This study was targeted at CX-PG-type Faiveley pantograph of high-speed train and cylinders and analysed the fluctuating flow field around these objects by using the large eddy simulation (LES) model, the scale adaptive simulation (SAS) model, the improved delayed detached eddy simulation with shear-stress transport-kω (IDDES sst-kω) model, the delayed detached eddy simulation with shear-stress transport-kω (DDES sst-kω) model, and the delayed detached eddy simulation with realizable-kε (DDES R-kε) model. The space distributions of velocity, vorticity, and vortex structures were compared to investigate their performances on simulating fluctuating flow fields and computing aeroacoustic sources through Fourier transformation based on the surface fluctuating pressures. Furthermore, the far-field radiated noise was calculated based on the Ffowcs Williams–Hawkings equation. Based on the computation precision of the five models, a feasible turbulent model was selected for simulating aerodynamic noise. The relative errors to the results from wind-tunnel experiments of the sound pressure level (SPL) were obtained as 0.7%, 1.6%, 7.8%, 3.8%, and 12.1%, respectively, and the peak Strouhal numbers were obtained as 2.0%, 8.5%, 5.5%, 11.5%, and 51.0% for cylinder simulation. Moreover, the relative errors of SAS, IDDES sst-kω, DDES sst-kω, and DDES R-kε models to the result from LES of SPL were respectively obtained as 2.3%, 4.5%, 5.6%, and 10.8% for pantograph. Thus, it is conclusive that none of the aforementioned models are comparable with the LES model with respect to the precision in the aeroacoustic simulation. However, SAS, IDDES sst-kω, and DDES sst-kω are practically competent with the LES model considering the numerical simulations with respect to the engineering computation precision. The numerical computation model was verified using the wind-tunnel test results.
A Dynamic Rotor Vertical-Axis Wind Turbine with a Blade Transitioning Capability
