Aerodynamic drag analysis of double-deck container vehicles with different structures

Abstract

To study the aerodynamic performance of a new six-axis X2K double-deck container vehicle, numerical simulation was done based on three-dimensional, steady Navier-Stokes equations and k-ɛ turbulence model. The results show that the pressure on the front surface of vehicle is positive, and others are negative. The maximum negative one appears as a “gate” shape on front surfaces. The pressure on vehicle increases with train speed, and pressure on vehicles with cross-loaded structure is smaller than that without it. The airflow around vehicles is symmetrical about train vertical axis, and the flow velocity decreases gradually along the axis to ground. Airflow around vehicles with cross-loaded structure is weaker than that without the structure. The aerodynamic drag increases linearly with the train speed, and it is minimum for the mid-vehicle. The linear coefficient for mid-vehicle without cross-loaded structure is 29.75, nearly one time larger than that with the structure valued as 15.425. So, from the view-point of aerodynamic drag, the cross-loaded structure is more reasonable for the six-axis X2K double-deck container vehicle.

Keywords

six-axis X2K double-deck container vehicle / loading form / aerodynamic drag / numerical simulation

References

[1] LiuH.-y., YangA.-guo.. Dynamics performance simulation of double-deck container flat car [J]. Journal of Traffic and Transportation Engineering, 2004, 4(3): 20-24

[2] XiongX.-h., LiangX.-feng.. Experimental research on pressure drag of the double container car passing through tunnel [J]. Journal of Experiments in Fluid Mechanics, 2006, 20(3): 18-22

[3] RobertA., HolmesS., HarveyS.. Measurement of the aerodynamic pressures produced by passing trains [C]. Proceedings of the ASME/IEEE Joint Railroad Conference, 2002, Washington D C, ASME: 57-64

[4] LOCATELLI D, PAOLO T. Inflatable and removable aerodynamic fairing for goods vehicles. EP 1435321 [P]. 2004-07-07.

[5] LiY.-f., LiangX.-feng.. Comparison of aerodynamic performances between double container car and boxcar [J]. Journal of Central South University: Science and Technology, 2009, 40(1): 169-174

[6] CicolaniL. S., SilvaJ. G. A., DuqueE. P. N., TischlerM. B.. Unsteady aerodynamic model of a cargo container for slung-load simulation [J]. Aeronautical Journal, 2004, 108(1085): 357-366

[7] MichaelC. H., DorisM. S.. The aerodynamic behaviour of the deck of Stonecutters Bridge [J]. Structural Engineering International: Journal of the International Association for Bridge and Structural Engineering (IABSE), 2010, 20(1): 79-90

[8] ZhouD., ZhangJian.. Research on the effect of cross-wind to dynamic characteristics of double container train [J]. Railway Locomotive & Car, 2004, 24(3): 17-20

[9] WangF.-jun.Analysis of computational fluid dynamics [M], 2004, Beijing, Tsinghua University Press: 7-12

[10] LiY.-f., LiangX.-feng.. Aerodynamic function and stability influence of high-speed moving EMUs on insulated boards [J]. Journal of Central South University: Science and Technology, 2009, 40(6): 1587-1592

[11] PhilippeR., ChristopherL.. Effective inflow conditions for turbulence models in aerodynamic calculations [J]. AIAA Journal, 2007, 45(10): 2544-2553

[12] KhierW., BreuerM., DurestF.. Flow structure around trains under side wind conditions: A numerical study [J]. Computer & Fluids, 2000, 29(3): 179-195

[13] SuzukiM., TanemotoK., MaedaT.. Aerodynamic characteristics of train/vehicles under cross winds [J]. Journal of Wind Engineering and Industrial Aerodynamics, 2003, 91(1/2): 209-218

[14] LEES. J., KangJ. H.. Wind load on a container crane located in atmospheric boundary layers [J]. Journal of Wind Engineering and Industrial Aerodynamics, 2008, 96(2): 193-208

[15] ShingaiM., HaramotoY., MatsuzakiK., MunekataM., OhbaH.. Relation between the three-dimensional flow structure and aerodynamic sound generated from inclined circular cylinder [J]. Journal of Thermal Science, 2004, 13(2): 127-132