RUNWAY AND HIGHWAY GEOMETRIC DESIGN WITH CONSIDERATION OF HYDROPLANING RISK
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.11113/mjce.v26.15882Keywords:
Hydroplanning, airport, highway, hydroplanning riskAbstract
Runway is multilane high speed corridor. Width of runway varies from 23 m to 60 m. An important aspect of runway and highway geometric design is ensuring prompt removal of water from the runway / highway to reduce skidding and hydroplaning risks of aircraft /highway traffic operating under wet-weather conditions. A methodology for runway and highway geometric design that incorporates hydroplaning consideration has been proposed to ensure safe operations. Cross-slope is the main geometric element affected by the hydroplaning consideration. This paper presents an independent simplified methodology for risk calculation against hydroplaning. This methodology determines whether a trial geometric design catering to the aircraft traffic and highway traffic meets the safety requirement against hydroplaning for the selected design rainfall. Critical texture depth has been found to be 0.5mm for airport pavement to avoid hydroplaning. Provision of side slope on one side is safer than that on both sides with regard to hydroplaning risk. Hydroplaning risk increases with increasing cross-slope of the runway for a known texture depth. Hydroplaning risk in highway is minimal and risk may be minimized by limiting vehicle speed to 40 kmph or lesser during rainingReferences
Anderson, D. A., R. S. Huebner, J. R. Reed, J. C. Warner, and J. J. Henry(1998). “Improved Surface Drainage of Pavements: Final Reportâ€. NCHRP Web Document 16. Pennsylvania
Transportation Institute, Pennsylvania State University, State College, 1998.
Ashford, N., and P. H. Wright(1992). Airport Engineering, 3rd ed. John Wiley and Sons, Inc., New York.
Fwa, T. F., and G. P. Ong (2006). “Transverse Pavement Grooving against Hydroplaning II: Design.†ASCE Journal of Transportation Engineering, Vol. 132, No. 6, 449–457.
G P Ong and T F Fwa (2009). “Runway Geometric Design Incorporating Hydroplaning Consideration.†Journal of the Transportation Research Board, No. 2106, Transportation
Research Board of the National Academies, Washington, D.C., 2009, pp. 118–128.
Gallaway, B. M., D. L. Ivey, G. G. Hayes, W. G. Ledbetter, R. M. Olson, D. L. Woods, and R. E. Schiller. Pavement and Geometric Design Criteria for Minimizing Hydroplaning. FWHARD-79-31. FWHA, U.S. Department of Transportation, 1979, 278 pp.
Helleberg, J., D. Domino, A. Mundra, and R. Mayer(2006). Predicting Aircraft Approach Speeds
for Enhancing Airport Capacity. In Proceedings of AIAA Guidance, Navigation, and Control Conference and Exhibit, AIAA, Keystone, Colo.
Horne, W. B., and U. T. Joyner(1965). Pneumatic Tire Hydroplaning and Some Effects on Vehicle Performance. Presented at SAE International Automotive Engineering Congress,
Detroit, Mich., 1965.
Horne, W. B., T. J. Yager, and D. L. Ivey. Recent Studies to Investigate Effects of Tire Footprint Ratio on Dynamic Hydroplaning Speed. The Tire Pavement Interface (M. G. Pottinger and T. J. Yager, eds.), ASTM STP 929, ASTM, West Conshohocken, Pa., 1986, pp. 26–46.
Huebner, R. S J. J. Henry. Criteria for Predicting Hydroplaning Potential. Journal of Transportation Engineering, ASCE, Vol. 112, No. 5, Sept. 1986, pp. 549–553.
Huebner, R. S., J. R. Reed, and J. J. Henry (1986). “Criteria for Predicting Hydroplaning Potentialâ€. ASCE Journal of Transportation Engineering, Vol. 112, No. 5, 549–553.
Surface Drainage Design(2006). FAA Advisory Circular AC 150/5320-5C. FAA, U.S. Department of Transportation, Washington, D.C.
