Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
Q
XIV Seminario ALACPA de Pavimentos AeroportuariosXII Taller Federal Aviation AdministrationVII Curso Rápido de Mantenimiento de Pavimentos de Aeródromos28/05 al 01/06 2018 – Ciudad de Quito - Ecuador
Demonstration of the Non-Applicability
of IRI as a Runway Roughness Indicator
Dr. Samuel Hautequest Cardoso, Ph.D., Int’l Consultant & ICAO TCBAntônio C. Pinto, Engineering Director, RIOgaleãoAntonio Noronha, Engineering Manager, RIOgaleãoEduardo Arruda, Projects, Runways and PMS CoordinatorRonaldo Hércules, Engineering – Projects, Runways and PMSAlessandro Santos Oliveira, Airport Infrastructure Manager
Quito, Ecuador, 29 May 2018
Q
Introduction
Regulation Requirements
Tom Jobin International Airport Information
Field Investigation
Comparison Between IRI and rms
Summary & Lessons
Q
Demonstration of the Non-Applicability of IRI
as a Runway Roughness Indicator
Introduction
✓ Aircraft & car/truck responses are ≠✓ Demonstration of the erratic results that
can be obtained with IRI (IT IS NOT GOOD)
✓ IRI: NON surface profile characteristics
✓ Some aviation agencies require IRI
✓ IRI application in airfield is a big concern
✓ IRI is a pavement index for roads/highways
Q
Demonstration of the Non-Applicability of IRI
as a Runway Roughness Indicator
Introduction
✓ Best tool is rod & level
✓ It takes time but it is worthwhile
✓ Obtained with the sensitive of 1 mm
✓ True information of runway surface profile
✓ rms: direct measurement of roughness
rms (“root mean square”)
Q
✓ Runway Roughness Studies Start 1950’s
Demonstration of the Non-Applicability of IRI
as a Runway Roughness Indicator
Regulation Requirements
Q
✓ ANAC – National Agency for Civil Aviation
✓ RBAC – Brazilian Regulation for
Civil Aviation (RBAC 154)
✓ IRI ≤ 2.5 m/Km reported every 200 m
✓ For Code D, E or F at 3 m & 6 m from each
side of the runway centerline
Demonstration of the Non-Applicability of IRI
as a Runway Roughness Indicator
✓ ANAC is severe, but it works as a partner
Tom Jobin Int´l Airport Information
Demonstration of the Non-Applicability of IRI
as a Runway Roughness Indicator
✓ Operated by RIOgaleão
✓ Concessionaire formed by:
51 % of
Changi
Airports
Int´l (CAI)
49 % of
INFRAERO
Q
PMS – RioGaleãoTom Jobin inT’l AirporT
Information
Runway 10/28
Tom Jobin Int´l Airport Information
Q
Field Investigation (Runway Profile)
Q
✓ Runway surface profiles (rod & level)
✓ Greater max. deformations → End 10
Demonstration of the Non-Applicability of IRI
as a Runway Roughness Indicator
✓ rms measured at center of each slab
& centerline
✓ Detected 30 deformation basins
✓ Smaller max. def. End 28, but critical
✓ Boeing Roughness Criteria
Q
✓ IRI obtained in 30 June 2017 (after
1st recuperation) – entire runway
✓ rms measured in 2017 (after 1st
recuperation) - entire runway
Demonstration of the Non-Applicability of IRI
as a Runway Roughness Indicator
Field Investigation
Q
Slab Bravo
Slab Charlie
RWY CL
Slab Delta
Slab Echo
Pavement Surface Recuperation
Demonstration of the Non-Applicability of IRI
as a Runway Roughness Indicator
2016
2017
&
Field Investigation (Runway Profile)
Longitudinal view
18.75
mCL
11.25
mCL
3.75
mCL
CL
3.75
mCL
11.75
mCL18.75
mCL
-3.5
-3
-2.5
-2
-1.5
-1
-0.5
0
Ma
x.
de
f. (
cm
)
Transverse view
18.75
mCL
11.25
mCL
3.75
mCL
CL
3.75
mCL
11.25
mCL
18.75
mCL
-5
-4
-3
-2
-1
0
Ma
x. d
ef. (
cm
)
Transverse vew
Q
Demonstration of the Non-Applicability of IRI
as a Runway Roughness Indicator
Field Investigation (Runway Profile)
Close by End 28
Q
Demonstration of the Non-Applicability of IRI
as a Runway Roughness Indicator
0.0
5.0
10.0
15.0
20.0
25.0
0 20 40 60 80
Bu
mp h
eig
ht
H, c
m
Bump length L, meters
Unacceptable Excessive
Temporarily
acceptable
Acceptable
Field InvestigationICAO-BOEING Roughness Criteria
Scale of Runway Roughness vs. IRI
You do not need to be an engineer!!!
Q
A high school student, may be?
Aircraft MTOW (lb) Ratio
( 3000)
Tire Presure
(psi)
Tire φ
(in)
EMB 190 110,861 37.0 131 104
B/737-800 155,456 51.8 185 121
A320 171,383 57.1 178 124
B/747-400F 909,745 303.2 230 127
A380 1,267,300 422.4 205 140
Vehicle Weight (lb) Ratio
( 3000)
Tire Pressure
(psi)Tire φ (in)
Chevrolet Spark 3,000 1.0 30 58
Ford Expedition 6,100 2.0 36 80
Demonstration of the Non-Applicability of IRI
as a Runway Roughness Indicator
Scale of Runway Roughness vs. IRI
Yes, you do need to be an engineer!!!
Q
Vehicle/Aircraft Weight (lb)Frequency of
Response (c/s)
Ratio
( A380)
Chevrolet Spark 3,000 4.90 20.4
Ford Expedition 6,100 3.44 14.3
F5-B 15,275 2.17 9.0
Embraer 190 110,861 0.81 3.4
B737-800 155,456 0.68 2.8
A320 171,383 0.65 2.7
B747-400F 909,745 0.28 1.2
A380 1,261,569 0.24 1.0
Demonstration of the Non-Applicability of IRI
as a Runway Roughness Indicator
Q
0
10
20
30
40
0 1000 2000 3000 4000
rm
s (
mm
)
Distance from End 10 (m)
3.75mL - rms Entire Runway
rms values rms limit 1.0
2.0
3.0
4.0
5.0
0 1000 2000 3000 4000
IRI
(m/K
m)
Distance from End 10 (m)
Average IRI at 6 m left CL
Slab C IRI limit
1
2
3
4
5
0 1000 2000 3000 4000
IRI
(m/K
m)
Distance from End 10 (m)
Average IRI at 3 m Left CL
Slab C IRI limit
Same Slab (“C”)
Same Slab (“C”)
Q
1.0
2.0
3.0
4.0
5.0
0 1000 2000 3000 4000
IRI
(m/K
m)
Distance from End 10 (m)
Average IRI at 6 m right CL
Slab D IRI limit
0.00
1.00
2.00
3.00
4.00
5.00
0 1000 2000 3000 4000
IRI
(m/K
m)
Distance from End 10
Average IRI at 3 m right CL
Slab D IRI limit
Same Slab (“D”)
Same Slab (“D”)
21.8315.27
0
10
20
30
40
0 1000 2000 3000 4000
rm
s (
mm
)
Distance from End 10 (m)
3.75mR - rms – Entire Runway
After correction (2017)
rms below and above 9.15 mm
IRI below and above 2.50 m/Km
6m left
CL
6m right
6m left
3m left
6m right
3m right
Q
Demonstration of the Non-Applicability of IRI
as a Runway Roughness Indicator
Comparison Between IRI and rms
500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000
Runway 15/33
Q
Demonstration of the Non-Applicability of IRI
as a Runway Roughness Indicator
500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000 3500 4000
rms below and above 9.15 mm
IRI below and above 2.50 m/Km6 mL cL
3 mL cL3 mR cL6 mR cL
500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000 3500 4000
3.75 m L cL
3.75 m R cL
Comparison Between IRI and rmsRunway 10/28
Q
Summary & Lessons
Demonstration of the Non-Applicability of IRI
as a Runway Roughness Indicator
✓ IRI is not an adequate indicator for
runway roughness
✓ IRI results do not match those of true
profiles
✓ IRI does not pick up runway deformations
and/or distortions
✓ IRI indicates that the runways are rough,
although they have good ride qualities
Q
0
5
10
15
20
0 2000 4000rm
s (
mm
)
Distance End 10 (m)
Centerline
Summary & Lessons
0
10
20
0 2000 4000
rm
s (
mm
)
Distance End 10 (m)
3.75mL
Vertical Curves
Demonstration of the Non-Applicability of IRI
as a Runway Roughness Indicator
Runway 10/28 after 2017
Q
0
5
10
15
20
0 2000 4000rm
s (
mm
)
Distance from End 10 …
11.75mR
0
5
10
15
20
0 2000 4000
rm
s (
mm
)
Distance from End 10 (m)
3.75mR
Summary & Lessons
Vertical Curves
Demonstration of the Non-Applicability of IRI
as a Runway Roughness Indicator
Runway 10/28 after 2017
Q
Demonstration of the Non-Applicability of IRI
as a Runway Roughness Indicator
2017
Q
Demonstration of the Non-Applicability of IRI
as a Runway Roughness Indicator
2017
Q
Demonstration of the Non-Applicability of IRI
as a Runway Roughness Indicator
2017
Q
Demonstration of the Non-Applicability of IRI
as a Runway Roughness Indicator
2018
Thank you
Q
Demonstration of the Non-Applicability of IRI
as a Runway Roughness Indicator
