Moving More People Through Big Cottonwood Canyon
A feasibility study for an Advanced Canyon Access Transit System (ACATS)
³Ô¹Ï¹ÙÍø Systems Engineering Senior Project Spotlight
SE 6510 Senior Capstone
The team studied how to improve access to Big Cottonwood Canyon while balancing congestion, cost, environmental impact, weather resilience, implementation time, and operating flexibility.
Three concepts were compared: rail, an improved road, and a shuttle-trailer system.
The shuttle-trailer concept emerged as the strongest overall option in the team's Pugh-method comparison.
Project Highlights
3 Concepts
Rail, Shuttle-trailer, Improved Road.
3.02
Shuttle-trailer Pugh score.
28
Operating shuttles for peak winter morning.
9 Spares
Modeled reserve fleet.
Main Idea
• Passengers board at a canyon base station rather than driving every vehicle into the canyon.
• Tow vehicles pull passenger trailers to increase capacity per trip.
• Service can split into Brighton Express, Solitude Express, and all-stops routes.
• Modular vehicles and spares improve flexibility during peak demand or equipment downtime.
Why the Shuttle-Trailer Concept Won
Lower Infrastructure Burden
Uses the existing canyon road and requires far less new infrastructure than rail.
Operational Flexibility
A modular fleet can scale service, swap vehicles, and respond to changing demand.
Lower Implementation Cost
The concept was found easier and less costly to deploy than rail.
Good Passenger Movement
The preferred concept still delivers strong people-moving capability in the team's comparison.
From Congestion Problem To Operating Concept
Peak Winter Morning Operating Concept
WHAT CHANGED?
• An earlier single-line concept required about 50 shuttles and created a load/unload bottleneck.
• The revised operating plan separates Brighton and Solitude express routes and adds a small all-stops service.
• The revised concept uses 28 operating shuttles and 9 spare units.
• The analysis targets a 30-minute-or-less wait for major express users during the main peak period.
Systems Engineering in Action
Stakeholder Needs → Requirements
Users, operators, regulators, designers/builders, and interested parties are connected to traceable requirements.
Trade Study
A weighted Pugh method compares rail, improved road, and shuttle-trailer concepts.
Queueing Analysis
Peak demand is modeled to size routes and fleet needs while controlling wait times.
Reliability + Supportability
FMECA, MTBF/MDBF, spares analysis, and RCM evaluate continued operation and maintenance.
MBSE / SysML
The report uses model-based tools to represent requirements, structure, behavior, interfaces, and parameters.
Lifecycle + Risk
Implementation, operations, maintenance, validation, and risk reduction are treated as part of the solution.
Where Students Connect These Skills at ³Ô¹Ï¹ÙÍø
SE 6010
Foundations
SE 6020
Project Management
SE 6370
Requirements
SE 6380
MBSE / SysML
SE 6500 / 6510
Senior Design
Connect It To The Profession & Career Readiness
COMMON REFERENCES
- Kossiakoff systems life-cycle model
- Blanchard & Fabrycky, Systems Engineering and Analysis
- Transportation studies, standards, and feasibility methods
- Reliability and supportability analysis practices
INCOSE VISION 2035 CONNECTION
- Systems thinking for complex public infrastructure
- Model-based and data-enabled engineering
- Lifecycle decision making
- Balancing human, technical, environmental, and economic needs
Keys to Capstone Success & How to Choose Your Project
Start with the whole system. Define success, trace the needs, compare the alternatives, test the uncertainty, and build a recommendation you can defend.
WEBER STATE UNIVERSITY | Systems Engineering Senior Project Spotlight