This article was published with three figures out of order and one figure incorrectly cited. In addition, two dashes were mistakenly inserted into the text, and two equations contained errors.
Figure 6 should have appeared as follows:
Figure 6. Time-averaged flame images at constant equivalence ratio 0.3 for several increasing mixture velocities from 1.7 m s–1 (a) to 6.79 m s–1 (f).
Figure 7 should have appeared as follows:
Figure 7. Timeseries of integrated chemiluminescence signals at constant 0.3 equivalence ratio for several increasing mixture velocities from 1.7 m s–1 to 6.79 m s–1.
Figure 8 should have appeared as follows:
Figure 8. Experimental flame imaging for equivalence ratio 0.3, 0.4 and 0.5 from left to right at constant air bulk velocity 6 m s−1. Measured time-averaged chemiluminescence emission fields are shown on panels (a, b, c) with constant variance isolines (orange dashed line) overlaid. Chemiluminescence emission variance fields are shown in panels (d1,e1,f1) with superimposed time-averaged contours (grey dashed line). Inverse Abel transform of the time-averaged fields are shown in panels (d2,e2,f2). Data are scaled by maxima taken at the highest equivalence ratio.
Both references to Figure 6 on page 13 should have referred to Figure 8. The expression ‘Fig. 6 (top and central rows) along with instantaneous shadowgraphs (bottom row)’ should have read ‘Fig. 8 (top row) along with post-processed fields (bottom row)’.
Dashes were mistakenly inserted into the abstract (‘(2) -describe the underlying flame stabilisation principle’) and nomenclature (‘-geometric swirl number at the bluff-body’).
Finally, the equations (A2) and (A3) were incorrectly published with negative signs on the left-hand side of the equations. These negative signs should not have been included.
The publisher and authors apologise for these errors.
Open access
