AERODYNAMIC DESIGN AND OPTIMIZATION OF MAGLEV TRAINS A Graduate Project Report submitted to Manipal University in partial fulfillment of the requtirements for the award of the degree of BACHELOR OF TECHNOLOGY in Mechanical Engineering by Prateck Biswas ‘Nihaar Ponnanna Apoorva Jain under the guidance of A. Amar Murthy Assistant Professor (Sr. Scale) Department of Mechanical and Manufacturing Engineering MANIPAL INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY DEPARTMENT OF MECHANICAL AND MANUFACTURING ENGINEERING = MANIPAL INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY (A constituent Institute of Manipal University) MANIPAL — 576104, KARNATAKA, INDIA Ce May, 2015DEPARTMENT OF MECHANICAL AND MANUFACTURING ENGINEERING — MANIPAL INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOG —_ (A constituent Institute of Manipal University) \eror ens ta si MANIPAL —$76104, KARNATAKA, INDIA oy Pee sere May, 2015 Manipal 4 F015 CERTIFICATE This is to certify that the project titled AERODYNAMIC DESIGN AND OPTIMIZATION OF MAGLEV TRAINS is a record of the bonafide work done by PRATEEK BISWAS (110909600) submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the award of the degree of BACHELOR OF TECHNOLOGY in MECHANICAL ENGINEERING of Manipal Institute of Technology, Manipal, Karnataka (A constituent college of Manipal University) during the year 2014 ~ 2015, A. AMAR MURTHY Dr. DIVAKARA SHETTY S Project Guide Head of DepartmentACKNOWLEDGEMENTS First and foremost, we would like to thank Manipal Institute of Technology for presenting us with the opportunity to carry out a project work in our desired field of interest, the design of future technology trains. We express my gratitude and sincere thanks to our guide Prof, A. Amar Murthy, Assistant Professor (Sr. Scale) in the Department of Mechanical and Manufacturing, MIT Manipal for his constant guidance and patience throughout the length of our project We are indebled to the Department of Mechanical and Manufacturing in our Institute for allowing us the use of their CAD Lab Systems for the running of necessary software which otherwise would not have been possible without such heavy-duty systems, A special thanks to Prof. Manjunath of the Department of Mechanical and Manufacturing who aided us in solving the several issues encountered in the last stage of my project. We would like to extend my regards to Dr, Vined Thomas, the Director of the Institute and Dr. Divakara Shetty S, the Head of Department for Mechanical and Manufacturing for allowing us to undertake this projectABSTRACT After the 3 Modes of Transport ~ air, water and land, there was conceived a 4" kind ~ magnetic levitation travel, The idea of using magnets as the medium of levitating and propelling a train across distances has been around for decades, yet it is only recently that magnetic levitation has been considered as a viable commercial altemative for high speed transportation, This project aims to unders and the technology and science behind the working of magnetic levitation, and focusses on its singular and foremost obstacle, the drag force generated by the train passing through the air. Through understanding of the drag force equation, it is possible to vary the related parameters namely dimensions of the train as well as shape of the train to decrease the drag coefficient of the train and subsequently ils drag force. Several designs are conceptualized and then designed using design software after Which they are subject to fluid flow analysis using appropriate software. After the optimization of the train shape, focus is shifted to the design of evacualed tubes/tunnels whose shapes affect aerodynamics. Hypothetical conditions of pressure that can be theoretically maintained in the tubes are used as the basis for the analysis of previously designed trains in order to reduce fluid density and subsequently drag force to considerably low levels,Acknowledgements Abstract CONTENTS List of Notations and Abbreviations List of Figures List of Tables Chapter 1 Chapter 2 w ip ry 1 re Introduction Introduction to MAGLEV ‘Types and Working of MAGLEV Rail Technology Advantages of MAGLEV over Conventional Rail Introduction to Aerodynamic Drag Drag Equation and its influence on Aerodynamic Designing using CFD Software Literature review ‘Commercial (Presently Operating) MAGLEY Train Systems Shanghai MAGLEV Linimo, Japan Incheon Airport MAGLEV ‘Commercial (Under Construction) MAGLEV Systems Short Distance Commuter Metro Lines Japan SCMAGLEV Acrodynamically Efficient Train/Rolling Stock Designs ‘TransRapid TROO Bombardier Zefiro 380 Automotrice & grande vitesse (AGV), Elettto Treno Rapido 500 Japan Chuo Shinkansen SCMAGLEY Trains. Page No. wort AaAnHunChapter 3 i} Chapter 4 41 42 43 44 45 46 is ae 441 442 45.1 452 4.6.1 462 ‘Objectives and methodology ‘Objectives of the Project Methodology of Design Result Analysis Design of train models Analysis of all designed models under constant Drag coefficients of all models Drag forces of all models Analysis of all models under varying parameters Variation of all models at 2 different lengths of train 100m and 31 5m (Standard train lengths) Variation of 2 models at 2 different areas Variation of all models at 3 different operating speeds “Analysis of all models with tack introduced as part of enclosure Variation of drag coefficients of all models Variation of drag forces of all modets Analysis of 2 models wi ‘tunnel shape introduced for enclosure design Drag coefficients of model 6.and 7 under varying tunnel enclosure shape Drag forces of model 6 and 7 under varying tunnel enclosure shape Evacuated tube analysis of all models incurved head tunnel enclosure at blockage ratio 0.17 at reduced density Drag coefficients of all rains in low density, curved bead tunnel conditions. Drag forces of all trains in low density, curved head tunnel conditions 10 10 cry 14 7 18 i8 19 19 wiChapter 5 5. 52 References Conclusions and Scope for Future Work, ‘Conclusions Scope for Future Work 30 3 vilLIST OF NOTATIONS AND ABBREVIATIONS LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS MAGLEV Magnetic Levitation EMS Electromagnetic Suspension EDS Electrodynamic Suspension LSM Linear Synchronous Motor HS High Speed KIMM Korea Institute of Machinery and Materials SCMAGLEV Superconducting Magnetic Levitation JRMAGLEV. Japan Railway Magnetic Levitation TR ‘TransRapid ATV Automotrice i Grande Vitesse ETR Elettro Treno Rapido Model V Model Version CFD ‘Computational Fluid Dynamics LIST OF NOTATIONS Fa Drag Force Mass Density of Fluid w Flow Velocity relative to object A Reference Area Ca Drag Coefficient of a Shape T Shear Stress m Meter kN Kilo Newton m Meter Squared kmph Kilometer per Hour Pa Pascal kgim* Kilogram per Meter Cubed vilLIST OF FIGURES Fig. No. Title of the Figure Page No. Ll Forces Acting on MAGLEV Train 1 12 LSM generating a Travelling Field 2 2d Shanghai MAGLEV 5 212 Linimo MAGLEV 5 213 Incheon MAGLEV 6 221 Beijing MAGLEV 6 2.22 Japan SCMAGLEV 7 231 TransRapid TROY Design 7 232 Bombardier Zefiro 380 8 AGY, France 8 MLXO1 Train 9 LO Train 9 3.241) Mesh Sizing ia 3.2(2) Mesh Statistics M1 3.23) Simple Solution Method 12 3.214) ‘Coupled Solution Method 12 3.245) Analysis using ANSYS 13 41d) Model Vi i4 4.1(2) Model V2 14 41) Model V3 14 41d) Model V4 15 4.1(5) Model V5 15 416) Model V6 15 41 Model V7 16 4.1 (8) Model V& 16 419) Model V9 16 42 ‘Train in regular enclosure 17 421 Drag coefficients of all models in regular enclosure 18422 43.14 43.12 432.1 4322 4332 44 44.1 442 4s 45.1 452 46 4.6.1 4.62 Drag forces of all models in regular enclosure Drag coefficients of all models under varying length Drag forces of all models under varying length Drag coefficients of 2 models with varying area Drag forces of 2 models with varying area Drag forces of all models with varying speed ‘Track inclusion in enclosure Drag coefficients of all models before and afier track inelusion Drag Forces of all models before and after track inclusion ‘Tunnel shapes Drag coefficients of model 6 and 7 under varying tunnel enclosure shape Drag coefficients of model 6 and 7 under varying tunnel enclosure shape ‘Curved head tunnel enclosure with ratio 0.17 Drag coefficients of all trains in low density, curved head tunnel conditions Drag forces of all trains im low density, curved head ‘tunnel conditionsLIST OF TABLES Table No. Title of the Table Page No. 421 Drag coefficients of all models in regular enclosure 18 422 Drag forces of all models in regular enclosure 18 43.1.1 Drag coefficients of all models under varying length 19 43.12 Drag forces of all models under varying length 20 432.1 Drag coefficients of 2 models with warying Area 21 4322 Drag forces of 2 Models with varying area 21 4332 Drag forces of all models with varying speed 22 441 Drag coefficients of all models before and after track 24 inclusion 442 Drag forces of all models before and after track 24 inclusion 45.1 Drag coefficients of model 6 and 7 under varying tunnel 26 enclosure shape 452 Drag coefficients of model 6 and 7 under varying tunnel 26 enclosure shape 461 Drag coefficients of all Trains in low density, curved head 28 ‘tunnel conditions 462 Drag forces of all trains in low density, eurved head. 28 ‘tunnel conditions xiChapter 1: INTRODUCTION 1.1 Introduction to MAGLEV MAGLEV or Magnetic Levitation is a system of transport, which differs from standard ground methods of transportation in s manner that it does not use friction as its means of required driving force, instead using the attraction and repulsion properties of a simple magnet to levitate the train over a steel track by a few millimeters and propel it forward. Levitation of the train removes all forms of drag/friction apart from air drag and propulsion using a motor with its basis being magnetic fields removes the necessity of fossil fuels or overhead electric wiring for a conventional engine. Because of the non-reliance of traction for propelling forward the train in this system, and the fact that MAGLEV trains levitate on a cushion of air, the tains are capable of accelerating and decelerating much faster "!, and thus are far more technologically advanced in this age. Fig.1.1 Forces Acting on MAGLEV Train1.2 Types and Working of MAGLEY Rail Technology Currently, the only tested and in usefplanned for commercial use MAGLEV systems are the EMS (Electromagnetic Suspension) and EDS (Electrodynamic Suspension)" ‘Their primary difference is in the technology used to levitate the train. In an EMS type MAGLEV, for levitation, the support and guidance electromagnets on the train’s undercarriage are electronically tumed off and on at high frequencies to make it allract and hover from the simple steel track. In an EDS type MAGLEY, levitation occurs due to the repulsion between the onboard magnets on the train and the electric coils embedded in the track that have an induced magnetic polarity due to magnetic field induction effect (from the perpendicularly crossing train magnets) that oppose it, Fig. 1.21SM generating travelling field Method of propulsion is same in both using the principle of a linear synchronous motor (LSM), where the track acts the stator with Coils inside/on it given skemating magnetic polarities to make a travelling magnetic field, and the magnets on the train act as the rotor, catching onto that magnetic field, The frequency of alternating magnetic polarities given 10 the track directly changes the effective speed of the MAGLEV train. Because of this, only the section of the track over which the train will be passing needs to be powered,1.3 Advantages of MAGLEY over conventional rail MAGLEV Systems enjoy several advantages over conventional wheel-on-wheel railway systems "I that are illustrated below: 1, MAGLEY being a non-contact type of transport between the train and the track is capable ‘of all-weather operations leading to dramatically lower maintenance costs. 2. Sound levels will be far lower considering the only sound will be from the expulsion of air allowing for MAGLEV lines to be built closer to metropolitan areas. A MAGLEV System is environmentally clean with its onboard train magnets powered by batteries and LSM in the Track powered by individual substations using renewable ‘energy. There is no reliance on fossil fuels. 4. Power efficiency is far higher. The only resistance is sir resistance 5. Considering that there is no contact between the track and train, MAGLEV tracks can be built in areas where the weight of the locomotive questions the structural stability of the track. 1.4 Introduction to Aerodynamic Drag Considering that aerodynamic drag is the primary and most important form of resistance that aMAGLEV train encounters al high speeds, design and optimization of a Train with the least drag coefficient and drag force at speeds greater than 400 kmph became paramount to * Improve the energy efficiency and reduce fuel costs © Optimizing safety focusing on stability in crass-winds “! and at high speeds Pressure pulses leading to structural issues on trains and on trackside structures and Preceding pressure waves created that bounce back to the train after hitting the open air have been observed and studied by engineers, as critical to the structural safety of the trains as well as the avoidance of unnecessary vibrations felt on the walls of the wain, These pressure waves are of particular importance in the case of trains travelling through evacuated tubes with air1.4 Drag Equation and its influence on aerodynamic designing using CFD software In aerodynamics, aerodynamic drag is the fluid drag force “ that acts on any moving solid body in the direction of the fluid freestream flow. Fp = jpu’CpA Fp = Drag force P = Mass density of the fluid WU =Flow velocity relative to the object A =Reference area Cb = Dimensionless drag coefficient subject to the object's geometry Therefore, our project is the aerodynamic design of MAGLEY trains using Creo as a design software and Ansys Fluent as a fluid flow simulation software to minimize the Drag coefficient by streamlining the design of the Train Drag coefficient by optimizing the shape of tunnel in the case of an evacuated tube Drag force by lowering drag coefficient and varying the ether parameters Streamlining the design of the train involves introducing changes in the modelling of the train itself such as curves, rounded ends and arrowhead-ends in the geometry, decreasing the drag coefficient and subsequently the drag force. Aerodynamic designs have been studied from shape effect papers "! and '*!Chapter 2: LITERATURE REVIEW 2.1 Commercial (Presently Operating) MAGLEV Train Systems 2.1.1 Shanghai MAGLEV Fig. 2.1.1 Shanghai MAGLEV Shanghai. MAGLEV is an EMS MAGLEV developed in Germany by Transrapid Intemational (joint venture of Siemens and ThyssenKrupp) and built commercially to connect a 40 km track between Pudong Airport and the center of the Shanghai, operating at a top speed of 430 kmph and a cruising speed of 300 kmph. 2.12 Linimo, Japan Fig. 2.1.2 Linimo MAGLEV Built in 2005 in Aichi, Japan by the Chubu High Speed Train Development Corporation, this, Maglev System is built only for a short distance of 9 km with a maximum operating velocity of 100 kmph. With its cruising velocity not sufficiently high to affect air drag, the train is built flat to the front with very little aerodynamic capabilities.2.1.3 Incheon Airport MAGLEV Fig 2.1.3 Incheon MAGLEV Incheon Airport Maglev, built in South Korea is the third commercial Maglev line to be built, by Korea Instimte of Machinery and Materials (KIMM) and Hyundai Rotem in 2014 for a track distance of 6 km and an operating speed of 110 kmph. The design of Incheon Maglev ‘Trains is similar to that of the Shanghai Maglev Train built 14 years prior to it 2.2 Commercial (Under Construction) MAGLEV Systems 2.2.1 Short Distance Commuter Metro Lines Fig, 2.2.1 Beijing MAGLEV Maglew trains are being built for short distance commuter metro lines in Georgia, Beijing, Changsha (China) and Tel Aviv. All these train lines will have trains operating at 100 kmph or below, not utilizing the entire potential of capability of MAGLEV's aerodynamic capabilities.2.2.2 Japan SCMAGLEV Fig. 2.2.2 Japan SCMAGLEV Japan SC Maglev or Super-cooled Maglev is the first of its kind prototype and commercial model of an EDS Maglev System with onboard magnets on the train cooled to subzero temperatures using liquid nitrogen to maximize electrical conductivity, It has a track distance of 286 km connecting Tokyo, Nagoya and Osaka with trains averaging almost 500 kmph. It is built by the Central Japan Railway Company and will be completed by 2045. 2.3 Aerodynamically Efficient Train/Rolling Stock Designs 2.3.1 TransRapid TRO9 Fig. 2.3.1 TransRapid TRO9 Design ‘TransRapid TRO9 is the current train design that is running on the 40 km long Shanghai Maglev track, Designed for speeds in excess of 300 kmph, this train has a drag coefficient of 0.26. Tests conducted in Germany "! certified that the air flow velocity 1 m from this train moving at 350 kmph was less than 1 kmph, relatively safe2.3.2 Bombardier Zefiro 380 Fig. 2.3.2 Bombardier Zefiro 380 The Bombardier Zefiro 380 train ! is a Canadian train design project result, aimed at improving 60 different de n parameters, taking account of the train's outer shell, eab, crash structure and ergonomic constraints. using CFD and CAD. The result is a train with the lowest drag coefficient of any previous tain: 0,13, 2.33 Automotrice a grande vitesse (AGV), Elettro Treno Rapido 500 Fig. 2.3.3 AGY, France The AGV (built by Alstom) and ETR trains are Euro rail tains built in 2008. Both were designed by supervising the outlining of the matrix in its tiniest detail, limiting the aerodynamic drag. The high pressures on the front doors and lags on the side doors were also minimized. Despite being a conventional railway train with no added advantage of levitation, these trains are capable of travelling at speeds over 350 kmph, owing to their AetoEfficient designs,2.34 Japan Chito-Shinkansen SCMAGLEV Trains 2.3.4.1 Model MLXO1 Fig 2.3.4.1 MLXOL The MLX 01 built in 2003 by Japan Railway Central was the first designed and tested SCMAGLEV train, capable of travelling at a maximum of 581 kmph "! using its arrow- wedge head as its primary aerodynamic feature, This design was discarded in 2013 for future commercial use for a newer and more advanced shaped train, the LO, 2.3.4.2 Model LO Series i A Fig. 2.3.4.2 LO Train The LO Series Train built in 2013 by Mitsubishi Heavy Industries and Nippon Sharyo specifically for commercial usage in the proposed 250km Chuo-Shinkansen line is currently undergoing testing. The LO Series train design has a characteristic long nose, which is purportedly designed to reduce aerodynamic drag and noise. This train very recently broke the land speed record al 6011 kmph in its test track.Chapter 3: OBJECTIVES AND METHODOLOGY 3.1 Objectives of the Project + Design of Maglev trains to obtain a low value of drag coefficient and drag force @ Observation of the effects of track shape on the value of drag coefficient and drag force. # Design and observations of the effects of density change and tunneling effect on the values of drag coefficient and drag force 103.2 Methodology of Design In Creo, the model of Maglev is prepared using extrude, blend and related options and saved with the extension IGES. Streamlining the shape by introducing curves, rounded ends and arrowhead-ends in the geometry are manipulated using the existing modification tools of Creo. Design cues are borrowed from existing designs such as the TransRapid and Bombardier round-end design, In the Ansys workbench, Ansys Fluent option is selected from the Menu, Geometry is double-clicked to open the “Design Modeler’ where the design is imported, using the ‘Import Extemal Geometry File’ option in the ‘File’ menu, Next, an enelosure is produced of a required shape and dimensions using the ‘Enclosure’ option in the “Tool” menu, During analysis im evacuated tube conditions, enclosure is produced of particular dimensions of tunnels as well as Keeping distance of train from tack base and guide walls into consideration, “Boolean Operation’ is used to subtract the train from the enclosure for meshing. The progress is saved and the window is clased. Next, in the workbench, the meshing option is updated and a meshing window is opened using ‘Edit for Meshing” where the different zones are named to distinguish each other later. Meshing quality options and values are entered e.g. minimum size, growth rate, tessellation, values, inflation options, assembly method ete. Next, meshing is performed as shown in Fig. 3.2.1 and Fig. 3.2.2, after which meshing is executed by clicking on “Update’ or ‘Generate Meshing’ "Fig, 3.2 (1) Mesh Sizing Fig, 3.2 (2) Mesh Statistics 1Next, in the workbench, the Setup Command where conditions like ‘Models (Standard k-e, , ‘Boundary Conditions (Inlet Velocity)’ and “Reference Values’ are chosen as per standard rules. Reference values include the reference non-equilibrium wall’, ‘Material ( area which signifies the frontal area of the train designed. During analysis in evacuated tube conditions, mesh quality is checked and when asked for a report, “Pressure Based Solver’ is chosen. ‘Viscous laminar’ is chosen in the model tab, as well as ‘k-epsilon’, ‘Enhanced wall treaiment” and *Realizable’. After this, fluid properties are changed to decrease air density to 1/1000" of its original value and materials needed are selected in the “Cell Zone condition’ too. Inlet and outlet boundary conditions are chosen. In inlet boundary conditions, ‘Turbulent Intensity’ and ‘Hydraulic Diameter’ are used as solving parameters. Reference is selected as inlet. Fig. 3.2 (3) Simple Solution Method Flow Courant umber 2 Expl Relaxation Factors Momentum {5-35 Pressure [5.35 Fig. 3.2 (4) Coupled Solution Method 12Next, the solution methods are chosen, which are either simple (Fig. 3.2.3) or coupled (Fig 3.2.4). Coupled Solution method is chosen for velocities in the range of 100 to 800 kmph ‘""! Next, in the monitor, the Parameters such as drag and lift are selected. Using hybrid initialization for accelerating the solution ""!, the solution is initialized for ‘obtaining the range of solution values. In the *Run Calculation’ option, the number of iterations to be performed is chosen for obtaining a result, When the calculations are completed, the results are obtained from the *Graphics and Animation’, with Plots and Report Option given under the heading ‘Results’ ‘The progress is saved as a. WBPI file ‘Enable the solution monitors of interest | ‘Calculate a solution Check for convergence 3Chapter 4: RESULT ANALYSIS 4.1 Design of Train Models A total of 9 Train Models were designed using Creo with subsequent modifications being made to decrease the drag coefficient. The models are: Fig. 4.1 (1) Model V1 Fig 4.1 (2) Model V2 Fig. 4.1 (3) Model V3 4Fig 4.1 (4) Model V4 Fig 4.1 (5) Model V5. Fig. 4.1 (6) Model V6 15,Fig. 4.1 (7) Model V7 Fig. 4.1 (8) Model V8 Fig. 4.1 (9) Model V9 164.2 Analysis of all designed models under constant parameters ‘© Common length of train 100 m © Common frontarea 3.7m x 4.02 m © Common speed 402 kmph Fig. 4.2 Trainin a regular enclosure Fig. 4.2 isa front cross-sectional view of the ain during analysis. The dashed line represents the enclosure surrounding the train (in red}. These dimensions are standard enclosure dimensions to simulate fluid flow analysis of an object in free air conditions 74.21 Drag coefficients of all models Table 4.2.1 Drag coefficients of all models in regular enclosure ™ Train Model Drag Version Coefficient a 0.68 f 2 0.653 3 06 4 0.55 ls 0.423 aan a3 7 0275 3 alr a | 0.22 Fig 4.2.1 Drag coefficients of all models in regular enclosure 4.22 Drag forces of all models: Table 4.2.2 Drag forces of all models in regular enclosure Train Model Drag Force Version (kn) 1 5 foe 71.96 "3 66.123 ra 6061 fe: 4661 f 6 4077 [fe 30.306 ES 18.73 vag 9 M3 Fig. 42.2 Drag forces of all models in regular enclosure4.3 Analysis of all models under varying parameters 4.3.1 Variation of all models at 2 different lengihs of train 100 m and 315m (Standard train lengths) 4.3.1.1 Variation of drag coefficients of all models Table 4.3.1.1 Drag coefficients of all models under varying length Length| Ca | Ca | Ca | Ga GQ |G G Ga | (m) (WI) | (V2) (V3) (way (v5) (V6) (V7) (V8) (v9) oo | 068 | 0653 | 06 | oss | 0423 | 037 | 0275 | 017 | 022 315. | 0.92 | 0.798 | 0.785 | a786 | a647 | o566 | 0543 | 038 | 0.43 Te big Costin prea coctfatane ve a Lemath (nih Loran Coefficient (al ran Cociciare (49) Fig. 4.3.1.1 Drag coefficients of all models under varying length 1943.1.2 Variation of drag forces of all models Table 4.3.1.2 Drag forces of all models under varying length Fa Fa Fa Fa Fo Fa Fa Fo Fa (VD | (V2) | (V3) | (V4) | CVS) (V6) | (VT) (VS) | (V9) CRN) | KN) | KN) | CKND | CRN) (KN) | (KN) (KN) | (KN) (m) 100 75 | 7126 | 66.12 | 60.61 | 4661 | 4077 | 303 | 18.73) 24.3 315 110.2) g446 83.1 | gat | 64 | 6289 | 41.68 | 38.69 | 40.11 10 Drag Farce (kN) a a sa 100 180 20 250 300 350 Length (mm) 2) {kN} mete Drag Force (V3) (kN) 5} [kH| a Drag Force iV) (kN) 8) {kM} — rag Force f¥5) kN) Fig. 4.3.1.2 Dag forces of all models under varying length 204.3.2 Variation of 2 models at 2 different areas Areas chosen are based on dimensions of widths Al =28 mx 2.65 m=7.42 m? At=42mxdm =167m' (Dimensions multiplied by 1.5) A3=63mx6m =37.56m’ (Dimensions multiplied by 1.5 4.32.1 Variation of drag coefficients of 2 models nd height of train model designed Table 4.3.2. 1 Drag coefficients with varying area ry Drag Drag ™ Area | Coefficient | Coefficient (my wp «vay 7.42 0.926 0.786 16.7 0.664 0.532 s 37.56 0.533 0.463 Fig. 43.2.1 Drag coefficients of 2 models with varying area 4.3.2.2 Variation of drag forces of 2 models Table 4.3.2.2 Drag forces of with varying area aa Drag Drag x0 Area | Force (Vi) | Force (V4) - (a) (KN) (KN) iw Taz | 43.32 53.34 i EE || 167 | 176.48 10674 = 37.56 | 318.66 208.82 Fig. 4.3.2.2 Drag forces of 2 models with varying area 214.3.3 Variation of all models at3 different operating speeds ‘Speeds chosen vary from regular intra-city rapid transit to very high speed inter-city travel Speed 1 = 100 kmph (Rapid transport speed) Speed 2= 300 kmph (High speed railway speed) Speed 3.= 500 kmph (Theoretical very high speed) 4.33.1 Variation of drag coefficients of all models Drag coefficient is subject only to the geometry of the train, and is unaffected by the speed, with changes being in the order of 0.0x (negligible) 4.33.2 Variation of drag forces of all models ‘Table 4.3.3.2 Drag forces of all models with varying speed aa Fa Fa Fa Fa Foo Fa | Bi Fi | Fa (kmph) (VD | (V2) (V3) | (V4) | (VS) | (VOD) (V7) | (V8) | (V9) (KN) | (kN) (KN) | (KN) | (KN) | (KN) | (KN) | (KIN) | (KN) 100 432 | 423 | 391 | 3.409] 253 | 217] 136 | 14s | 1.27 300 37.22 | 3873 | 35.56 | 2989 | 1684 17.86] 11.97 | 9.85 | 10.91 500 106.74 | 106.87 | 97.95 | 81.37 | 4661 | 40.77} 32.25 | 26.35 | 29.41 1a 108 9 Drag Fores VI (HN) me brag ore (va) (4) a Drag Force V2) (AN) eng Force (Va) (hy) Dra Force V5) (48) Drag tones (v6) (hy) Drag Force (kN) rag Fores (us) (4) Dra Force V8) (HN) 5 con Pag Force us) (4) a 109 200 a0 00 ‘speed {kmph Fig. 4.3.3.2 Drag forces of all models with varying speed 224.4 Analysis of all models with track introduced as part of enclosure ‘The track designed as part of the enclosure is meant to represent the aerodynamics of the train travelling above a set track, elevated by a certain distance, and between 2 guide walls, with certain clearances. This approach of narrowing the passage of air between the train and its surroundings om 3 of its sides is an attemptat showing the fluid flow as realistic as possible 5 ' ' ' ' ' 37 —— ty 50m 1 ' ' ' I ' ' ' ' I 402m 150 mm. Fig. 44 Trackinelusion in enclosure As can been seen in Fig. 4.4, the train (marked in red), is surrounded by the track (marked in purple) whose guide walls have a clearance of 150 mm as per dimensions used for Japan Maglev, and the elevation from the base being 100 mm, the maximum elevation of track possible, The total height of the guide wall is 1.44 m, out of which 1.34 m lies above the base of the train. This portion is 1/3" of the height of the train itself to align with the magnets in the base of the train Because of the change in the flow of air, the drag coefficient of the train changes and correspondingly the drag foree. 2344.1 Variation of drag coefficients of all models Table 4.4.1 Drag coefficients before and after track sage ighull stag Cet talc! Train & |% (Original) | (Track include) 06s | 062 z 06s | Ot a 06 057 a oss | O57 5 042 | 059 6 037 | 058 7 027 O38 8 017 | 023 ee a 02 | 0m Fig, 4.4.1 Drag coefficients of all models before and after track 4.4.2 Variation of drag forces of all models Table 4.4.2 Drag forces before and afler track sung cena) nage enka ee f Model | (Original) | (Track mes ‘Version| (KN) | Include) a we 1 7S 679 2 7196 | 65.27 3 61 | 61a 2s + coer | 61a my 7 3 4661 | 634 wy 6 ao77 | 63a a 303 | 284 8 ia? | 237 2 243 | 318 Fig. 4.4.2 Drag forces of all models before and after track 244.5 Analysis of 2 models with tunnel shape introduced for enclosure design Before the analysis of the designed trains in evacuated tubes at low pressure/density values, it is necessary to compare the variation of drag values of a train in constant conditions of area, speed and length but varying tunnelAube shape, To address this, 3 tunnel shapes were designed as part of the enclosure surrounding the tains, The illustrations along with accurate dimensions used for designing are as follows: Circular Rectangular Curved Head 10m 7m 10.6m | Fig. 45 Tunnel Shapes ‘Therefore, the 3 tunnel shapes are Circular Rectangular Curved Head Cross-sectional area of the enclosures was drastically reduced to simulate an actual tunnel with capabilities of being constructed over long distances. All tunnel shapes are designed with a constant blockage ratio of 0.17 based on the values used for proposed Swiss Underground Maglev Metro |), with the resulting cross-sectional area of the tunnel being 87.5 m’. Parameters kept constant were speed at 402 kmph, dimensions of the train at 3.7 m x 4.02 m, length at 100 m. Models 6 and 7 were chosen to be tested on, after which the tunnel design whose enclosure results in the lowest drag for the analyzed train, would be chosen for the final evacuated tube analysis 2545.1 Drag codfficients of model 6and 7 under varying tunnel enctasure shape Ey os ORE : : : : 2 : ; ; : Table 4.5.1 Drag coefficients varying enclosure shape Train G q G Model | (Cireular) | (Rectangular) | (Curved Version Head) 6 0.87 091 on a 067 0.68 0.63 Fig. 4.5.1 Drag coefficients varying enclosure shape 4.5.2 Drag forees of model 6 and 7 under varying tunel enelosure shape sa tiog tore ted ® svg seem ae seg Foversiewat ea a Fig 4.5.2 Drag forces varying enclosure shape Table 4.5.2 Drag forces. varying enclosure shape Train Fe Fe Fe Model | (Circular) (Rectangular) | (Curved Version) kN kN Head) KN 6 96.7 101.2 20 7 74s 156 70 ‘As can be seen, curved head tunnel shape generates least drag values out of 3, and hence is chosen as the tunnel for the evacuated tube analysis of all train models in low pressureMensity conditions. 264.6 Evacuated tube analysis of all models in curved head tunnel enclosure at blockage ratio 0.17 at reduced density x Fig. 4.6 Curved Head Tunnel Enclosure with Ratio 0.17 Evacuated tube analysis is necessary to simulate a maglev train travelling in conditions that drastically reduce its primary form of friction ~ air drag. As exemplified in SpaceX’s paper ‘Hyperloop Alpha’ "*l while it is impossible to create and maintain vacuum conditions in large tubes, it is quite possible to implement a low pressure system that can be maintained by standard commercial pumps as well as overcome any leaks. Pressure of air inside the evacuated ube is hypothesized to be feasibly reduced upto 100 Pa, 1/1000" of the sea level air pressure, The pressure is equivalent to an airplane travelling al 150,000 fl. Since Ansys Fluent does not allow change of operating pressure, we can simulate this low pressure by changing the density of the air inside the tube in the reference values. By Ideal Gas Law density is directly proportional to air pressure. By changing the air pressure to 100 Pa, the density inside the tube will be 1.225 x 10° kg/m’. This is the value that we use for the analysis of all trains in low density conditions in realistic fluid flow simulations. Changing the density changes the drag coefficient and drag force values. 274.6.1 Drag coefficients of all trains in low density, curved head tunel conditions Table 4.6.1 ‘Drag coefficients in low density, tunnel Ge G (Original) | (Tunnel) 0.68 1? oes | 159 06 152 055 | 133 oa | 134 srg Cnn Hea BoC om 13 Fig. 4.6.1 Drag coefficients in low density, tunnel a7 |, ine 8 oa | 067 9 om | 129 4.6.2 Drag forces of all trains in low density, curved head tunnel conditions Table 4.62 Drag forces in low density, tunnel Train | Fe i A inagsone [Crgrall ex) ag eeceherrel(e, Model | (Original) | (Tunnel) Brig Wersion | — (kN) (ken) =a 1 5 02 2 | nse | oa ‘ow 3 | 66.123 | 016 a | coer | 0246 s | 4661 | 0147 6 | ao77 | 013 pz ee, 7 30.306 | 0.09 : - a | 1873 | 007 Fig. 46.2 Drag forces in low density, tunnel 3 saa olaCONCLUSIONS AND SCOPE FOR FUTURE WORK Chapter 5.1 Conclusions «Levitation of a MAGLEV train allows the removal of all other forms of drag except air drag, which becomes significant at high speeds. Aerodynamic modelling of trains directly influences power consumption and fuel efficiency. © AeroEfficient shaping of trains is carried out in design software and tested out using wind ‘tunnel analysis to determine drag coefficients and drag Forces. We have used Creo as our design sofiware and Ansys Fluent for the fluid (airy flow analysis with varying parameters. «Streamlining the front end of the train lowers the drag coefficient of the train, allowing us to achieve the lowest drag coefficient of 0.17 with a train length of 100 m, front area dimensions of 3.7 m x 402 m, anda speed of 402 kmph. «With increase in length of train, drag coefficient and drag force increases greatly. Trains ‘with shorter lengths, such as shuttles are optimum, # With increase in speed of air flow inside enclosure, drag force increases exponentially, * With increase in front-end cross-sectional area of the train, drag force increases, Trains ‘with relatively smaller frontal areas are optimum, © Guide walls as part of the Maglev tack narrow the passage of air flow around the tain, increasing the drag coefficient and drag force. @ Curved head tunnel as an enclosure allows least drag for a Maglev train passing through it as compared toa circular and rectangular design. «Simulating a Maglev train travelling in an evacuated tube by its fluid flow analysis in a ‘tunnel with a blockage ratio of 0.17 and reducing the density to 1/1000® of its regular Value will increase the drag coefficient of the train slightly but drastically decrease its drag force to negligible values. 295.2 Scope for Future Work © Our project has solely focused on the design and analysis of EDS maglev trains modelled afler the Japan SCMaglev, Design of EMS Magky trains and tracks, analysis and ‘comparison of drag values could be of paramount importance to understand which system, is better/more efficient. * Design of Maglev trains with dimensions capable of running on existing Indian Rails ng) could be done as a hypothetical case to reduce costs of not building a brand new (using the steel tracks as guide walls and sleepers as bases for installing levitation wi infrastructure. © Aerodynamic simulation of Maglev trains to understand nature and damage capabilities ‘of shock waves induced from the opposite direction erossing of 2 Maglev wains at an excess of 600 kmph can be assessed using different software + Simulation of a train in a closed evacuated tube can help understand the syringe-ffect of a train pushing air till it reaches the Kantrowitz limit " ‘of maximum speed and the phenomenon’s variation with diameter of the tube. * Analysis of drag encountered by trains in the evacuated tubes proposed at super-sonic speeds could be of importance when considering possibility of inter-continental travel at 3000 kmph. 30REFERENCES ‘Wikipedia Articles on Maglev, EMS, EDS, SCMaglev, Shanghai Maglev Dispelling the Top Ten Myths of Maglev by Laurence E. Blow President, Maglev Transport, Ine. - High Speed Rail 2010 Conference: White Paper Aerodynamic Aspects of Magly Systems by Th. Tielkes, Deutsche Bahn AG, DB Systemtechnik, Dep. of Aerodynamics and Air Conditioning, Munich, Germany, 2014 A review of Train Aerodynamics Fundamentals by Baker, Christopher, University of Birmingham - Citation for published version (Harvard): Baker, C 2014, The Aeronautical Journal, Vol. 118, no.1201 Rocket Aerodynamics — ScienceLearn.ORG Website Shape Effects on Drag — Glenn Research Centre, NASA Website High Tech for “Flying on the Ground” ~ TransRapid International, Summary Article published on website, Published 2013 AeroEfficient Optimized Train Shaping ~ Bombardier, EcoActi ve Technologies Superconducting Maglev Developed by RTRI and JR Central ~ Kazuo Sawad, published in Raibway Technology Today, October 2000 |.A coupled finite volume solver for the solution of incompressible flows on unstructured grids - M. Darwish, 1. Sraj, F. Moukalled, published 2009, Department of Mechanical Engineering, American University of Beirut, P-O. Box 11-0236, Riad El Solh, Beirut 1107 2020, Lebanon “Accelerating CFD Solutions - Mark Keating, Principal Engineer. ANSYS, Inc. published in ANSYS Advantage * Volume V, Issue 1, 2011 Feasibility and Economic Aspects of Vactrains - Worcester Polytechnic Institute. Professor Oleg Pavlov. SSPS, published October 11, 2007 Hyperloop Alpha — Space Exploration Technologies Corporation, Open Paper published 2013 31