Comparative analysis of the aerodynamic performance of trains and dynamic responses of catenaries for windbreak walls with different heights under crosswind

Abstract

Due to the deterioration of the crosswind-protection performance of the original earth embankment windbreak walls on the train with increased speed, researching the influence of the heightened windbreak walls on aerodynamic performances of trains as well as the protection of the catenary is necessary for optimizing the windproof performance. The improved delayed detached eddy simulation based on the shear stress transport (SST) κ-ω turbulence model was employed to simulate flow structures. Furthermore, the effect on the displacement of the catenary was investigated using the finite element method (FEM). The numerical case was validated against the field tests. The results show that the aerodynamic performances of the train were improved as the windbreak wall was heightened by 0.5 m. Whereas, further heightening the windbreak wall worsened the aerodynamic performance. When the windbreak wall was heightened by 0.5 and 1 m, the wind speed of the catenary was reduced by 31.17% and 53.87%, and the displacement of the catenary was reduced by 48.09% and 74.11%, respectively, compared with that of the original windbreak wall. These results reveal that the wind-protection performance on the train and catenary can be both improved by reasonably heightening windbreak walls.

Keywords

Windbreak wall height high-speed train catenary aerodynamic characteristics flow structures wind-induced displacement crosswind

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Dong

Minelli

Wang

, et al. The effect of ground clearance on the aerodynamics of a generic high-speed train. J Fluids Struct 2020; 95: 102990. DOI: 10.1016/j.jfluidstructs.2020.102990.

Wang

X-Z

Xiao

, et al. An experimental analysis of the aerodynamic characteristics of a high-speed train on a bridge under crosswinds. J Wind Eng Ind Aerodyn 2018; 177: 92–100. DOI: 10.1016/j.jweia.2018.03.021.

Suzuki

Tanemoto

Maeda

. Aerodynamic characteristics of train/vehicles under cross winds. J Wind Eng Ind Aerodyn 2003; 91: 209–218. DOI: 10.1016/s0167-6105(02)00346-x.

Liu

, et al. Investigation of aerodynamic effects on the high-speed train exposed to longitudinal and lateral wind velocities. J Fluids Struct 2016; 61: 347–361. DOI: 10.1016/j.jfluidstructs.2015.12.005.

Zhang

Yang

M-z

Liang

X-F

. Experimental study on the effect of wind angles on pressure distribution of train streamlined zone and train aerodynamic forces. J Wind Eng Ind Aerodyn 2018; 174: 330–343. DOI: 10.1016/j.jweia.2018.01.024.

Chen

Liu

, et al. Aerodynamic performance and dynamic behaviors of a train passing through an elongated hillock region beside a windbreak under crosswinds and corresponding flow mitigation measures. J Wind Eng Ind Aerodyn 2021; 208: 104434. DOI: 10.1016/j.jweia.2020.104434.

Cheli

Corradi

Rocchi

, et al. Wind tunnel tests on train scale models to investigate the effect of infrastructure scenario. J Wind Eng Ind Aerodyn 2010; 98: 353–362. DOI: 10.1016/j.jweia.2010.01.001.

Avila-Sanchez

Meseguer

Lopez-Garcia

. Turbulence intensity on catenary contact wires due to parapets placed on a double track bridge. J Wind Eng Ind Aerodyn 2010; 98: 504–511. DOI: 10.1016/j.jweia.2010.03.003.

Baker

. Train aerodynamic forces and moments from moving model experiments. J Wind Eng Ind Aerodyn 1986; 24: 227–251. DOI: 10.1016/0167-6105(86)90024-3.

10.

Tomasini

Giappino

Cheli

, et al. Windbreaks for railway lines: wind tunnel experimental tests. Proc Inst Mech Eng F J Rail Rapid Transit 2016; 230: 1270–1282. DOI: 10.1177/0954409715596191.

11.

Zhang

Gao

Liu

, et al. Shape optimization of a kind of earth embankment type windbreak wall along the Lanzhou-Xinjiang railway. J Appl Fluid Mech 2017; 10: 1189–1200. DOI: 10.18869/acadpub.jafm.73.241.27353.

12.

Chu

C-R

Chang

C-Y

Huang

C-J

, et al. Windbreak protection for road vehicles against crosswind. J Wind Eng Ind Aerodyn 2013; 116: 61–69. DOI: 10.1016/j.jweia.2013.02.001.

13.

Mohebbi

Rezvani

. Analysis of the effects of lateral wind on a high speed train on a double routed railway track with porous shelters. J Wind Eng Ind Aerodyn 2019; 184: 116–127. DOI: 10.1016/j.jweia.2018.11.011.

14.

Qiao

. Optimization of existing wind break facilities on Nanjiang railway based on safe operation of EMU trains. China Railway 2018; 12: 60–67. DOI: 10.19549/j.issn.1001-683x.2018.12.060.

15.

Zhu

Cheng

Zhang

. Analysis and research on the stability of earth embankment wind-break wall with high dam board. Railway Stand Des 2015; 59: 16–20.

16.

Johnson

. Strong; wind effects on railway operations—16th october 1987. J Wind Eng Ind Aerodyn 1996; 60: 251–266. DOI: 10.1016/0167-6105(96)00038-4.

17.

Lopez-Garcia

Carnicero

Maroño

. Influence of stiffness and contact modelling on catenary–pantograph system dynamics. J Sound Vib 2007; 299: 806–821. DOI: 10.1016/j.jsv.2006.07.018.

18.

Avila-Sanchez

Lopez-Garcia

Cuerva

, et al. Assesment of the transverse galloping stability of a railway overhead located above a railway bridge. Int J Mech Sci 2017; 131−132: 649–662. DOI: 10.1016/j.ijmecsci.2017.07.024.

19.

Stickland

Scanlon

. An investigation into the aerodynamic characteristics of catenary contact wires in a cross-wind. Proc Inst Mech Eng F J Rail Rapid Transit 2001; 215: 311–318. DOI: 10.1243/0954409011531602.

20.

Xie

Zhi

. Wind tunnel test of an aeroelastic model of a catenary system for a high-speed railway in China. J Wind Eng Ind Aerodyn 2019; 184: 23–33. DOI: 10.1016/j.jweia.2018.11.008.

21.

Park

T-J

Han

C-S

Jang

J-H

. Dynamic sensitivity analysis for the pantograph of a high-speed rail vehicle. J Sound Vib 2003; 266: 235–260. DOI: 10.1016/s0022-460x(02)01280-4.

22.

Guo

Liu

Chen

, et al. Aerodynamic influences of bogie’s geometric complexity on high-speed trains under crosswind. J Wind Eng Ind Aerodyn 2020; 196: 104053. DOI: 10.1016/j.jweia.2019.104053.

23.

Guo

Liu

Chen

, et al. Study of the flow around railway embankment of different heights with and without trains. J Wind Eng Ind Aerodyn 2020; 202: 104203. DOI: 10.1016/j.jweia.2020.104203.

24.

Niu

Zhou

Wang

. Numerical comparison of aerodynamic performance of stationary and moving trains with or without windbreak wall under crosswind. J Wind Eng Ind Aerodyn 2018; 182: 1–15. DOI: 10.1016/j.jweia.2018.09.011.

25.

Chen

Liu

Jiang

, et al. Comparative analysis of the effect of different nose lengths on train aerodynamic performance under crosswind. J Fluids Struct 2018; 78: 69–85. DOI: 10.1016/j.jfluidstructs.2017.12.016.

26.

Niu

Zhou

Liang

. Numerical investigation of the aerodynamic characteristics of high-speed trains of different lengths under crosswind with or without windbreaks. Eng Appl Comput Fluid Mech 2018; 12: 195–215. DOI: 10.1080/19942060.2017.1390786.

27.

Zhang

Wang

Tan

, et al. Detached eddy simulation of flow characteristics around railway embankments and the layout of anemometers. J Wind Eng Ind Aerodyn 2019; 193: 103968. DOI: 10.1016/j.jweia.2019.103968.

28.

Xia

Liu

, et al. Aerodynamic effects of the gap spacing between adjacent vehicles on wind tunnel train models. Eng Appl Comput Fluid Mech 2020; 14: 835–852. DOI: 10.1080/19942060.2020.1773319.

29.

Kozmar

Procino

Borsani

, et al. Sheltering efficiency of wind barriers on bridges. J Wind Eng Ind Aerodyn 2012; 107−108: 274–284. DOI: 10.1016/j.jweia.2012.04.027.

30.

Zhong

, et al. Numerical investigation on the aerodynamics and dynamics of a high-speed train passing through a tornado-like vortex. J Fluids Struct 2020; 96: 103042. DOI: 10.1016/j.jfluidstructs.2020.103042.

31.

Chen

X-B

Liu

, et al. Dynamic analysis of the effect of nose length on train aerodynamic performance. J Wind Eng Ind Aerodyn 2019; 184: 198–208. DOI: 10.1016/j.jweia.2018.11.021.

32.

Zhou

Jia

, et al. Effects of yaw angle on the unsteady aerodynamic performance of the pantograph of a high-speed train under crosswind. J Wind Eng Ind Aerodyn 2018; 182: 49–60. DOI: 10.1016/j.jweia.2018.09.009.

33.

Lee

J-H

Kim

Y-G

Paik

J-S

, et al. Performance evaluation and design optimization using differential evolutionary algorithm of the pantograph for the high-speed train. J Mech Sci Techn 2012; 26: 3253–3260. DOI: 10.1007/s12206-012-0833-5.

34.

Cho

. Numerical simulation of the dynamic responses of railway overhead contact lines to a moving pantograph, considering a nonlinear dropper. J Sound Vib 2008; 315: 433–454. DOI: 10.1016/j.jsv.2008.02.024.

35.

Huang

. Building and analysis for dynamic simulation model of catenary. J Mech Strength 2020; 42: 919–924.

36.

Tang

Wang

Luo

. Analysis of wind load by formula for jack up platform. Ship Eng 2016; 38: 35–38. DOI: 10.13788/j.cnki.cbgc.2016.S1.035.

37.

Ding

. Impact of modifying terrain roughness class on theoretic wind pressure of air filtration. Heat Ventilat Air Condit 2005; 35: 7–9.

38.

Zhu

Chen

. Study on wind load on the topside modules of fixed platforms. China Pet Mach 2020; 48: 55–61.

39.

Liu

Chen

Zhou

, et al. A CFD analysis of the aerodynamics of a high-speed train passing through a windbreak transition under crosswind. Eng Appl Comput Fluid Mech 2018; 12: 137–151. DOI: 10.1080/19942060.2017.1360211.

40.

Liu

T-H

Chen

X-D

, et al. Field study on the interior pressure variations in high-speed trains passing through tunnels of different lengths. J Wind Eng Ind Aerodyn 2017; 169: 54–66. DOI: 10.1016/j.jweia.2017.07.004.

41.

X-B

Chen

Wang

, et al. Dynamic analysis of the flow fields around single- and double-unit trains. J Wind Eng Ind Aerodyn 2019; 188: 136–150. DOI: 10.1016/j.jweia.2019.02.015.