2010
DOI: 10.1134/s0001437010060202
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

The hydroacoustic method for the quantification of the gas flux from a submersed bubble plume

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

3
28
0
1

Year Published

2014
2014
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
6
1
1

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 30 publications
(32 citation statements)
references
References 9 publications
3
28
0
1
Order By: Relevance
“…Accurately calculating gas flow rates using hydroacoustic methods is needed but different research groups still use very different approaches (Artemov et al ; Nikolovska et al ; Ostrovsky et al ; Muyakshin and Sauter ; Jerrem et al in press). To date, no standard methodology exists for analyzing free gas flow rates of large bubbles in deep water (> 100 m) with ship‐based hydroacoustic systems alone.…”
Section: Materials and Proceduresmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Accurately calculating gas flow rates using hydroacoustic methods is needed but different research groups still use very different approaches (Artemov et al ; Nikolovska et al ; Ostrovsky et al ; Muyakshin and Sauter ; Jerrem et al in press). To date, no standard methodology exists for analyzing free gas flow rates of large bubbles in deep water (> 100 m) with ship‐based hydroacoustic systems alone.…”
Section: Materials and Proceduresmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The use of remote acoustic methods is preferable here. The conventional methods of determining the methane flux in a gas flare [15,28] are based on estimating the methane volume carried by bubbles from data on the backscattering level, and, hence, they also determine the upward methane flux. In addition, to obtain such an estimate, the acoustic data should be supplemented with data on the distribution functions characterizing the distributions of bubbles in their upward velocity, size, and shape at individual depths.…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The dependence on flow rate and bubble size matched predictions from an analytical model of the expected sonar response to a constant bubble stream rising through a horizontally oriented multibeam sonar. The expected response from a bubble stream with a wide but constant bubble size distribution was calculated by adapting a method that was developed for single and split beam sonar [Muyakshin and Sauter, 2010;Veloso et al, 2015], assuming a constant bubble size distribution measured in UML with an optical bubble sizer [Delwiche et al, 2015] and assuming that plumes are too sparse to be influenced significantly by multiple scatter reflections (see supporting information). The relative uncertainty in flux estimates is estimated to be ∼70% (see supporting information).…”
Section: A2 Calibrationmentioning
confidence: 99%