Union Tpke Posted March 15, 2018 Share #1 Posted March 15, 2018 http://web.mta.info/nyct/procure/contracts/199416sol-1.pdf SHORT SCOPE OF WORK Project C-32518: Design-Build, Furnish, Install, and Maintain a Platform Barrier Door System at the 3rd Avenue Station on the Canarsie Line, Borough of Manhattan Description of work: This Project consists of design/build activities to develop, furnish and install half-height PSD technology (aka – automated platform gates (APGs)) on both 500 ft. platforms at the 3rd Avenue ‘L’ Line (Canarsie) Station. This will be the first such installation in the NYC Transit Subway System and will serve as a pilot to evaluate such systems from the perspectives of public interface, systems integration, operations, safety and maintenance for potential future installations in the existing NYC Transit Subway System. General Contractors and their Design Professionals responding to this RFP must demonstrate that their preferred APG manufacturer has the appropriate technology, experience, and performed successful installations of similar systems. The project will also include a three year maintenance contract option plus subsequent renewals. These platform screen doors are to be built at the platform edge in a continuous line with bi- parting doors coordinated with the location of the train car doors when a train is in the station. Secondary hinged emergency egress doors are to be provided between the bi-parting doors in case a train does not berth correctly in an emergency. The dimensional requirements of door width and height are unique to NYCT and cannot be altered; a custom fabrication is therefore required. Installation will require demolition of the existing concrete platform edge and platform topping of the entire platform, and its replacement with new concrete aligned with the train door sills and coordinated with top of rail to assure compliance with accessibility requirements of all applicable codes. All periodic maintenance of the APG system will be performed from the platform to minimize the requirement for General Orders (service changes) after the commencement of service. Prevention of passenger entrapment between the train doors and APG doors is also required. One known approach is the use of door entrapment sensors mounted at the ceiling above each door (32 per platform) with CCTV monitors at the both ends and center of the platforms to be observed by train operators and conductors. Alternate means of entrapment prevention should be proposed, if possible. A wayside only berthing system assuring alignment of the train is to be included and requires door operation detection devices to be mounted along the platform length (4 per platform). All communication network elements required for functionality and monitoring will be included. Video, APG system status and alarms are required to be transmitted to the NYCT's Rail Control Center and displayed via a monitoring system head end to be developed and provided by the Contractor. Fiber optic cabling will be run to 14 St, Union Square to access NYCT's existing Connection Oriented Ethernet network in order to transmit the high-bandwidth video traffic. In addition, a high-bandwidth leased line shall be provided to provide video, APG system status and alarms to an off-site location to provide 24-hour x 7-day annunciations to the Contractor performing maintenance of the APG system. An air conditioned Equipment Room housing door controllers, Uninterrupted Power Sources, and Communications panels is required to be built at the end of one platform. A Storage room will also be built at the other platform. Power will be tapped off the existing station power. The Contract includes a training provision at two levels: for train operations personnel on the procedures to follow as it relates to the coordination of the opening and closing of the train doors and manual control of the APGs prior to placing the APG system in service is required, and training of NYCT maintenance personnel in maintaining and repairing APG equipment. An optional maintenance contract with a three-year term with mandated response times to guaranty continuous operation of the APGs is included. The Contractor will initially be responsible for performing preventative and remedial maintenance of the APG equipment. Training of NYCT maintenance personnel in maintaining and repairing APG equipment will be part of the maintenance contract and will take place any time during the maintenance contract term but no later than the 24th month of the three-year term. The maintenance contract may be extended at the Authority’s discretion based on the availability of trained NYCT maintenance personnel and the level of support needed to maintain APGs by NYCT maintenance personnel and/or the Contractor. Schedule The contract is to be awarded by July 2018, with design development proceeding for six months, and fabrication of the APGs initiating at seven months (February 2019). Installation is to coincide with the Canarsie tunnel closure in April 2019, with inspection/ testing/ commissioning complete by March 2020. Due to other construction activity on the ‘L’ Line, Contractor access will be via existing street stairs. There will be no option for work train access. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kosciusko Posted March 16, 2018 Share #2 Posted March 16, 2018 Looking forward to seeing this in action. I wonder if they will be effective at stopping injuries. One concern I have is that the screens will cause people to act more careless near the tracks. People leaning over the PSDs could also prove to be an issue. As far as I am aware full height PSDs are not possible from an operational standpoint because it prevents the C/R from controlling the platform. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RR503 Posted March 16, 2018 Share #3 Posted March 16, 2018 5 hours ago, kosciusko said: Looking forward to seeing this in action. I wonder if they will be effective at stopping injuries. One concern I have is that the screens will cause people to act more careless near the tracks. People leaning over the PSDs could also prove to be an issue. As far as I am aware full height PSDs are not possible from an operational standpoint because it prevents the C/R from controlling the platform. The whole point of PSDs is that the conductor doesn't have to worry about the platform... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kosciusko Posted March 16, 2018 Share #4 Posted March 16, 2018 4 hours ago, RR503 said: The whole point of PSDs is that the conductor doesn't have to worry about the platform... I get that but for what other reason would the opt for half-height screens? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
officiallyliam Posted March 16, 2018 Share #5 Posted March 16, 2018 18 minutes ago, kosciusko said: I get that but for what other reason would the opt for half-height screens? Because they're being cheap. If they wanted to prove that PSDs can work here, they'd install full-height ones at all of the platforms from Bedford to 8th. It's pretty much a perfect setup for installation of full-height doors: a crowded subway line which doesn't share tracks, which will have full platform access for workers in a year, and uses ATO. They'd rather not make that investment - and have the consequently go OPTO as it should and would have to - for something they really have little or no desire to bring to the rest of the subway system. This will just be another pilot project that will die wordlessly in a few years, with vague explanations as to why. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
QM1to6Ave Posted March 16, 2018 Share #6 Posted March 16, 2018 What a waste of money Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Italianstallion Posted March 17, 2018 Share #7 Posted March 17, 2018 13 hours ago, RR503 said: The whole point of PSDs is that the conductor doesn't have to worry about the platform... Really? Doesn't he still have to watch for people running into the train at the last minute? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Trainmaster5 Posted March 18, 2018 Share #8 Posted March 18, 2018 On 3/16/2018 at 6:09 PM, QM1to6Ave said: What a waste of money I’m going out on a limb here. This is being proposed for a fully automated service, right ? I’m asking because if there’s a station overrun by a T/O or any type of malfunction there the train would be forced to bypass the station completely. Anyone who rides the s/b Lex at Union Square knows about gap filler failures. With the screen installed even keying open doors isn’t an option. I have to agree with you. It’s bad enough that signal malfunction delays are rampant these days and the CBTC line is reliant on signals more than other lines it seems to me that PSDs is an idea best forgotten. Just my opinion. Carry on. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
7LineFan Posted March 18, 2018 Share #9 Posted March 18, 2018 8 hours ago, Trainmaster5 said: I’m asking because if there’s a station overrun by a T/O or any type of malfunction there the train would be forced to bypass the station completely. I'm guessing the secondary egress doors were specified for exactly this reason. Of course, if there aren't enough of them, there'll be delays up and down the line. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
R68OnBroadway Posted March 18, 2018 Share #10 Posted March 18, 2018 I would at least install PSDs at Union Sq due to the fact that it gets dangerously overcrowded. If someone overruns, I would have the train just dump its passengers at the next stop (which will not have PSDs). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RR503 Posted March 18, 2018 Share #11 Posted March 18, 2018 3 hours ago, R68OnBroadway said: I would at least install PSDs at Union Sq due to the fact that it gets dangerously overcrowded. If someone overruns, I would have the train just dump its passengers at the next stop (which will not have PSDs). Why? They reduce platform space, you know. PSDs are great (and in fact necessary) in automated systems. In our, very human system, however, they will serve just as targets for vandals, operational headaches, and yet another thing someone can get stuck in. They may, from time to time, prevent someone from being pushed/falling, but I'd wager that the percent decrease in available platform space, the percent increase in delays, and their failure rate would outweigh any such incidents. And anyway, with LIDAR tech being developed quickly, we may soon be able to recognize 12-9s before they take place. So why spend, MTA? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
R68OnBroadway Posted March 18, 2018 Share #12 Posted March 18, 2018 18 minutes ago, RR503 said: Why? They reduce platform space, you know. PSDs are great (and in fact necessary) in automated systems. In our, very human system, however, they will serve just as targets for vandals, operational headaches, and yet another thing someone can get stuck in. They may, from time to time, prevent someone from being pushed/falling, but I'd wager that the percent decrease in available platform space, the percent increase in delays, and their failure rate would outweigh any such incidents. And anyway, with LIDAR tech being developed quickly, we may soon be able to recognize 12-9s before they take place. So why spend, MTA? I forgot to say that I would not put in PSDs until the is automated. However, I would not automate the until automation technology is tested on the Franklin as both routes involve the following: -minimal switching -rather straightforward routes -self contained lines with one car class type Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.