R/2
u(r) must be equal to Urn,x/2, which leads to
A = 2.77, whereas B is supposed to be related to dR ~ "R 2
A according to the following relation [11]: B =A/
1.172 (B = 2.025 in the present case).
With reference to Fig. 1, the following mass I2 dum k'Qo'(Co-Ca)-~R'um'p ]
and momentum balance equations can be written: • pa.I'Um +
L dl g " u~
* Continuity equation (global mass balance):

which together with the algebraic Eq. (8) give rise

(p" "/~e 2 ° lgm)l-(p'~R2"Um)l+dl
to a set of four equations in the four dependent
(5) variables: R, C (local bulk mean concentration),
= - 2 ~ R . d l . PaU e
0 (local jet trajectory inclination) and um (local
• Momentum flux, x-direction mean velocity). The above set of equations can,
therefore, be solved once proper boundary con-
ditions are imposed. These may be written taking
(TzR 2.P. ~v.U2.cosO )l
into account that in the region l = 0-5"do, the jet
(6) is still in a developing condition, so that a virtual
- (7~R 2"p" )%'U2"COS O )l +dl = O jet origin may be placed at l = 5.do. Hence, for l =
462 A. Cipollina et al. / Desalination 167 (2004) 459-468

0.4~
5"do, R equals do~2 (where do is the the nozzle
diameter); 0 =0o (where 0o is the initial nozzle 0,4

inclination); u m = u o (where Uo is equal to (Qo)/ 0.3~

(~do2 / 4) and C = Co. Notably, in the model there
0,2
is only one adjustable parameter, namely the
entrainment coefficient, E, defined by Eq. (1). 0.2~

0.2

4. Results and discussion

0.I

The above equation set was solved by the 0.06

simple Euler method. The value adopted for Al
was do / 100 for all computations, as this value was 0,I 0.2 0.3 04 0.5 0:6

found to guarantee converged results, yet re-

quiring acceptable computing times (in the range
o f tens o f seconds). Jet trajectory was computed
by adding at each step a segment AI with the
slope given by the local angle 0.
Fig. 2. Comparison of model predictions (solid lines)
calculated using E = 0.04, with experiment (underlying
map). Case of do = 2 ram, Apo = 55 g/l, Qo = 0.45 1/min,
0o = 45 °.

01 0.2 0.3 0,4 06 0,6 0.06 0.1 0.16 0.2 0.25 03 0.~ 04 0,46

0.I 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0,~ 0.1 0.15 0.2 0,235 0.3 0.36 0.4 0,45 05

Fig. 3. Comparison of model predictions and experimental results. (a) 00 = 45 °, do = 2 mm, Qo = 0.451/min, Apo = 55 g/l;
(b) 00 = 30°, do = 2 mm, Qo = 0.3 l/rain, Apo = 98 g/l; (c) 00 = 45 °, d o = 3 mm, Qo = 1.1 1/min, Apo = 98 g/l; (d) 00 = 45 °,
d o = 4 mm, Qo = 0.8 1/min, Apo = 179 g/l.
 A. Cipollina et al. / Desalination 167 (2004) 459-468 463
0.5
Regarding the entrainment coefficient E, the

1
only empirical parameter used in the model, E
(.9
indications for a suitable value for it can be found 0.4 o/
+/ •
in Demuren [12] where a similar modeling @
approach was discussed. After correcting the
.~ 0.3 or/O o •
value of 0.057 reported therein to account for the 0}
Q. ° / N
different definition of the conventional radius R, LU •, ~ / z ° =

a value of E = 0.04 was obtained. Regarding 0"2

30°
45 °
parameter k in Eq. (4), its value depends only on 50°
J~'/ u
the solutes dissolved in the jet. For the present /
case of NaC1 as the only solute, a value of 0.642 0 r~
0'1 0"2 0.3 0.4 0,5
was evaluated and used for all computations. Model predictions, G [m]
Model results for a specific jet obtained with
the above value of E, are compared with Fig. 4. Comparison of model predictions and experi-
mentaldata for the impactpoint distance, G. Jets inclined
experiments in Fig. 2. The central white solid line
by 30°, 45° and 60° , all nozzle diameter, all flow rates,
represents the jet trajectory predicted by the all density ratios.
model, while the two thinner solid lines are the
predicted jet conventional boundaries. As can be 0.35 7
J ,,,
seen, though the predicted trajectory shape looks E /
0.30 // t
reasonable, model predictions fail to match the /
/

experimental jet geometry. 0.25 • ~//

//
If a value of E of 0.06 is used instead, the
0.20 ~///
results reported in Fig. 3a--d are obtained. As can E
g II~D/Q///
be seen, with this value for E, the model predicted ul 0.15
jet trajectories compare very well with experi- n
0.10 • e We Y v : 45°
ments, independently of nozzle diameter, jet ~ro 60°

density and flow rate as well as nozzle incli- 0.05 ~"

nation. It is worth noting that the predicted jet
boundaries appear to be in poorer agreement with
experiments than the jet centertines. This is likely
to be due to the difficulty of experimentally
assessing the actual jet concentration boundaries,
which may not coincide with the relevant visible
jet boundaries.
Model predictions were found to be in good
agreement with experiments for all (more than
50) available experimental data, leading to the
conclusion that the present model can be con-
sidered well validated. As a matter of fact, model
predictions are quantitatively compared with
experimental results in Figs. 4-6 for impact point
distance G, maximum trajectory trajectory Y, and
maximum jet rise level Z, respectively. As can be
0.05 0.10 0.15 0.20 0.25 0.30 0.35
Model predictions,Y [m]
Fig. 5. Comparison of model predictions and experi-.
mental data for trajectory maximum, Y. Jets inclinedby
30°, 45° and 60° , all nozzle diameter, all flow rates, all
density ratios.
seen, model predictions are in very good agree-
ment with experiment for the first two parameters
(Figs. 4 and 5), while the jet maximum rise level
(Fig. 6) is slightly over-predicted by the model In
this last case, however, the observation pre-
viously made on the visibility of the actual jet
boundaries applies again.
Model predictions may finally be compared
with literature data on parameters not covered by
 464 A. Cipollina et al. / Desalination 167 (2004) 459-468

the experiments considered so far. This is, for 4. Sample practical application
instance, the case of experimental dilution data
In this section, the practical application of the
measured at the jet impact point by Roberts et al.
[8]. These data are plotted vs. model dilution above dense jet model to the design of an effluent
diffuser is illustrated. The hypothetical design
predictions in Fig. 7 and, as can be seen, very
good agreement is obtained again, thus providing problem faced is that of a brine stream from a
small desalination plant that has to be discharged
a further independent validation of the present
model. through a suitable marine diffuser. Brine charac-
teristics and physical conditions of a possible
disposal site are listed in Table 1.
0.35 As a design specification, according to
E #/ Pincince and List [7], the value of brine concen-
N 0,30 //
tration at the impact on the sea floor may be
/ required to differ by less than 15% from the
0.25 // O• •
ambient seawater concentration. This implies that
.E 0.20 /// • a 10:l dilution for the effluent here under exami-
,.'/ • ° •
ILl / #/lt~ •
nation may be considered as satisfactorily com-
0.15 m"o • plying with environmental protection criteria.
// • O0 • 30*
.,"o o" • 45° After a diffuser type has been selected, e.g., a
0.~0 /./eo • 60"
/
/ , t A,, two-port diffuser like the one illustrated in Fig. 8
0,05 ' ' ' J (with a nozzle height of about 0.4 m), the effluent
0.05 0.10 0.15 0.20 0.25 0.30 0.35
design reduces to suitably choosing its geometri-
Model predictions, Z [m]
cal parameters, namely nozzle diameter and
Fig. 6. Comparison of model predictions and experi- inclination.
mental data for maximum rise level, Z. Jets inclined by
For each choice of the two parameters, the
30 °, 45 ° and 60 ° , all nozzle diameter, all flow rates, all
density ratios. dense jet model here proposed can be run in order
to predict the diffuser performance. In Table 2
model predictions obtained with nozzle diameters
~" 6O
jj// of 50 mm, 60 mm or 75 mm and inclinations of
/"
P 45 ° or 60 ° are reported.
/
1:: /
,,0 //
/ The results show that all the simulated jets
o // exceed the dilution level required, hence guaran-
50 /*
m- //
/ teeing safe environmental conditions. Differences
/ / •
/
01~0
40 //j
/
Table 1
E
"E Characteristics of the brine to be discharged and the
e~ //•
X marine environment
/ //
W 30 I
//
/
Brine flow rate, m3/h 50
30 40 50 60
Brine TDS, kg/m 3 70
M o d e l predictions, S i
Seawater TDS, kg/m 3 35
Fig. 7. Jet dilution at impact point, S i. Comparison of Depth of the sea floor at discharge point, m 6
model predictions and experimental data (60 ° inclined Slope of the sea floor at discharge point, % 0
jets, by Roberts et al. [8]). Type of sea floor Sandy
 A. Cipollina et al. / Desalination 167 (2004) 459-468 465

t
l-I

III I II II II II

Fig. 8. Sample submarine two-port diffuser.

Table 2
Jet parameters in the case of a 0% slope of the sea floor

do, m 0.05 0.05 0.06 0.06 0.075 0.075

0 o~ O 45 60 45 60 45 60
Outlet velocity (Uo), m/s 3.5 3.5 2.45 2.45 1.6 1.6
Distance of the impact point (IP), m 5.2 4.2 4.0 3.3 3.1 2.5
Minimum dilution ratio at IP 59 62 39 41 24 25
Maximum velocity at IP, m/s 0.065 0.07 0.07 0.075 0.08 0.08
Jet upper boundary maximum rise, m 3.7 4.6 2.9 3.6 2.3 2.8

Table 3
Jet parameters in the case of a 15% slope of the sea floor

do, m 0.05 0.05 0.06 0.06 0.075 0.075

~ o' 0 45 60 45 60 45 60
Outlet velocity (Uo), m/s 3.5 3.5 2.45 2.45 1.6 1.6
Distance of the impact point (IP), m 5.6 4.5 4.3 3.4 3.3 2.6
Minimum dilution at IP 72 71 46 46 29 29
Maximum falling velocity at IP, rn/s 0.06 0.07 0.07 0.075 0.08 0.08
Jet upper boundary maximum rise, m 3.7 4.6 2.9 3.6 2.3 2.8

due to jet inclination are significant as far as the
distance o f the impact point is concerned; con-
versely they are almost negligible when looking
at the dilution or the jet impact velocity. In
particular, this velocity is found to be in the range
of 6 to 8 cm/s, i.e., numerical values that may
well imply the adoption o f protective measures in
case of a sandy sea floor in order to prevent its
erosion by the falling plume.
The nozzle diameter essentially determines the
issuing velocity and therefore strongly influences
the dilution levels as well as the whole jet
geometry. In particular, it can be observed that
the smaller the nozzle diameter, the higher the
dilution, impact point distance and maximum rise
level. Nozzle diameter choice should therefore be
made by suitably taking into account both the
energy requirements for higher velocities and the
need o f high dilution levels.
The nozzle initial inclination affects the
dilution values since 60 ° inclined jets are consist-
ently found to give rise to slightly larger dilution
levels. This is due to the larger maximum jet rise
which, despite the smaller impact point distance,
466 A. Cipollina et al. / Desalination 167 (2004) 459--468
gives rise to a longer jet path and in turn to higher
jet dilution. It is worth noting that the larger jet
rise requires that the sea free surface height is
sufficiently high, as it will normally be required
that the jet stays significantly below the free
surface in order not to disturb it.
The above considerations hold true for the
horizontal sea floor case dealt with in Table 2.
The situation may, however, be changed by
changes in the sea bed slope. For instance,
Table 3 reports model predictions for the same
stream of Table 2 but in the case of a sloping sea
floor (slope = 15%). As can be seen, in this case
the differences in dilution values reached by 45 °
and 60 ° inclined jets, though practically negli-
gible, slightly favour the former over the latter.
This, in conjunction with the smaller jet maxi-
mum rise, leads to the conclusion that in the case
of sloping see floors, jets inclined less than 60 °
are likely to be preferred since they allow a safer
dilution process.
5. Conclusions
An effective model aimed at simulating the
behavior of inclined jets heavier than the environ-
ment in which they are dispersed has been
developed. The main model assumptions are an
entrainment flux proportional to local jet velo-
cities and Gaussian distributions for velocity and
concentration across the jet section. The model
involves only one adjustable parameter (the
entrainment proportionality coefficient E) and
reduces to a set of three ODEs and one algebraic
equation, which can be easily solved by the
simplest numerical methods.
Model results provide information on impor-
tant geometric features (jet shape and axial
trajectory geometry), as well as on the dilution
levels achieved along the trajectory and on the
velocity field that characterizes the jet.
After best fitting the entrainment propor-
tionality coefficient E, model predictions were
compared with both in-house experimental data
and data from the literature. In all cases very
good agreement was observed, despite the fairly
wide range of experimental conditions encom-
passed, therefore leading to the conclusion that
the model can be regarded as being fully
validated.
Finally, a sample application of the model to
the diffuser design for an hypothetical dense
effluent was reported. It highlights how the model
can be an effective tool for predicting the effects
of a dense effluent disposal in a body of water.
Acknowledgements
This research was carried out with the finan-
cial support of the Italian Ministry of Universities
and Research, D . M . n . 7 2 0 14.12.99, Piano
Ambiente Terrestre, Cluster 1 1B, Project No. 23,
"ISRI".
References
[1] R. Einav, Environmental aspects of a desalination
plant in Ashkelon, Desalination, 156 (2003) 79-85.
[2] J.S. Turner, Jets and plumes with negative or
reversing buoyancy, J. Fluid Mech., 26 (1966) 779-
792.
[3] W.P. James, I. Vergara and K. Kim, Dilution of a
dense vertical jet, J. Environ. Eng., ASCE, (1983)
1273-1283.
[4] P.J.W. Roberts and G. Toms, Inclined dense jets in
flowing current, J. Hydr. Div. ASCE, 113 (1987)
323-341.
[5] H. Zhang and E.R. Baddour, Maximum penetration
of vertical round densejets at small and large Froude
numbers, J. Hydr. Eng. ASCE, 124 (1998) 550-553.
[6] F.M. Holly and J.H. Grace, Model study of dense jet
in flowing fluid, J. Hydr. Div., ASCE (1972) 1921-
1933.
[7] A.B. Pincince and E.J. List, Disposal of brine into an
estuary, J. Water Pollution Control Fed., 45 (1973)
2335-2344.
 A. Cipollina et al. / Desalination 167 (2004) 459-468 467

[8] P.J.W.Roberts,A. Ferrier and G. Daviero, Mixing in
inclined dense jets, J. Hydr. Eng., ASCE, (1997)
693-699.
[9] G. Abraham, Jets with negative buoyancy in homo-
geneous fluid, J. Hydr. Res., 5 (1967) 235-248.
[10] A. Cipollina, A. Brucato, F. Grisafi and S. Nicosia,
Bench scale investigation of inclined dense jets,
submitted for publication.
[1 t] N. Rajaratnam, in N.P. Cheremisinoff, ed., Ency-
clopedia of Fluid Mechanics, Vol. 2, Gulf Pub-
lishing, Houston, 1986, pp. 391-400.
[12] A.O. Demuren, in N.P. Cheremisinoff, ed., Ency-
clopedia of Fluid Mechanics, Vol. 2, Gulf Pub-
lishing, Houston, 1986, pp. 440-441.

APPENDIX: Mathematical details R

(C_Ca)=_ Um"~R2
1 " f (C-C~)(r)'u(r)'2~'r'dr
The mean velocity urn, volume mean concen-
0
tration Cmand bulk mean concentration C appear-
ing in Eqs. (5)-(8) are defined in Eqs. (12)-(14), R
1
respectively.
urn.~xRz "f (Cm~-C~) "um~x
0
R R
1 "fu(r)'2r~'r'dr= 1 "fUm~ e×p [-(A (,'/R/' ]"2=.,'. (14)
gR 2 gR 2
0 0 (12)
• (Cm(A-Ca)'Umax.[l_e-(A+B) ]
• exp [-A'(r/R) 2]2rc'r.& = Umax" -~'(1 - e - a ) + B)" Urn

The coefficient 3~v in Eqs. (6) and (7) is a

R correction factor that compensates for the use of
Crn-C~- 1 .f(c_c~)(r).2~.r.dr_ 1 the product of the mean variable (u,,) where the
rcR z 0 rcR z integral of the product of local variables on the
whole jet cross section would have been required.
R Its definition is given in Eq. (15):
"f (Cm~x-Co)'exp[-B'(r/R)2]" 2z~'r'dr R (15)
0 (13) l'fu(r)2"2~'r'dr
r~R z
0
1.(1 e -M)
~. =
=(Cmax-Ca)'l'(1-e -B)
468 A. CipoIlinaet al. / Desalination 167 (2004) 459-468

In order to decrease the number of operating • Continuity equation:

variables, it is worth relating the mean volume of
density (related, in turn, to concentration) in the
second term of Eq. (7) to the mean bulk density
d(p'rcR2"Um) = 2xRp "U. : 2rcR'pa'I'um (18)
dl
After some manipulation one obtains:

Cm-Ca _ (A +B)'(1-e-S)'(1-e-a) =M • Momentum flux, x-direction:

C-C a A'B'[1 - e -(A+s)] (16)
d(xR2"p" ~'v'U2"c°sO) =0
(19)
which shows that the ratio (C,,-C,)/(C-C,) is a dl
constant along the jet trajectory, as is also the case
for coefficient ~.v. • Momentum flux, y-direction:
Finally, by substituting for A and B the values
of 2.77 and 2.05, respectively, values of 0.338,
d(uR2"P'3"vu~'sinO)= _xR2. (pm_pa).g
(20)
0.422, 1.57, 0.701 are obtained for Um/Umax,
dl
(Cm-C,)/(Cr~x-Ca), )~ and M, respectively. All
these values clearly depend on the Gaussian
distributions chosen as the initial hypothesis
= = -=R=.kM(C-Co).g
[Eqs. (1) and (2)]; if different distribution curves
had been chosen, the only change needed to the • Integral solute mass balance:
model would have been that suitably different
values would have been obtained for the above
< Oo(Co-Co) (21)
parameters.
Re-arranging the previous equations, it is
possible to write:
• Expression for the entrainment: By substituting the expressions for Ue and C
given by Eqs. (17) and (21) into Eqs. (18)-(20),
A Eqs. (9)--(11) are obtained.
Ue=E'Umax=E" [ ~ u,.=I'u= (17)