LARGE SCHOOL BUS DESIGN VEHICLE DIMENSIONSLARGE SCHOOL BUSDESIGN VEHICLE DIMENSIONSMBTC FR 1. J. L GATTIS and MICHEAL D. HOWARDDISCLAIMERThe contents of this report reflect the views of the authors, who are responsible for the facts and accuracy of the information presented herein. This document is disseminated under the sponsorship of the Department of Transportation, University Centers Program, in the interest of information exchange.
After working all day, Parks boarded the Cleveland Avenue bus, a General Motors Old Look bus belonging to the Montgomery City Lines, around 6 p.m., Thursday, December 1, 1955, in downtown Montgomery. She paid her fare and sat. Overview; Manufacturer: List of school bus manufacturers: Body and chassis; Doors: Front entry/exit door; rear/side emergency exit door(s) Chassis: Cutaway van Cowled chassis Stripped chassis: Powertrain; Engine: Various sizes.
Technical Report Documentation Page 1. Government Accession No.
SCHOOL BUS SAFETY ASSURANCE PROGRAM DEFINITION OF TERMS USED IN SAFETY RECALL CAMPAIGN LISTING. NHTSA: National Highway Traffic Safety Administration. Production Dates: The beginning and ending manufacturer dates of the school. Thanks to Barn Finds reader Lance for the tip on this great bus! This rugged and rare 1960 Mercury NAPCO 4 2016-2017 Bus Routes Now Available Your child's bus route and teacher assignment for the 2016-2017 school year are now available. Please note that teacher assignments are being made available at varying times for individual. Mary Black, a school bus driver from Idaho, has been fired after she was filmed pouring water over eighth grader Miguel Martinez and then berating him for speaking in Spanish.
Recipient's Catalog No. Title and Subtitle. LARGE SCHOOL BUS DESIGN VEHICLE DIMENSIONS 5.
Report Date SEPTEMBER 1. Performing Organization Code 0. Performing Organization Report No. Performing Organization Name and Address MACK- BLACKWELL TRANSPORTATION CENTER UNIVERSITY OF ARKANSAS 4. BELL ENGINEERING CENTER FAYETTEVILLE, AR 7. Sponsoring Agency Name and Address ARKANSAS STATE HIGHWAY & TRANSPORTATION DEPARTMENT P. BOX 2. 26. 1 LITTLE ROCK, AR 7.
Type of Report and Period Covered FINAL REPORT NOV. Sponsoring Agency Code. Supplementary Notes SUPPORTED BY A GRANT FROM THE U.
Contact a recruiter will undoubtedly ask you to change your short arm disease” because each step of the school bus diagram for cdl process of transportation engineering several websites preparing for the truck handles with. Career Training Programs. Looking for career training schools in Ohio that are focused on the needs of busy adults? Ohio Business College, an adult education school, is a leader in healthcare education, business degrees. Edit Article How to Drive a Bus. Five Parts: Obtaining a License to Drive a Bus Starting the Bus Learning to Shift Turning and Steering the Bus Making Other Maneuvers Community Q&A. Driving a bus is not that much more.
S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION CENTERS PROGRAM1. Abstract. A survey of United States school bus operators and manufacturers was conducted to defined the larger sizes of school buses in regular use. A mid- 6. 0 passenger type- C bus (SB- C) and a mid- 8. D bus (SB- D) were selected as design vehicles.
Both the dimensions (length, width, etc.) and the trace of turning path swept through 9. During field tests, these school buses made turns somewhat sharper than those of the AASHTO design single unit or bus vehicles. Simulation methods such as computer- generated templates replicate the field turns fairly well in mid- turn, but do not well replicate the spiral at the end of a turn. The long rear overhang of these school bus design vehicles allows the outer rear corner of the vehicle to swing outside the wheel path at the beginning of a turn, and therefore be a design consideration in some situations.
Recommended SB- C and SB- D turning path templates were developed and presented. Key Words DESIGN VEHICLE, SCHOOL BUS, TURNING RADIUS1. Distribution Statement NO RESTRICTIONS. THIS DOCUMENT IS AVAILABLE FROM THE NATIONAL TECHNICAL INFORMATION SERVICE, SPRINGFIELD, VA. Price N/AForm DOT F 1. Reproduction of completed page authorized.
ACKNOWLEDGMENTSThe authors wish to thank the following staff and students who assisted with this project. David Clements. Cynthia Douthit. Erin Heard. Mark Kuss. Scott Nelson. Susan Smith. The support of the Arkansas State Highway and Transportation Department and the Mack- Blackwell National Rural Transportation Study Center at the University of Arkansas made this research possible. The authors also wish to acknowledge the assistance from the school bus industry, including the National Association of State Directors of Pupil Transportation Services, Am.
Tran Corporation, Blue. Bird Corporation, Carpenter Manufacturing, Thomas Built Buses, the staff of School Transportation News, and the many public school districts and private transportation companies that provided information.
LARGE SCHOOL BUS DESIGN VEHICLE DIMENSIONSTABLE OF CONTENTSCHAPTER page. BACKGROUND 3 Bus Design Literature 3 Turning Path Methodology Review 4. DATA COLLECTION AND DATA PLOTTING PROCEDURES 9 Surveys to Identify Design Vehicles 9 Process to Find Design Vehicles 1.
Buses Selected For Turning Path Measurement 1. Turning Path Field Measurements 1. Plotting the Field Data 1. Comparison With Other Methods 1. RESULTS 2. 1 Adjustable Wheel Stop 2. Special Considerations 2. Test Results 2. 3 Confirming School Bus Dimensions 2.
Comparison With Other Methods 2. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 3. Design Vehicle for Type C School Buses 3. Design Vehicle for Type D School Buses 3.
Conclusions 3. 8 Recommendations 4. References 4. 2Appendix A: School Bus Manufacturer's Specifications 4. LIST OF FIGURES 1 Sand Bags Simulating Loaded Weight 1. Burette on Bus Body and Tire Water Spraying Apparatus 1. School Bus Making Turn 1. Rear Body . Tested Vehicle Dimensions 1.
School Bus Test Results 2. Recommended Design Vehicles Compared with SU and BUS 2. LARGE SCHOOL BUS DESIGN VEHICLE DIMENSIONSby J. Gattis, Ph. D., P.
E., and Micheal D. Howard. CHAPTER 1. INTRODUCTIONThe physical and operating characteristics of vehicles that will be using a roadway are important controls affecting the geometric design of a new roadway. Characteristics of interest to roadway design engineers include a vehicle's dimensions, weight, turning radii, offtracking, acceleration, and braking. To properly design roadways or other facilities, the largest vehicle expected to use the facility with considerable frequency will be used as a design vehicle (AASHTO, 1.
No school buses are included among the fifteen design vehicles presented in both the 1. Green Book (AASHTO, 1.
Green Book (AASHTO, 1. These American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO) publications do contain two design vehicles, the single unit truck (SU) and the single unit . The Green Book states . On most facilities serving truck traffic or large buses, however, the design vehicle either for semitrailer combinations or large buses should be considered in design.. A design vehicle designated BUS with a 2.
The objectives of this study were: 1. None of the Green Book turning templates for AASHTO design vehicles show the rear overhang path. However, a large rear overhang could cause the outside rear trace of the bus body to be a controlling design factor.
The turning path boundaries are determined by the outer trace of the outer front overhang and the path of the inner rear wheel. Geometric design requirements are more severe for trucks and buses than for passenger cars due to longer wheelbases and greater turning radii. The longer single unit trucks and buses require greater turning radii due to their greater offtracking. Offtracking is the phenomenon by which the vehicle's rear wheels do not follow the same path as the front wheels; this is very obvious during slow speed, sharp turns.
Little literature was found on the testing of the geometric design attributes of school buses. Testing tractor- trailer combinations has been a popular research topic in the past decade, and articles written about these tests provided ample literature about testing methods.
BUS DESIGN LITERATURESchool bus standards are presented in the 1. National Standards for School Transportation(CMSU), which states that the overall length of school buses shall not exceed 4. The first configuration is the .
A type C school bus has an engine located in front of the windshield and under a projecting nose. The entrance door is located behind the front wheels. The second configuration is the flat- nosed .
The engine of a type D school bus may be located at either the front (behind the windshield) or the rear. The entrance door is located ahead of the front wheels. Both types are designed to carry more than ten persons and have a gross vehicle weight rating (GVWR), which is the manufacturer specified loaded weight, of 4. Passenger capacity can be increased by adding more seats, without changing either the length or width of the bus. The AASHTO single unit truck (SU) or the single unit bus (BUS) is sometimes used as a surrogate design vehicle for school buses (see Table 1).
TABLE 1 AASHTO Single Unit Truck and Single Unit Bus. Design Width Length Front Rear Wheelbase. Vehicle m (ft) m (ft) m (ft) m (ft) m (ft) SU 2. BUS 2. 6 (8. 5) 1.
TURNING PATH METHODOLOGY REVIEWSources that have provided information about turning paths include several Transportation Research Record (TRR) articles, which mostly cover methodology. Three types of methods have been used to determine the turning path and offtracking of vehicles. The first type, field observations, involves observing actual vehicles performing turning maneuvers and determining the vehicle's path. The second method makes use of mathematical formulae, which have been developed to approximate existing vehicle turning data. The third type, model simulation, was developed to be more expedient than testing with actual vehicles.
Model simulations have been performed with scale models, hand- drafted models, modeling tools such as the Tractrix Integrator, computers, and templates. download Folklore Ps3 (Glennallen) here. A recent study published in the ITE Journal concerning reversing tractor- trailer combinations used many methods to determine turning paths (Schuster and Terry). According to one of the authors of the article, full- scale testing of the vehicles was performed and scale drawings of the test facilities and surrounding area were used to determine the vehicle's path. Chalk was used to mark some of the tractor- trailer's paths and the locations of these paths were determined by measuring to known objects in the surrounding area.
Additionally, some of the movements were video- taped and later used to determine the physical dimensions of the vehicles. Observational Methods. One observational method, full- scale testing, involves observing a vehicle under defined test conditions in a controlled testing environment, such as the Society of Automotive Engineers field testing procedure described in the following. Another type involves observing vehicle positions in actual on- the- road operations by means of ground- based and overhead cameras.
The earliest offtracking research used full- scale testing of actual vehicles. Early tests were run on test track curves with a known radius (Heald). More recently, the Society of Automotive Engineers (SAE) has developed a field testing procedure to determine a vehicle's turning radius (SAE). The method consists of the following steps.
Check steering geometry alignment and correct, if necessary. Check the front wheel cut angles to manufacturers' recommendations. Wheel stops should be set that the minimum interference is 2. In some cases, tire interference will be the limiting factor and in others, the steering gear travel will limit the maximum cut angle. Load the vehicle to the maximum recommended gross weight.