Aerodynamic drag reduction is one of the most important issues in the development of high-speed trains. This study focused on the aerodynamic optimization of the train by modifying the shape of the head car and tail car. Three shape parameters were studied in this paper: the angle of cab-window, nose-length, and nose-width of the train. The effects of shape parameters on the aerodynamic drag coefficients of the head car and tail car were discussed, respectively. It can be concluded that the flat surface of the window region, long and sharp nose are the distinguishing characters of a high-speed train with low resistance. Response surface models of the shape parameters and the aerodynamic drag of the head car and tail car were obtained, respectively. Based on these models, an aerodynamic optimization was performed to achieve the optimal shape. As a result, the total aerodynamic drag of the optimal train decreased by 2.05% compared with the original value.
TianHQ. Train aerodynamics, Beijing: China Railway Press, 2007.
2.
BakerC. The flow around high speed trains. J Wind Eng Ind Aerodyn2010; 98: 277–298.
3.
Maeda T, Matsumura T, Iida M, et al. Effect of shape of train nose on compression wave generated by train entering tunnel. In: Proceedings of the International Conference on Speedup Technology for Railway and Maglev Vehicles, Yokohama, Japan, 1993, Vol. 2, pp.315–319.
4.
Lorriaux E, Bourabaa N and Monnoyer F. Aerodynamic optimization of railway motor coaches. In: The World Congress on Railway Research, 2006.
5.
KrajnovićS. Shape optimization of high-speed trains for improved aerodynamic performance. Proc IMechE, Part F: J Rail and Rapid Transit2009; 223: 439–452.
6.
Vytla VV, Huang PG and Penmetsa RC. Multi objective aerodynamic shape optimization of high speed train nose using adaptive surrogate model. In: The 28th AIAA Applied Aerodynamics Conference, 2010.
7.
Muñoz-PaniaguaJGarcíaJCrespoA. Genetically aerodynamic optimization of the nose shape of a high-speed train entering a tunnel. J Wind Eng Ind Aerodyn2014; 130: 48–61.
8.
MatsumuraTNakataniKFukudaT, et al.Effective noise shape for reducing tunnel sonic boom. Q Rep RTRI1997, pp. 38: 206–211.
9.
KwonHBJangKHKimYS, et al.Nose shape optimization of high-speed train for minimization of tunnel sonic boom. JSME Int J Ser C2001; 44: 890–899.
10.
LeeJKimJ. Approximate optimization of high-speed train nose shape for reducing micropressure wave. Struct Multidiscip Optim2008; 35: 79–87.
11.
KuYCRhoJHYunSH, et al.Optimal cross-sectional area distribution of a high-speed train nose to minimize the tunnel micro-pressure wave. Struct Multidiscip Optim2010; 42: 965–976.
12.
YaoSBGuoDLYangGW. Three-dimensional aerodynamic optimization design of high-speed train nose based on GA-GRNN. Sci China Technol Sci2012; 55: 3118–3130.
13.
YaoSBGuoDLSunZX, et al.Multi-objective optimization of the streamlined head of high-speed trains based on the Kriging model. Sci China Technol Sci2012; 55: 3495–3509.
14.
YaoSBGuoDLSunZX, et al.Optimization design for aerodynamic elements of high speed trains. Comput Fluids2014; 95: 56–73.
15.
LiRXuPPengY, et al.Multi-objective optimization of a high-speed train head based on the FFD method. J Wind Eng Ind Aerodyn2016; 152: 41–49.
16.
Keye S. Fluid-structure-coupled analysis of a transport aircraft and comparison to flight data. In: The 39th AIAA Fluid Dynamics Conference, San Antonio, 2009, p.4198. Texas: AIAA.
17.
CellaUBiancoliniME. Aeroelastic analysis of aircraft wind-tunnel model coupling structural and fluid dynamic codes. J Aircraft2012; 49: 407–414.
18.
RendallTCSAllenCB. Unified fluid–structure interpolation and mesh motion using radial basis functions. Int J Numer Methods Eng2008; 74: 1519–1559.
19.
Biancolini ME. Mesh morphing and smoothing by means of radial basis functions (RBF): a practical example using. In: Handbook of research on computational science and engineering: theory and practice. Vol. 2, 2011, p.347–380.
20.
BiancoliniMEViolaIMRiotteM. Sails trim optimization using CFD and RBF mesh morphing. Comput Fluids2014; 93: 46–60.
21.
Silva RG, Antunes AP, Flatschart RB, et al. CFD based optimization of high-lift devices using a mesh morphing technique. In: Proceedings of the 29th Congress of the International Council of the Aeronautical Sciences, 2014.
22.
Staten ML, Owen SJ, Shontz SM, et al. A comparison of mesh morphing methods for 3D shape optimization. In: Proceedings of the 20th International Meshing Roundtable, Berlin, 2011, pp.293–311. Heidelberg: Springer.
23.
Wei D, Spence SMJ and Kareem A. Dynamic mesh for deformable or movable boundaries in fluid-structure interaction. In: Proceedings of the 11th ASCE Joint Specialty Conference on Probabilistic Mechanics and Structural Reliability, 2012.
24.
WeiDSpenceSMJKareemA, et al.A structured mesh boundary motion approach for simulating wind effects on bluff bodies with changing boundaries. J Wind Eng Ind Aerodyn2014; 126: 118–131.
25.
SiegerDMenzelSBotschM. RBF morphing techniques for simulation-based design optimization. Eng Comput2014; 30: 161–174.
26.
ZhangZZhouD. Wind tunnel experiment on aerodynamic characteristic of streamline head of high speed train with different head shapes. J Central South Univ (Sci Technol)2013; 44: 2603–2608. (in Chinese).
27.
FerreiraSCBrunsREFerreiraHS, et al.Box-Behnken design: an alternative for the optimization of analytical methods. Anal Chim Acta2007; 597: 179–186.
28.
Myers RH and Montgomery DC. Response surface methodology: process and product optimization using designed experiments. New York: Wiley, 1995.
29.
DebKPratapAAgarwalS, et al.A fast and elitist multiobjective genetic algorithm: NSGA-II. IEEE Trans Evolut Comput2002; 6: 182–197.
