Aerodynamic influences of typical windbreak wall types on a high-speed train under crosswinds. Issue 231 (December 2022)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Xia, Yutao; Liu, Tanghong; Su, Xinchao; Jiang, Zhenhua; Chen, Zhengwei; Guo, Zijian
• Is Part Of: Journal of wind engineering and industrial aerodynamics. Issue 231(2022)
• Publication Date: 2022-12
• Subjects: High-speed train -- Crosswind -- Windbreak walls -- Aerodynamic performances -- Flow pattern; Wind-pressure -- Periodicals; Buildings -- Aerodynamics -- Periodicals; Pression du vent -- Périodiques; Constructions -- Aérodynamique -- Périodiques; Buildings -- Aerodynamics; Wind-pressure; Periodicals
• DOI: 10.1016/j.jweia.2022.105203
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 0167-6105

Abstract

Abstract: The effect of windbreak wall types on their windproof effects on trains has been systematically investigated by comparing the flow field around a high-speed train behind three typical windbreak walls. These three typical windbreak walls are widely used along the windy railway lines in China, which include the earth embankment–type windbreak wall (EW), the road cutting–type windbreak wall (RW), and the straight reinforced concrete–type windbreak wall (SW). We compared the time-averaged crosswind-induced flows and aerodynamic performances of high-speed trains behind these three windbreak walls with the same height using numerical simulations. The results revealed that the windbreak wall geometric shape effects on the aerodynamic load coefficients varied according to the type of aerodynamic load and carriage marshalling positions but barely varied with yaw angles. The total drag coefficients of the train in the EW and RW were approximately 50–60% of that in the SW under the two smaller yaw angles and were only 30–40% for the largest yaw angle. For the absolute value of the side force and rolling moments coefficients, the maximum values for the head and middle cars both appeared in the RW, and the corresponding minimum values were obtained in the SW. The maximum and minimum values for the tail car were obtained at the SW and EW, respectively. The maximum of the rolling moment coefficient among three carriages in the SW was approximately 45–60% of that in the EW and only 30–40% of that in the RW. The time-averaged train surface pressure coefficient and flow patterns were similar between the EW and RW, which showed apparent differences from those in the SW. The SW provided a strong blocking effect on the incoming windward airflow and avoided the direct impact on the train. Compared with the RW, the uplifting effect of the EW's windward slope on the incoming flow further reduced the crosswind effect on trains. In addition, the dominating frequency characteristics of the aerodynamic loads were significantly affected by windbreak wall types. These findings provide a systematic understanding of the time-averaged aerodynamics of trains behind these three typical windbreak walls. Highlights: Simulations of crosswind-induced flows around high-speed trains behind three typical windbreak walls were conducted. Time-averaged flow characteristics were analyzed for three different windbreak walls. Train aerodynamic performances behind three typical windbreak walls were compared in detail. The mechanism of windproof performance differences between three typical windbreak walls was systematically explored.