FAA Airport Design

David AarsvoldDrew Hauck

Elpiniqi MartopulloTyler Watson

12-14-2006

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.

Installation Cont’d.

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

HMI Display

Attention Minimized information Proximity

Memory Consistency

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

Recommendations

References

FAA Circulars:150/5340-30B 150/5345-56 120-57A

Websites:Siemens Airfield SolutionsCooper Crouse-Hinds

Acknowledgements

Darren Christopher of RS&H

David Keranen and William Pedersen

Chris Dixon and Rebecca Grammse