Building Serv. Eng. Res. Technol. 26,2 (2005) pp.

129
/143

Experimental-based study of the aerodynamics of

super-high-speed elevators
Hong-lei Baia BEng, Gongxin Shena Professor and Albert Sob BSc MPhil PhD FCIBSE
a
School of Aeronautic Science and Engineering, BUAA, Beijing 10083, China
b
City University of Hong Kong

Elevators can be considered to be the most important building services system in

a modern super-high-rise building. At the same time, the speed record has also
been elevating with recent record of 1010 m/min. The design and construction of
super-high-speed elevators are thus demanded. The primary experimental
measurements for the aerodynamic characteristics of super-high-speed elevators
were conducted using a physical model for simulation. The instantaneous speed
of a falling elevator car at five different positions as well as the average pressure
in front of and behind the car along the hoistway were measured while four
scenaria with different shapes of car design were tested. Parameters associated
with the hoistway, including the open ratio and the blockage ratio, varied in the
experiments. Results were produced with respect to the car having different
shapes and hoistway parameters. The nondimensional pressure differences for
different shapes of car and hoistway parameters were analyzed so that several
instructive conclusions were arrived at. Finally, a new concept of ‘tunnel effected
shape drag’ was introduced based on these experiments and this effect clearly
differentiates the aerodynamic performance of a car moving inside a hoistway
from a race-car moving on a race-track.
Practical application: The speed record of elevators keeps increasing because
building are getting taller. The major hurdles to the development of super-high-
speed elevators are the aerodynamics. The experiments detailed in this article
help us to understand ways to handle the problems and to design elevator cars
with shapes that are more aerodynamically friendly.

1 Introduction with 101 stories in Taipei, which is structurally

As cities are becoming more and more densely
populated, buildings are getting taller and
taller. The tallest building in Hong Kong is
about 400 m with 88 stories. The tallest
building in mainland China is 421 m high
with 88 stories in Shanghai; the next world-
record will also be in Shanghai by 2007. The
world’s existing tallest building is 508 m high
Address for correspondence: Albert So, Department of Building
and Construction, City University of Hong Kong, Tatchee
Avenue, Kowloon, Hong Kong, China. E-mail: bcalbstp@
cityu.edu.hk
# The Chartered Institution of Building Services Engineers 2005
taller than the world’s second tallest in Kuala
Lumpur, 452 m high with 88 stories. In 1998, a
plan to build a 610 m high building in Chicago
was announced. The concept of a ‘mile-high
building’ was suggested by Frank Lloyd
Wright in 1956 to construct a 1609 m building,
in Illinois, Other proposals included a 900 m
M Tower in Shanghai, an 840 m Millennium
Tower in Tokyo and a 701 m World Trade
Center in Chicago. It is now obvious that
super-high-rise buildings will be inevitable in
the twenty-first century. The most distinctive
requirement of a super-high-rise building is, of
course, a fast, safe, comfortable and efficient
10.1191/0143624405bt121oa
130 Aerodynamics of elevators
vertical transportation system. The speed of
elevators serving the Taipei 101 is rated up to
1010 m/min.
The major difficulty hindering the develop-
ment of super-high-speed elevators is related
to aerodynamics. The super-high-speed air
flowing around the moving car produces
various problems such as excessive vibration
of the car frame, high air resistance to the car
movement, excessive acoustic noise around
the sharp edges and the rapid pressure fluc-
tuation inside the car as it is moving along the
hoistway. Up to now, we can only find a few
publications describing aerodynamic charac-
teristics of super-high-speed elevators.1
5
In 1992, some very preliminary experimen-
tal works were carried out by Mitsubishi1
and Toshiba.2 Mitsubishi was responsible for
installing the 12.5 m/s lifts in Yokohama. They
studied two types of noise associated with a
high-speed car, namely mechanical noise at the
contact between the car and the guide rails
and aerodynamic noise due to the air flow
around the car inside a narrow lift shaft. It
was found that aerodynamic noise became
larger in proportion to the fifth through sixth
power of the air speed around the car. Owing
to this fact, aerodynamic noise is usually much
larger than the mechanical noise for high-
speed lifts. When a car travels either up or
down, the air-flow splits at either the top or
the bottom and then merges again at the other
end. The air-flow moving over the side faces of
the car will vibrate the entire car body, causing
excessive noise inside the car. They therefore
proposed to use a streamlined cover at both
the top and bottom of the car. A wind tunnel
experiment was carried out with two stream-
lined covers mounted on a 1:12.5 scale minia-
ture lift. These streamlined covers were
removable and it was possible to observe the
air-flow around the lift with and without the
covers. An ‘oil-flow pattern method’ was
applied to visualize the air-flow patterns over
the surfaces of the car. It was discovered that a
reduction of 4.1 dB(A) to 4.3 dB(A) could be
achieved with the covers.
Over the same period of time, Toshiba
carried out another experiment in a water
tank to observe the overall flow and to
visualize the flow around the model sub-
merged in water using a tracer. The Re
number based on the car width and the speed
of the water stream was approximately 800.
This value was approximately 104 times
smaller than that of the actual lift car. What
Toshiba wanted to study was the effect on the
air-flow with and without an apron which was
compulsorily installed at the bottom of each
lift car due to a legal requirement. Large scale
horse shoe shaped vortices were produced due
to the existence of the apron. This could
explain why a higher level of noise was
produced for a downward moving car as
compared with an upward moving one. Using
the setup, Toshiba was able to design a guide
plate for each apron so as to reduce the
magnitude of the aerodynamic noise.
Both experiments performed by the two
reputable lift manufacturers in Japan faced
one common problem. The car and the shaft
wall were static while the air was dynamic.
This was a total deviation from the real
situation where both the car and the air were
dynamic. Furthermore, both experiments were
used to improve the car design by a small
amount i.e., either the addition of stream-
lined covers or the installation of guide plates
for the aprons. The research work was quite
narrowly confined to one or two detailed
technical issues. Having said that, their works,
though quite primitive, did provide the
authors of this article with a very important
insight. The aerodynamic performance of
super-high-speed lifts needs to be studied in
detail so as to arrive at the best design.
Owing to the need to study the aerodynamic
performance, a one-dimensional aerodynamic
model was developed3 and several interesting
results were obtained, such as the existence
of shock waves. Later, this model was up-
graded to two dimensions, some of the results
obtained were not realistic. Hence, we gave up
the goal to develop a good mathematical

model for a super-high-speed elevator. It
should be particularly noted that the so-called
‘tunnel aerodynamic effects’ of elevators are
very different from that of high-speed trains
passing through a tunnel.6 Computational
fluid dynamic (CFD) simulations on compu-
ters were later used but very often we encoun-
tered divergence of a numerical solution due
to the existence of highly nonlinear turbu-
lences. Therefore, we aimed at constructing an
experimental platform for the continuous
study of the aerodynamic characteristics of
super-high-speed elevators. Regularities com-
plying with the real physical condition of
elevator systems were obtained and implemen-
ted. The primary experimental measurements
of aerodynamic characteristics of super-high-
speed elevators were carried out using this
platform. Average pressures in front of and
behind the moving car as well as the instanta-
neous speed at five different positions along
the hoistway were measured with four differ-
ent shapes of car and variable hoistway based
parameters, including the open ratio and the
blockage ratio.
In 2003, Munakata et al. 4 published a
report on the construction of the world’s
fastest elevator, the 1010 m/min system, at
Taipei. In this article, the driving system, the
traction machine, the vibration suppression
control at the guide rollers, the atmospheric
pressure control, the aerodynamic capsule
(based on References 1 and 2), the safety
gears and oil buffers are briefly described.
This article is just a case study and it did
not give us a comprehensive understanding of
the proper design of each component, in
particular, the aerodynamic capsule which
was supposed to be the main theme of this
paper.
2 Experimental platform and methods of
measurement
The experimental platform to study the aero-
dynamics of a super-high-speed elevator is
Hong-lei Bai et al. 131
Figure 1 The experimental platform (the physical model
of the elevator)
shown schematically in Figure 1 and a photo-
graph of the experimental setup with an
elevator model is shown in Figure 2. The
basic structure and design considerations of
the whole system was described in an article
by the authors.5 It is a general purpose testing
tower for high-speed elevators. The hoistway
is a vertical pipe with an internal diameter of
80 mm and a total length of 8.2 m. The
pipe consists of two parts. The upper part
comprises of two ABS (acrolein
butadiene

/ /
styrene) pipes with lengths of 3 m and 4 m,
respectively. The lower part is made of organic
glass with a length of 1.2 m. Orifices at both
ends of the pipe (shown in Figures 3 and 4) are
available so that the open ratio can be freely
adjusted. Since this model was constructed for
us to have a general understanding of the
aerodynamic characteristics around a high-
speed moving car, a one-car-one-hoistway
design was implemented, similar to firefight-
ing lifts. In future, more realistic car combina-
tions will be constructed.
Here, the open ratio, C, is defined as the
ratio of the open area of the orifice at each end
of the pipe to the internal cross-sectional area
of the hoistway.
132 Aerodynamics of elevators

open area of orifice

C
cross-sectional area of hoistway

The blockage ratio, V, is defined as the ratio

between the cross-sectional area of the car and
the internal cross-sectional area of the hoist-
way.

cross-sectional area of car

V
cross-sectional area of hoistway

The basic design of this experimental platform

is that the car is allowed to drop freely from
the top to the bottom of the hoistway, so as to
simulate the super-high-speed movement of
the car inside it. During the experiment, the
maximum terminal speed achieved could be
up to 12 m/s. Two pressure sensors are fixed at
the two ends of the pipe, which are depicted
schematically in Figure 1, and in photographs
in Figure 4. The type used is a YZD-1
diffusion silicon pressure transducer. The
measuring range of pressure transducer No.1
is 0 2.5 kPa and that of pressure transducer
/

No.2 is
2.50 kPa. Pressure transducer

/ /

No.1 measures changes of average pressure

P1 in front of the car along the hoistway and
pressure transducer No. 2 measures changes
of average pressure P2 behind the car. The air
flow at the two measuring positions is almost
zero and thus, we can visualize these pressures
as the approximate average pressures in front
of and behind the car along the hoistway.
The five positions to measure instantaneous
speed are located at X1 345 mm, X2 1365
/ /

mm, X3 3495 mm, X4 5125 mm and X5 

/ / /

7375 mm measured from the top of the

hoistway and the measuring method of in-
stantaneous speed, u, at a particular position
is as follows. u L/Dt, where L50 mm
/ /

which is the distance between two optoelec-

tronic gates positioned 25 mm above and
25 mm below the measuring position so that
the time interval, Dt, for the car to pass
Figure 2 Photograph of the real model through the two gates can be measured.

Figure 3 Photograph showing the upper orifice
Figure 5 shows two optoelectronic gates at one
speed measuring position.
In the experiments, there are two different
blockage ratios, namely 0.8 and 0.72, based
on the construction of the model cars. In fact,
the blockage ratio is about 0.5 for a real
super-high-speed car. Experiments based on
these two slightly larger blockage ratios (0.8
and 0.72) have been conducted under the
consideration of motion stability when the
car is falling down. Moreover, there are four
different shapes of car. Hence, eight cars have
to be available, which are classified as follows:
1) The blockage ratio is 0.8 in this group.
They can be spherical in shape with a
Figure 4 Photographs of pressure transducers; No.1 at the bottom of the hoistway (left) and No. 2 at the top of the
hoistway (right)
Hong-lei Bai et al. 133
length of 181 mm; triangular in shape
with a length of 182 mm; cylindrical in
shape with a length of 180 mm; or
parabolic in shape with a length of
189 mm.
2) The blockage ratio is 0.72 in this group.
They can be spherical in shape with a
length of 180 mm; triangular in shape
with a length of 180 mm; cylindrical in
shape with a length of 180 mm; or
parabolic shape with a length of 189 mm.
A photograph and the schematic plan of
these four different shapes of the car are
shown in Figure 6. As illustrated, each model
of the car consists of three parts, namely one
middle part with a cylindrical shape (length of
100 mm; diameter of 67.9 mm and 71.6 mm
for the blockage ratio of 0.72 and 0.8 respec-
tively) and two heads with four different kinds
of shapes. The middle part is mounted with
four small wheels (external diameter of 22 mm
and width of 7 mm each) in order to keep the
car moving smoothly along the pipe. The two
heads can be attached to and removed from
the middle body easily. Although the existence
of the four wheels can slightly affect the
blockage ratio, it is not a significant problem
because the four small wheels are inlaid in the
middle part of the car and their protrusion is
negligible compared with the air gap between
the car body and the wall of the hoistway. In
134 Aerodynamics of elevators
Figure 5 Photograph showing the optoelectronic gates at
one speed measuring spot
general, the cars can fall down smoothly and
pick up speed gradually as if they were falling
in free air. The terminal instantaneous speed
of the car can get up to about 12 m/s when it
arrives at the bottom of the hoistway.
In order to clearly explain the method of
measurement and the hardware of the system
used in our experiment, Figure 7 shows the
schematic diagram of the pressure and speed
measuring and sampling system. Analogue
signals from both pressure transducers, No.1
Figure 6 Photograph (left) and schematic layout (right) of four different shapes of car design: (a) cylindrical; (b)
spherical; (c) conical (or simply triangular) and (d) parabolic
and No.2, and five sets of optoelectronic gates
are first fed back to the signal amplifier. Then,
the amplified analogue signals are sent to the
A/D card in a PC for further digitization and
processing. In our experiment, we had 12
optoelectronic gates altogether, namely 10 of
them for five instantaneous speeds at five
measuring positions, one for the starting point
and one for the ending point, to record the
voltage pulses (each voltage pulse is at the 5 V
level). An electronic board with three chips
was designed and tailormade, as shown in
Figure 8.
3 Analysis of experimental result
3.1 Analysis of speed curves
Owing to the existence of tunnel-based
aerodynamic effects as the car is moving in
the hoistway, the aerodynamic drag on the car
includes three components:
1) the skin friction which is due to the air
viscosity;
2) the shape drag on the car because differ-
ent shapes of car lead to different pressure
distribution on its surface as the car is
moving in a fluid;
3) the tunnel-based pressure difference due
to the existence of the tunnel wall; air in
front of the car is pressed and the volume
of air is reduced; while on the other hand,

Figure 7 Schematic diagram showing pressure and
speed measurements
the volume of air behind the car is
increased when the car is moving forward
along the hoistway, thus resulting in a
pressure difference in front of and behind
the car.
It is convenient to visualize tunnel-based
pressure differences from the pressure curves
when the car moves along the hoistway. In
order to visualize changes of the total aero-
dynamic drag on the car, it is necessary to
analyze speed-curves because changes of
acceleration of the car, which is proportional
Figure 8 Photograph showing the electronics of pressure
and speed measurements
Hong-lei Bai et al. 135
Figure 9 Car speed (u) versus distance (X) with C /0.3
and V /0.72
to the total forces on it, can be obtained from
the speed-curves. Speed-curves (u) versus the
distance (X) of different parameters are shown
in Figures 9, 10 and 11, derived from experi-
mental data based on the five instantaneous
speed measuring positions. Curves in Figure 9
show the variation in speed with a bigger
open ratio (C0.3) and a smaller blockage
/
ratio (V0.72). No distinct differences in
/
Figure 10 Car speed (u) versus distance (X) with C /0.2
and V /0.72
136 Aerodynamics of elevators

Figure 12 Pressure (P1) versus time (T) with V /0.72 and

different open ratios (C)
Figure 11 Car speed (u) versus distance (X) with C /0.1
and V /0.8
pressure change can be obtained as the
blockage ratio is increasing or the open ratio
performance between different shapes of is decreasing.
car can be found from the speed-curves in Results of different shapes of car under the
Figure 9. That means, the changes of total different conditions of hoistway based para-
forces on different car shapes are basically the meters are then analyzed. When the blockage
same. Furthermore, the skin friction and ratio is 0.72, Figures 18 and 19 can be
shape drag on the car are small when the car obtained, showing changes of average pressure
is moving in the pipe. The main impact on the
difference for four shapes of car with bigger
car seems to stem from the tunnel effected
open ratios, 0.3 and 0.2, respectively. We
pressure difference. Speed-curves with open
ratios (C) of 0.2 and 0.1, blockage ratios (V) can see that changes of average pressure
of 0.72 and 0.8, are shown in Figures 10
and 11 with almost the same conclusion as
Figure 9. That is, the change of total force in
different cars is basically the same, the main
impact being the tunnel-effected pressure
difference.

3.2 Analysis of pressure curves

Changes of average pressure in front of and
behind the car along the hoistway were
studied with respect to different open ratios
and blockage ratios. Curves of air pressure
(P1, P2, or P1
P2) versus dropping time (T)
/

are depicted in Figures 12 to 17 as derived

from experimental data for a car cylindrical in
shape. T is counted right from the instant the
car starts to accelerate from the top of Figure 13 Pressure (P2) versus time (T) with V/0.72 and
the hoistway. It is obvious that a higher different open ratios (C)

Figure 14 Pressure difference (P1
/P2) versus time (T)
with V /0.72 and different open ratios (C)
differences are only slightly dependent on
different shapes of car because air in the
hoistway can freely flow through the orifices
and the air gap between the vertical car
surface and the pipe wall without much
resistance.
Curves of average pressure differences of
four different shapes of car with a blockage
ratio of 0.72 and open ratios of 0 and 0.1,
respectively, are shown in Figures 20 and 21.
With reduction in open ratio, less air can pass
Figure 15 Pressure (P1) versus time (T) with C /0.2 and
different blockage ratios (V)
Hong-lei Bai et al. 137
Figure 16 Pressure (P2) versus time (T) with C /0.2 and
different blockage ratios (V)
through the orifices and more air is forced to
flow through the air-gap between the vertical
car surface and the wall of the hoistway. The
result is that the shape of car then plays a
more significant role on the flow-field char-
acteristics inside the hoistway. Different
shapes of car lead to distinct average pressure
difference in front of and behind the car.
Particularly with an open ratio of 0, the
parabolic shape of car, among the four
Figure 17 Pressure difference (P1
/P2) versus time (T)
with C /0.2 and different blockage ratios (V)
138 Aerodynamics of elevators

Figure 20 Pressure difference (P1
/P2) versus time (T)

Figure 18 Pressure difference (P1
/P2) versus time (T) with C /0.1 and V /0.72
with C /0.3 and V /0.72

the blockage ratio. From Figures 18, 19 and

different shapes, can significantly achieve the
20, the open ratio is gradually reduced from
best performance due to the smallest average
0.3 to 0.1, while the blockage ratio is kept
pressure difference (P1
P2) in front of and
/
constant at 0.72 i.e., a bigger air-gap between
behind it.
the car wall and hoistway. As a result, the
Further analysis of the tendency of curves is
tunnel effected aerodynamic pressure differ-
as follows. The main factor which influences
ence is not significantly different between the
the tunnel aerodynamic pressure is not only
four different shapes of car. In Figure 21, with
the shape of car, but also the open ratio and
an open ratio of 0, air flow along the hoistway

Figure 19 Pressure difference (P1
/P2) versus time (T) Figure 21 Pressure difference (P1
/P2) versus time (T)
with C /0.2 and V /0.72 with C /0 and V /0.72
 Hong-lei Bai et al. 139

Figure 24 Pressure difference (P1
/P2) versus time (T)

Figure 22 Pressure difference (P1
/P2) versus time (T) with C /0.1 and V /0.8
with C /0.3 and V /0.8
1) The shapes of the car plays a weak role on
average pressure differences when open
is forced through the car side/hoistway wall
ratios are large, such as 0.3 and 0.2,
gap. Then, the shape of car strongly influences
respectively.
the tunnel effected aerodynamic pressure dif-
2) The shapes of the car plays an important
ference.
role on average pressure difference when
Curves showing changes of average pressure
open ratios are reduced to 0.1 and in
difference with a blockage ratio of 0.8, open
particular, 0.
ratio varying from 0.3 to 0, are shown in
Figures 22, 23, 24 and 25. It can be seen that: Curves in Figure 25 show that the parabolic
shape of car can achieve the best performance

Figure 23 Pressure difference (P1
/P2) versus time (T) Figure 25 Pressure difference (P1
/P2) versus time (T)
with C /0.2 and V /0.8 with C /0 and V /0.8
140 Aerodynamics of elevators
with an open ratio of 0 and a blockage ratio of
0.8. This result is consistent with that obtained
before, shown in Figure 21. The obvious
explanation is that when air is forced through
the car side/hoistway wall-gap, a parabolic
shape can ensure a smooth airflow pattern
compared with other shapes.
3.3 Quantitative analysis to experimental
curves
1) Average pressure differences in front of/
behind the car along the hoistway are
seriously affected by hoistway based para-
meters, including open ratios and block-
age ratios. For example, in Figure 14,
when the car is of cylindrical shape with a
blockage ratio of 0.72, the average pres-
sure differences are about 1151 Pa, 778 Pa
and 678 Pa with respect to an open ratio
of 0.1, 0.2 and 0.3, respectively, at time
T1.2 s i.e., corresponding position be-
/ behind the car, especially when the car is
ing about 7.5 m below the top of the
hoistway. Comparing with the average
pressure differences with an open ratio
of 0.1, the reduction of pressure difference
is about 32% with an open ratio of 0.2 and
about 40% with an open ratio of 0.3. In
Figure 17, the open ratio is kept constant
at 0.2. With a blockage ratio of 0.8, the
average pressure difference is about 1400
Pa when the car has been moving for
about 1.2 s along the hoistway. However,
the average pressure difference drops to
about 788 Pa at the same position with a
blockage ratio of 0.72, a reduction by 40%
comparatively.
2) The average pressure difference in front of
and behind the car is distinctly affected by
small open ratios and large blockage
ratios. For example, the curves in Figure
21 and Figure 25 obviously show that,
with a parabolic shape, the average pres-
sure difference is much less than that of
other three shapes under the conditions
of open ratio of 0 and a blockage ratio of
0.72, the average pressure difference of
the parabolic shape being about 500 Pa
which is about 60% lower than the average
pressure differences, generally above 1000
Pa, of three other shapes at time T1.2 s.
/
As shown in Figure 24, with an open ratio
of 0.1 and a blockage ratio of 0.8, the
average pressure difference of the cylind-
rical shape is about 2100 Pa while that of a
conical shape is about 2000 Pa, which is
about 5% lower. The average pressure
difference of the spherical shape is about
1900 Pa, with a further reduction by
about 10%. That of a parabolic shape is
about 1800 Pa, a further 15% reduction.
Based on the data above, it is clear that
the average pressure difference in front of
and behind the car is significantly affected
by small open ratios and large blockage
ratios.
3) Shapes of car play a distinctive role on the
average pressure difference in front of and
of a parabolic shape with an extreme open
ratio of 0. This can be visualized by
referring to Figures 20, 21, 24 and 25,
and the explanation follows. The average
pressure difference DP of the car consists
of two parts: DPa and DPb. DPa is caused
by the compression of air in front of the
car and the expansion of air behind the
car. DPb is shape drag due to the differ-
ences between car shapes. With a small
open ratio, DPa is large and it forces the
majority of air flow to pass through the
air-gap between the vertical car surface
and the wall of hoistway. As a result, the
shape of car can exert a strong influence
on the air-flow pattern i.e., DPb becomes
significant. On the other hand, with large
open ratios, DPa is small and more air can
escape through the orifices at the top and
bottom of the hoistway while less air
flows through the gap between the car
surface and the hoistway wall. As a result,
DPb plays a weaker role on DP. Based on
these observations and arguments, we
can define such a shape drag as DPb as

‘tunnel-effected shape drag’ which is
mainly due to the hoistway effect. The
‘tunnel-effected shape drag’ which is
influenced by the average pressure differ-
ence along the tunnel when a vehicle is
moving inside it differs very much from
the usual concept of shape drag when
vehicles are moving in open air. In the
open air, it appears that there is no DPa
that independently affects DPb and hence
DP.
3.4 Nondimensional analysis of average
pressure difference
The method of nondimensional analysis has
been widely used in different kinds of experi-
mental research works of aerodynamics and
hydrodynamics. Normally, models used in
experiments are very much smaller than the
practical prototypes because small models
are easy to manufacture, and are thus cost
effective and financially viable. Moreover,
due to the experimental situations and condi-
tions, such as cost of models, energy con-
sumption, risk assessment etc, using small
Figure 26 Nondimensional pressure difference (DP/(mg/
Ac)) versus nondimensional time (T/T0) with C /0 and V /
0.72
Hong-lei Bai et al. 141
models can be expediently manipulated.
Afterwards, we are able to apply and extend
the results of experiments using small models
to practical prototypes and projects without
loss of generosity according to the principles
and theories of non-dimensional analysis. In
our experiments, the average pressure differ-
ence can be non-dimensioned in terms of
DP/(mg/Ac ), where DPP1
P2, mg is the
/ /
weight of the car and Ac represents the cross-
sectional area of the car.
Curves in Figures 26, 27 and 28 are depicted
in terms of nondimensional average pressure
difference, DP/(mg/Ac ) versus nondimensional
time T/T0, where T is the course time the car
moves along the hoistway and T0 1 s is /
considered to be the characteristic time in our
experiments. The final goal of nondimensional
analysis concerns the influence of the gravity,
cross-sectional area and different shapes of the
car to the average pressure difference. Changes
of nondimensional average pressure difference
DP/(mg/Ac ) are different for the four different
shapes of car with different hoistway para-
meters i.e., open ratios and blockage ratios. It
is shown that the average pressure difference
Figure 27 Nondimensional pressure difference (DP/(mg/
Ac)) versus nondimensional time (T/T0) with C /0.1 and
V /0.72
142 Aerodynamics of elevators
Figure 28 Nondimensional pressure difference (DP/(mg/
Ac)) versus nondimensional time (T/T0) with C /0.1 and
V /0.8
in front of and behind the car relates not only
to gravity and cross-sectional area of the car,
but also to the shape of it. Moreover, the
impact of car shapes on the average pressure
difference is slight when both the open ratio
and the blockage ratios are slightly larger as
revealed from Figure 28.
4 Conclusions
The huge demand for super-high-speed ele-
vators is obvious due to the construction of
super-high-rise intelligent buildings in this
century. Problems associated with the devel-
opment of super-high-speed elevators have
been discussed, leading to the establishment
of the experimental platform to study
the aerodynamic performance of them.
Although lots of research work has been
done on aircraft and racing cars, they are
not applicable to elevators because of the
existence of ‘tunnel-effected pressure differ-
ence’ discussed throughout this paper. Works
on trains in tunnels are similar but usually
the open ratio is very large and the blockage
ratio is very small for trains and thus the
‘tunnel-effected pressure difference’ is not
obvious.
There are two major differences between
this experimental platform and a real elevator
system, making this platform seemingly less
realistic. First, we have adopted a one-car-
one-hoistway design as a beginning so that the
results can be clearer and the experiments can
be more easily designed. Second, both the car
and the hoistway are cylindrical in shape, real
cars and hoistways normally being rectangular
in shape. As a matter of fact, lots of observa-
tion lifts are cylindrical in shape. Furthermore,
a cylindrical car/hoistway is more symmetrical
in shape so that less confounding factors
are encountered during the experiments as
well as the processing of data. We can then
have more confidence with our conclusions.
Although the blockage ratios adopted in these
experiments are not very realistic, the open
ratios are realistic because openings of most
hoistways to the external world are much
smaller compared with the size of the hoist-
ways themselves. It was only with a big
blockage ratio were we able to clearly reveal
the tunnel-effected pressure difference in order
to study the aerodynamic performance of the
different car shapes in our experiments. Based
on our experimental work, there are four
observations.
First, it seems that the skin friction and
shape drag related to the car is much smaller
than that caused by the ‘tunnel-effected
pressure difference’. So, it is very important
during the design stage of super-high-speed
elevators that reasonable hoistway based
parameters i.e., open ratios and blockage
ratios, must be selected. It may not be
practical or realistic for the designer to
select the best open and blockage ratios.
Provided that the designer bears in mind the
importance of these two parameters when
carrying out the design works, that is fair
enough.

Second, the average pressure differences in
front of and behind the car under the condi-
tion of small open ratios and big blockage
ratios are revealed from Figures 21, 24 and 25.
These special conditions must be borne in
mind by designers of super-high-speed eleva-
tors. At this moment, we do not have enough
experimental data to arrive at a set of guide-
lines on the maximum average pressure differ-
ence to ensure smooth motion of the car and
passenger comfort. More experiments using a
real hoistway may be deemed necessary to give
us a clearer picture.
Third, with a small open ratio i.e., below
0.1, and a big blockage ratio i.e., above 0.8,
our experimental results reveal that the order
of favourable car shapes, according to the
consideration of average pressure difference,
is parabolic, spherical, conical and cylin-
drical. Although this order of recommenda-
tion has not been fully justified by all results,
we have been able to show that normal cars in
use nowadays with a flat top and a fat bottom
are unsuitable for super-high-speed applica-
tions.
Finally, fourth the ‘tunnel-effected shape
drag’ considered by us, which is mainly caused
by the average pressure difference, may be the
key item to be considered. This concept
sounds quite obvious but such a phenomenon
is not obvious for vehicles or trains moving in
a tunnel. Hence, experimental results currently
available on vehicles and trains cannot be
directly applied to the design of super-high-
speed elevators. More research work has to be
done to reduce such drag when super-high-
speed elevators become popular in the near
future.
Hong-lei Bai et al. 143
Acknowledgements
This project has been financially supported by
the Strategic Research Grants No. 7001379
and 7001109 of City University of Hong
Kong. The first author would like to extend
his appreciation to an undergraduate student,
Li Yan, for his assistance during the experi-
ment. Help from other members in the Full
Flow Field Observation and Measurement
Laboratory (FFFOM lab) of Beijing Univer-
sity of Aeronautics and Astronautics are also
appreciated. The authors would also like to
thank the reviewers who have paid a lot of
effort to every word of this article and have
upgraded the quality of it since our initial
submission.
References
1 Matsukura Y, Watanabe E, sugiyama Y, Kana-
mori O. New mechanical techniques for super-
high-speed elevators. In Barney GC editor.
Elevator Technology 4, IAEE, 1992: 174
/81.
2 Teshima N, Miyasako K, Matsuda H. Experi-
mental and numerical studies on ultra-high-
speed elevators. In Barney GC editors. Elevator
Technology 4 , IAEE, 1992: 276
/85.
3 So ATP, Chow TT, Shen GX, Yang HW. An
aerodynamic model for super-high-speed eleva-
tors. Elevatori 1998; October: 23
/24.
4 Munakata T, Kohara H, Takai K, Sekimoto Y,
Ootsubo R, Nakagaki S. The world’s fastest
elevator. Elevator World 2003 ; September: 97.
5 Duan Y, Shen GX, Zhang YG, So ATP. Aero-
dynamic testing simulation facility for high-
speed elevator (in Chinese). Journal of BUAA ,
2004 (in press).
6 Schetz A. Aerodynamics of high-speed trains.
Annual Rev. Fluid Mechanics 2001; 33: 371
/414.