1125 Scale Moving Model Tests for the TRANSAERO Project

TJOHNSON' and S. DALLEY'

'AEA Technology Rail, PO Box 2, London Road, Derby, DE24 8YB, United Kingdom

Summary

AEA Technology Rail have undertaken 1125 model-scale tests for the TRANSAERO Project
using their unique Moving Model Rig. This catapults model trains along a 146 m test track at
full-scale train speeds, allowing measurements to be made of the aerodynamic effects generated.
Pressures were measured for a shortened model ETR500 train for direct comparison with data
gathered during full-scale tests undertaken in Italy. The model was also used to validate
numerical simulation predictions carried out for the TRANSAERO Project. Additional model-
scale tests were made featuring train nose and track spacing configurations not tested at full-scale.
The results have increased the understanding of the importance of these features adding to the
knowledge compiled to assist the design of European high speed trains of the future.

Nomenclature

'P peak to peak pressure change as train nose or tail passes, kPa (§ 9)
p air density, kg.m-3
y train model speed, m.s- I
-Cp normalised pressure coefficient = 'P/(O.5py2)
Air train cross-sectional area, m2
s mid-track to mid-track distance, m
e half train width, m

1 Introduction

The Aerodynamics Unit of AEA Technology Rail, (ex BR Research) has a unique moving model
facility that allows studies of transient effects on trains to be performed at model-scale. The
facility can catapult 1125 scale train models, either in the open air or through tunnels, at full-scale
train speeds. It has been validated against full-scale data [1].

AEA Technology Rail were contracted by the TRANSAERO project to provide model-scale data
for the study in Working Party 3, which is summarised in Reference 2. The data was used firstly
to confirm the use of the MMR by comparison with full-scale tests performed in Italy as another
part of the TRANSAERO project, and then to validate results from numerical simulations taking
place at SNCF and by other partners of TRANSAERO. The model tests featured additional
configurations to that at full-scale, including two variations to the train nose length and three
different track spacings. The results from these configuration tests have increased the
understanding of the importance of these features and adds to the knowledge database which has
been compiled within TRANSAERO to assist the design of future European high speed train
systems.

123

B. Schulte-Werning et al. (eds.), TRANSAERO — A European Initiative on Transient Aerodynamics

for Railway System Optimisation © Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2002
 2 Moving Model Facility

The Moving Model Rig (MMR) at AEA Technology Rail was capable at that time of testing 1125
scale models of railway rolling stock at speeds of up to 250 km!h. (It has since been upgraded to
277 km!h). The facility has a track length of 146 m with a 46 m test section in the centre where
the model will coast at near-constant speed in the open air. Sections of tunnel may be mounted
over the test section and it is possible to simulate tunnels up to 45 m (model-scale) in length. The
model is propelled by a complex rubber bungee system and braked using a mechanical
deformation braking device.

The MMR is unique in its ability to propel realistic model trains at high velocities, thus achieving
Mach Number similarity for the majority of full-scale conditions. Experiments performed on the
MMR simulate the transient forces and pressures generated by a train on its surroundings. These
transient phenomena cannot be modelled in a wind tunnel. Similarly, the MMR is unique in its
ability to experimentally model the pressure waves created by the entry of a realistic train into a
tunnel. These waves propagate at sonic speed through the tunnel and are reflected by the tunnel
openings and train causing a complex wave pattern through which the train has to pass.

Pressures experienced on the surface of the train models are measured using miniature transducers
mounted directly behind tappings on the skin of the model. This arrangement allows the accurate
measurement of frequencies of 1000 Hz without the problem of attenuation caused by a tubing
system. Due to the fact that 1125 scale models are being frred at actual train velocities, a factor of
25 is introduced into the scaling Of time. For this reason, high frequency data acquisition is
necessary but is only needed for the 1-2 second portion of the journey in which the model is
moving over the test section of the track.

3 Modelling Detail

The model tests were all performed at 1125 scale. To maximise the configurations possible, the
train passings were simulated by frring a moving model past a stationary model. The pressure
tappings were located only on the stationary model and this simplified and accelerated the test
process.

The model for the moving high speed train was built from scaled drawings of the Italian ETR500
used in the full-scale test and was identical in nose shape and cross-section to that used by SNCF
and DLR in their numerical investigations. The model comprised a loco + two coaches + loco
configuration and was thus a shortened version of the nine coach train used at full-scale. The
total length of the model with the standard ETRSOO nose, (length = 0.176 m) was 3.74 m. The
forward end of the ETRSOO model could be fitted with either of two noses as well as the standard
configuration. One of these was a shortened version of the ETRSOO nose where the length
dimensions had been decreased by a factor of 3 for the same corresponding height dimensions.
The other nose was an elongated version of the ETRSOO nose where all the length dimensions had
been increased by a factor of3.

Two static models were built. One was a replica of an Italian freight Loco E652 with three
Hbbin306 wagons and had a total length of 2.572 m. The second static model was a shortened
copy of the ETR500 train and was identical to the moving model. Both of these train types were

124
used in the full-scale tests, although the full-scale trains featured additional coaches and wagons
and hence were longer.

Photograph 1 View of the three ETR500 noses tested

A replica of the fIrst 751 m, (30.02 m model-scale), of the Italian Terranuova la Ville tunnel was
constructed and fItted over the test section of the MMR. The tunnel was fItted so that the fast
track of the MMR passed through the tunnel on one side, leaving space for the stationary model to
be mounted on the other. The model tunnel was fItted with two ''l2 Penne Pasta' type portals of
the type seen on the North entrance to the Terranuova la Ville tunnel. These portals extended for
a further 0.737 m beyond the basic tunnel. The beginning or end of the tunnel was defIned to
correspond to the point at which the portal becomes a continuous part of the tunnel. The portal at
the beginning of the tunnel featured a simplifIed representation of a hillside extending a distance
of 0.1 m from the portal.

For the open air tests, the stationary models were positioned at the side of the moving model track
using supporting arms, which could be adjusted to give variable track spacing.

4 Instrumentation

Pressure transducers were situated on the static model adjacent to the moving model and also at
three positions in the tunnel. The transducers were patched to a PC based data acquisition system
where they were sampled at 4000 Hz with 1000 Hz anti-aliasing filters. A light beam event
detector was situated in the working section of the MMR. The event detector was also patched to
the PC and underwent sampling simultaneously with the transducers, thus giving a record of the
model's position and (hence) speed.

125
4.1 Pressure Measurements

The ETR500 static model was instrumented with 11 pressure tappings on its nose, tail and at two
cross-sections on the coaches. The static freight model was also instrumented with 11 tappings
located at three cross-sections on the centre wagon. The positions corresponded to transducer
locations on the wagon used in the full-scale tests.

The tunnel was instrumented with three tappings. Two were 1.73 m from the beginning of the
tunnel at heights of 0.1 m on the left hand side and 0.06 m on the right hand side. The third
tapping was positioned 3.21 m from the beginning of the tunnel at a height of 0.1 m on the left
hand side. Left hand and right hand relate to the perspective of the moving model.

4.2 Event Measurements

One event detector was positioned in the working section of the MMR. It position varied
according to whether the tests were in the open air or in the tunnel and with the choice of
stationary model.

The moving model was equipped with retro-reflective tape at two locations. The fIrst strip of tape
was located close to the model ETR500 nose, the second was located further down the train. The
response of the event detectors to the passing of the tape was used to determine the speed of the
model. The maximum error in model speed was estimated to be ±0.02 mls

5 Tunnel Leakage Area

Pressure wave attenuation is very sensitive to any leaks in the model tunnel (and even an actual
full size tunnel may have effective leaks due to cavities in the rock and ballast). It was therefore
important to eliminate leakage wherever possible and to determine a value of leakage area for the
tunnel. A new, advanced technique for tunnel sealing was developed for the TRANSAERO tests.
Special attention was paid to sealing the track bed.

The leakage area was determined by sealing the tunnel portals and pressurising the tunnel using a
centrifugal fan. Once pressurised, the fan was sealed off, and the resulting pressure decay
recorded. The value ofleakage area determined from this experiment was 0.0000032 m2/m.

6 Model Firing Tests

The project began in January 1997 when the ETR500 moving and static models were
commissioned. The frrst tests took place in June 1997 with an extensive set of frrings featuring
open air passings of the moving model and the ETR500 static model. The stationary freight train
model and the tunnel model were commissioned in July 1997 and the open air passings of the
moving model and the freight static model took place in November 1997.

The model passing tests inside the tunnel began in December 1997, with the tests series involving
the moving model passing the static freight model inside the tunnel and then the tests involving
the moving model passing the static ETR500 model inside the tunnel. On completion of these

126
tests a further series of complementary firings were performed where tunnel pressures were
measured for varying nose lengths and train speeds with no other model present in the tunnel.
These were completed in January 1998.

6.1 ETR500 Open Air Passings

The stationary model was positioned adjacent to the moving model track. Initial firings were used
to establish the repeatability of the tests. A total of 59 firings took place using three different
model speeds, three configurations of nose length on the moving model and three track spacings.

6.2 Freight Vehicle Open Air Passings

The stationary model was positioned with its nose facing the moving model and adjacent to the
moving model track. A total of 7 firings took place at three speeds using the standard ETR500
nose on the moving model and one track spacing.

Photograph 2 ETR model (right) passing stationary freight train model (left) in the open

6.3 ETRSOO Tunnel Passings

The stationary model was positioned in the tunnel on a ground board. Initial firings took place to
establish that strong waves were present in the tunnel and also to verify the repeatability of the
tests. A total of 12 firings took place using three speeds, the three nose lengths and one track
spacing.

Unlike the open air passings where the model is moving at near constant speed over the test
section of the MMR, the resistance of the tunnel causes the moving model to slow slightly during
its transit through the tunnel. The extent to which the deceleration occurs depends on nose
geometry, blockage caused by models etc. in the tunnel and the speed of the moving model. An
examination of the data indicated a speed loss in the region of the static model of approximately

127
0.S-3% for the ETRSOO entering the empty tunnel. The model speeds were measured as the train
entered the tunnel

6.4 Freight Vehicle Tunnel Passings

The stationary model was positioned on the ground board in the tunnel with the nose of the model
0.089 m inside the tunnel portal. A total of 14 firings took place at speeds of approximately SO
mls using three train nose lengths and three track spacings.

6.5 Empty Tunnel Firings

A total of 9 firings took place through the empty tunnel at three speeds and using the three nose
lengths.

7 Validation - Comparison with Full-scale Data.

A brief comparison of the test data with the full-scale data was undertaken. A set of full-scale
data was selected which had been sampled on a static ETR500 as it was passed in the open by a 9
coach ETRSOO travelling at 181 kmIh. This was compared to MMR model data, which was
sampled on a static ETRSOO model as it was passed by a 4 vehicle ETRSOO model travelling at
181.1 kmIh.

0.3
--~
01 0.2
Nose Passes
Tail Passes
'-' 0.1
t
= -2
III
III -0.1 2 4 8
t -0.2
=-
-0.3 Time (s)

Figure 1 Full-scale data

Figure I shows the pressure time history seen at a tapping in the centre of the first coach of the
full-scale static train as the moving train passes. Figure 2 shows the data recorded for the same
configuration during tests on the MMR. The pressures are shown in units of kiloPascals.

The pressure trace in Figure 2 has been cut after the passing of the first coach and offset along the
time axis to account for the reduction in train length by seven coaches. The initial rise and fall in
pressure as the nose of the moving vehicle passes the tapping is evident and near-identical in the
two traces. This is an important result for the modelling as this peak to peak change in pressure
gives a measure of the maximum force fluctuation generated by the moving train on its
surroundings.

128
 0.3
,... N sePasses
~"
0.2 Tail Passes
..., 0.1
e
:I
'" -2
'"e -0.1 2 4 8
CI. -0.2
-0.3
Time (8)
Figure 2 MMRdata

Following the time history in Figure 1, the pressure can be seen to fluctuate around zero as the
coaches of the full-scale train pass the tapping. There are clear periodic fluctuations and these
correspond to the reduced inter-car cross-section between the coaches. Some can be observed at
model scale in Figure 2, eg at about 1 second.

The fall and rise in pressure as the tail of the moving train passes the tapping is again simulated at
both scales. However this time the model test has slightly over-predicted the peak to peak
pressure change. This is could be due to differences introduced into the flow regime because of
the shorter train length.

A comparison of the MMR test data with full-scale data was performed using a set of full-scale
data which had been sampled at a tapping 80 m from the entrance to the tunnel as a 9 coach
ETR500 passed through the Terranuova la Ville Tunnel travelling at 180 km/h. This was
compared to MMR model data, which was sampled at an identical position in the empty model
scale tunnel as it was passed by a 4 vehicle ETRSOO model travelling at 185 km/h.

The solid line on Figure 3 shows the pressure time history at full-scale in the tunnel and the dotted
line shows the pressure time history measured on the MMR.

Nose passes

-0.5 7 9 11 J15
First wave
-1 Tail passes reflection
Time (s) (model)
- - Full Scale data
- - Model Data

Figure 3 Comparison of full-scale and MMR data in tunnels.

The initial pressure rise on both traces at 6s shows the arrival of the nose entry wave at the
measurement position, with the sharp drop in pressures at 8s occurring as the nose of the train
passes the measurement position. It can be seen that for all of these features the MMR data

129
describes the full-scale situation well. The slightly larger values of pressure seen at model scale
are be ascribed in part to the higher speed of the model. The peaks seen directly before and after
the nose passing pressure drop are caused by the localised effect of the bogies. The differences
between the MMR and full-scale data are attributed to the fact that in the MMR tests, the model
was travelling closer to the tunnel wall, and here localised effects were recorded more strongly.

After the nose has passed the full-scale pressures are almost constant, but show small periodic
fluctuations caused by the passing of the 9 coaches. The MMR data has been cut at this point and
displaced along the time axis to account for the shorter train length. When the train has passed
the pressures become negative as the rarefaction pressure wave caused by the tail entering the
tunnel reaches the measuring position. This is quickly followed by the passing of the tail, after
which the pressure traces returns to ambient. It can be seen that for both of these features the
MMR trace accurately simulates the situation measured at full-scale.

Shortly after the tail passes the measurement position, the MMR pressure shows the effect of the
reflection of the nose entry wave from the end of the tunnel. As the model tunnel is much shorter
then the full-scale tunnel this effect is not seen in the full-scale trace and after this time
comparison between the two traces becomes inappropriate.

It was concluded that the MMR produces an excellent representation of the full-scale situation,
both in the open air and in tunnels.

8 Analysis of Open Air Passing Tests

As the nose of the moving model passes the static model a transient pulse, comprising fIrStly a
positive then a negative pressure is seen in the time histories. In the following analysis, the peak
to peak value of this pressure pulse is used to characterise the train passing event and it is used to
indicate the influence of model speed, nose geometry and track spacing.

Side Tapping

III 600
..!I
:I 500
=-."III 400
=
Z 300
.-
: 200
'-"

=-<I 100
0
0 500 1000 1500 2000
112 pv 1

Figure 4 Nose passing pressure change at the tapping on the side of the stationary
freight model in the open.

130
8.1 Effect of speed

Figure 4 shows the peak to peak pressure change, (~p), at a tapping on the side of the central
freight wagon as the nose of the moving model passes. The data represents moving model ftrings
at six different velocities and ~p has been plotted against the train dynamic head, py2/2, where p
is the density of air and Y the speed of the moving model. It can be seen that, within
experimental scatter, there is a linear relationship between the amplitude of the pressure
fluctuation and the speed squared. This enables the use of a normalised pressure coefftcient, ~Cp,
in the following analysis.

~Cp = 2~p / (py2) (1)

8.2 Effect of Nose Geometry and Track Spacing

Figure 5 considers the passing pulse inflicted by the nose of the moving model on the tapping on
the nose of the stationary model. The Figure displays normalised pressure data from all the open
air ETR500 passings, plotted against the non-dimensional parameter AJ(s-ei, where A is the
train cross-sectional area, s is the mid-track to mid-track distance and e is the half-train width.
This parameter was ftrst proposed by Gaillard(3).

Figure 5 Effect of nose passing the tapping on the nose of the

stationary ETR500 model in the open.

It can be seen that the normalised pressure pulse exerted by the nose of the moving model varies
linearly with AJ(s-ei.

Increasing the nose length dramatically reduces the pressure pulse with the greatest reduction
occurring for the long nose.

Figures 6 and 7 show the same information for taps on the centre of the ftrst cross-section and on
the tail, of the stationary model. The tapping on the side sees much greater pressures than those at

131
the nose or tail of the stationary train. This reflects the fact that it is much closer to the moving
model and is in a region of greater blockage. The trends with track spacing and nose length for
Figure 5 are also apparent in Figure 6 and 7. Figure 6 shows a particular reduction in pressure
pulse for the long nose and also indicates that the pressure pulse is less affected by the three
different track spacings for this longer nose.

Side tapping

t
<II

1 A

.r.. 0.8
i 0.6
S 0.4
Zg. 0.2

~ O+----,----,-----,----~--__,
2.5 o l.ongNose
c EIR500
A Short Nose

Figure 6 Effect of nose passing the tapping on the side of the

stationary ETR500 in the open.

Tall tappiDg

<II 0.3
t
.r. 0.2
i
:; 0.1
Eo-
~
... ••
a-<I 0
I 1.5 2 2.5 3
• LongNose
Atrl (S-e)l
• EfR500
• SoortNose

Figure 7 Effect of nose passing the tapping on the tail of the

stationary ETR500 in the open.

132
 9 Analysis of Tunnel Passing Tests

The pressure time histories measured inside the tunnel are complicated by the presence of
pressure waves generated by the entrance of the moving model and reflecting from the tunnel
portals, but which were not of interest here.

The static model was positioned near to the tunnel entrance in order to avoid reflected waves
occurring when the model passings took place. Using wave diagrams calculated for the
experimental set up it is possible to conclude that the nose passing event is clear of the reflected
waves and can be identified as a rapid drop in pressure occurring after the initial rise of the nose
entry wave. During the following analysis the amplitude of this pressure drop is used to
characterise the pressures exerted by the nose passing event and is used to examine the effect of
nose geometry, track spacing and model speed.

9.1 Effect of Speed

Figure 8 shows the pressure drop at a tapping on the cross-section of the ETR500 static model as
the nose of the model passes. Firings are available at only three speeds, however it is obvious that
for all three nose configurations of the moving model the pressure varies linearly with the speed
squared of the moving model.
This finding enables the use of the normalised pressure coefficient (see Section 8.1) again in the
following analysis. It also indicates that in future experimental simulations, where only the
passing event is examined, the simulation of actual train speeds is not important.

Side Tapping

CJl2000
.S
'"
'"
!,1500

~
..,
Q>

~ 1000
,-..
COl
e
Q.
500
U
<I 0
• LongNose
0 500 1000 1500 2000
• E1R500
112pV2 & Short Nose

Figure 8 Nose passing pressure drop at the tapping on the side of

the ETR500 in the tunnel.

9.2 Effect of Nose Geometry and Track Spacing

Figure 9 considers the pressure drop generated by the nose of the moving model on a tapping on
the cross-section of the stationary freight model, here plotted against track spacing.

133
 Side Tapping

...= 1.6
01)

rIl

=
rIl
1.2
~
~
=-
1/
rIl
Q
0.8
Z
0.4
=-
U ... 0 + Long Nose
3 3.5 4 4.5 • ETR500
Track spacing m (fuU-scale) • Short Nose

Figure 9 Effect of nose passing the tapping on the side of the stationary Freight model in
the tunnel.

It can be seen that an increase in track spacing reduces the pressure pulse exerted by the nose of
the moving model for all the noses. The relationship between track spacing and L\Cp is not linear.
The long nose appears to be even less sensitive to the track spacing than was seen in the open air
passings.

10 Conclusion

A test series has been conducted on the MMR for the TRANS AERO Project. Over 60 firings
took place both in the open air and in a tunnel.

A brief validation was conducted using full-scale open air and tunnel data. It was found that the
MMR data gave an excellent representation of the full-scale situation.

A simple analysis was also undertaken. Data from each firing was represented in terms of the
peak to peak pressure change caused by the passing of the moving model nose. This parameter
was then analysed for trends with model speed, track spacing and nose length.

It was found that both in the tunnel and in the open air, the pressures varied linearly with the
square of the speed. This confirmed the suitability of representing nose passing effects by a non-
dimensional coefficient, as is current AEA Technology Rail practise.

Increasing the length of the nose of the model had a dramatic effect in reducing the pressures
inflicted by the nose on its environment.

Increasing track spacing gave a decrease in pressures. The relationship between pressure and
track spacing was not linear and varied for nose length. The long nose was less sensitive to track
spacing, particularly in the tunnel where the track spacing had remarkably little effect on the
pressure experienced as the long nose passed.

134
 Acknowledgements

AEA Technology Rail acted as contractor within TRANS AERO under the supervision of SNCF. The
Authors wish to thank Remi Gregoire for his advice and support. The Authors would also like to
acknowledge the individual contributions of 0 Gillott, R Colebome, F Chill, J Holding, J Temple to the
project.

References

1) CW Pope, "The Simulations Of Flows In Railway Tunnels Using A 1125th Scale Moving Model
Facility". pp 709-737, Aerodynamics and Ventilation of Vehicle Tunnels, edited by Alex Haerter,
published by Elsevier.

2) R Gregoire, "Synthesis of WP3 as WP leader", Notes on Numerical Fluid Mechanics 79, Springer-
Verlag Berlin, 2002.

3) MA Gaillard, "Aerodynamics of Trains in Tunnels", pp J4-33 - J4-46, International Symposium of

Aerodynamics and Tunnel Ventilation of Vehicle Tunnels, 10-12 April 1973, Canterbury, UK,
published by BHRA Fluid Engineering.

135