TY - JOUR
T1 - Comparative analysis of the aerodynamic characteristics on double-unit trains formed by different types of high-speed train
AU - Huo, Xiaoshuai
AU - Liu, Tanghong
AU - Chen, Zhengwei
AU - Li, Wenhui
AU - Gao, Hongrui
AU - Wang, Sumei
N1 - Funding Information:
This work was supported by the National Key R&D Program of China (Grant No. 2020YFA0710903 ) and the Fundamental Research Funds for the Central Universities of Central South University (Grant No. 2021zzts0171 ).
Publisher Copyright:
© 2021 Elsevier Ltd
PY - 2021/10
Y1 - 2021/10
N2 - Double-unit trains composed of the same type of high-speed trains (HSTs) are relatively common. The connection of different types of trains, however, has been rarely studied. Therefore, we adopted an improved delayed detached-eddy simulation (IDDES) method to investigate the aerodynamic characteristics on double-unit trains formed by different types of HSTs. Two standardized HSTs—Train A and Train B at present in China—are used to form four different cases (A-A, A-B, B-A, and B-B). We conducted algorithm validation and grid independence to ensure the reliability of numerical results. The results showed the drag of case B-B was smaller when the same HST units were connected, whereas the drag of case A-B was smaller when the different HST units were connected. Downstream the coupling region, the structures of vortex shedding presented obvious differences for each case, which further led to different fluctuation intensities in wake vortices. The order of the height of the wake vortices was as follows: h1(A-A) > h3(B-A) > h2(A-B) > h4(B-B). The tail of the upstream vehicle had a dominant influence on the slipstream peak in the coupling region.
AB - Double-unit trains composed of the same type of high-speed trains (HSTs) are relatively common. The connection of different types of trains, however, has been rarely studied. Therefore, we adopted an improved delayed detached-eddy simulation (IDDES) method to investigate the aerodynamic characteristics on double-unit trains formed by different types of HSTs. Two standardized HSTs—Train A and Train B at present in China—are used to form four different cases (A-A, A-B, B-A, and B-B). We conducted algorithm validation and grid independence to ensure the reliability of numerical results. The results showed the drag of case B-B was smaller when the same HST units were connected, whereas the drag of case A-B was smaller when the different HST units were connected. Downstream the coupling region, the structures of vortex shedding presented obvious differences for each case, which further led to different fluctuation intensities in wake vortices. The order of the height of the wake vortices was as follows: h1(A-A) > h3(B-A) > h2(A-B) > h4(B-B). The tail of the upstream vehicle had a dominant influence on the slipstream peak in the coupling region.
KW - Aerodynamic drag
KW - Double-unit train
KW - Flow field
KW - Improved delayed detached-eddy simulation (IDDES)
KW - Slipstream and pressure
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85113973417&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1016/j.jweia.2021.104757
DO - 10.1016/j.jweia.2021.104757
M3 - Journal article
AN - SCOPUS:85113973417
SN - 0167-6105
VL - 217
JO - Journal of Wind Engineering and Industrial Aerodynamics
JF - Journal of Wind Engineering and Industrial Aerodynamics
M1 - 104757
ER -