ds

© All Rights Reserved

5 views

ds

© All Rights Reserved

- Statistics Study Guide
- add math probability distribution
- Wind Load Calculatio-1
- Statistical Methods in Engineering and Quality Assurance
- ASCE710W
- s1 paper
- Chapter 03 Random Variables Part A
- Effect of Lateral Fin Profiles on Turbulent Flow and Heat Transfer Performance
- Lecture12_2012
- 220_Chapter 5_BB(1)
- Distribution
- Aloha Instructor
- Course_ Probability and Random Variables
- R
- qm2 notes
- fortstat_english.pdf
- Mcphee 1992
- [IEEE SENSORS JOURNAL 2011]-Decision Analysis Environmental Learning Automata for Sensor Placement
- maths iia paper 2
- Clabe Problem Sheet 6 Solution

You are on page 1of 13

1

D. Rocchi, 2G. Solari, 3M. Testa, 1G. Tomasini

Politecnico di Milano, Milano, Italy 1; University of Genova, Genova, Italy 2; RFI, Rome, Italy 3

Abstract

This paper describes a new methodology to perform the cross wind risk analysis on railway

lines. This study consists in the evaluation of the probability of rail vehicles overturning when it

is running on a railway line under the action of cross wind.

According to the new methodology described in this paper, the cross wind risk analysis is based

on a meteo study and on a stochastic approach. The former provides the probability of

occurrence of wind gusts on the specific site on the line while the latter leads to the evaluation

of the Characteristics Wind Curve (CWC) probability distribution. The probability of vehicles

overturning is calculated as the combined probability of the wind gust velocity occurrence and of

the overcoming of the safety limit adopted for the definition of the CWC.

Some preliminary results of the application of this new methodology to the Rome-Naples high

speed railway line are also reported.

Introduction

The European regulations for the interoperability of the European High Speed railway system

are focused at facilitating the technical harmonisation of the European railway network and at

improving its competitiveness, contemporarily fulfilling high levels of safety.

The tool for achieving these goals is the European Technical Specification for High Speed

Interoperability (TSI).

These specifications define a series of technical parameters that constitute the interface

between the several subsystems of the whole railway transportation system: Infrastructure

subsystem, Rolling Stock subsystem, Signalling subsystem, Energy subsystem, etc.. For these

interface parameters, limit values are thus established, that are able to ensure the proper

interaction between the subsystems involved.

As far as it is the case of the Infrastructure subsystem, the interface parameters are almost

exclusively established with the Rolling Stock subsystem: as a rule, interoperable trains will

run on interoperable infrastructures without special supplementary technical requirements.

One of the many interface parameters considered in the interoperability specifications is the

cross wind.

At the current state, by the side of the Rolling Stock technical specifications for interoperability,

the interface parameter cross wind is addressed by defining limit reference values for the wind

speed, that indirectly define the Rolling Stock aptitude of being sufficiently stable under severe

cross winds. These limit values are described as a set of curves that define the wind speeds,

corresponding to a limit reference wheel unloading, in relationship with the train speed and with

a limited set of reference infrastructure scenarios.

By the side of the infrastructure, the interface parameters cross wind is treated as a

commitment for the Infrastructure Manager to identify those regions of a line that can be

exposed to severe winds, and to adopt, for these regions, the most appropriate

countermeasures in order to ensure the operation safety. These countermeasures can consist

either in the installation of alarm systems, able to impose temporary speed restrictions to the

trains, or in fixed trackside protections.

As a general remark, the approach outlined by the European Technical Specifications for High

Speed Interoperability is valid for any railway line. But, on the other hand, it has to be stressed

that the cross wind problem becomes a major topic for the high speed operations on new lines.

It is relevant, for the high speed circulations, because the aerodynamic forces depend on the

square of the relative wind speed (calculated by composing the wind velocity vector and the

train speed) which increases for higher train speeds. Moreover, it is relevant for the new lines

since the construction of new lines, with totally new topographic layouts, can potentially imply

the crossing of locally windy regions. In many cases, these two conditions (high speed of the

trains and new topographical layout of the line), are both present in a new railway infrastructure

investment. The main aspects concerning the assessment of the cross wind risk are: the

definition of a standardized methodology leading to comparable results between different lines,

and the combination of the probability due to all the aspects concerning the crosswind stability

(probability of wind occurrence; probability of wind direction; probability of train load condition;

probability of failure of the train suspension system; probability to reach overturning conditions

etc.). For all the previous reasons, Rete Ferroviaria Italiana (RFI), University of Genova (Unige)

and Politecnico di Milano (Polimi) developed a new methodology to assess the risk analysis on

railway lines related to cross wind effects through a cooperation research.

The proposed methodology to assess the cross wind risk analysis consider as a first approach a

statistical meteo analysis and a stochastic approach for the calculation of the CWC. This is the

first step towards a more complete approach that may overcome the limit to consider the CWC

as a deterministic limit as suggested by the TSI standard approach.

In this paper, the proposed methodology has been applied to the new high speed line RomeNaples, in the south of Italy.

2

The risk analysis consists in the evaluation of the rail vehicles overturning probability when it is

running on a railway line under the action of cross wind.

According to the new methodology described in this paper, the cross wind risk analysis is based

on a meteo analysis, providing the probability of occurrence of wind gusts, and on a stochastic

approach that leads to the evaluation of the Characteristics Wind Curve (CWC) probability

distribution.

The probability of vehicles overturning is calculated as the combined probability of the wind

gust velocity occurrence and of the overcoming of the safety limit adopted for the CWC

definition.

From a theoretical point of view, the risk analysis could be carried out starting from the

Characteristic Wind Curves evaluated, in each point of the line, accounting for the specific

infrastructure characteristics of the site through the aerodynamic coefficients. Nevertheless,

according to this approach, it would be necessary to evaluate the aerodynamic coefficients of

the considered train with all the infrastructure scenarios (flat ground, viaducts and embankments

of different geometries) along the line. In order to avoid all these wind tunnel tests, very

expensive in terms of both cost and time, an equivalent alternative approach has been set up

ad hoc for this application.

The new methodology proposed in this paper follows four steps:

1. definition of the line characteristics in terms of infrastructure (scenarios geometry,

curve radius, cant, orientation to the north, design speed);

2. probabilistic analysis of the wind speed and direction and definition of the statistical

properties of the mean and peak wind speed along the line, at 2m height above

TOR, considering also the speed-up and speed-down effects induced by the track

scenario;

3. calculation, of the statistic distribution of the Characteristic Wind Curve (CWC) in

each point of the line, according to the stochastic approach (Cheli et al. 2004),

adopting the flat ground aerodynamic coefficients;

4. evaluation of the probability of CWC exceedance along the line, combining the

cumulative probability distribution of the wind speed and the stochastic distribution

of the CWC.

With this approach, the speed-up/speed-down effects due to the different scenarios along the

line are not considered in the aerodynamic coefficients and, as a consequence, in the CWC

(that is evaluated for any scenario using the flat ground aerodynamic coefficients). The

scenarios geometrical characteristics (height, embankments slope, ) modify only the wind

This approach is based on the assumption that the aerodynamic coefficients measured with flat

ground scenario are equivalent to the aerodynamic coefficients measured with different

infrastructure scenarios (viaduct/embankment) by adopting, as reference wind speed, the wind

velocity measured over the track, in correspondence of the train position, without the train.

Figure 1 shows the rolling moment aerodynamic coefficients measured through wind tunnel

tests on an high speed train with different scenarios (Bocciolone et al, 2003). In particular,

Figure 1 shows a comparison between the coefficients measured in three different ways:

flat ground configurations (blue points);

6-m high standard embankment with wind speed measured in free stream P1 (green

point);

6-m high standard embankment with wind speed measured at an height of 2 m over

the TOR, in correspondence of the train position but without the train (P2 red points).

For the high speed trains, the direction of the relative wind train speed is ranged between

w=[0-30], where w represents the angle between the relative wind speed and the line, in the

horizontal plane. It is possible to see that, in the interesting range of angles of attack, the

agreement between the aerodynamic coefficient relative to the flat ground and the one relative

to the embankment, evaluated by the wind speed measured on P2, is significantly high. Good

agreements have been found also for the other main aerodynamic coefficients.

In the following sections, the four steps of the methodology are analyzed in details and the

methodology for the calculation of the probability of rail vehicle overturning is presented.

FLAT GROUND

Mx

7

6

EMBANKMENT

Mx

Mx

P2

P1

4

3

2

flat ground

embankment - P

embankment - P

0

0

1

2

20

40

w []

60

80

100

Figure 1. Rolling moment aerodynamic coefficients on flat ground (blu points) in terms of comparison

with the corresponding coefficients measured on embankment with the wind speed measured in P1

(green points) and in P2 (red points).

In order to carry out the risk analysis, the line has been divided into homogeneous sections in

terms of meteo features and general infrastructure features.

For the aspects linked to the general infrastructure features, the topographic layout and the

relevant cinematic parameters must be precisely described.

In the case of a double track line with the two tracks running with a constant distance between

the track centres, the topographic position of the line is sufficiently represented by the position

of just one of the two tracks. This position is established in the framework of a general reference

topographic system that must be consistent with the general topographic reference system used

in the meteo studies. The general layout is then constituted by the position (x and y coordinates)

of the reference track in the top view, by the height (z coordinate) of the reference track above

the see level and by its orientation with respect to the geographic North.

The points along the track that describe its topographical position are spaced of about 50 m.

Each of these reference points is associated not only to the set of topographic coordinates (x, y,

z) and track orientation (), but also to its progressive distance from the origin of the line

(line_km position).

Considering each reference track point, the height of the reference track above the surrounding

ground is then recorded. In case of embankment or viaduct, the ground points, that are closest

to the infrastructure, are considered. In case of cut, the closest points to the cuts upper edge

are considered.

In a first step, both left hand and right hand sides of the line, are considered. But with a further

step a simplification is made: at each line_km position the worst situation is assigned. That is to

say that in the case of an embankment or of a viaduct, the higher value of the embankments

height is assigned to both sides of the line; if it is the case of a cut, then the lowest value of the

cuts depth is assigned to both sides of the line.

In the case of a tunnel, no description of the line is carried on, except for the positions of tunnel

entrance and tunnel exit.

Using the same reference points along the reference track, the cinematic relevant features of

the line are described as: the radius of curvature, the cant of the track and the uncompensated

acceleration, considered with respect to the highest train speed allowed at that line_km.

In the transition curves, the uncompensated acceleration linearly increases from zero

(alignment) to the maximum value in the curve. When describing the transitions curves, a

conservative simplification is made: each transition curve is simply assigned the

uncompensated acceleration associated to the adjoining curve.

The line referred to in the present paper is located in the northern part of the line and is

surrounded by an even terrain. This part of the line is characterized by a quite constant height

above terrain and not very high viaducts and embankments (heights of around 8 meters for the

embankments and heights between 10 and 15 meters for the viaducts). No cuts nor tunnels are

present. This line is almost fully situated in correspondence of two adjoining curves having

different radii and cants, where the uncompensated acceleration is 0,40 m/s2 and 0,58 m/s2,

respectively. The maximum allowed train speed is 300 km/h.

4

Meteo analysis

4.1

Numerical simulation of wind fields along the Rome-Naples HS/HC railway line

A numerical model of the territory and two distinct and complementary numerical simulation

methods have been adopted and compared to perform the probabilistic analysis of the wind

speed and direction along the HS/HC Rome-Naples railway line. The analysis makes use of the

meteorological databases of the anemometric stations of the Italian Air Force (AM) in the

neighborhoods of the line, and of the anemometric measures recorded by RFI at some points

along the line.

The numerical modeling of the territory, where high-resolution simulations have been performed,

requires mainly two bi-dimensional fields: the topography and the terrain roughness derived

from the land cover.

The numerical simulations have been performed by means of the mass-consistent model

WINDS (Sherman 1978, Ratto et al. 1990, Ratto et al. 1994, Georgieva et al. 2003). Firstly, the

code has been applied as a stand-alone model to simulate a set of mean wind scenarios under

idealized barotropic atmospheric conditions corresponding to a number of combinations of wind

velocities aloft. Then the code has been used inside an operational chain composed by the

mass-consistent model nested into the mesoscale meteorological model BOLAM (Buzzi et al.

1994) to downscale the BOLAM low-resolution wind fields and simulate a number of strong-wind

situations under baroclinic conditions. For further details see Burlando et al. (2007).

The numerical territory modeling mainly involves two groups of data: the soil topography and its

roughness derived from the land cover.

Soil topography is described by a digital terrain model of about 230 m resolution, provided in

digital form by the Italian Istituto Geografico Militare (IGM).

Land cover is obtained from the European project CORINE database. This database is derived

from satellite images (LANDSAT TM) at scale 1:100.000 collected in the years 1996-2000. It

consists of maps in vectorial format, converted into a raster format by a geographical

information system. The resolution of this discretization is about 230 m, in order to define the

land cover matrix exactly over the topography matrix.

The roughness length is derived from the land cover, with the same discretization, using the

conversion criteria proposed in Stull (1988), Wieringa (1993), Davenport et al. (2000), Wieringa

et al. (2001), and Baklanov and Joffre (2003). Moreover, continuous roughness models have

been implemented in the neighboring areas of the meteorological stations, with the aim of

improving the local wind simulation.

The simulation domains, with horizontal resolution of about 200 m, consist of five rectangular

areas, partially overlapped each other, which cover the whole railway line as shown in Figure 1.

(m)

42.5

2500

2300

2100

42.0

1900

Latitude (deg)

1700

1500

41.5

1300

1100

41.0

900

700

500

40.5

300

100

12.0

12.5

13.0

13.5

14.0

14.5

15.0

Longitude (deg)

Figure 2. The simulation domains represented by the five dashed. The railway line (solid line)

and the AM anemometric stations () are also shown.

4.1.2 Numerical simulations of high-resolution wind fields

As a first approach, the mass-consistent model WINDS has been applied to evaluate a set of

mean wind scenarios coherent with different uniform mean wind speeds and directions at the

top of the atmospheric boundary layer. Following this approach, vertical profiles of the wind

velocity based on similarity-theory formulations (Zilitinkevich et al. 1998) have been used at the

initialization step to define the first-guess wind field. Moreover, a module for the

parameterization of the development of internal boundary layers has been used to take into

account steep changes of the surface roughness parameter, i.e. sea-land transition.

The wind scenarios consist of 36 simulations with an initial imposed geostrophic wind intensity

of 50 m/s, and wind directions ranging from 0 to 360 with 10-wide sectors. The atmosphere

has been assumed neutrally stratified, as this is the only stability condition appropriate in case

of strong winds. This procedure has provided a complete characterization of the wind

climatology in the areas where the line lies, and the correlation matrices to transfer local

anemological measurements to wind field estimates along the railway line.

In the second approach, the mass-consistent model WINDS has been nested into the

mesoscale meteorological model BOLAM, which is used operationally at the University of

Genoa since June 2003. The version of the code used in the present research runs within a

domain centered over Italy with a spatial resolution of 10 km both in longitude and latitude. The

12 windiest meteorological events from June 2003 to May 2006 have been selected, and the

corresponding wind fields have been downscaled onto the simulation domains of Figure 1.

These meteorological events have provided a description of the wind patterns associated to

strong-wind events over the considered domain. For instance, Figure 2 shows an example of

simulated wind field at 10 m above ground level corresponding to a mistral event in the western

Mediterranean, which determines a south-westerly flow over central Italy. The maximum wind

intensity is around Naples.

The information from both kinds of simulation has been used also to identify the windiest parts

of the railway line where new anemometers should be installed by RFI in order to detect the

data relevant to the alarm system.

flow.

4.2

Probabilistic analyses

The numerical simulations described in the previous section have been used to extract the wind

speed at the meteorological stations and at the line. The extraction of the mean wind speed in a

set of points of the line is a delicate task because wind speed relevant to train operations is

close to ground, and such a speed is strongly influenced by the local terrain conditions. Thus,

suitable post-processors of the territorial mean wind fields have been developed to account for

the presence of embankments, cuts, and viaducts by means of relationships based upon wind

tunnel tests (Tielkes and Gautier, 2005) and itemized numerical simulations (Engineering

Sciences Data Unit, 2002). Such post-processors evaluate the wind speed for the whole railway

line, at 2 meters over the track plane. Peak wind speeds have been estimated by processing

mean wind speeds and turbulence intensities through the gust factor technique (Solari, 1993).

The estimation of the mean and peak wind speeds at the line, at the meteorological stations and

in ideal reference conditions (i.e. open and homogeneous flat ground with roughness length

equal to 0.05m) by means of a complete set of scenarios allows to evaluate two sets of

transmission coefficients, i.e. the parameters expressing the change of the wind speed and

directions at different locations. They have been evaluated from the stations to reference

conditions and then from reference conditions to the railway line, at a height equal to 3m above

the ground (i.e. 2m above the track). The passage to reference conditions has been adopted to

make the data of the stations more homogeneous, and then to allow a former comparison of the

results of the probabilistic analyses before the projection of the databases to the line. Thanks to

the transmission coefficients, it became possible to transfer the databases of the anemological

records from each stations to any point of the line, and to submit them to probabilistic analyses.

The parent population has been regressed by using a hybrid Weibull model to get the wind

velocity having assigned exceedance probability. The extreme distribution of the wind speed

with assigned return period has been obtained by means of three alternative methods: the

asymptotic model of the first type (Gumbel distribution), the POT Pareto technique and the

process analysis. The process analysis has also been implemented to avoid biased values due

to discontinuous acquisitions, missing data and wrong wind calms. The final distributions of the

wind speeds and directions along the line are expressed as a weighted average of the

distributions of the wind speeds and directions associated with the different stations through

appropriate weighting coefficients. Figure 3 illustrates for a generic point along the line, the polar

representations of the mean and peak wind speed with assigned exceedance pw probability.

The whole sequence is reported more in detail in Solari et al. (2007).

Figure 4. Mean and peak wind speed with assigned exceedance probability evaluated in a

generic point of the railway line.

5

CWC evaluation

The CWC for the calculation of the probability of rail vehicle overturning have been evaluated

through the stochastic methodology developed, during these last years, by the researchers of

Mechanical Department of Politecnico di Milano (Cheli et al. 2004, Cheli et al. 2003). According

to this approach, since the wind-train interaction is a random process, the CWC are defined by a

stochastic approach: the final output of this procedure is a probability distribution of CWC,

defined in terms of mean CWC and corresponding spread band.

The main steps of the methodology are presented in the flow chart of Figure 5:

1. experimental wind tunnel tests on reduced-scale physical models, in low turbulent flow, for

the evaluation of the static aerodynamic coefficients;

2. starting from the wind speed statistical properties of each point of the line (roughness length,

Power Spectral Density, coherence function), calculation of the turbulent wind speed

experienced by a point moving with the vehicle;

3. evaluation, by a numerical algorithm based on static aerodynamic coefficients and

aerodynamic admittance function, of the aerodynamic forces acting on a vehicle subjected

to real turbulent wind. This algorithm accounts for the actual turbulent wind speed

distribution as a function of space and time and for the vehicles geometry;

4. the dynamic loads evaluated at point 3 are the input for the multi-body model that allows to

simulate the dynamic behaviour of a specific rail vehicle subjected to real turbulent wind;

5. starting from the output of the numerical simulation, evaluation of the CWC by adopting, as

stability limit, the 90% unloading of the wheels, in agreement with the TSI (Technical

Specification of Interoperability).

Starting from given wind statistical properties (point 2), it possible to define different wind speed

time histories, all satisfying the same statistical properties. By performing the steps from 3 to 5

for different wind velocity time-histories (output of step 2), different CWC, all referred to the

same wind scenario, can be defined. A statistical analysis of the obtained results allows

evaluating the corresponding CWC probability distribution.

As far as point 1 is concerned, as already described in the section 2, the aerodynamic

coefficients are evaluated for the only flat ground scenario because the speed-up/speed-down

effects due to the scenario are not accounted for the aerodynamic coefficients but are

considered through the wind speed distribution that is calculated at the height of 2m over the

TOR. Moreover, the aerodynamic forces depend also on the vehicles geometry and, as a

consequence, the calculated CWC and the corresponding probability of vehicle overturning are

variable according to the considered train. In order to characterise the high speed line

independently from the specific operating railway vehicle, an equivalent interoperable train as

been adopted. The interoperable train is the ideal train characterised by the CWC limits reported

in HST TSI standard.

2. Wind speed definition

30

UT [m/s]

20

CF

10

0

0

20

40

60

[s]

80

100 120

5. CWC

180

160

140

U [m

/s]

120

100

80

60

40

20

20

40

60

80

100

[deg]

Figure 5. Flow chart of the stochastic methodology for the CWC calculation.

Once fixed the aerodynamic coefficients (relative to the interoperable train on flat ground), the

CWC evaluated through the stochastic method depend only on:

wind statistical properties (turbulence intensity Iu, integral length scale xLu, );

track layout (alignment/curve, cant deficiency).

Different macro-categories have been defined as a function of both wind characteristics and

track layout (uncompensated acceleration) typical Rome-Naples line. Each meteo point along

the line has been categorised according to these macro-classes.

In order to highlight the effects due to this parameters on CWC, Figure 6 shows CWC in terms

of gust wind speed Ug, evaluated in alignment for different wind scenario, with a train speed

Vtr=300 km/h. In particular, Figure 6 shows CWC calculated for the train running in alignment

with three different wind scenarios as a function of the angle between wind speed and train

direction w: it is possible to see that, increasing the turbulence intensity, the mean value of

CWC increases. The differences in terms of CWC mean value between the two extreme wind

scenarios are ranged between 0.5 m/s at w=90 to about 6 m/s at w =20. On the other hand,

the wind scenario with an higher turbulence intensity is characterised by an error bar twice the

corresponding error bar calculated for Iu=0.22 and xLu=60m. As a consequence, at almost all

wind angles of attack w, the lower value, between the minimum values of the analysed CWC

distributions, is relative to Iu=0.55 and xLu=20m.

0

330

I =0.22 xL =60m

100

pw =10-8

I =0.3 xL =29m

u

80

pw =10-7

60

300

pw =10-6

I =0.55 xL =20m

u

60

150

100

50

270

90

U [m/s]

CWC ITM Ug

30

40

20

0

0

240

20

40

w []

60

210

80

Vtr=300 km/h, alignment: comparison between

CWC relative to different wind scenarios.

120

150

180

pCWC compared with the corresponding gust

wind speed cumulative distribution for the

probability pw=10-6, 10-7 and 10-8.

The probability of CWC exceedance (POE) is evaluated as the combined probability that three

events contemporary occur:

1. the wind direction with respect to the north is ranged within the s-th angular sector,

30 wide (s=1:12);

2. the gust wind speed is higher than a threshold Ug ;

3. for a gust wind speed equal to the threshold Ug= Ug and coming from the sector s, the

limit of stability of 90% unloading of the wheels (that is the threshold for the CWC

definition) is overcome.

As described in the previous section, in correspondence of all the sections along the line, for

each angular sector s, the meteo study leads to the definition of the wind speed cumulative

probability function pw, while the CWC distribution pCWC is calculated through the stochastic

approach.

The wind speed cumulative probability function pw represents the combined probability that the

wind comes from the sector s (point 1) and that, contemporary, the gust wind speed is higher

than the specific threshold (point 2). The CWC distribution pCWC represents the probability that a

gust wind speed equal to the specific threshold Ug , coming from the angular sector s, leads the

safety index to the overcoming of the limit of stability (point 3).

As an example, Figure 7 shows, for a specific point of the Rome-Naples line, a polar

representation of both the CWC distributions and the wind speed cumulative probability for three

value of pw: the angle is referred to the north (0) and the black arrow represents the line

direction in the considered point.

The combined probability of the three events pi_s, for the angular sector s and for the section i, is

calculated as the integral over the gust wind speed of the product between the wind speed

probability cumulative function pw and the CWC distribution pCWC, with the following expression:

p (U , i, s) *p (U , i, s) dU

w

CWC

(1)

The probability of CWC exceedance for the i-th section Psec_i along the line is the integral over

the angles of the calculated combined probabilities pi_s: due to the fact that the combined

probabilities have been evaluated for a discrete number of angular sectors s (s=1:12), the

probability of CWC exceedance for the i-th section Psec_i is calculated as the sum of the

combined probability evaluated for each angular sector:

12

Psec_i = pi_s

(2)

s=1

The probability of CWC exceedance calculated starting from the wind cumulative probability

function and the CWC distribution, does not depend on the length of the section.

As an example, Figure 8 shows the local probability of CWC exceedance (POE) evaluated for

the Rome-Naples line. In the figure, the symbol V indicates the viaducts, the symbol E1

corresponds to embankments while the symbol C is referred to cuts: each symbol is followed by

the corresponding scenario height.

It is possible to highlight that the POE does not seem very influenced by the scenario

characteristics: the most critical zone is composed both by embankments 7.5m high and viaduct

9m high while the less critical zone is composed also by embankments and viaducts higher than

respectively 7.5m and 9m.

As a consequence, this analysis highlight that the wind speed distribution over the line has the

main influence on the calculation of the POE.

From the risk analysis, it appears that one of the most critical angular sectors in terms of POE is

=15. Figure 9 shows the cumulative probability functions of the gust wind speed (evaluated at

a height of 2m over the track for all the scenarios) for the probability values pw=[10-6 10-7 10-8 ],

as a function of the kilometre of the line. In all the figures, the sections characterised by viaducts

are indicated by the marker x, the sections characterised by embankments are indicated by

square markers while the sections in correspondence of the cuts are indicated by circle markers.

From these figures it is possible to see that the higher wind velocities are calculated in

correspondence of the first two viaducts of the analysed sketch of the line (x marker). On the

other hand, Figure 8 shows that the first viaduct (V9), set in correspondence of the most

exposed zone, presents a POE similar to that calculated for the following embankment (E1 7.5m

high); moreover, the second viaduct (V9-14.5m high) is characterised by a much lower POE.

50

E1 7.5

2,00E-06

p w=10 -7

40

1,50E-06

p w=10 -6

35

E1 7.5

1,00E-06

5,00E-07

p w=10 -8

45

V9

E1 12.5

[m/s]

2,50E-06

E1 12.5

V 9-14.5

30

25

C-4

E1 7.5

E1 7.5

V 6-12

E1 2.5

20

0,00E+00

72

,8

73 2

,0

73 7

,3

73 2

,5

73 7

,8

74 2

,0

74 7

,3

74 2

,5

74 7

,8

75 2

,0

75 7

,3

75 2

,5

75 7

,8

76 2

,0

76 7

,3

76 2

,5

76 7

,8

77 2

,0

77 7

,3

2

15

[km]

10

72

probabilities of CWC exceedance.

73

74

75

[km]

76

77

78

sector =15:

wind speed cumulative

probability functions (x viaduct; embankment; o cut).

In order to understand the reason of this trend, Figure 10 and Figure 11 show a comparison

between the CWC and the wind cumulative probability functions respectively for a point

representative of the first viaduct and for a point of the following embankment, 7.5m high. This

trend is justified by the observation that for the viaducts the maximum wind speed is directed

parallel to the line direction: actually, Figure 10 shows that the wind speed is lower where the

CWC decreases, and, as a consequence, the corresponding POE is not very high.

Figure 11 shows that the CWC distribution relative to the embankment case is very similar to

that calculated for the viaduct (it depends only on the wind scenario and on the track layout that,

for the two analysed points, are equal). On the other hand, it is possible to observe that, for the

embankment case, a maximum of the wind speed distribution corresponds to a minimum of the

CWC. This is due to the fact that, the speed up effect associated to the embankment is higher

for wind directions perpendicular to the scenario, where the CWC is lower. Therefore, with the

embankment case, the angular distributions of the wind speed and of the CWC are such as to

maximise the POE. As a consequence, for the embankment case, the POE trend is mainly due

to the wind speed distribution along the line while, for the viaducts, the POE value is strongly

influenced also by the wind coming directions with respect to the line.

140

CWC ITM Ug

120

140

pw=10 -8

CWC ITM U

p =10-8

100

pw=10 -7

100

p =10-7

80

pw=10 -6

80

p =10-6

120

[m/s]

[m/s]

w

w

w

Line orient.

60

40

40

20

0

0

20

0

0

100

200

300

400

Line orient.

60

100

200

300

400

w []

w []

comparison between CWC and wind data.

high: comparison between CWC and wind data.

Finally, the less exposed zone of the line, ranged between km 76.72 to km 77.52, is composed

by embankments of different heights (12.5m-7.5m-2.5m) and also by a viaducts: as shown in

Figure 8, the reason of this behaviour is due to the fact that, along this zone, the gust wind

velocities are the lowest of the overall sketch of the line.

7

Conclusion

A new methodology that allows to perform the cross wind risk analysis on high speed railway

lines has been set up.

According to the new methodology described in this paper, the cross wind risk analysis is based

on a meteo study providing the probability of occurrence of wind gusts on the specific

considered site and on a stochastic approach that leads to the evaluation of the Characteristics

Wind Curve (CWC) probability distribution. The probability of vehicles overturning is calculated

as the combined probability of the wind gust velocity occurrence and of the overcoming of the

safety limit adopted for the definition of the CWC.

The preliminary results shown in the paper allows to understand that the probability of CWC

exceedance is very influenced by the wind speed distribution along the line, both in terms of

modulus and in terms of direction. Moreover the proposed methodology gives a more realistic

approach to consider also the statistic distribution of the CWC limits in the risk assessment. It

represents a first step towards a more complete risk definition that may take into account in a

probabilistic way all the other important aspects for the running stability for example the train

operating conditions.

References

Baklanov, A. and S. Joffre (Eds.) (2003) Improved Models for Computing the Roughness

Parameters of Urban Areas, Baklanov, A., Mestayer, P., Schatzmann, M., Zilitinkevich, S.,

Clappier, A., et al. (co-authors), D4.4 FUMAPEX Report, November 2003, DMI Sci. Report

03-19, ISBN: 87-7478-495-1, 51 p., URL: DMI Scientific Report No. 0319.

Burlando M., A. Ferrera, M. Formenton, and C. F. Ratto (2007) Numerical simulation of highresolution wind fields along the Rome-Naples HS/HC railway line. In Proceedings of the 12th

International Conference on Wind Engineering, 3-8 July, Cairns, Australia.

Davenport, A., C. S. B. Grimmond, T. R. Oke, and J. Wieringa (2000) Estimating the roughness

of cities and sheltered country. Preprints of the AMS 12th Conference on Applied

Climatology, pp. 96-99.

Georgieva E., E. Canepa, A. Mazzino and C. F. Ratto (2003) WINDS Release 4.2 User's Guide,

Department of Physics, University of Genoa, Genoa, Italy.

Ratto C. F., R. Festa, O. Nicora, R. Mosiello, A. Ricci, D.P. Lalas and O.A. Frumento (1990)

Wind field numerical simulation: a new user-friendly code, In W. Palz (Ed.), Proc. European

Community Wind Energy Conference, Madrid, Spain.

Ratto C. F., R. Festa, C. Romeo, O.A. Frumento and M. Galluzzi (1994) Mass-consistent

models for wind fields over complex terrain: The state of the art, Environ. Soft., 9, 247-268.

Sherman C. A. (1978) A mass-consistent model for wind fields over complex terrain, J. Appl.

Meteor., 17, 312-319.

Stull R. B. (1988) An introduction to boundary layer meteorology, Kluwer Academic Publishers,

Dordercht.

Wieringa J. (1993) Representative roughness parameters for homogeneous terrain, BoundaryLayer Meteorol. 63, 323363.

Wieringa, J., A. Davenport, C. S. B. Grimmond, and T. R. Oke (2001) New revision of

Davenport roughness classification. Proceedings of the 3rd European & African Conference

on Wind Engineering, Eindhoven, Netherlands.

Zilitinkevich S. S., P.-E. Johansson, D. V. Mironov and A. Baklanov (1998) A Similarity-Theory

Model for Wind Profile and Resistance Law in Stably Stratified Planetary Boundary Layers, J.

Wind Engng. Indus. Aerodyn., 74-76, 209-218.

Tielkes, T., Gautier, P. E., 2005. Common DEUFRAKO research on the cross wind effects on

high speed railway operation, Deutsche Bahn and SNCF.

Engineering Sciences Data Unit, 2002. Strong winds in the atmospheric boundary layer. Part I:

Hourly-mean wind speeds, ESDU Item 82026, London, UK.

Solari, G., 1993. Gust buffeting. I: Peak wind velocity and equivalent pressure. J. Struct. Engng.,

ASCE, 119, 365-382.

Solari, G. , Ratto, C.F., Buonanno, A., Testa, M., Freda, A., Burlando, M., Mancini, M., 2007.

Probabilistic analysis of the wind speed along the Rome-Naples HS/HC railway line.

Proceedings of the 12th Int. Conf. on Wind Engineering, Cairns, Australia.

Cheli F., Corradi R., Diana G., Tomasini G. (2004). A Numerical-Experimental Approach to

Evaluate the Aerodynamic Effects on Rail Vehicle Dynamics. Vehicle System Dynamics

Supplement Vol. 41, pp 707-716

Bocciolone M., Cheli F., Corradi R., Diana G., Tomasini G. (2003). Wind tunnel tests for the

identification of the aerodynamic forces on rail vehicles. 11th ICWE International

Conference on Wind Engineering, 2-5 June, Lubbock, Texas

Cheli R., Mancini G., Roberti R., Diana G., Cheli F., Corradi R., Tomasini G. (2003). Cross-Wind

Aerodynamic Forces On Rail Vehicles: wind tunnel Experimental Tests And Numerical

Dynamic Analysis. WCRR, Edimburgh

- Statistics Study GuideUploaded byldlewis
- add math probability distributionUploaded bykamil muhammad
- Wind Load Calculatio-1Uploaded bySourav Biswas
- Statistical Methods in Engineering and Quality AssuranceUploaded byniko
- ASCE710WUploaded byArnel Dodong
- s1 paperUploaded byharris20rebecca
- Chapter 03 Random Variables Part AUploaded byYasir Ateeq
- Effect of Lateral Fin Profiles on Turbulent Flow and Heat Transfer PerformanceUploaded bymiklera
- Lecture12_2012Uploaded byasp9924
- 220_Chapter 5_BB(1)Uploaded byphasher99
- DistributionUploaded byup99stud
- Aloha InstructorUploaded byPaolo Mocellin
- Course_ Probability and Random VariablesUploaded byragvshah
- RUploaded byjagdeshwari
- qm2 notesUploaded bydeltathebest
- fortstat_english.pdfUploaded byFritz M. Ferran
- Mcphee 1992Uploaded bysebadilla
- [IEEE SENSORS JOURNAL 2011]-Decision Analysis Environmental Learning Automata for Sensor PlacementUploaded byyaya
- maths iia paper 2Uploaded byapi-312385754
- Clabe Problem Sheet 6 SolutionUploaded bySyed Muhammad Danish
- Lecture Notes for STAT2602Uploaded byHarry Kwong
- Week 07 Flow ChartUploaded byJane Doe
- 2012 Stats MstUploaded byElle Smart
- UGC NET June 2012 Management Paper II SolvedUploaded byJason S
- Introduction to statisticsUploaded byRockArman
- Monte Carlo Methods PrimerUploaded byMrDubster
- Lecturenotes14-15-ProbabilityUploaded byarjunvenugopalachary
- Key Renew TheoryUploaded byDimas Adip
- hhhhhhhhhhhhhhUploaded byAnonymous BrUMhCjbiB
- Gauss Distribution.docxUploaded bymeita puspadewi

- 9784431548911-c1 (2)Uploaded byMarcoFranchinotti
- 2012 Properly Spec MaterialsUploaded byKurt Zarwell
- BuckUploaded byMarcoFranchinotti
- 20101005112720 (1)Uploaded byMarcoFranchinotti
- 526_MS27_ABS_1018Uploaded byMarcoFranchinotti
- ENG_2013082911113714Uploaded byDave Thompson
- I.1.4.1.4Uploaded byMarcoFranchinotti
- Track Gauge Study Report-EgisUploaded byMarcoFranchinotti
- TSL PAR 2.1.5Uploaded byMarcoFranchinotti
- Saudi ArabiaUploaded byMarcoFranchinotti
- Bridges SafetyUploaded byMarcoFranchinotti
- tm5_852_6Uploaded byMarcoFranchinotti
- Cnpy - Semi Integral AbutmentBridgesUploaded byMarcoFranchinotti
- Http Www.aphref.aph.Gov.au House Committee Laca Disabilitystandards Exhibits Exhibit09Uploaded byMarcoFranchinotti
- Full Text 01Uploaded byMarcoFranchinotti
- Nowak Panel9Uploaded byMarcoFranchinotti
- 223197211102015104004778Uploaded byMarcoFranchinotti
- Intab Guide EnUploaded byMarcoFranchinotti
- 09e41513878e24dc5a000000Uploaded byMarcoFranchinotti
- Wadis Physical DataUploaded byMarcoFranchinotti
- SCI P318 SecureUploaded byMarcoFranchinotti
- Atkins Wind Loads on Steel Box GirdersUploaded byMarcoFranchinotti
- Theory of Vesic 1977Uploaded byMarcos Ma
- How2 Deflection Calculations v05.07Uploaded by蓉蓉
- BuroHappold Engineering on Rail InterchangeUploaded byMarcoFranchinotti
- 512 2 Noise and Windbarrier EnUploaded byMarcoFranchinotti
- SNiP vs EurocodeUploaded bypektoph
- Standard Precast Concrete Bridge BeamsUploaded byadeolaodukoya
- 7776538-20130828061648521d95d0ec08d (1)Uploaded byMarcoFranchinotti

- CountingUploaded byJon Mactavish
- 03 Quality Control Lecture #3(1)Uploaded byFelipe
- Weatherwax Goodman SolutionsUploaded byMi Ro
- Sheet 4Uploaded byNoppawee Apichonpongpan
- MAT097 Chapter 7 Random Variables (With Solution)Uploaded byARe-may Pudean
- Probability and statistics in criminal proceedingsUploaded byvthiseas
- CdfUploaded byRonald Tan
- Learning Unit 9Uploaded byBelindaNiemand
- PTSP Tutorial ProblemsUploaded bySri Krishna
- DecisionUploaded byGil Maya
- 4700-07-Notes-BMUploaded bygari_tero
- Lesson ProbabilityUploaded bySudip799
- KISI - KISI MATEMATIKA - 9.1Uploaded byBambang Kurniawan
- Biostatistics NotesUploaded byWin Khaing
- Fendler History of the Bell CurveUploaded byPhung Ha Thanh
- girsanovUploaded bySun Ray
- Stanford Stats 200Uploaded byJung Yoon Song
- Probability ImpUploaded bysoundharya
- PDF AND PMFUploaded bys.r.
- Probability, Var, MeanUploaded byAli Akbar
- Probability NewUploaded byVeeraragavan Subramaniam
- Pareto DistributionUploaded byBesHox
- MIT6_041F10_L01Uploaded byIbrahim T. Soxibro
- Notes on Markov ChainsUploaded bymalongane
- HW 3 OR METHODSUploaded byaidoutza2101
- [Mark P. Silverman] A Certain Uncertainty NatureUploaded bylev76
- Statsmidterm 01 KeyUploaded byfelipecam5
- S1 Exercise.pdfUploaded byantonyluk
- Towards a Better Modelling and Assessment of Construction RiskUploaded byAhmad Raza
- Posdoc in Bogota, Colombia 2013Uploaded byEscuela de Matemática, Universidad de Costa Rica

## Much more than documents.

Discover everything Scribd has to offer, including books and audiobooks from major publishers.

Cancel anytime.