On the Scale Size of the Aerodynamic Characteristics of a High-Speed Train

Document Type : Regular Article

Authors

1 State Key Laboratory of Traction Power, Southwest Jiaotong University, Chengdu610031, China

2 State Key Laboratory of Traction Power, Southwest Jiaotong University, Chengdu, Sichuan, 610031, China

Abstract

In the wind tunnel test of trains, the scale size changes the Reynolds numbers of trains, which may affect the aerodynamic characteristics of the train. Based on computational fluid dynamics (CFD), numerical models of train aerodynamics with five different scale sizes are established. The five different scale sizes are λ=1/1, 1/2, 1/8, 1/16 and 1/25, respectively, and the aerodynamic characteristics of trains running in the open-air operating condition and crosswind operating condition with different scale sizes are numerically simulated. The results show that the pressure drag coefficients and pressure lift coefficients of the train tend to decrease with the decrease of the scale size. In the open-air operating condition, compared with the full-size train, the pressure drag coefficient of the 1/25th scaled train is less by 14.4%, and the pressure lift coefficients of the head car, middle car and tail car change 16.1%, 46.6% and 12.3%, respectively. The scale size affects the velocity gradient near the train surface and the position of flow separation changes. The decrease of the scale size leads to the decrease of Reynolds numbers and the increase of viscous drag coefficient. When the scale size is 1/25, the viscous drag coefficient of the train is 0.186, which is 48.6% larger than the one of the full-size train. Compared with the open-air operating condition, the trend of the pressure drag coefficients and viscous drag coefficients is consistent except for the head car in crosswind operating condition when the scale size decreases. In the range of scale size λ between 1/1 and 1/25, the aerodynamic drag coefficient of the head car, middle car and tail car increase with the decrease of scale size, and the difference in the aerodynamic drag coefficient of the train is 12.9%. In addition, the train’s aerodynamic lift coefficient shows an increasing trend with the decrease of scale size.

Keywords


Baker, C. J. and N. J. Brockie (1991). Wind tunnel tests to obtain train aerodynamic drag coefficients: Reynolds number and ground simulation effects. Journal of Wind Engineering and Industrial Aerodynamics 38(1), 23-28.##
Bell, J. R., D. Burton, M. C. Thompson, A. H. Herbst and J. Sheridan (2017). A wind-tunnel methodology for assessing the slipstream of high-speed trains.  Journal of Wind Engineering and Industrial Aerodynamics 166, 1-19.##
Bell, J. R., D. Burton, M. Thompson, A. Herbst and J. Sheridan (2014). Wind tunnel analysis of the slipstream and wake of a high-speed train. Journal of Wind Engineering and Industrial Aerodynamics 134(1), 122-138.##
Catalano, P., M. Wang, G. Iaccarino and P. Moin (2003). Numerical simulation of the flow around a circular cylinder at high Reynolds numbers. International Journal of Heat and Fluid Flow 24(4), 463-469.##
Collin, C., S. Mack, T. Indinger and J. Mueller (2016). A numerical and experimental evaluation of open jet wind tunnel interferences using the DrivAer reference model. SAE International Journal of Passenger Cars-Mechanical Systems  9(2), 657-679.##
De Graaff, D. B. and J. K. Eaton (2000). Reynolds-number scaling of the flat-plate turbulent boundary layer. Journal of Fluid Mechanics 422, 319-346.##
Han, Y. D. and  Y. Song (2017). Scale effect analysis in aerodynamic performance of high-speed train. Journal of Zhejiang University (Engineering Science) 51(12), 2383-2391.##
Kwon, H. B., Y. W. Park, D. H. Lee and M. S. Kim (2001). Wind tunnel experiments on Korean high-speed trains using various ground simulation techniques. Journal of Wind Engineering and Industrial Aerodynamics 89(13), 1179-1195.##
Li, T., H. Hemida, M. M. Rashidi and W. Zhang (2020). The effect of numerical divergence schemes on the flow around trains. Fluid Dynamics Research 52(2), 025509.##
Li, T., J. Y. Zhang, M. Rashidi and M. Yu (2019a). On the Reynolds-averaged Navier-Stokes modeling of the flow around a simplified train in crosswinds. Journal of Applied Fluid Mechanics 12(2), 551-563.##
Li, T., Q. Deng, J.Y. Zhang (2019b). Effect of RANS turbulence model on aerodynamic behavior of trains in crosswind. Chinese Journal of Mechanical Engineering 32(1), 85##
Li, T., Z. Dai, M. Yu and W. Zhang (2021). Numerical investigation on the aerodynamic resistances of double-unit trains with different gap lengths. Engineering Applications of Computational Fluid Mechanics 15(1), 549-560.##
Li, W. H., T. H. Liu, J. Zhang, Z. W. Chen, X. D. Chen and T. Z. Xie (2017). Aerodynamic study of two opposing moving trains in a tunnel based on different nose contours. Journal of Applied Fluid Mechanics 10(5), 1375-1386.##
Emil, L., S. Sebben and A. Broniewicz (2020). Inclusion of the physical wind tunnel in vehicle CFD simulations for improved prediction quality. Journal of Wind Engineering and Industrial Aerodynamics 197, 104055.##
Lu, C. L., Q. S. Li, S. H. Huang, F. B. Chen and X. Y. Fu (2012). Large eddy simulation of wind effects on a long-span complex roof structure. Journal of Wind Engineering and Industrial Aerodynamics 100(1), 1-18.##
Munoz, P. J., J. Garcia and A. Crespo (2015) Aerodynamic optimization of the nose shape of a train using the adjoint method. Journal of Applied Fluid Mechanics 8(3), 601- 612.##
Niu, J., X. Liang and D. Zhou (2016). Experimental study on the effect of Reynolds number on aerodynamic performance of high-speed train with and without yaw angle. Journal of Wind Engineering and Industrial Aerodynamics 157, 36-46.##
Paz, C., E. Suárez, C. Gil and M. Concheiro (2015). Numerical study of the impact of windblown sand particles on a high-speed train. Journal of Wind Engineering and Industrial Aerodynamics 145, 87-93.##
Vallikivi, M., M. Hultmark and A. J. Smits (2015). Turbulent boundary layer statistics at very high Reynolds number. Journal of Fluid Mechanics 779, 371 -389.##
Xia, Y., T. Liu, H. Gu, Z. Guo, Z. Chen, W. Li and L. Li (2020). Aerodynamic effects of the gap spacing between adjacent vehicles on wind tunnel train models. Engineering Applications of Computational Fluid Mechanics 14(1), 835-852.##
Yu, M., J. Liu and Z. Dai (2021). Aerodynamic characteristics of a high-speed train exposed to heavy rain environment based on non-spherical raindrop. Journal of Wind Engineering and Industrial Aerodynamics 211, 104532.##
Zhang, J., K. He, X. Xiong, J. Wang and G. Gao (2017). Numerical simulation with a DES approach for a high-speed train subjected to the crosswind. Journal of Applied Fluid Mechanics 10(5), 1329-1342.##
Zhou, D., H. Q. Tian, J. Zhang and M. Z. Yang (2014). Pressure transients induced by a high-speed train passing through a station. Journal of Wind Engineering and Industrial Aerodynamics 135, 1-9.##
Volume 15, Issue 1 - Serial Number 63
January and February 2022
Pages 209-219
  • Received: 25 May 2021
  • Revised: 29 October 2021
  • Accepted: 04 September 2021
  • First Publish Date: 14 November 2021