faa airport design david aarsvold drew hauck elpiniqi martopullo tyler watson 12-14-2006
Post on 22-Dec-2015
218 views
TRANSCRIPT
Problem statement Functional requirements Constraints and limitations Alternatives
Sensors Lights Interface
Definition of project completion Positions and Responsibilities Conclusions
Outline
Problem
Runway IncursionsPoor visibilityRunways and Taxiways
SolutionsHold short lines
Lights Sensors Better control from Tower
Project Scope
The team is providing a complete design including the exact number, specification and location of all the lights and sensors.
The wiring system configuration that illustrates the connection of the visual aids to their power source and the interface with the control tower.
The final report will be submitted to the FAA by 12/21/2006.
Background
Currently there are about 5.4 runway incursions for every one million operations. One of the FAA’s top priorities is to reduce the frequency of these incursions and the risk of runway collisions.
There are multiple ways to go about reducing runway incursions, including: different lighting new forms of guidance for the pilots warning systems
Functional Requirements
Improve communication between the control tower and the pilots/drivers on the runway
Enhance the visibility of the runway lighting system for the pilots/drivers
Make the communication system in tower less weather dependent through redundancy
Project Organization
Project manager: David Aarsvold
Coordinate communication with Duluth Airport and FAA point of contact
Human Machine Interface Design
Create cost estimate Industrial Engineer:
Elpiniqi Martopullo ALMCS logic design Human Machine Interface
SOP BRITE system application
Mechanical Engineer: Tyler Watson
Product and alternatives research
Find correct spacing for lights Lighting control system
Mechanical Engineer: Drew Hauck
Product and alternatives research
Find correct spacing distances for sensors
Magneto sensor testing research
Lighting Alternatives In pavement multi-color lens lights.
Pros: Ease of installation and implementation. Cheapest while still providing improvement over the current situation.
Cons: Visibility angle of in-pavement lights.
Runway guard lights with in-pavement yellow lens lights. Pros:
Greater visibility for pilots. Similar to street lights
Cons: Not accustomed to a stop light type of fixture.
Runway guard lights flashing yellow, in-pavement yellow lights and a red stop bar light.
Pros: Most redundant of the options. System that is currently used at airports.
Cons: Uses more equipment than necessary.
Reasons for Choosing Alternative
The green and red lens RGL and in-pavement light combination was chosen because:
The ability to let the pilots know at all times where to be and what they should be doing by adding visual confirmation.
The amount of redundancy and the placement of lights all complied with the FAA regulations in Circular 150/5340-30B .
Saves approximately $500,000 over the typical SMGCS system that is used currently in some airports across the country.
Products
Inset Stop Bar/Runway Guard LightCrouse-Hinds L-852G/S Model
Yellow lens cover on left side and
blank on right, with quartz halogen bulbs.
Elevated Runway Guard LightSiemens L-804 Model
Red and green lens covers for
stop and go conditions.
Location of Fixtures
2ft
9ft10in
9ft10in
9ft10in
9ft10in
9ft10in
9ft10in
9ft10in
2ft
80ft
2ft8in
8ft6in
300ft
75ft
10ft 10ft
Elevated RunwayGuard Light
In-PavementRunway Light
Runway Hold Short Line Lighting Layout
Special Condition Areas
The Duluth Airport has a few special conditions that needed to be addressed when specifying lighting locations.
Air Force Taxiways Wider than the other taxiways.
ILS Situations Hold short line is back farther from runway than
usual.
Installation for Fixtures For the installation of the in-pavement lighting
Sawed wireway that runs parallel to the lighting fixtures and run-offs connecting to each fixture.
The parallel wireway cut needs to be 5/8” wide.
The run-offs to the light fixtures have to be 3/8” wide.
Need to allow for pavement sealer to be applied.
Lighting Control System
For controlling the lighting system from the tower remotely the Siemens BRITE system was used.BRITE Remote Control
2 needed at each hold short line.
BRITE Master Unit 1 needed for each CCR in the system.
Information Flow for Lighting
Information Flow to and from the RGL’s, Sensors, and the Tower.
RGL RGL Sensor
Lighting Control System
Master
InterfaceModule
Tower
Information Path for Lighting and Sensors
Remote Remote
Functionality of Elements
BRITE Lighting Control System (LCS) Central unit that links the tower to the field elements. 2 Inputs: One from Remotes, one from IM 3 Outputs: One to Remotes, one to IM, one to Tower
BRITE Master Links Remotes to LCS BRITE Remotes
2 Inputs: Information from the tower PC via the LCS and Master regarding light color change
2 Outputs: Connected to the RGL’s for color change
Element Functionality cont.
Interface Module (IM) 1 Input: Connected to the magneto reflexive sensors to
detect presence of vehicle 1 Output: Transmits the detection of a vehicle to the tower
PC via the LCS Default signal is interrupted when a vehicle is detected
Fail-safe system
Tower PC 1 Input: Vehicle detection signal (from IM) 1 Output: Lights change to green or stay red (to Remotes)
Logic Flow
Start
Sensor
Light Up redline on screen
Hold shortlights stay red
High (1)
Low (1)
ProceedButton
Hold shortlights change
to green
Yes No
SensorSensor
Red line onthe screen
goes off
Hold shortlights
change tored
High (1)
Low (0)
Enable theAlarm and the
Stop SignSignal
Low (0)
High (1)
Disable Button
NoYes
Yes
Disable theAlarm andthe Stop
Sign Signal
RGL RGL Sensor
Remote Remote
Lighting Control System
Master
InterfaceModule
Tower
Information Path for Lighting and Sensors
RWY/TWY
Main view of airport Control of all lights
Task Display is Intended to Support Decision making Control
Operator Capabilities Perception Attention Memory
Touch Screen Animation
Zoomed in View
Features Allow Take Off
Blue to match where vehicle is waiting
Disable Alarm Yellow to match where
the vehicle is traveling from
HMI Display
Perceptual Advantages Legible Expectancies influence
perception Redundancy
Mental models Realism What is to be expected
Budget
Types of costs Individual to each hold sort line
Sensors Lights Cable
Common to all hold short lines ALCMS BRITE system
Military accommodations Excess lights
Product Unit Cost Quantity Extended PriceM-Gage Q7M W/100' $269.00 1 $269.00
M-Gage Q7M W/50' $230.00 5 $1,150.00
PS115-1P Sensor Interface Module w/ Power Supply $57.00 1 $57.00
Sensor Installation $3,500.00 1 $3,500.00
Elevated Lights $2,100.00 2 $4,200.00
In-Pavement Lights $2,400.00 8 $19,200.00
Manhole $6,800.00 1 $6,800.00
5 kV Cable $1.75 500 $875.00
Equipment Ground $2.15 250 $537.50
Counter Poise $2.90 250 $725.00
Power Adapter $1,200.00 1 $1,200.00
Control Cable 50 pair $3.85 777.78 $2,994.44
2" GRS Pipe $24.00 100 $2,400.00
Pavement Restoration $3,000.00 1 $3,000.00
ALCMS Modifications $555.56 1 $555.56
BRITE Master $653.64 1 $653.64
BRITE Remote $657.60 5 $3,288.00
BRITE Instillation $2,000.00 1 $2,000.00
Subtotal $53,405.14
Mobilization $2,670.26
Safety and Security $1,602.15
Project Survey and Stakeout $500.00
Hold Short Total $58,177.55
Air fore base accommodations 5357.6
Hold-short lines 18
System Total $1,047,195.90
References
FAA Circulars:150/5340-30B 150/5345-56 120-57A
Websites:Siemens Airfield SolutionsCooper Crouse-Hinds