PAPER

Evaluation Method for Air Pressure Variation and Station Facility Member
Variation
Deterioration Caused by High-Speed T rain Passage in Stations
Train

Yasushi TAKEI
TAKEI Yasuhiko IZUMI Seiji YAMADA, Dr
YAMADA, Dr.. Eng.
Laboratory Head, Senior Researcher, Assistant Senior Researcher,
Architecture Laboratory, Structures Technology Division

Masanobu IIDA, Dr
Dr.. Eng. Katsuhiro KIKUCHI, Dr Dr.. Sci.
Laboratory Head, Senior Researcher,
Aerodynamics Laboratory, Environmental Engineering Division

When trains pass through stations at high speeds, large variations in air pressure
occur. As the structural members that make up station facilities are susceptible to these
repeated variations, it can be assumed that the likelihood of member deterioration is high.
Since future train speed increases will result in larger air pressure variations, it is essen-
tial to make efforts to ensure the structural safety of stations. To this end, we developed
calculation equations for air pressure variations based on the results of field measure-
ments and model tests, and also proposed prediction methods for response deformation
and an evaluation method for the fatigue strength of members exposed to air pressure
variations.

Keywords
Keywords: station, high-speed train, air pressure variation, building member, response
deformation, fatigue damage

1. Introduction the sectional area of the track story is relatively small.

When trains pass through stations at high speeds,
large variations in air pressure occur. As the structural
members that make up station facilities are susceptible
to these repeated pressure variations, it can be assumed
that the deterioration of such members will be acceler-
ated. In particular, air pressure variations at track story
where the whole area is covered by walls and roof (re-
ferred to below as a whole covering shed) are higher than
those at track story where only the platforms are covered
(referred to below as a partially covering shed). In addi-
tion, the deterioration of finishing materials on the walls
has occurred in some whole covering sheds. Since future
train speed increases will result in larger air pressure
variations, it is essential to make efforts to ensure the
structural safety of stations.
To this end, we developed calculation equations for
air pressure variations based on the results of field mea-
surements and model tests, and also proposed prediction
methods for response deformation and an evaluation
method for the fatigue strength of members exposed to
air pressure variations.
2. Air pressure variations occurring in stations
2.1 Field measurements
Figure 1 shows the sectional shapes and specifica-
tions of measured stations. Station A, which has two plat-
forms and two tracks, has a whole covering shed, and
Station B, which has two platforms and five tracks, also
has a whole covering shed with few openings, and the
sectional area of the track story is larger than that of
Station A. Station C, which has two platforms and four
tracks, has a partially covering shed (referred to here as
an F-shaped shed ) with no cover over the tracks. We mea-
sured air pressure variations using pressure gauges in-
stalled adjacent to the sidewalls of the platforms.
Figure 2 shows the air pressure variations caused by
train passage, and it can be seen that the wave shapes
differ widely from each other. At stations A and B, which
have whole covering sheds, positive pressure occurs when
the train nose passes, while negative pressure is seen
when the tail of the train passes. The maximum values
of the positive and negative pressure are almost the same.
Although the maximum pressure value at Station B is
less than that at Station A, the duration of the pressures
at Station B is longer. Furthermore, Station B clearly
shows a striking influence from the pressure waves gen-
erated when the train enters and exits the station. On
the other hand, at Station C, which has partially cover-
ing shed, positive-negative pressures such as pulse waves
occur only when the train nose or tail passes. This wave
shape is the same as those found in open sections. The
maximum values of the positive and negative pressure
are almost the same, and are less than those for the whole
covering shed. From the above, it can be confirmed that
air pressure variations are influenced not only by dis-
tance from vehicles or train speed but also by the area
and shape of the section and the amount of track story
opening.

QR of RTRI, Vol. 49, No. 2, May. 2008 89

 Openingψ

Track story
Stop Passage Stop Stop Track story
track tracks track track
φOpening Stop Passage Stop
Track story
Openingψ track tracks track
Passage
tracks

Shape: whole covering shed Shape: whole covering shed Shape: partially covering shed
two platforms and two tracks two platforms and five tracks (F-shaped shed)
Sectional area: 147m2 Sectional area: 351m2 two platforms and four tracks
Opening ratio: 0.97% Opening ratio: 0.12%
Track: slab tracks Track: ballast tracks Track: slab tracks
Station A Station B Station C
Fig. 1 Section shapes and specifications of measured stations

㪋㪇㪇
Air pressure (Pa)

㸠Train nose Station A

passage
㪇
Train speed: 272km/h 㸠Train tail
Distance to center of passage
vehicle: 10.3m
㪄㪋㪇㪇
㪋㪇㪇
Air pressure (Pa)

Pressure Wave
Pressure Wave Train nose 㸣
㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㸣 㸠㩷passage
㪇
Train speed: 240km/h 㸠Train tail
passage
Distance to center of 㸡 Station B
vehicle: 13.9m Pressure wave
㪄㪋㪇㪇
Fig. 3 Experimental model
㪋㪇㪇
Air pressure (Pa)

Station C 㪈㪉㪇㪇 Central run, opening ratio=1%, 360km/h

Train nose
㸠㩷passage
㪇 㪏㪇㪇
Air pressure (Pa)

Train speed: 273km/h 㸠Train tail

Distance to center of passage 㪋㪇㪇
vehicle: 7.2m
㪄㪋㪇㪇 㪇
㪄㪌 㪇 㪌 㪈㪇
Time (s) 㪄㪋㪇㪇
Fig. 2 Air pressure variations
㪄㪏㪇㪇

2.2 Experiments with a reduced-scale model 㪄㪈㪉㪇㪇

㪇 㪈㪇 㪉㪇 㪊㪇 㪋㪇
2.2.1 Outline of experiments Time (ms)
Fig. 4 Air pressure wave in experimental model
We experimented on a reduced-scale model to inves-
tigate the influence of sectional areas and shapes and the The height position of the vehicle model running was
amount of track-story opening on air pressure variations. equivalent to the height in the real Station A, while the
The model was based on Station A, and an opening was horizontal positions for the station model were either on
installed in the shape of a slit on the top of the model to horizontal center (for the central run outlined below) or
simplify the experimental conditions. The opening ratios, with offset eccentricity (for the offset run outlined below).
which were equal to dividing the width of the slit into the The offset run simulated running on real double-tracks
circumference length of the station model, were 1% and (or more), and the speeds of the vehicle model were 200,
3%, and the scale reduction of the (station and vehicle) 300 and 360 km/h.
models was 1/90. The size of the station model was 189 mm
(width) × 100 mm (height) × 4000 mm (length), repre- 2.2.2 Experimental results
senting actual measurements of 17 m (width) × 9 m
(height) × 360 m (length). Figure 3 shows the reduced- Figure 4 shows the air pressure wave of the central
scale model used for the experiments, which involved run for an opening ratio of 1% and a vehicle model speed
rushing the vehicle model into the station model at high of 360 km/h. Positive pressure occurs when the vehicle
speed and measuring the air pressure variations inside model nose passes, and negative pressure is seen when
the station. its tail passes. These wave shapes are the same as those

90 QR of RTRI, Vol. 49, No. 2, May. 2008

 X2
㪈㪇㪇㪇 h
h Sp
X2
X1 yt
0 V
X3 X3
w 0 zt w

Fig. 6 Train running in square tube with slit

Train
Air pressure (Pa)

㪏㪇㪇 Theoretical
Experimental
㪋㪇㪇

Air pressure (Pa)

Opening ratio = 1% (model)
㪇
Opening ratio = 3% (model)
Square law 㪄㪋㪇㪇
Station A (actual) Opening ratio = 1%
㪄㪏㪇㪇
㪈㪇㪇 㪄㪈㪉㪇㪇
㪈㪇㪇 㪈㪇㪇㪇 㪄㪉㪇 㪄㪈㪌 㪄㪈㪇 㪄㪌 㪇 㪌 㪈㪇 㪈㪌 㪉㪇
Train speed (km/h) Non-dimensional time (t/(h/V))
Fig. 5 Maximum values of air pressures 㪏㪇㪇
Theoretical
Experimental

Air pressure (Pa)

obtained from field measurements, demonstrating that
this experiment was able to reproduce true phenomena
at least qualitatively. Figure 5 shows the maximum val-
ues of the positive air pressure at the passage of the ve-
hicle model nose for both the experiment of the offset run
and the field measurement at Station A with an opening
ratio of 0.97%. The experimental results with an open-
ing ratio of 1% are almost the same as those of field mea-
surements, demonstrating that this experiment was able
to reproduce true phenomena quantitatively. The figure
shows that the air pressure is almost in proportion to the
square of the train speed, and that the results with an
opening ratio of 3% are approximately 20-30% lower than
those obtained with an opening ratio of 1%.
The above demonstrates that true phenomena can be
reproduced by model experiments, and that various kinds
of conditions can be examined. We can therefore expect
the practical use of this experimental methodology in the
prediction of air pressure variations and examination of
pressure-reduction measures at stations.
3. Estimation method of air variations
3.1 Theoretical analysis of air variations
3.1.1 Outline of analysis [1]
The situation of a train running in a square tube with a
slit parallel to the track is considered as shown in Fig. 6.
The distribution of air pressure around the vehicle in such
a tube is different from those in tunnels and open sec-
tions. If the tube is long enough and the effect of the air
pressure wave that occurs on entry attenuates soon, the
air stream is steady in a coordinate system fixed on the
vehicle. We assume the flow to be incompressive in the
analysis because Mach number of a high-speed train is
less than 0.3, and the effect of the air pressure wave can
be ignored. The effect of friction between the sides of the
vehicle and the walls of the tube is also ignored, but we
do consider the pressure loss caused by the separation of
the airflow at the tail of the train. The analysis is com-
posed of two stages, one for steady 1D flow in the tube
㪋㪇㪇
㪇
㪄㪋㪇㪇 Opening ratio = 3%
㪄㪏㪇㪇
㪄㪈㪇 㪄㪌 㪇 㪌 㪈㪇 㪈㪌 㪉㪇
Non-dimensional time (t/(h/V))
Fig. 7 Comparisons between analytical and experimental
results (central run, 360km/h)
with the slit, and the other for 3D potential flow around
the nose/tail of the train. The air pressure distribution is
obtained by superimposing these results.
3.1.2 Comparison between analytical and experimental
results
Figure 7 shows comparisons between the analytical
and experimental results of the central run at a train
speed of 360 km/h. The two cases of the opening ratio are
1% and 3%, and the analytical results agree well with
the experimental results in both cases. However, the er-
ror between both results for the opening ratio of 3% is
bigger than with the opening ratio of 1%. This is because
the airflow with a large opening ratio becomes three-di-
mensional in the same way as in open sections, so the
errors originated by the assumption of 1D flow except the
regions around the nose and tail become bigger.
From this study, it is apparent that the analytical
results are consistent with the experimental results as
long as the opening ratio is not excessively large (approxi-
mately less than 3%).
3.2 Simplified estimation method of air variations
3.2.1 Whole covering shed
Since the existing estimation formula [2] of air varia-
tions for the whole covering shed cannot consider open-
ings at track story, the values calculated by the formula
are inconsistent with the measured results. We therefore

QR of RTRI, Vol. 49, No. 2, May. 2008 91

 㪌㪇㪇 㪌㪇㪇

Measurement pressure (Pa)

㪋㪇㪇 㪋㪇㪇
Measured pressure (Pa)

㪊㪇㪇 㪊㪇㪇

㪉㪇㪇 Stations of small 㪉㪇㪇

sectional area
Stations of small
㪈㪇㪇 sectional area
㪈㪇㪇 Stations of large
sectional area Stations of large
sectional area

㪇 㪇
㪇 㪈㪇㪇 㪉㪇㪇 㪊㪇㪇 㪋㪇㪇 㪌㪇㪇 㪇 㪈㪇㪇 㪉㪇㪇 㪊㪇㪇 㪋㪇㪇 㪌㪇㪇
Calculated pressure (Pa) Calculated pressure (Pa)
Fig. 8 Comparison between calculated and measured Fig. 9 Comparison between calculated and measured
maximum values of air pressure variations (whole maximum values of air pressure variations (partially
covering shed) covering shed)

propose a new simplified estimation formula as shown in
Eq. (1). This formula contains the parameters of block-
age ratio (division of the sectional area of the vehicle into
the sectional area of the track story), opening ratio, dis-
tance between the center of the vehicle and the struc-
tural members of the station, train speed and air density.
Each coefficient is determined from field measurements
taken at adjacent walls on the platforms, as it is necessary
to estimate loads to the structural members of stations.
Pmax = C p ⋅ 1 / 2 ρV 2
where Cp=(1−15φ)2R･(L/Lo) , R = blockage ratio, φ = open-
k
tions) and Y = distance from center of vehicle. These co-
efficients have the ranges of application V : 230-360 km/h
and Y : 6-18 m.
Figure 9 shows the measured and calculated results,
which agree well with each other. However, as with the
case of the whole covering shed, the ranges of the appli-
cation must be considered. Moreover, because air pres-
sure variations are likely to be affected by the form of the
train's nose and tail, the corrective constant should be
adjusted for specific vehicle shapes.
(1)

ing ratio, L = distance from the center of the vehicle (m), 4. Response prediction of members exposed to air
Lo = standard distance (= 13 m), k = power exponent de- pressure variations
pending on the attenuation by distance (= −0.0037φR−3.1),
ρ = air density and V = train speed. These coefficients 4.1 Prediction method
have the ranges of application V : 200-350 km/h, R : 0.04-
0.08, φ : 0.005-0.035 and L : 6-20 m. The response spectrum of members is made as a con-
Figure 8 shows the measured and calculated results, venient method of predicting the displacement response of
which are largely consistent with each other. The ranges the members (assumed as board-shaped finishing materi-
of the application are determined from field measure- als) exposed to air pressure variations. We also assume a
ments. lumped-mass model as the members and eternal force time
history by multiplying the air pressure variation Pa(t) and
3.2.2 Partially covering shed the action area A. The response displacement time history
x(t) of the members is shown in Eq. (3).
In the case of a partially covering shed, the maximum
A 1 t
m ω d ∫0
values of air pressure variations are less than those of the x (t ) = ⋅ Pa (τ ) e− hω ( t −τ ) sinω d (t − τ ) dτ (3)
whole covering shed. However, the effect on the shed when
trains run nearby cannot be ignored. Air pressure varia- where ω d = ω ⋅ 1 − h , ω = natural angular frequency and h
2

tions with partially covering sheds are almost the same as = damping factor.
those in open sections [3, 4]. We therefore made an esti- The generalized response displacement spectrum Sd is
mation formula (2) for the maximum values of air pres- therefore defined as Eq. (4) from Eq. (3).
sure variations for partially covering sheds based on the
m 1 t
∫ Pa(τ ) e
− hω ( t −τ )
formula for the open section, and corrected the estimation S d = x (t ) ⋅ = sinω d (t − τ ) dτ (4)
formula using the measurement results. Corrective coeffi- A max ω d 0 max

cient α in Eq. (2) is 2.3, which was determined from the We calculate the generalized response displacement of
results measured near members of stations. members corresponding to the first mode natural frequency
of the members using the generalized response displace-
2 ρ AV 2
Pmax = α (2) ment spectrum Sd. In addition, we obtain the maximum
3 3 2π Y
2
displacement response of the members simply by dividing
where A = sectional area of vehicle, ρ = air density, V = the generalized response displacement by the mass-area
train speed, α = corrective constant (2.3 near walls of sta- density m/A.

92 QR of RTRI, Vol. 49, No. 2, May. 2008

 For the proposed prediction method outlined above, we consideration of effective mass. The analysis results and
need to estimate first mode natural frequency. At station the generalized response displacement spectra correspond
facilities, many members consist of rectangular boards and closely, and the effectiveness of the proposed prediction
glass, and the first mode natural frequency f0 of such mem- method is confirmed.
bers is expressible by Eq. (5) if the boundary condition of Figure 10 also shows generalized response displace-
the members is assumed as four sides supported by pins. ment spectrum as static loading with a maximum value
In addition, we need to estimate natural frequency for of air pressure variation generated at a train passage
members with complicated shapes by eigenvalue analysis speed of 250 km/h. In the range of less than approximately
utilizing FEM. 15 Hz, the response displacement spectrum amplifies as
static loading. We can thus estimate the amplification
π  L2x  D
f0 =  1 +  (5) characteristics of response by the resonance phenomenon
2 L2x  L2y  ρ t0 of members using the generalized response displacement
E0 t03 spectrum.
where bending stiffness D = , E0=Young’s modulus
12 (1 −ν 2 )
t0 = board thickness, ρ = density, ν = Poisson’s ratio, Lx =
board width and Ly = board height. 5. Fatigue strength evaluation of members exposed to
air pressure variations
4.2 Effectiveness of generalized response displacement
spectrum 5.1 Fatigue test

We confirmed the effectiveness of the generalized re- In order to evaluate the fatigue strength of members
sponse displacement spectrum by comparing with FEM exposed to air pressure variations, we carried out fatigue
analyses. The analysis models consist of two glass boards tests using a concentrated load referring to JIS-A1414
assuming two types of boundary condition with two kinds (Methods of performance test of panels for building con-
of natural frequency. The material specifications of the struction). All test specimens were of the same shape, and
glass and the natural frequencies of boards are shown in it was confirmed that the strain distribution of the test
Table 1. Input time history of air pressure variation are specimens using a concentrated load was almost equal to
determined for a station with a partially covering shed that with air pressure variation [5].
[4]. The test specimens consisted of groundwork and fin-
Figure 10 shows comparisons between the general- ishing material, with the test parameters as the bulk of
ized response displacement spectra and values multiply- load and the kinds of finishing material. The test condi-
ing mass-area densities and maximum response displace- tions are shown in Table 2. The finishing materials con-
ments by the FEM analysis results. In addition, the mass- sisted of three kinds of flexible board, calcium silicate
area densities are assumed to be 0.7 times the mass in boards and steel plates. The width and height of the ma-
terials were 600 mm and 900 mm respectively, and their
Table 1 Specifications of analysis model
Two sides are fix Table 2 Test conditions
support and the All sides are Materials Loading forces Loading types
Boundary conditions
other two sides pin support 　 maximum
1960 N at the Static
are pin support Flexible boards
216 × 3 N Repetition
Natural frequencies (Hz) 4.7 7.8 (t=6mm)
216N equivalent
　 to 400Pa Repetition
Young's modulus (N/mm2) 72000 　 maximum
1960 N at the Static
Poisson's ratio 0.2 Calcium silicate boards
216 × 1.5 N Repetition
Size (mm) 1500 × 2500 (t=6mm)
216N equivalent
　 to 400Pa Repetition
Thickness (mm) 5 　 maximum
1960 N at the Static
Steel plates
㪈㪇 216 × 2 N Repetition
V=250km/h (t=5mm)
216N equivalent
　 to 400Pa Repetition
V=300km/h
displacement (m ˜ (kg/m2))

4.7Hz V=350km/h
Generailzed response

Frame to fix test specimen

FEM V=250km/h
㪈 FEM V=300km/h
Negative Positive
FEM V=350km/h loading loading
Test specimen
7.8Hz
Static loading (250km/h)
㪉㪉㪌

Generalized response
㪇㪅㪈 displacement spectra Pressurization boards
㪈㪇㪇㪇
㪉㪉㪌
㪐㪇㪇

Load cell Jack

㪇㪅㪇㪈 㪍㪇㪇 Jack
Load cell
㪈 㪈㪇 㪈㪇㪇
Frequency (Hz)
Fig. 10 Comparisons between generalized response 㪊㪊㪎 㪊㪊㪎

displacement spectra and FEM analyses Fig. 11 Experimental device

11

QR of RTRI, Vol. 49, No. 2, May. 2008 93

circumference was fixed by steel angles and steel studs and the values of one repetition in the figure represent
of 0.8 mm in thickness and 50 mm in height. The studs the results with static loading. Damage was not confirmed
were welded to the steel angles by spot welding, and the for the flexible board until 300,000 loading applications
finishing materials were fitted to the studs by tapping at 216 N (as shown by the square symbol in the figure).
screws (circle head φ4.0 × 25). The figure confirms that the loading forces and the num-
Force was loaded onto two points on both sides of the ber of fatigue damage occurrence showed an almost lin-
test specimens utilizing the experimental device shown in ear relationship. In addition, these relationships suggest
Fig. 11. The three loading methods applied were: Case 1, that the fatigue characteristics of finishing materials can
with repetitive loading of 150,000 times at the maximum be expressed utilizing fatigue curves as S-N curves.
using a concentrated load (216 N) assuming a maximum
air pressure variation of 400 Pa; Case 2, with static load- 5.2 Fatigue strength evaluation
ing; and Case 3, with repetitive loading of x times the load
used in Case 1. The x value for each material in Case 3 To estimate whether structural members subjected
was decided with reference to the results of Case 2. to repeated air pressure variations can remain sound, it
For both loading directions in the fatigue tests, we is necessary to confirm the presence of fatigue damage
calculated out-of-plane stiffness for each repetition us- through specimen testing. However, due to the enormous
ing the maximum deformation at the center of the test repetition number required, we proposed a simplified
specimens and the loading forces. Figure 12 shows the method for evaluating fatigue strength considering con-
relationships between the repetition numbers and the venience in practical use. The precondition of the proposed
stiffness decline ratios of the calcium silicate boards. At method is the fatigue strength decided from loading force
the point where the stiffness had deteriorated approxi- and repetitive load, and can be evaluated with S-N curve.
mately 10%, we confirmed phenomena such as the expan- The outline of the evaluation procedure is as follows:
sion of any crazing that occurred or the falling out of plu- (1) Through a test by static loading, damage outbreak
ral screws. We therefore defined the number that stiff- force (P o) are found.
ness deteriorated more than 10% as the number of fa- (2) In accordance with JIS-A1414, the upper limit for the
tigue damage occurrence. Figure 13 shows the relation- repetition number of fatigue test is assumed as
ships between the loading forces and the number of fa- 100,000.
tigue damage occurrence. In this figure, the horizontal (3) The loading force ( Pe) of the fatigue test are decided
axis has a log scale and the vertical axis a linear scale, by Eq. (6) utilizing the repetition number in consid-
eration of train passage for the necessary durability
㪈㪅㪉 range (Nn), action force (P ) and P o.

㪈㪅㪇
Stiffness is deteriorated
around 10% Pe = P + ( Po − P )(log N n − log10 5 )/log N n (6)
Stiffness decline ratio

(4) Where no damage is confirmed after 100,000 repeti-

㪇㪅㪏 tions of the loading force (as in Fig. 14), it is judged
Crazing
outbreak
that no damage occurs within the necessary durabil-
㪇㪅㪍
Further expansion ity range.
Expansion of of the crazing
㪇㪅㪋 the crazing (5) Where damage is confirmed within 100,000 repeti-
Penetration tions (as in Fig. 15), damage is judged to occur within
of the crazing
㪇㪅㪉 Positive loading
Destruction
the necessary durability range. We therefore calcu-
Negative loading late the number of fatigue damage occurrence (N) by
㪇㪅㪇 䋲 Eq. (7) with the number of fatigue damage occurred
䇭䇭䇭䇭䇭䇭䇭䇭䇭䇭䋱㪇䋳 䇭䇭䇭䇭䇭䇭䇭䇭䇭䇭䋱
䋱䋰 䇭䇭䇭䇭䇭䇭䇭䇭䇭䇭䋱 䇭䇭䇭䇭䇭䇭䇭䇭䇭䇭䋱㪇䋴 䇭䇭䇭䇭䇭䇭䇭䇭䇭䇭䋱
䇭䇭䇭䇭䇭䇭䇭䇭䇭䇭䋱㪇䋵 in the fatigue test (Ny), P , Po and Pe.
Repetition number (times)
log N y ⋅( P0 − P )/( P0 − Pe )
N = 10 (7)
Fig. 12 Relationships between repetition numbers and
stif fness decline ratios
stiffness In the fatigue test, it is desirable to adopt test speci-
(Test specimen: calcium silicate boards, loading
(Test men shape and loading method that can reproduce real
force: 216 × 1.5 (N))
Flexible board Calcium silicate board Steel plate
㪈㪌㪇㪇 㪈㪌㪇㪇 㪈㪌㪇㪇
Loading force (N)

Loading force (N)

Loading force (N)

㪈㪇㪇㪇 㪈㪇㪇㪇 㪈㪇㪇㪇

㪌㪇㪇 㪌㪇㪇 㪌㪇㪇

No damageψ

㪇 㪉 㪊 㪋 㪌 㪍
㪇 㪉 㪊 㪋 㪌 㪍 㪇 㪉 㪊 㪋 㪌 㪍
㪈 㩷䇭㪈㪇
㪈㪇 䇭㩷㪈㪇
㩷㪈㪇 䇭㪈㪇
㪈㪇 䇭㪈㪇
㪈㪇 䇭㪈㪇
㪈㪇 㩷㪈㪇 㪈 㩷䇭㪈㪇
㪈㪇 䇭㩷㪈㪇
㩷㪈㪇 䇭㪈㪇
㪈㪇 䇭㪈㪇
㪈㪇 䇭㪈㪇
㪈㪇 㩷㪈㪇 㪈 㩷䇭㪈㪇
㪈㪇 䇭㩷㪈㪇
㩷㪈㪇 䇭㪈㪇
㪈㪇 䇭㪈㪇
㪈㪇 䇭㪈㪇
㪈㪇 㩷㪈㪇
Number of fatigue damage Number of fatigue damage Number of fatigue damage
occurrence (times) occurrence (times) occurrence (times)
Fig. 13 Relationships between loading forces and number of fatigue damage occurrence

94 QR of RTRI, Vol. 49, No. 2, May. 2008

 [Loading force] by high-speed train passage through stations and its in-
Repetition number
in fatigue test fluence on the structural members of station facilities,
the following conclusions were obtained:
˜ True
Damage outbreak force by
static loading (Po) (1) We clarified the characteristics of air pressure varia-
fatig
ue c
urve tions at stations according to the results of field mea-
(unk
now
n) Loading force of surements and experiments using a reduced-scale
٤ fatigue test (Pe) model. In addition, we established an analytical
Ima
gin
ary
fati
theory and a simplified estimation method.
gue
cur Action force (P) (2) A simplified method for the response prediction of
ve
members exposed to air pressure variations was
[Repetition number] shown.
100,000 Repetition number for necessary (3) Based on fatigue tests of structural members sub-
durability range (Nn) jected to repetitive loading, we proposed an evalua-
Fig. 14 In a case of no damage after 100,000 repetitions tion method for the fatigue strength of structural
members.
damage
[Loading force] In the future, we hope it will be possible to apply these
Number of fatigue damage occurred results to the evaluation of structural safety in stations.
in fatigue test (Ny)
Damage outbreak force by
˜Tr static loading (Po)
ue
fat
igu
Number of fatigue damage References
ec occurrence (N)
urv ٨ Loading force of
e ˜ fatigue test (Pe) [1] Iida, M., Kikuchi, K., Takei, Y. and Izumi, Y., “Steady
pressure field around a train running in a vented
٨ ٨
Action force (P) tube,” Proceedings of 83rd JSME Fluids Engineering
Conference, 1207, October 2005 (in Japanese).
[Repetition number] [2] Japanese National Railways, Recommendations of De-
100,000 Repetition number for necessary sign Standards for Railway Architectures, 1986 (in Japa-
durability range (Nn) nese).
Fig. 15 In a case of some damage within 100,000 [3] Kikuchi, K. and Iida, M., “Simple Numerical Method
repetitions to Calculate Pressure Fluctuation Due to Train Pas-
sage,” Transactions of the Japan Society of Mechanical
phenomena. In consideration of variations in the fatigue Engineers. B, Vol. 71, No. 708, pp. 2022-2029, August
strength of test specimens, examination using plural test 2005 (in Japanese).
specimens is also desirable. In addition, it is necessary to [4] Kikuchi, K., Uchida, K., Nakatani, K., Yoshida, Y.,
charge an extra appropriate value of Nn in consideration Maeda, T. and Yanagizawa, M., “Numerical analysis
of the damping characteristics of members due to the pos- of pressure variation due to train passage using the
sibility of resonance from the result of response predic- boundary element method,” Quarterly Report of RTRI,
tion of members. In terms of safety evaluation, it is de- Vol. 37, No. 4, pp. 231-237, 1996.
sirable to anticipate suitable safety factors in consider- [5] Ichikawa, M., Nakazawa, S., Takei, Y., Yamada, T. and
ation of variations in fatigue strength and the aging of Fujii, K., “Strength Estimation of Finishing Material
members. in Station Exposed to Pressure Variation due to Train
Passage: Part 1 Outline of Experiment and Result of
Static Loading Test,” Summaries of Technical Papers of
6. Conclusions Annual Meeting Architectural Institute of Japan. A-1, pp.
987-988, September 2006 (in Japanese).
From investigation of air pressure variations caused

QR of RTRI, Vol. 49, No. 2, May. 2008 95