Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Feasibility of replacing the 3-coach with a 1.5-coach grouping train model in wind tunnel experiment at different yaw angles

不同风向角下一节半编组替代三车编组的风洞可行性研究

  • Published:
Journal of Central South University Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The effects of different yaw angles on the aerodynamic performance of city electric multiple units (EMUs) were investigated in a wind tunnel using a 1:16.8 scaled model. Pressure scanning valve and six-component box-type aerodynamic balance were used to test the pressure distribution and aerodynamic force of the head car respectively from the 1.5- and 3-coach grouping city EMU models. Meanwhile, the effects of the yaw angles on the pressure distribution of the streamlined head as well as the aerodynamic forces of the train were analyzed. The experimental results showed that the pressure coefficient was the smallest at the maximum slope of the main shape-line. The side force coefficient and pressure coefficient along the head car cross-section were most affected by crosswind when the yaw angle was 55°, and replacing a 3-coach grouping with a 1.5-coach grouping had obvious advantages for wind tunnel testing when the yaw angle was within 24.2°. In addition, the relative errors of lift coefficient CL, roll moment coefficient CMx, side force coefficient CS, and drag coefficient CD between the 1.5- and 3-coach cases were below 5.95%, which all met the requirements of the experimental accuracy.

摘要

首先，在风洞中采用1：16.8的模型研究了不同风向角对市域动车组气动性能的影响；其次，采用压力扫描阀和六分度天平对1.5 节和3 节列车编组的市域动车组模型的头车车体压力分布和气动性能进行了测试；最后，分析了风向角对列车流线型头部压力分布和列车气动力的影响。实验结果表明： 压力系数在主型线斜率最大处最小。当风向角为55°时，横风对车头横截面的侧向力系数和压力系数影响最大。在风洞实验中，若风向角在24.2°内，用1.5 节车编组代替3 节车编组有明显的空间优势。 此外，升力系数CL、横摇力矩系数CMx、侧向力系数CS和阻力系数CD的相对误差均在5.95%以内，实验精度满足要求。

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. NAYERI C N, STRANGFELD C, ZELLMANN C, et al. The influence of wind tunnel grid turbulence on aerodynamic coefficients of trains [C]//The Aerodynamics of Heavy Vehicles III. Switzerland: Springer International Publishing, 2016: 133–141. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-20122-1_8.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  2. DIEDRICHS B. On computational fluid dynamics modelling of crosswind effects for high-speed rolling stock [J]. Proceedings of the Institution of Mechanical Engineers, Part F: Journal of Rail and Rapid Transit, 2003, 217(3): 203–226. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1243/095440903769012902.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. ZHANG J, HE K, XIONG X, et al. Numerical simulation with a DES approach for a high-speed train subjected to the crosswind [J]. Journal of Applied Fluid Mechanics, 2017, 10(5): 1329–1342. DOI: https://doi.org/10.18869/acadpub.jafm.73.242.27566.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. KWON H B, PARK Y W, LEE D H, et al. Wind tunnel experiments on Korean high-speed trains using various ground simulation techniques [J]. Journal of Wind Engineering and Industrial Aerodynamics, 2001, 89(13): 1179–1195. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/S0167-6105(01)00107-6.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. BAKER C J, JONES J, LOPEZ-CALLEJA F, et al. Measurements of the cross wind forces on trains [J]. Journal of Wind Engineering and Industrial Aerodynamics, 2004, 92(7–8): 547–563. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jweia.2004.03.002.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. SUZUKI M, TANEMOTO K, MAEDA T. Aerodynamic characteristics of train/vehicles under cross winds [J]. Journal of Wind Engineering and Industrial Aerodynamics, 2003, 91(1–2): 209–218. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/S0167-6105(02)00346-X.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. DORIGATTI F, STERLING M, BAKER C J, et al. Crosswind effects on the stability of a model passenger train—A comparison of static and moving experiments [J]. Journal of Wind Engineering and Industrial Aerodynamics, 2015, 138: 36–51. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jweia.2014.11.009.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. GIAPPINO S, ROCCHI D, SCHITO P, et al. Cross wind and rollover risk on lightweight railway vehicles [J]. Journal of Wind Engineering and Industrial Aerodynamics, 2016, 153: 106–112. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jweia.2016.03.013.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. BOCCIOLONE M, CHELI F, CORRADI R, et al. Crosswind action on rail vehicles: Wind tunnel experimental analyses [J]. Journal of Wind Engineering and Industrial Aerodynamics, 2008, 96(5): 584–610. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jweia.2008.02.030.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. NIU Ji-qiang, LIANG Xi-feng, ZHOU Dan. Experimental study on the effect of Reynolds number on aerodynamic performance of high-speed train with and without yaw angle [J]. Journal of Wind Engineering and Industrial Aerodynamics, 2016, 157: 36–46. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jweia.2016.08.007.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. ZHANG Lei, YANG Ming-zhi, LIANG Xi-feng. Experimental study on the effect of wind angles on pressure distribution of train streamlined zone and train aerodynamic forces [J]. Journal of Wind Engineering and Industrial Aerodynamics, 2018, 174: 330–343. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jweia.2018.01.024.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. ZHOU Dan, TIAN Hong-qi, THOMPSON M, et al. Numerical and experimental investigations of the flow around a high-speed train on an embankment under side wind conditions [C]// The Aerodynamics of Heavy Vehicles III. Switzerland: Springer International Publishing, 2016: 113–130. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-20122-1_7.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  13. NIU Ji-qiang, ZHOU Dan, LIANG Xi-feng. Experimental research on the aerodynamic characteristics of a high-speed train under different turbulence conditions [J]. Experimental Thermal and Fluid Science, 2017, 80: 117–125. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.expthermflusci.2016.08.014.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. CHELI F, CORRADI R, TOMASINI G. Crosswind action on rail vehicles: A methodology for the estimation of the characteristic wind curves [J]. Journal of Wind Engineering and Industrial Aerodynamics, 2012, 104–106: 248–255. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jweia.2012.04.006.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. DING Y, STERLING M, BAKER C. An alternatiFe approach to modelling train stabiiity in high cross winds [J]. Proceedings of the Institution of Mechanical Engineers Part F: Journal of Rail and Rapid Transit, 2008, 222(1): 85–97. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1243/09544097JRRT138.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. WETZEL C, PROPPE C. On reliability and sensitivity methods for vehicle systems under stochastic crosswind loads [J]. Vehicle System Dynamics, 2010, 48(1): 79–95. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/00423110903183917.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. HEMIDA H, BAKER C, GAO Guang-jun. The calculation of train slipstreams using large-eddy simulation [J]. Proceedings of the Institution of Mechanical Engineers, Part F: Journal of Rail and Rapid Transit, 2014, 228(1): 25–36. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/0954409712460982.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. HASHMI S A, HEMIDA H, SOPER D. Wind tunnel testing on a train model subjected to crosswinds with different windbreak walls [J]. Journal of Wind Engineering and Industrial Aerodynamics, 2019, 195: 104013. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jweia.2019.104013.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. BS EN 14067-6. Railway applications — Aerodynamics. Part 6: Requirements and Test Procedures for Cross Wind Assessment [S]. 2013.

  20. HUANG Sha, HEMIDA H, YANG Ming-zhi. Numerical calculation of the slipstream generated by a CRH2 high-speed train [J]. Proceedings of the Institution of Mechanical Engineers, Part F: Journal of Rail and Rapid Transit, 2016, 230(1): 103–116. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/0954409714528891.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. LUHAR M, SHARMA A S, MCKEON B J. A framework for studying the effect of compliant surfaces on wall turbulence [EB/OL]. 2014: arXiv: 1411.6690[physics. flu-dyn]. https://arxiv.org/abs/1411.6690.

  22. SCHEWE G, LARSEN A. Reynolds number effects in the flow around a bluff bridge deck cross section [J]. Journal of Wind Engineering and Industrial Aerodynamics, 1998, 74–76: 829–838. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/S0167-6105(98)00075-0.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. BELL J R, BURTON D, THOMPSON M, et al. Wind tunnel analysis of the slipstream and wake of a high-speed train [J]. Journal of Wind Engineering and Industrial Aerodynamics, 2014, 134: 122–138. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jweia.2014.09.004.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. GJB1179A. Requirements for flow quality of low and high speed wind tunnels [S]. 2012. (in Chinese)

  25. ZHANG Jie, GAO Guang-jun, LIU Tang-hong, et al. Crosswind stability of high-speed trains in special cuts [J]. Journal of Central South University, 2015, 22(7): 2849–2856. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11771-015-2817-y.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. FLYNN D, HEMIDA H, BAKER C. On the effect of crosswinds on the slipstream of a freight train and associated effects [J]. Journal of Wind Engineering and Industrial Aerodynamics, 2016, 156: 14–28. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jweia.2016.07.001.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. SCHOBER M, WEISE M, ORELLANO A, et al. Wind tunnel investigation of an ICE 3 endcar on three standard ground scenarios [J]. Journal of Wind Engineering and Industrial Aerodynamics, 2010, 98(6–7): 345–352. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jweia.2009.12.004.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. TIAN Hong-qi. Review of research on high-speed railway aerodynamics in China [J]. Transportation Safety and Environment, 2019, 1(1): 1–21. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/tse/tdz014.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. NIU Ji-qiang, SUI Yang, YU Qiu-jun, et al. Aerodynamics of railway train/tunnel system: A review of recent research [J]. Energy and Built Environment, 2020, 1(4): 351–375. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enbenv.2020.03.003.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. NIU Ji-qiang, WANG Yue-ming, LIU Feng, et al. Numerical study on the effect of a downstream braking plate on the detailed flow field and unsteady aerodynamic characteristics of an upstream braking plate with or without a crosswind [J]. Vehicle System Dynamics, 2021, 59(5): 657–674. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/00423114.2019.1708959.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Key Laboratory of Traffic Safety on Track of Ministry of Education, Central South University, Changsha, 410075, China

    Bo Yang  (杨波), Xiao-hui Xiong  (熊小慧), Zhao He  (何钊), Xiao-bai Li  (李小白), Peng-hui Xie  (谢鹏辉) & Ming-zan Tang  (唐明赞)

  2. Joint International Research Laboratory of Key Technology for Rail Traffic Safety, Changsha, 410075, China

    Bo Yang  (杨波), Xiao-hui Xiong  (熊小慧), Zhao He  (何钊), Xiao-bai Li  (李小白), Peng-hui Xie  (谢鹏辉) & Ming-zan Tang  (唐明赞)

  3. National & Local Joint Engineering Research Center of Safety Technology for Rail Vehicle, Changsha, 410075, China

    Bo Yang  (杨波), Xiao-hui Xiong  (熊小慧), Zhao He  (何钊), Xiao-bai Li  (李小白), Peng-hui Xie  (谢鹏辉) & Ming-zan Tang  (唐明赞)

Authors
  1. Bo Yang  (杨波)
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Xiao-hui Xiong  (熊小慧)
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Zhao He  (何钊)
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Xiao-bai Li  (李小白)
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Peng-hui Xie  (谢鹏辉)
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Ming-zan Tang  (唐明赞)
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Xiao-hui Xiong  (熊小慧).

Additional information

Foundation item

Project(2020YFA0710903) supported by the National Key R&D Program of China; Projects(2020zzts111, 2020zzts117) supported by the Graduate Student Independent Innovation Project of Central South University, China; Project(202037) supported by Transport Department of Hunan Province Technology Innovation Project, China

Contributors

YANG Bo edited the draft of the manuscript. XIONG Xiao-hui provided the methodology. HE Zhao conducted the literature review. LI Xiao-bai and XIE Peng-hui analyzed the measured data. TANG Ming-zan conducted the investigation.

Conflict of interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Yang, B., Xiong, Xh., He, Z. et al. Feasibility of replacing the 3-coach with a 1.5-coach grouping train model in wind tunnel experiment at different yaw angles. J. Cent. South Univ. 29, 2062–2073 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11771-022-5060-3

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11771-022-5060-3

Key words

关键词

Search

Navigation