Airport Pavement Roughness

Boeing Bump Index Computations for
Airport Pavement Roughness

Injun Song, Ph.D., P.E., SRA International, Inc.
Albert Larkin, Federal Aviation Administration
November 4, 2015
Road Profile Users’ Group (RPUG) Meeting
Raleigh Marriott City Center Hotel, Raleigh, NC
Acknowledgement
• Jeffrey Gagnon, P.E., FAA Airport Technology R&D

Branch
• Albert Larkin, FAA Airport Technology R&D Branch
• Mike Roginski, P.E., Boeing
SRA Proprietary 2
Outline
• Boeing Bump Index

– Boeing Bump Index Computations.
– Background for Development of BBI.
– Current Standards for BBI.
– Computer Program for BBI Computations.
– Application for Rut Depth Measurements.
• Runway Surface Drainage
• Case Studies
1. BBI for In-Service Airfield Pavement Evaluation.
2. Aircraft Responses to Wavelength Changes.
3. FAA Simulator Project.
4. Runway Intersection Profiling
SRA Proprietary 3
Boeing Bump Index Computations
• A virtual rod between two points of an imaginary

longitudinal runway profile line.
• Variable rod length from three times of sample spacing
to 400 feet (=120 meters).
• Bump height and shortest bump length for each
individual disturbance.
• BBIi=(computed bump height) / (limit of acceptable bump
height).
SRA Proprietary 4
Background for Developments of BBI
– Rational
• “Single discrete, large wavelength bumps on a runway, which if

severe enough, could lead to structural failure by exceeding the limit
design loads of an aircraft. Currently, the Boeing Bump Criteria
addresses this issue, such that bumps reaching the unacceptable
level are repaired.”
– Mike Roginski, “Runway Roughness Evaluation- Boeing Bump
Methodology”, ASTM E17 Committee Meeting, Dec 9, 2014
• Structural failure of an axle or bottoming of the main gear
oleo strut are typical concerns when the bump falls
within the criteria limit.
SRA Proprietary 5
Background for Developments of BBI
– Research
• NASA studies on aircraft response for wavelength

variation with speed increases.
• Boeing 737 simulation studies for relationship of
roughness level and aircraft vertical acceleration.
• Boeing Commercial Airplane Group, “Runway
Roughness Measurement, Quantification, and
Application - Boeing Method,” Document No. D6-81746,
Boeing, November 1995.
SRA Proprietary 6
Document No. D6-81746
• Boeing Commercial Airplane
Group, “Runway Roughness
Measurement, Quantification,
and Application - Boeing
Method,” Document No. D6-
81746, Boeing, November
1995.
• http://www.airporttech.tc.faa.gov
/Pavement/25rough.asp
SRA Proprietary 7
Aircraft Response
– NASA Studies (Lee and Scheffel, 1968)
600
0.5
500
aircraft response frequencies (cps)
400
Wavelength, ft
1.0
300
1.5
200
100
10
0
120
0 50 100 150 200
Speed, knots
|8
Roughness Criteria 1975 vs 1994
|9
Airplane Load Factor Exceedances for Fatigue
Life Study in 1974
| 10
Roughness Occurrence Frequency of Typical
Runways
| 11
Main Landing Gear Axle Fatigue Life (1975)
| 12
1995 Boeing Roughness Criteria
1975-1994
1973
Shortest Bump Length
Bump
height
| 13
Current Standards for BBI
• AC 150/5380-9, Guidelines and Procedures for

Measuring Airfield Pavement Roughness.
• ICAO Annex 14, Aerodrome Design and Operations.
• ASTM, WK41777, New Standard Boeing Bump Index
Computations Based on Bump Template Simulations
(under development).
| 14
Computer Program for BBI Computations
– ProFAA
http://www.airporttech.tc.faa.gov/Pavement/25rough.asp
| 15
Application for Rut Depth Measurements – FAA
NAPTF Transverse Profiler
Encoder (DMI)
Infrared Laser
FAA NAPTF Transverse Profiler for High Tire
Pressure Project for ICAO
Runway Surface Drainage
• AC 150/5320-5D Airport Drainage Design

– Longitudinal Slope: “…in sag vertical curve…,a minimum slope of 0.3
percent should occur within 50 feet of the low point of curve.”, AASHTO
Green Book A Policy On Geometric Design of Highways and Streets
– Transverse Slope: “For roadways, Use of a cross slope steeper than 2
percent on pavements with a central cross line is not desirable. In areas of
intense rainfall, a somewhat steeper cross slope (2.5 percent) may be used
to facilitate drainage.”, UFC-3-250-01FA (Pavement Design for Roads,
Streets, Walks, and Open Storage Areas)
• For drainage purpose only, minimum 0.50 percent of pavement
surface slope in any direction at runway intersection.
• In general, however, pavement roughness would be an issue at
runway intersections with increasing slopes like 0.50 percent to
improve drainage at pavement surfaces.
SRA Proprietary 18
Runway Surface Drainage (Cont’d)
0.5%
0.36%
0.17%
SRA Proprietary 19
Case Study I: BBI for In-Service Airfield
Pavement Evaluation – Runway Profile
FAA Boeing APR
180
160
West East
140
120
Boeing-SurPro
Elevation, cm
100
FAA-Inertial
80
60
40
APR-Auto Rod and Level
20
0
0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000 3500
Distance, m
Case Study I: BBI for In-Service Airfield
Pavement Evaluation
FAA-Inertial
Boeing-SurPro
APR-Auto Rod and Level

Case Study I: BBI vs Dynamic Force (B-727)
SRA Proprietary 22
Case Study I: BBI vs Dynamic Force (B-727)
SRA Proprietary 23
Case Study II: B-737 Simulator Study at the
FAA Mike Monroney Aeronautical Center
• The Oklahoma City B-737 flight simulator provided

simulations to 33 highly experienced pilots of various
backgrounds using 37 vertical profiles of real world
taxiways & 37 vertical profiles of real world runways.
• Four ISO measures of the vibration experienced in the
cockpit were computed for each simulation: weighted
RMS, weighted VDV, weighted MTVV and DKup.
• 5% of pilots rated unacceptable roughness when they
experienced 0.31g and 0.35g taxiway and runway
profiles based on Weighted RMS.
• A-330 project is on going.
| 24
Case Study II: B-737 Simulator Study at the
FAA Mike Monroney Aeronautical Center
| 25
Case Study II: B-737 Simulator Study at the FAA Mike
Monroney Aeronautical Center – f vs CGg
| 26
Case Study III: Aircraft Responses to
Wavelength Changes – ProFAA
• Used FAA’s ProFAA. • B727 Gear Config.

• Selected Boeing 727-200.
• Used simulation speed at
100 knots.
• Used 0.025 damping
factor. 63.25 ft
• Computed accelerations
at cockpit (Gcp) and
center of gravity (Gcg).
23.15 ft
Wavelength Changes – G Responses
3-inch +0.17% -0.17%
300 ft
Wavelength Changes
SRA Proprietary 29
Case Study IV: Runway Intersection Profiling
SRA Proprietary 30
Longitudinal Slope at Primary Runway
SRA Proprietary 31
Transverse Slope Secondary Runway
SRA Proprietary 32
Questions?
Injun Song, Ph.D., P.E.

SRA International, Inc.
Phone: (609) 601 – 6800 ext.173
Email: injun_song@sra.com
SRA Proprietary 33

Airport Pavement Roughness - Boeing

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Airport Pavement Roughness - Boeing

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Airport Pavement Roughness - Boeing

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Boeing Bump Index Computations for

• Jeffrey Gagnon, P.E., FAA Airport Technology R&D

• Boeing Bump Index

• A virtual rod between two points of an imaginary

• “Single discrete, large wavelength bumps on a runway, which if

• NASA studies on aircraft response for wavelength

• AC 150/5380-9, Guidelines and Procedures for

• AC 150/5320-5D Airport Drainage Design

APR-Auto Rod and Level

• The Oklahoma City B-737 flight simulator provided

• Used FAA’s ProFAA. • B727 Gear Config.

3-inch +0.17% -0.17%

Injun Song, Ph.D., P.E.

You might also like