• HOME
  • MyTRB
  • CONTACT US
  • DIRECTORY
  • E-NEWSLETTER
  • SUBSCRIBE
  • RSS
  • HOME
    • MyTRB
    • CONTACT US
    • DIRECTORY
    • E-NEWSLETTER
    • SUBSCRIBE
    • RSS
  • About TRB
    • Get Involved with TRB
    • Mission & Services
    • Strategic Plan
    • Centennial Celebration
    • TRB Divisions
      • Executive Office
      • Administration & Finance
      • Cooperative Research Programs
      • Studies and Special Programs
      • Strategic Highway Research Program 2
      • Technical Activities
    • Sponsors & Affiliates
    • Awards
    • Facilities & Directions
    • Job Openings
  • Annual Meeting
    • Program
    • Registration
    • Resource Pages
    • Exhibits & Marketing Opportunities
    • Online Program
    • Announcements
  • Calendar
    • TRB Conferences
    • TRB Webinars
    • All TRB Events
    • Cosponsored Events
  • Committees & Panels
    • Executive Committee
    • Standing Committees
    • Policy Committees
    • Marine Board Members
    • Committee & Panel Homepages
    • Cooperative Research Panels
      • Highway (NCHRP)
      • Transit (TCRP)
      • Airport (ACRP)
      • Freight (NCFRP)
      • Hazardous Materials (HMCRP)
      • Rail (NCRRP)
    • Synthesis Panels
      • Highway
      • Transit
      • Airport
    • IDEA
      • Safety IDEA
  • MyTRB
  • Programs
    • Cooperative Research
      • Highway (NCHRP)
      • Transit (TCRP)
      • Airport (ACRP)
      • Behavioral Traffic Safety (BTSCRP)
      • Freight (NCFRP)
      • Hazardous Materials (HMCRP)
      • Rail (NCRRP)
    • Synthesis
      • Highway
      • Transit
      • Airport
      • Truck & Bus Safety
    • Innovations Deserving Exploratory Analysis (IDEA)
    • Legal Research
    • Marine Board
    • Consensus and Advisory Studies
    • Strategic Highway Research Program 2 (SHRP 2)
      • SHRP 2 Naturalistic Driving Study Data Access
      • SHRP 2 Archives
    • Transportation Research Information Services (TRIS)
  • Projects
    • Find a Project
    • Requests for Proposals
    • Requests for Information
    • Upcoming Projects
  • Publications
    • Bookstore
    • Subscription Services
    • by Series
    • by Subject
    • E-Newsletter
    • Transportation Research Record Online
    • Publications Index
    • Errata
  • Resources & Databases
    • Webinars
    • Conference Recordings
    • Research In Progress (RiP)
    • Research Needs Statements (RNS)
    • TRID (A Transportation Research Database)
    • Transportation Research Thesaurus (TRT)
    • SHRP 2 Naturalistic Driving Study Data Access
    • Online Directory
    • Library
    • Research Funding
    • Careers in Motion Job Center
  • Provide Feedback
  • Connect with TRB
ACRP 20th Anniversary
ACRP Collections
ACRP Infectious Disease Resources
ACRP Insight Event Future of Aviation
ACRP Research Report 202
ACRP Staffing and Workforce Resources
ACRPGetNotified
Challenges and Opportunities for the Airport Business Model
Design ACRP
Design Announcements
Design Contact
Design FAA
Design FAQs
Design Partners
Design Resources
Design Submissions
Design Winners
Design Winners 2008
Design Winners 2009
Design Winners 2010
Design Winners 2011
Design Winners 2012
Design Winners 2013
Design Winners 2014
Design Winners 2015
Design Winners 2016
Design Winners 2017
Design Winners 2018
Design Winners 2019
Design Winners 2020
Design Winners 2021
Design Winners 2022
Design Winners 2023
Design Winners 2024
Problem Statements
Publications
Rights and Permissions
Projects
Find a Project
All Projects
Requests for Proposals
Upcoming Projects
Subprograms
Synthesis
ACRP
Staff Contacts
Information for
Panel Members
Proposers
Subawardees
Partners
ACC
ACI-NA
NASAO
AAAE
A4A
Conflict of Interest
COI Resource Page
ACRP Chats With
Text Size: Increase Text Size Decrease Text Size | Share:


ACRP University Design Competition
  • ACRP Home
  • ACRP Design Competition

ACRP Design Competition

About the ACRP About the FAA About Competition Partners


Submissions

Submission can be made through our submission portal.


All submissions must be made by 5:00pm EDT on May 9, 2025

 


Please review past winners in each category for ideas. Note that only place award winners submission are posted.

Notice of Intent

Please submit your Notice of Intent to Matt Griffin

Appendixes

Appendix D (pdf)

*Note: This form should be included as Appendix D in the submitted PDF of the design package. The original with signatures must be sent along with the required print copy of the design

Appendix E (pdf)

2025 Evaluation Criteria for University Design Competition for Addressing Airport Needs.

The Competition Evaluators will use the following in judging submissions. The total number of available points is 130. Evaluators may choose to provide a score in half-point increments.

  1. Introductory Material - 5 points
    • Does the Executive Summary accurately encapsulate the design? (2 points)
    • Is the Table of Contents present and does it follow the structure in the Competition Guidelines? (3 points)
  2. Problem Statement and Background - 10 points
    • Is the Design Challenge clearly stated? (3 points)
    • Does the section of the design submission demonstrate that the individual or team has a clear understanding of the issues surrounding the design challenge, including current problems and issues as well as state of the art approaches? (7 points)
  3. Literature Review - 11 points
    • An effective summary of literature review is provided. (7 points)
    • The literature review includes relevant ACRP studies and reports or notes if no relevant ACRP studies found. (4 points)
  4. Problem Solving Approach - 46 points
    • How sound is the team's approach? Are solid engineering/scientific methodologies employed? How effective is the technical analysis? (10 points)
    • Is there evidence of thorough design process? (5 points)
    • Is the design supported by appropriate drawings, mockups, computer codes, charts, tables or other data as appropriate? (5 points)
    • The degree to which the design shows evidence of understanding of appropriate regulatory and certification issues. (4 points)
    • How well are the student's/team's conclusions supported? (5 points)
    • Is the work presented an appropriate level of effort for the design participants? (Individual student versus team; undergraduate or graduate or mixed.) For example, one would expect a higher level of knowledge and design from an all graduate student team versus an all undergraduate team; one would also expect a higher level of effort for a team versus an individual because the team has multiple contributors and can collectively devote more time than an individual. Award 3 points if the level is deemed as appropriate. Award more points for an effort that exceeds what you would deem typical or appropriate for the number and level of student participants. (5 points)

    Evidence of effective interaction with airport operators and industry experts in the design process. Note: per the guidelines, students must connect with both airport operators and industry experts.

    • Is there evidence of effective interaction with an airport operator and impact on the design process/result? (6 points)
    • Is there evidence of effective interaction with one or more industry experts with a resulting impact on the design process? (6 points)
  5. Practicality and Feasibility of the Proposed Design - 20 points
    • How well does the proposed design meet identified national needs for the area being addressed? (5 points)
    • Is a solid cost-benefit analysis provided? Does the proposed solution offer increased affordability and utility? (5 points)
    • What is the potential real-world impact of the proposed solution, including commercial potential? (5 points)
    • Is there a description of the processes that would need to be undertaken to bring the design to the product/implementation state? (5 points)
  6. Safety Risk Assessment - 8 points
    • A safety risk assessment of the proposed design considers inherent risks and describes how these risks should be addressed to ensure safe operations. (4 points)
    • Appropriate FAA documents, including Introduction to Safety Management Systems for Airport Operations (FAA Advisory Circular 150/5200-37) and FAA Safety Management System Manual, are understood and referenced in the assessment. (4 points)
  7. Innovation - 14 points
    • Does the design offer fresh thinking or new ways of approaching the problem considering that students are not in the field and possessing expertise or specific working knowledge?
    • Does the design reflect creativity and imagination on the student's or team's part? (14 points)
  8. Overall quality of the design package - 16 points
    • Is the design well written? (5 points)
    • Does the design effectively present the design solution? (3 points)
    • Are all required appendices present and complete? (4 points)
    • Is a solid evaluation of the educational experience offered by both the student(s) and faculty advisor(s)? (4 points)
  • ACRP Design Competition Home
  • Competition Winners
  • Submissions
  • FAQs
  • Resources
  • Announcements
  • Contact

Follow Us

facebook-icon twitter-icon linkedin-icon notification-icon
Copyright © 2010 All rights reserved. | Legal Terms | Console Login
P: | F: |
The National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine

The National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine 500 Fifth Street, NW | Washington, DC 20001 | T: 202.334.2000 Copyright © National Academy of Sciences. All Rights Reserved. Terms of Use and Privacy Statement

Loading... Loading...
Please click here to view our sponsor's message.