Already a subscriber? 
MADCAD.com Free Trial
Sign up for a 3 day free trial to explore the MADCAD.com interface, PLUS access the
2009 International Building Code to see how it all works.
If you like to setup a quick demo, let us know at support@madcad.com
or +1 800.798.9296 and we will be happy to schedule a webinar for you.
Security check
Please login to your personal account to use this feature.
Please login to your authorized staff account to use this feature.
Are you sure you want to empty the cart?
PD CEN/TR 14067-7:2021 Railway applications. Aerodynamics - Fundamentals for test procedures for train-induced ballast projection, 2021
- undefined
- 1 Scope
- 2 Normative references
- 3 Terms and definitions
- 4 Symbols and abbreviations
- 5 General aspects of ballast projection and state of the art [Go to Page]
- 5.1 Introduction
- 5.2 Summary of studies and incidents (by countries, manufacturers) [Go to Page]
- 5.2.1 General
- 5.2.2 Italy
- 5.2.3 Spain
- 5.2.4 France
- 5.2.5 Germany
- 5.2.6 Great Britain
- 5.3 Overview of ballasted track systems in Europe [Go to Page]
- 5.3.1 General
- 5.3.2 Sleepers
- 5.3.3 Rail fastenings
- 5.3.4 Ballast Size
- 5.3.5 Ballast maintenance regimes [Go to Page]
- 5.3.5.1 General
- 5.3.5.2 Great Britain
- 5.3.5.3 Germany
- 5.3.5.4 CER position paper
- 5.4 Ice accumulation induced ballast projection
- 6 Economic judgement of damage [Go to Page]
- 6.1 Cost of reported damage
- 6.2 Cost of homologation, measures to rolling stock and infrastructure [Go to Page]
- 6.2.1 General
- 6.2.2 Cost of homologation
- 6.2.3 Cost of measures
- 6.3 Cost benefit analysis [Go to Page]
- 6.3.1 General
- 6.3.2 Average damage cost versus cost of national or European regulation
- 7 Homologation concepts [Go to Page]
- 7.1 General
- 7.2 Existing technical approaches [Go to Page]
- 7.2.1 General
- 7.2.2 Impact counting for a train running on current track
- 7.2.3 Measuring the aerodynamic load over a standardized ground configuration or a specific track, with analysis using a risk modelling parameter
- 7.2.4 Simulating the aerodynamic loads exerted on a standardized ground configuration
- 7.2.5 Model scale testing (alternative to CFD and full scale)
- 7.2.6 Passing a track mounted test set-up and count stones moved or loads on an instrumented model stone
- 7.2.7 Improve protection measures
- 7.2.8 Strength determination of infrastructure without train runs
- 7.2.9 No requirements
- 7.3 Responsibilities, interests and intended interface definitions
- 7.4 Conceptual approaches [Go to Page]
- 7.4.1 General
- 7.4.2 Approach 1: Relative train comparison
- 7.4.3 Approach 2: Demonstration on the most vulnerable track
- 7.4.4 Approach 3: No homologation requirement; counter measures if needed
- 7.4.5 Approach 4: Requirement only at national level
- 7.4.6 Approach 5: Minimum testing in homologation; counter measures if needed
- 7.4.7 Approach 6: Full-scale testing and criterion
- 7.4.8 Approach 7: Check train underbelly design at the design stage
- 7.4.9 Approach 8: Make recommendations for testing and initial operations
- 8 Comparison of existing methods [Go to Page]
- 8.1 France [Go to Page]
- 8.1.1 General principles
- 8.1.2 Train assessment methodology (SAM X 012) [Go to Page]
- 8.1.2.1 Test conditions
- 8.1.2.2 Track configuration and air speed sensors
- 8.1.2.3 Operational conditions
- 8.1.2.4 Data processing and PCEB calculation
- 8.1.3 Ballast flying probability (SSIA)
- 8.2 Spain [Go to Page]
- 8.2.1 General
- 8.2.2 General principles
- 8.2.3 Surface aerodynamic load determination
- 8.2.4 Ballast impact risk determination on reference track
- 8.2.5 Validation of the ballast impact risk determination procedure
- 8.2.6 Main features of impact risk calculation method
- 8.2.7 Investigated track systems [Go to Page]
- 8.2.7.1 General
- 8.2.7.2 Ballasted track with AI99 mono‐block sleeper
- 8.2.7.3 Ballasted track with PLEIN profile and bi‐block sleeper
- 8.2.7.4 RHEDA 2000 slab track
- 8.3 Italy
- 8.4 Belgium [Go to Page]
- 8.4.1 General
- 8.4.2 Test conditions
- 8.4.3 Conformity assessment
- 8.5 Other countries [Go to Page]
- 8.5.1 Austria
- 8.5.2 Germany
- 8.5.3 UK
- 8.6 Comparison of existing methods
- 8.7 Conclusion drawn from French and Spanish assessments
- 9 Available background
- 10 Conclusion and next steps
- Annex A (informative)Summary comparison of existing methods addressing ballast projection
- Annex B (informative) Review of ballast projection papers [Go to Page]
- B.1 Reports and database of EU-funded projects
- B.2 Reports on ballast projection [Go to Page]
- B.2.1 Kaltenbach (2008). DeuFraKo Project “Aerodynamics in the Open Air” AOA WP1 Underfloor Aerodynamics – Summary Report, [22]
- B.2.2 Cheli et al (2008). CFD analysis of the under car body flow of an ETR500 high speed train, [19]
- B.2.3 Deeg et al (2008). Cross-comparison of measurement techniques for the determination of train induced aerodynamic loads on the track bed, [20]
- B.2.4 Ido et al (2008). Study on under-floor flow to reduce ballast flying phenomena, [21]
- B.2.5 Kaltenbach et al (2008). Assessment of the aerodynamic loads on the track bed causing ballast projection: results from the DEUFRAKO project Aerodynamics in Open Air (AOA), [23]
- B.2.6 Ido & Yoshioka (2009). Development of a model running facility for study of under floor flow, [24]
- B.2.7 Sanz-Andres & Navarro-Medina (2010). The initiation of rotational motion of a lying object caused by wind gusts, [25]
- B.2.8 Quinn et al (2010). A full-scale experimental and modelling study of ballast flight under high speed trains, [26]
- B.2.9 Garcia et al (2011). Study of the flow between the train underbody and the ballast track, [27]
- B.2.10 Lazaro et al (2011). Characterization and Modelling of Flying Ballast Phenomena in High-speed Train Lines, [28]
- B.2.11 Saussine et al (2011). Ballast Flying Risk Assessment Method for High Speed Line, [29]
- B.2.12 Sima et al (2011). Presentation of the EU FP7 AeroTRAIN project and first results, [30]
- B.2.13 Jing et al (2012). Ballast flying mechanism and sensitivity factors analysis, [31]
- B.2.14 Bedini-Jacobini, Tutumluer & Saat (2013). Identification of high-speed rail ballast flight risk factors and risk mitigation strategies, [32]
- B.2.15 Diana et al (2013). Full scale experimental analysis of train induced aerodynamic forces on the ballast of Italian high speed line, [33]
- B.2.16 Ido et al (2013). Study on under-floor flow of railway vehicle using on-track tests with a Laser Doppler Velocimetry and moving model tests with comb stagnation pressure tubes, [34]
- B.2.17 Jönsson, Wagner & Loose (2013). Under floor flow measurements of a 1:50 generic high-speed train-set by means of high-speed PIV in a water towing tank, [35]
- B.2.18 Lazaro et al (2013). Test Procedure for Quantitative Ballast Projection Risk Evaluation, [36]
- B.2.19 Giappino et al (2013). Numerical-experimental study on flying ballast caused by high-speed trains, [37]
- B.2.20 Saussine et al (2013a). High speed in extreme conditions: ballast projection phenomenon, [38]
- B.2.21 Saussine et al (2013b). High speed in extreme conditions: ballast projection phenomenon, [39]
- B.2.22 Jing et al (2014). Aerodynamic Characteristics of Individual Ballast Particle by Wind Tunnel Tests, [40]
- B.2.23 Somaschini et al (2014a). Ballast flight under high-speed trains: full-scale experimental tests, [41]
- B.2.24 Somaschini et al (2014b). An experimental investigation on flying ballast phenomenon: on board measurements with microphones and optical barriers, [42]
- B.2.25 Navarro-Medina Perez-Grande & Sanz-Andrez (2015). Comparative study of the effect of several trains on the rotation motion of ballast stones, [43]
- B.2.26 Premoli et al (2015). Ballast flight under high-speed trains: Wind tunnel full-scale experimental tests, [44]
- B.2.27 Saat et al (2015). Identification of High-Speed Rail Ballast Flight Risk Factors and Risk Mitigation Strategies – Final Report, [45]
- B.2.28 Saussine et al (2015). A risk assessment method for ballast flight; managing the rolling stock/infrastructure interaction, [46]
- B.2.29 Rocchi et al (2016). Ballast lifting: a challenge in the increase of the commercial speed of HS-trains, [47]
- B.2.30 Jönsson (2016), Particle image velocimetry of the undercarriage flow of downscaled train models in a water-towing tank for the assessment of ballast flight, (page 89), [48]
- B.2.31 Paz, Suarez & Gil (2017). Numerical methodology for evaluating the effect of sleepers in the underbody flow of a high-speed train, [49]
- B.2.32 Soper et al (2017). Full scale measurements of train underbody flows and track forces, [50]
- B.2.33 Zhu & Hu (2017). Flow between the train underbody and track bed around the bogie area and its impact on ballast flight, [51]
- B.2.34 Rocchi et al (2018). Wind effects induced by high speed train pass-by in open air, [52]
- B.2.35 Somaschini et al (2019) A new methodology for assessing the actual number of impacts due to the ballast-lifting phenomenon, [53]
- B.2.36 Hara, M. et al (2019). The Concept of Experimental Platform on Next-Generation Shinkansen Development, Type E956 Shinkansen Test Train named ALFA-X, [54]
- B.2.37 Murotani, K. et al (2019). Numerical Analysis of Snow Accretion by Airflow Simulator and Particle Simulator, [55] [Go to Page]
