Railways built in cold, snowy, and lightly populated areas are subjected to wind and snow disasters. In this study, we selected a snow hazard prevention and control section of the Altay-Zhundong Railway in Xinjiang Uygur Autonomous Region of China as the research object. We investigated the deposited snowfall variation characteristics on the two sides and in the embankment pavement area of snow fences with different porosities, fence heights, and arrangement distances using single-factor tests and orthogonal tests based on global atmospheric reanalysis climate data, field survey data, and a multi-phase flow analysis model. The results showed significant differences in the characteristics of snow cover distribution and snow cover thickness between the embankment and the cutting in the absence of snow protection measures. The maximum snow cover thickness of the embankment pavement decreased by 12.6% relative to the cutting pavement. The snow cover thickness of the embankment exhibited an increasing trend from windward shoulder to leeward shoulder, whereas the snow cover thickness of the cutting presented a declining trend from windward shoulder to leeward toe. In the collaborative prevention and control of snow fences and embankments, the three factors can be ranked in terms of their sensitivity to deposited snowfall within the influence scope of snow fences as follows: fence height>arrangement distance>porosity. At the same time, fence height yielded a significant relationship for the influence scope of snow fences (P<0.05). The three factors can also be ranked in terms of their sensitivity to deposited snowfall on the pavement as follows: porosity>fence height>arrangement distance. For the embankment protection of the Altay-Zhundong Railway against wind and snow, snow fence with a porosity of 75%, a fence height of 4.8 m, and an arrangement distance from the embankment of 60 m produced the best snow control effect. By revealing the characteristics of snow cover distribution along railway subgrade and the protective effect of snow fences, this study provides valuable references for the engineering applications of railway construction in areas prone to wind and snow disasters.
LEI Jia, CHENG Jianjun, GAO Li, MA Benteng, AN Yuanfeng, DONG Hongguang. Characteristics of snow cover distribution along railway subgrade and the protective effect of snow fences. Journal of Arid Land, 2023, 15(8): 901-919.
Fig. 2Snow hazards along the Altay-Zhundong Railway. (a), snow cover along the railway line; (b), snow cover alongside slopes; (c), snow cover along snow fences.
Fig. 3Time-history diagram of snow thickness in the study area from 2018 to 2020
Fig. 4Rose plot of the frequency of wind directions. (a), 2018; (b), 2019; (c), 2020; (d), in the winter of 2018; (e), in the winter of 2019; (f), in the winter of 2020. MWS, max wind speed; AWS, average wind speed; N, north; NNE, north-northeast; NE, northeast; ENE, east-northeast; E, east; ESE, east-southeast; SE, southeast; SSE, south-southeast; S, south; SSW, south-southwest; SW, southwest; WSW, west-southwest; W, west; WNW, west-northwest; NW, northwest; NNW, north-northwest.
Fig. 5Schematic diagram of the building entity (a) and the computational domain (b)
Fig. 6Schematic diagram of mesh generation for the computational domain
Fig. 7Variation rates of wind speed of the monitoring surface under different numbers of grids
Boundary
Type
Outlet
Outflow
Outer side of the computational domain
Symmetry
Ground, subgrade, and snow fence
Wall
Table 1 Setting of the remaining boundary conditions
Working condition
Porosity (%)
Fence height (m)
Arrangement distance (m)
1
0, 25, 50, 75
4.8
80
2
75
2.1, 3.0, 3.9, 4.8
80
3
75
4.8
20, 40, 60, 80
Table 2 Computational variables and working conditions
NO.
Porosity (%)
Fence height (m)
Arrangement distance (m)
Average volume fraction of snow grains
Area I
Area II
1
0
2.1
20
0.39273
0.12124
2
0
3.0
40
0.27658
0.11452
3
0
3.9
60
0.35911
0.12174
4
0
4.8
80
0.44215
0.10029
5
25
2.1
40
0.36019
0.12694
6
25
3.0
20
0.33829
0.10029
7
25
3.9
80
0.39491
0.14488
8
25
4.8
60
0.48909
0.10821
9
50
2.1
60
0.29172
0.14166
10
50
3.0
80
0.30679
0.13402
11
50
3.9
20
0.50527
0.10015
12
50
4.8
40
0.49930
0.08282
13
75
2.1
80
0.29993
0.15682
14
75
3.0
60
0.39738
0.13629
15
75
3.9
40
0.40315
0.10301
16
75
4.8
20
0.50140
0.29079
Table 3 Orthogonal conditions and orthogonal results
Fig. 8Comparative analysis of dimensionless snow cover thickness between embankment height (a) and cutting depth (b)
Fig. 9Comparison diagram between the flow field with and without snow fence on the Altay-Zhundong Railway. (a), the flow field without snow fence, 0 on the x-axis represents the inlet boundary; (b), the flow field with snow fence, 0 on the x-axis denotes the position of snow fence. The positive and negative values of the x-axis represent snow fence's leeward and windward sides, respectively.
Fig. 10Volume fraction of snow grains under different porosities. (a), porosity=0%; (b), porosity=25%; (c), porosity=50%; (d), porosity=75%. The value of 0 is the position of snow fence, and the positive and negative values represent the leeward and windward sides of snow fence, respectively.
Fig. 11Volume fraction of snow grains under different fence heights. (a), fence height=2.1 m; (b), fence height=3.0 m; (c), fence height=3.9 m; (d), fence height=4.8 m. The value of 0 is the position of snow fence, and the positive and negative values represent the leeward and windward sides of snow fence, respectively.
Fig. 12Volume fraction of snow grains under different arrangement distances. (a), arrangement distance=20 m; (b), arrangement distance=40 m; (c), arrangement distance=60 m; (d), arrangement distance=80 m. The value of 0 is the position of snow fence, and the positive and negative values represent the leeward and windward sides of snow fence, respectively.
Factor
Sum of square
Degree of freedom
Mean square
F
P
Arrangement distance (m)
0.011
3
0.004
1.563
0.293
Fence height (m)
0.063
3
0.021
8.615
0.014*
Porosity (%)
0.003
3
0.001
0.409
0.752
Residual
0.015
6
0.002
-
-
Table 4 Variance analysis of the average volume fraction of snow grains in Area I
Level index
Average volume fractions of snow grains
Level index
Average volume fraction of snow grains
Porosity factor
Fence height factor
Arrangement distance factor
Porosity factor
Fence height factor
Arrangement distance factor
¯k1
0.36764
0.33614
0.43442
¯k3
0.40077
0.41561
0.38433
¯k2
0.39562
0.32976
0.38480
¯k4
0.40046
0.48299
0.36094
Table 5 Range analysis of the average volume fraction of snow grains in Area I
Level index
Average volume fraction of snow grains
Level index
Average volume fraction of snow grains
Porosity factor
Fence height factor
Arrangement distance factor
Porosity factor
Fence height factor
Arrangement distance factor
¯k1
0.11445
0.13667
0.15312
¯k3
0.11466
0.11744
0.12698
¯k2
0.12008
0.12128
0.10682
¯k4
0.17173
0.14553
0.13400
Table 6 Range analysis of the average volume fraction of snow grains in Area II
Beria H, Larsen J R, Ceperley N C, et al. 2018. Understanding snow hydrological processes through the lens of stable water isotopes. WIREs Water, 5(6): e1311, doi: 10.1002/wat2.1311.
doi: 10.1002/wat2.1311
[3]
Beyers J, Sundsbo P A, Harms T M. 2004. Numerical simulation of three-dimensional, transient snow drifting around a cube. Journal of Wind Engineering and Industrial Aerodynamics, 92(9): 725-747.
doi: 10.1016/j.jweia.2004.03.011
[4]
Cao Z G, Liu M M, Wu P C. 2019. Experiment investigation and numerical simulation of snowdrift on a typical large-span retractable roof. Complexity, 5984804, doi: 10.1155/2019/5984804.
doi: 10.1155/2019/5984804
[5]
Cheng J J, Lei J Q, Li S Y, et al. 2016. Disturbance of the inclined inserting-type sand fence to wind-sand flow fields and its sand control characteristics. Aeolian Research, 21: 139-150.
doi: 10.1016/j.aeolia.2016.04.008
[6]
Fu Z K, Li Q W. 2023. Study on wind-proof effect and stability of windbreak fence in alpine skiing center. Sustainability, 15(4): 3369, doi: 10.3390/su15043369.
doi: 10.3390/su15043369
[7]
Gao L, Cheng J J, Wang H F, et al. 2022. Effects of different types of guardrails on sand transportation of desert highway pavement. Journal of Arid Land, 14(9): 993-1008.
doi: 10.1007/s40333-022-0030-z
[8]
Gordon M, Taylor P A. 2008. Measurements of blowing snow, part I: particle shape, size distribution, velocity, and number flux at Churchill, Manitoba, Canada. Cold Regions Science and Technology, 55(1): 63-74.
doi: 10.1016/j.coldregions.2008.05.001
[9]
Gossart A, Palm S P, Souverijns N, et al. 2020. Importance of blowing snow during cloudy conditions in east Antarctica: comparison of ground-based and space-borne retrievals over ice-shelf and mountain regions. Frontiers in Earth Science, 8: 240, doi: 10.3389/feart.2020.00240.
doi: 10.3389/feart.2020.00240
[10]
Kang L Y, Zhou X Y, van Hooff T, et al. 2018. CFD simulation of snow transport over flat, uniformly rough, open terrain: impact of physical and computational parameters. Journal of Wind Engineering and Industrial Aerodynamics, 177: 213-226.
doi: 10.1016/j.jweia.2018.04.014
Kumar G, Gairola A, Vaid A. 2020. Flow and deposition measurement of foam beads in a closed re-circulating wind tunnel for snowdrift modelling. Flow Measurement and Instrumentation, 72: 101687, doi: 10.1016/j.flowmeasinst.2019.101687.
doi: 10.1016/j.flowmeasinst.2019.101687
[13]
Li P X, Bai M Z, Li J X, et al. 2022. Analysis of the influence of snow fences on snow redistribution under snow-drifting in railway cuttings. Cold Regions Science and Technology, 196: 103520, doi: 10.1016/j.coldregions.2022.103520.
doi: 10.1016/j.coldregions.2022.103520
[14]
Liu D, Li Y, Wang B, et al. 2016. Mechanism and effects of snow accumulations and controls by lightweight snow fences. Journal of Modern Transportation, 24(4): 261-269.
doi: 10.1007/s40534-016-0115-5
[15]
Liu Q K, Liang P F, Gao L, et al. 2021. Effects of side slope inclination on drifting snow of embankment. Journal of Vibration and Shock, 40(3): 87-94. (in Chinese)
[16]
Loeb N A, Kennedy A. 2021. Blowing snow at Mcmurdo station, Antarctica during the aware field Campaign: surface and ceilometer observations. Journal of Geophysical Research-Atmospheres, 126(7): e2020JD033935, doi: 10.1029/2020JD033935.
doi: 10.1029/2020JD033935
[17]
Lu N, Wayllace A, Oh S. 2013. Infiltration-induced seasonally reactivated instability of a highway embankment near the Eisenhower Tunnel, Colorado, USA. Engineering Geology, 162: 22-32.
doi: 10.1016/j.enggeo.2013.05.002
[18]
Ma G S, Huang N. 2006. Threshold wind-speed of snow drifting. Journal of Lanzhou University (Natural Sciences), 42(6): 130-134. (in Chinese)
[19]
Ma W Y, Li F Q, Sun Y C, et al. 2021. Field measurement and numerical simulation of snow deposition on an embankment in snowdrift. Wind and Structures, 32(5): 453-469.
[20]
Ma W Y, Li S, Sun Y C, et al. 2022. Investigation of snow deposition on the railway cuttings during the snowdrift. Frontiers in Earth Science, 10: 857981, doi: 10.3389/feart.2022.857981.
doi: 10.3389/feart.2022.857981
[21]
McClure S, Kim J J, Lee S J, et al. 2017. Shelter effects of porous multi-scale fractal fences. Journal of Wind Engineering and Industrial Aerodynamics, 163: 6-14.
doi: 10.1016/j.jweia.2017.01.007
[22]
Mott R, Vionnet V, Grunewald T. 2018. The seasonal snow cover dynamics: review on wind-driven coupling processes. Frontiers in Earth Science, 6: 197, doi: 10.3389/feart.2018.00197.
doi: 10.3389/feart.2018.00197
[23]
Naaim M, Naaim B F, Martinez H. 1998. Numerical simulation of drifting snow: erosion and deposition models. Annals of Glaciology, 26: 191-196.
doi: 10.3189/1998AoG26-1-191-196
[24]
Potac J, O'Rourke M, Thiis T K. 2018. Determination of wall height to capture windward drift snow on flat roofs. Cold Regions Science and Technology, 150: 51-61.
doi: 10.1016/j.coldregions.2017.09.006
[25]
Potsis T, Tominaga Y, Stathopoulos T. 2023. Computational wind engineering: 30 years of research progress in building structures and environment. Journal of Wind Engineering and Industrial Aerodynamics, 234: 105346, doi: 10.1016/j.jweia.2023.105346.
doi: 10.1016/j.jweia.2023.105346
[26]
Prokop A, Procter E S. 2016. A new methodology for planning snow drift fences in alpine terrain. Cold Regions Science and Technology, 132: 33-43.
doi: 10.1016/j.coldregions.2016.09.010
[27]
Qiu S M, Bai M Z, Jiang H, et al. 2022. Field measurements and numerical simulation of snowdrift on railway subgrade. Journal of Testing and Evaluation, 50(6): 2988-3000.
[28]
Qi Y L. 2018. Strategies of railway alignment selection for Karamay-Tacheng railway in Xinjiang considering snow drifting disasters. Journal of Railway Science and Engineering, 15(11): 2813-2824. (in Chinese)
Sanudo-Fontaneda L A, Castro-Fresno D, del Coz-Diaz J J, et al. 2011. Classification and comparison of snow fences for the protection of transport infrastructures. Journal of Cold Regions Engineering, 25(4): 162-181.
doi: 10.1061/(ASCE)CR.1943-5495.0000031
[31]
Tominaga Y, Okaze T, Mochida A. 2011. CFD modeling of snowdrift around a building: an overview of models and evaluation of a new approach. Building and Environment, 46(4): 899-910.
doi: 10.1016/j.buildenv.2010.10.020
[32]
Tominaga Y. 2018. Computational fluid dynamics simulation of snowdrift around buildings: Past achievements and future perspectives. Cold Regions Science and Technology, 150: 2-14.
doi: 10.1016/j.coldregions.2017.05.004
[33]
Tominaga Y, Stathopoulos T. 2020. CFD simulations can be adequate for the evaluation of snow effects on structures. Building Simulation, 13(4): 729-737.
doi: 10.1007/s12273-020-0643-0
[34]
Wang J B, Zhang J, Xie F, et al. 2018. A study of snow accumulating on the bogie and the effects of deflectors on the de-icing performance in the bogie region of a high-speed train. Cold Regions Science and Technology, 148: 121-130.
doi: 10.1016/j.coldregions.2018.01.010
Xia C C, Zhou K F, Cheng Y, et al. 2017. Prediction model of snow depth of snowdrift on highway based on back propagation neural network. Journal of Tongji University (Natural Science), 45(5): 714-720. (in Chinese)
[37]
Yang S, Zhang M Y, Pei W S, et al. 2022. Numerical study on snow erosion and deposition around an embankment with a snow fence under snowfall conditions. Aeolian Research, 56: 100798, doi: 10.1016/j.aeolia.2022.100798.
doi: 10.1016/j.aeolia.2022.100798
[38]
Yu Y P, Zhang K C, An Z S, et al. 2020. The blocking effect of the sand fences quantified using wind tunnel simulations. Journal of Mountain Science, 17(10): 2485-2496.
doi: 10.1007/s11629-020-6095-2
Zhang X T. 1985. Structure Wind Pressure and Wind Vibration Calculation. Shanghai: Tongji University Press, 34-36. (in Chinese)
[41]
Zhou X Y, Zhang Y, Kang L Y, et al. 2019. CFD simulation of snow redistribution on gable roofs: impact of roof slope. Journal of Wind Engineering and Industrial Aerodynamics, 185: 16-32.
doi: 10.1016/j.jweia.2018.12.008
[42]
Zhou X Y, Zhang T G, Ma W Y, et al. 2021. CFD simulation of snow redistribution on a bridge deck: effect of barriers with different porosities. Cold Regions Science and Technology, 181: 103174, doi: 10.1016/j.coldregions.2020.103174.
doi: 10.1016/j.coldregions.2020.103174
