4500 Class Double-Ended Passenger Ferry Design For Staten Island Ferry

1y ago
8 Views
2 Downloads
1.59 MB
16 Pages
Last View : Today
Last Download : 2m ago
Upload by : Josiah Pursley
Transcription

Ollis Class Double-Ended Passenger FerryDesign for Staten Island FerryAuthor name(s): Patrick D. Faas1 (AM), Kurt A. Jankowski1 (AM), Michael E. Johnson1 (V), Matthew J. Wichgers1 (AM),Matthew Williamson1 (M)1. Elliott Bay Design Group, LLC, Seattle, Washington, USAContinuing the tradition of service provided by New York City Department of Transportation, Staten Island Ferry(SIF) Division, the new Ollis Class Ferry will be a welcome addition to the fleet. Designed to meet the future needsof the ferry system, the design incorporates the latest regulatory and environmental requirements while drawing frommany of the best aspects of the existing fleet. Elliott Bay Design Group (EBDG) worked closely with the entire StatenIsland Ferry team to ensure the functionality of the ferries would be as desired.The design of the Ollis Class Ferry is developed looking forward to meet the future needs for renewal of the StatenIsland Ferry fleet. As ridership continues to grow over the life of these new vessels passenger load and unload timesat the terminal are likely to increase while the overall schedule must remain the same. Therefore these vessels willbe required to operate at greater speeds than any of the vessels in the current fleet. In order to meet this requirementhullform and weight optimizations were performed throughout the design process. As a result, the new Ollis ClassFerry design will be among the fastest Voith Schneider Propeller driven, double-ended vessels in the world.New regulations place ever tighter requirements on the design for safety and environmental requirements. Thevessels will be ABS classed to the Rules for Service on Rivers and Intracoastal Waterways and will meet therequirements of USCG Subchapter H including NVIC 9-97 CH-1. The engines will be some of the first to meet thenew EPA Tier 4 emissions standards.This paper follows the design process, from an initial fleet analysis, which included development of a concept designof the vessel among other options, through model testing and completed contract design.KEY WORDS: ferry; passenger ferry; double-ended ferry;Staten Island Ferry; vessel an Bureau of ShippingAmericans with Disabilities ActBrake HorsepowerCode of Federal RegulationsComputational Fluid DynamicsControllable Pitch PropellerDirections in DesignElliott Bay Design GroupElectro-Motive DieselEngineers Operating StationEnvironmental Protection AgencyFinite Element AnalysisFixed Pitch PropellerGalley Design and SalesGeneral ElectricGlobal Positioning SystemLiquefied Natural GasMarine Research Institute NetherlandsMaximum Continuous RatingMarine Design DynamicsMain Vertical ZoneNoise Control EngineeringNavigation and Vessel Inspection CircularPreliminary Design InvestigationRhinoSCRSIFSLMSWBSUSCGVSPRhinoceros 3D Modeling SoftwareSelective Catalytic ReductionStaten Island FerryService Life MarginShip Work Breakdown StructureUnited States Coast GuardVoith Schneider PropellerINTRODUCTIONTravel between Staten Island and Manhattan has been providedby ferry services since the 18th century and became an officialmunicipal service in 1905. Staten Island is the southernmost ofNew York City's five boroughs and is the only borough which isnot connected via the New York City Subway system. StatenIsland Ferries transit across the upper bay of New York Harbor(Figure 1) between the St. George Terminal on Staten Island andthe Whitehall Terminal on Manhattan Island. The 5.2 mileroute is operated 24 hours a day, every day of the year andserves over 22 million passengers annually. On a typicalweekday, five boats make 109 trips, carrying approximately70,000 passengers.

port and starboard notations are referred to following thatorientation. However, because both ends will act as both bowand stern, concepts of forward and aft for a double-ended vesselcan be confusing. Thus, the directions referred to in this reportwill primarily be referenced as towards midships or towards theends.FLEET ANALYSISIn 2009 Elliott Bay Design Group (EBDG) was part of a teamled by KPFF Consulting Engineers, engaged by SIF to performa preliminary design investigation study. The goal of the studywas to determine the best course of action for the Staten IslandFerry fleet to meet the demands to be placed on the system inthe next several decades. Fleet ridership is expected to increasecontinually into the foreseeable future as both recreationalactivities on Staten Island and commuter traffic into the city areexpected to continue to grow. Included in this study was ananalysis of the existing fleet of vessels.Figure 1: Staten Island Ferry RouteThe current Staten Island Ferry (SIF) fleet consists of threeclasses of vessels, the AUSTEN, BARBERI, and MOLINARIClasses, and the M/V JOHN F. KENNEDY (KENNEDY). SeeTable 1 for the particulars of the current fleet of vessels.Table 1: Current Staten Island Ferry FleetVesselClassAUSTENKENNEDYBARBERIMOLINARINo. 07,00010,000While SIF originally provided automobile service it has sincebeen discontinued. Of the large vessels in the SIF fleet, thethree MOLINARI Class ferries and the KENNEDY have thecapability of accommodating vehicles, while the two BARBERIClass ferries do not. The ferries currently provide passengeronly service, with bicycles allowed to be walked on via thelower bridge to the Main Deck.GENERAL INFORMATIONThe Staten Island Ferries are double-ended vessels whichoperate consistently in the same orientation with respect to theirroutes. As a result, the ends are labeled as the New York endand the Staten Island end. The New York end is assumed to bethe forward end for standard naval architecture purposes, andFaas, et al.Options assessed in the fleet analysis included whether to renewthe existing BARBERI and AUSTEN Class vessels to extendtheir service life, to design new large or new small vessels toexpand the fleet capacity or replace existing vessels, andwhether to augment overnight service with a high speed vessel.Multiple combinations of these concepts and their integrationinto the existing fleet were evaluated based on factors includingoperating costs, capital costs, and a qualitative scorerepresenting reliability, safety and security, maintainability,environmental stewardship, passenger experience, and fleetcomplexity. The primary recommendation resulting from thisstudy was to build three new large ferries and retire threeexisting large ferries, namely the KENNEDY and the twoBARBERI Class vessels.Each vessel in the current fleet operates on a 30 minute oneway, one-hour round-trip schedule; with up to four vesselsoperating during peak rush hour periods. It is important to notethat to remain on schedule the ferry must depart on time fromthe terminal on each end of the route.Although passenger loads are variable throughout the day,several aspects of the system operation are fixed. Primarily, theterminal ramps are of a set width and provide a fixed capacityfor loading and unloading passengers. While a typical runduring rush hours can reach loads of approximately 2,500passengers, this number is expected to increase in the comingyears. As passenger loads increase, the loading and unloadingtime spent at the terminal will also increase, leaving less of theremaining hour of the schedule available for actually making thetransit. The current fleet has a typical cruising speed ofapproximately 15.4 knots, with a little margin left over to makeup time in the event of any delays. Part of the options forupdating the existing fleet involved addressing this potentialfuture schedule shortcoming via increasing the power and speedof the existing fleet.Ollis Class Double-Ended Passenger Ferry Design for Staten Island Ferry2

In a separate study commissioned by SIF and performed byGeorge G. Sharp, the option of converting the MOLINARIClass from conventional propeller driven propulsion topropulsion via Voith Schneider Propeller (VSP) units toimprove maneuverability was considered. The BARBERI Classand AUSTEN Class vessels are driven by VSP units andprovide a high degree of maneuverability appreciated by thecaptains within the SIF fleet. The study was done to determinethe practicality of gaining similar maneuverabilitycharacteristics on the MOLINARI Class. Based on modeltesting of the concept design of this modification, including barehull resistance testing and self-propelled testing using VSPpropeller models, the modification proved not to be feasible.The added power required as a result of the modifications tomaintain the desired operating speeds did not allow forsufficient operating margins with the presently installed enginepower.Evaluation of the recommendations provided by these twostudies led to the decision to procure new large passenger onlyferries to allow for replacement of the aging vessels within thefleet.CONCEPT DESIGN STUDYAs part of the KPFF led Preliminary Design Investigation (PDI)EBDG prepared concept design studies for each of the vesseloptions to assist with the assessment of ridership, operation andacquisition aspects of each potential fleet combination. Thefollowing highlights the attributes of the new large ferry conceptdesign included in the recommendation from the PDI.primary goal was to fit as many seats as possible on the threepassenger decks (the Main Deck, Saloon Deck, and BridgeDeck). Additionally, it was desired that the Main and SaloonDecks be at the same elevation as the terminal loading ramps,similar to the MOLINARI Class and KENNEDY vessels whichcarry vehicles. Replicating a feature from the KENNEDY,direct and unimpeded walkways from the loading ramps into thepassenger spaces were identified as a means for minimizingloading times by providing passengers direct access into thevessel without bunching around the exterior doors. See Figure 3for the preliminary concept arrangements of the Main andSaloon Decks.The fourth deck, the Hurricane Deck, is to be crew only; withboth pilot houses and a house top space for ventilation andvarious machinery such as the emergency generator.Additionally, stair towers were decided to be located at the endsof the vessels. Partly this was necessitated by the engineuptakes which needed to be located near midships, but mainlythe intent was to accommodate passengers loading andunloading to and from the Bridge Deck, and also to assist inmeeting the fire protection and refuge requirements of USCGSubchapter H (Reference [1]) and NVIC 9-97 (Reference [2]).The current vessels in the fleet do not have separate stair towers,which required special regulatory approval. For simplicity, itwas decided that this design should feature fully separated andprotected stair towers in order to comply with Reference [1].The addition of the dedicated stair towers was a major reasonfor the 10 foot length increase over the existing fleet.CONCEPT ARRANGEMENTSThe initial arrangements for the new large ferry were stronglydriven by the overall look and feel of the current fleet of vessels,as well as the parameters of the terminals, as shown in Figure 2.The shape of the Main Deck ends is set by the dimensions of theterminals, and the terminal loading ramps set the approximateheights for the lowest two passenger decks at the ends.Figure 2: Concept Outboard ProfileThe vessel length overall was increased slightly relative to theBARBERI and MOLINARI Class vessels to maximize internalspace, with the intent of minimizing the effect on operations.Within the available envelope of the vessel interior space theFaas, et al.Figure 3: Concept Passenger Deck ArrangementsOllis Class Double-Ended Passenger Ferry Design for Staten Island Ferry3

PROPULSION CONFIGURATION STUDYDuring the concept design phase a propulsion configurationstudy was performed for the new large and small ferry designsbeing developed. The propulsion study looked at seven uniquepropulsion system design options. The propulsion study wasperformed using input from SIF to ensure that emphasis wasplaced on the correct aspects of the propulsion systemarrangement and operations. Attributes of the propulsionsystem were selected and weighted in accordance with thepriorities of SIF operations.These attributes includedmaneuverability, reliability, maintainability, capital costs, lifecycle cost, and efficiency.four EMD model 8V-710 diesel engines rated at 2,000 BHPeach were selected as being adequate to power the vessel to asimilar speed as the rest of the fleet (8,000 BHP total, closest tothe BARBERI Class). See Figure 4 for the original propulsionarrangement concept featuring four diesel engines and four VSPunits. A shaft alley was included in the design to minimize thenumber of watertight bulkhead penetrations, and to provide aneasy walkway from the engine room to the propulsion rooms.The seven propulsion systems evaluated were: Diesel-mechanical with one VSP at each end Diesel-mechanical with two VSPs at each end Diesel-mechanical with one controllable pitch propeller(CPP) at each end Diesel-mechanical with two controllable pitch azimuththrusters at each end Diesel-electric with one fixed pitch propeller (FPP) ateach end Diesel-electric with two fixed pitch azimuth thrusters ateach end Hybrid propulsion with VSPsThe results of the study indicated that the configurations withfour total propellers were the most reliable because of their highdegree of redundancy. However, the VSP and azimuth optionswere nearly as reliable because the vessel would still be able tooperate if one propulsion unit were to fail. For maneuverability,the VSP options scored highest. Fuel use was the strongestdriver for life cycle costs and emissions, and the dieselmechanical options rated highest, with controllable pitchpropellers first, followed by the azimuth thrusters, and VSPsslightly below those. Finally, the VSP options were deemed themost maintainable, based on SIF's experience and expertise withthe VSP driven vessels in their current fleet. The VSP optionswere followed by the diesel-electric with FPP option, and thenall others, including the CPP and azimuth thrusters last, as theyhad the least similarity to the existing vessels in the fleet.The final results of the propulsion configuration study indicatedthat either the two or four VSP unit diesel-mechanical optionswere the best choices for the Staten Island Ferry fleet, and werenearly equal in overall ranking.The option with fourindependently driven VSPs provided the best overall reliability,while the two VSP option had better maintainability and wasless expensive over the full life-cycle of the vessel.PROPULSION ARRANGEMENTThe concept design was completed based on the four unit optionbecause it had received a slightly higher score and the heights ofthe smaller units proved easier to fit within the available depthand draft of the hull during initial development of the hullform.Because of commonality of EMD engines within the SIF fleet,Faas, et al.Figure 4: Concept Propulsion ArrangementSTRUCTURAL CONCEPT DESIGNThe structural arrangement concept for the new large ferrydesign was developed assuming a steel hull transversely framedwith 24 inch frame spacing. The original concept was to havelarge web frames every 20 feet, with longitudinal girdersrunning between the web frames to support the ordinary frames.For structural continuity and racking strength the superstructurewould be supported by web frames in line with the hull webframes, with superstructure decks stiffened longitudinallybetween frames. The basic midship scantlings were calculatedagainst the ABS Rules for Building and Classing Steel Vesselsfor Service on Rivers and Intracoastal Waterways (Reference[3]).PARAMETRIC WEIGHT ESTIMATEOnce the overall hull dimensions, concept superstructurearrangements, and propulsion configuration options wereroughly settled, a parametric weight estimate was performed toestimate the vessel's light ship weight.The light ship weight estimate was performed based on the U.S.Navy's Ship Work Breakdown System (SWBS), which dividesthe vessel into structure, propulsion, electrical, electronics,auxiliary, and outfit groupings. The various vessel parameterswere used to estimate the weight of each SWBS group based onknown weights from a database of similar vessels. Finally,margins were applied in accordance with Table II of the MarginManagement and Procedures for U.S. Navy Small Craft [4]commensurate with the concept design phase of a vessel. SeeFigure 5 for a summary of the initial parametric weight estimate.Ollis Class Double-Ended Passenger Ferry Design for Staten Island Ferry4

New Large VesselLength (ft)Beam (ft)Depth (ft)Power (hp)Generators 402.5Margin(%)15%15%20%20%20%20%W/ mponentVertical CGEstimate(ft)22.3Margin(ft)0.5W/ Margin(ft)22.8Figure 5: Concept Design Parametric Weight EstimateCONCEPT LINES PLANSBased on the propulsion configuration study and weightestimate, an initial hullform was developed for the four VSPoption. The most important factor defining the hullform wasplacement of the VSPs, which need a flat mounting plane. Forthe concept design, mounting planes were placed such that theVSP units were at the farthest longitudinal location possiblewhile still maintaining a fine half angle of entrance andremaining within the envelope of the superstructure and stairtowers. This was an important consideration to ensure the VSPunit housing would fit within the hull while providing a pathwayfor removal.Further constraining the placement of the VSPs was availableheight for the engines and their maximum inclination. Thisdetermined the shaft angle which was fixed because straight-lineshafts were preferred to keep the overall shaft layout simple andmaximize efficiency.The initial hullform featured hard double chines near midship tokeep construction of the hull as simple as possible while stillmaintaining adequate width throughout the engine room.Displacement for the concept hullform was developed such thatthe estimated light and fully loaded drafts and freeboards for thevessel would be similar to all existing vessels in the fleet toensure proper alignment with the terminal. Figure 6 shows theinitial hullform developed in the concept design study.Faas, et al.Figure 6: Concept Hull Body PlanOUTLINE SPECIFICATIONMany parts of the concept design do not appear directly on thedrawings or calculations. To provide a more complete view ofthe design, a set of outline specifications was developed duringthe concept design phase. The specifications covered theregulatory requirements for the vessels, such as the specificABS rules and class notations. Additionally, the specificationsdiscussed the interior arrangement concepts for seating andidentified the use of tamper and graffiti resistant stainless steelfixtures similar to those installed on the other vessels in thefleet. The heating and ventilation system was also addressed,including the intentional lack of air conditioning as the currentvessels are naturally ventilated.DESIGN PHASE TRANSITIONThe concept design report was finalized and submitted to SIF inNovember of 2010.As mentioned above, the designinvestigation related to reconfiguring the MOLINARI Classwith VSP units, while running in parallel, was concluded in2012. Also in 2012, SIF issued a request for proposals (RFP)for vessel design and construction support of new vessels whichincluded options for the design of new ferries, the modificationof the MOLINARI Class design or a combination.Concurrent with the RFP solicitation and award process, a valueengineering study was done on the new large ferry conceptdesign in 2013, and in 2014 SIF applied for and was awardedfederal funding from the Federal Transit Administration'sHurricane Sandy Resilience Program. These events contributedto ultimate selection by SIF to design and construct three newvessels based on the new large vessels. Further they also servedto identify some attributes to be included in the contract design.CONTRACT DESIGN PHASEIn 2014, EBDG was awarded the contract to design the newlarge vessels. Concurrent with this award, SIF also awarded acontract to The Glosten Associates as its Owner'sRepresentative to provide review and oversight on behalf of SIFthroughout the project.Ollis Class Double-Ended Passenger Ferry Design for Staten Island Ferry5

At the outset of the contract design effort, the team of SIF,Glosten, and EBDG met regularly to review, test the vesselparameters established by the concept design, update parametersbased on the concept design value engineering study and theresiliency grant, and to establish the baseline set of requirementsfor this vessel.The team paid significant attention to the operational aspects ofthe existing SIF fleet. All departments of SIF were included inthese discussions to ensure the best attributes were carriedforward into the new design, and that opportunities forimprovements were identified for the new vessels. Fundamentalcriteria for the final vessel design were established, these were: Capacity for 4,500 passengers.Minimum 2,500 Seats.Direct and unobstructed loading and unloading paths.ABS Classed.Minimum transit speed of 15.6 knots. Investigate andincrease transit speed to provide additional passengerloading time at each terminal over existing vessels,with ability to make up lost time via a sprint speed.Exceptional maneuverability able to deal withprevailing tidal currents, weather conditions, and vesseltraffic in New York Harbor.Operate in all weather conditions within the harbor.Weathertight side loading doors on Main Deck.Operate with one generator down for maintenance.Diesel mechanical driveline, able to maintain schedulewith one engine off-line.Robust interior outfit, capable of surviving highpassenger traffic with a minimum of maintenance.Enhanced crew accommodations.ADA compliant passenger spaces [5].EPA Tier 4 compliant engines.ROUTE TIMING ANALYSISAs has been noted, maintaining schedule is extremely importantto the operation of the SIF fleet and incorporating the bestattributes of the existing vessel arrangements will simplifypassenger loading. Ridership will increase, however, vessel andterminal arrangements will remain fixed. To accommodate forincreased loading and unloading times, shorter transit times willbe required.To determine a design speed that would allow for one extraminute of load and unload time at the terminals at (from eight tonine minutes), SIF requested an assessment of the existingvessel schedules. To accomplish this analysis, two data setswere used. SIF made available a set of GPS data collected byAECOM under a separate contract related to each run of theBARBERI between May and August 2011. In addition, data forthe tidal and river currents in the upper bay of New York Harborover this same period were obtained. These two sets of datawere used to evaluate the average transit speed, the averageacceleration when approaching and departing each terminal, andthe average passenger loading time. A model of the operatingFaas, et al.profile was then developed from these statistics.Based on the results of the study a design speed of 16.3 knotswas selected, and a goal of having a sprint speed above 17 knotswas set. The intent was that the new vessels would be able tomaintain a typical schedule as ridership increases. In addition,the vessels will be well suited to maintain schedules duringperiods of high traffic on the route and in cases of anyunanticipated delays.PROPULSION SYSTEM CONFIGURATION UPDATEOne of the first subjects addressed in the contract design phasewas the propulsion system configuration. Several options andconfigurations were revisited and reviewed. Propulsion systemattributes were reviewed as well. Significant to this review wasthe question of the final VSP configuration. The concept designpropulsion configuration study had shown that the two-unit andfour-unit options were nearly equal based on the weightingsgiven in the propulsion configuration study. The four-unitoption was considered favorable for the reliability provided byredundancy. However, because SIF has ultimately experienceda high degree of overall reliability with VSP units and a twounit configuration would be similar to that found on theBARBERI Class; the two-unit option was reconsidered. Areview of lifecycle costs of both options, including capital,acquisition, and maintenance costs, showed that the two-unitoption was less expensive overall. Although the addition of acombining gear added some complexity, the two-unit optionwas desirable to SIF operations and maintenance teams.Ultimately the two VSP unit option was selected.The major issue with the two-unit configuration was the heightof the VSP units themselves and the clear height above themrequired to perform standard maintenance. Propulsion powerrequired remains unchanged whether driven by two or fourunits. Thus, with double the power being supplied to a singleunit, the required blade length and mechanical height increasedsignificantly while the depth of the vessel remain firmly fixedbecause of terminal interface requirements. Changes to thearrangements had to be made in order to fit the larger Voith36R6 ECS/285-2 units. First, the hullform had to be modified toreduce depth in way of the VSP units such that the bladesremained above baseline in normal operation. Secondly, asignificant amount of extra height needed to be provided underthe passenger stairs for the required maintenance clearances forthe units. To accomplish this, the stair towers on the Main Deckwere shifted towards the end of the vessel as far as possible.Figure 7 shows a profile view which illustrates the heightconstraints of the two VSP units, and how the stair towers wereadjusted to work with them.Ollis Class Double-Ended Passenger Ferry Design for Staten Island Ferry6

However, a clear result became apparent despite the variationamongst the different estimate methods. First and foremost wasthat the vessel would likely require more power than previouslyplanned to meet the higher design speed of 16.3 knots. Thus itwas decided that the larger and more powerful EMD 12V-710engines would be used.Figure 7: VSP Unit ArrangementsUPDATED LINES PLANThe major impact from the switch to two VSP units was toupdate the hullform. Because the blades of the larger units aresignificantly longer, the bottom of the hull in way of the VSPunit had to be raised to suit. In turn, the available displacedvolume near the ends went down significantly. To compensatefor the loss of volume at the ends the midship section had toincrease accordingly, which had the benefit of increasing theavailable space in the engine room. Additionally, the switchwas made to a round bilge to improve the hull efficiency and tohelp add volume lost by the switch to the shallower depth at theends to fit the VSP units. Figure 8 shows the updated lines planfor the configuration with two VSP units.ARRANGEMENT UPDATESDuring the meetings with Staten Island, members from allaspects of SIF operations were included in the discussions. Thefollowing are the key design changes from the conceptarrangement which fully refined the design to a level suitablefor release as a bid package to shipyards.Machinery ArrangementOnce the propulsion configuration was decided upon, themachinery arrangement could begin to be settled in place. Thisproved somewhat difficult because the engines would need tomeet EPA Tier 4 emissions requirements at the time ofconstruction, but the Selective Catalytic Reduction (SCR)system required for this had not yet been finalized by EMD.The design team considered both GE and EMD engines as eachwas finalizing their EPA Tier 4 engines in this power range.Ultimately the EPA Tier 4 version of the EMD 12V-710 enginewas selected at a power rating of 2,500 HP at 750 RPM.Concurrent with vessel design, EMD was finalizing the designand seeking regulatory approval for their SCR system.Throughout the design process EMD provided updates to thedesign team with changes in the SCR design and their bestestimates for certification. For a brief period early in the designthe possibility of requiring an upper engine room level on MainDeck for housing the SCRs was considered. This proved to notbe necessary as the SCRs were reconfigured for installationforward of the engine and their size reduced. The overallmachinery arrangement improved as a result.Figure 8: Two VSP Hull Initial Body PlanSPEED AND POWERA round of speed and powering estimates were performed forthe vessel's updated propulsion configuration and hullform. Theprogram HydroComp NavCad 2012 was used to perform aparametric resistance estimate based on available data sets.Factors addressed included appendage and air drag, wind andwaves, and shallow water effects to account for the 50 footaverage water depth within New York Harbor.The engines, accessory racks, and SCRs were placed in thecenter of the engine room and positions were adjusted as thedesign progressed. Some additional factors affecting the finalengine placement included size and configuration of thetorsional couplings, and fluid coupling selection by VoithSchneider. Figure 9 shows the final engine room arrangement,including placement of the main engines and accessory racks,and the generators, boilers, and marine sanitation device.The speed and powering estimates were performed based onseveral parametric data sets, and attempts were made to alignthe results with model test data from another double-endedferry. However, the variation in speed and powering estimatesbetween the various methods used was high, largely because ofthe fact that t

Design for Staten Island Ferry Author name(s): Patrick D. Faas1 (AM), Kurt A. Jankowski1 (AM), Michael E. Johnson1 (V), Matthew J. Wichgers1 (AM), Matthew Williamson1 (M) 1. Elliott Bay Design Group, LLC, Seattle, Washington, USA Continuing the tradition of service provided by New York City Department of Transportation, Staten Island Ferry

Related Documents:

Driver or Passenger Squib 1 open AND the stored DTC minutes for Driver or Passenger Squib 1 open is GREATER than the stored DTC minutes for Driver or Passenger Squib 2 by 15 minutes or more Squib 1 is live; Squib 2 was used. Driver or Passenger Squib 2 open Driver or Passenger Squib 1 open AND Driver or Passenger Sq

Cisco Catalyst 4500-X Switch Series Feature Highlights Cisco Catalyst 4500-X Series Switch provides nonblocking 10 Gigabit Ethernet per port bandwidth and Cisco IOS Flexible NetFlow for optimized application visibility. In addition to this, the enterprise-class Cisco Catalyst 4500-X offers the following: Performance and scalability

temperature in the above table to calculate the property. Also temperature as a function of enthalpy or entropy are included. Table 5.3 Public Functions in Region 3 public double Prt(double r, double t) pin kPa public double Rho(double p, double t, int phase) U in kg/m3. See Section 5.1 public double V(double p, double t) ( , ) p v pT RT

Cortright, Maddie PORT 1st Class Passenger, Miss Marjorie Anne Newell Frederick Fleet, Lookout STARBOARD 3rd Class Passenger, Miss Anna Sofia Nysten Crosby, Shannon PORT 1st Class Passenger, Miss Margaret Bechstein Hays STARBOARD 3rd Class Passenger, Miss Velin Ohman Third Officer Pitman

ES652DOCT* 50 .93 4500 240 2 211 2 561 2.60 126 729 ES666DOCT 66 .92 4500 240 2 23 61 1.00 165 951 ES680DOCT* 80 .93 4500 240 2 25 611 2 1.25 127 1,047 SHORTMODELS ES650DOCS 50 .93 4500 240 2 23 49 .70 127 729 SELECT BlueDiamond GlassCoating PEXANTMTurboSelf-CleaningInletTube Tamper-ResistantBrassDrainValve

Installing IVMS 4500 1. Log onto the Google Play or App Store. 2. Enter “iVMS-4500” to search the mobile client software. 3. Select the iVMS-4500 software, download and install it to your phone. 4. After having installed the software successfully, you File Size: 1MBPage Count: 13

iVMS-4500 ןומושיי ןומושייה תנקתה Google Play לא רבחתה ירלולס חוקלל הנכותה תא שפחל ידכ iVMS-4500 ןזה התוא ןקתהו ןופלטל התוא דרוה iVMS-4500 הנכותה תא רחב

iVMS-4500(Android) Mobile Client Software 1 iVMS-4500(Android) Mobile Client Software User Manual (V1.0) Thank you for purchasing product. This manual applies toour iVMS-4500 (Android) mobile client software, please read it carefully for the better use of this software. The contents in this manual are subject to change without notice.