National Academies Press: OpenBook
« Previous: IV. Crash Testing Matrix and Evaluation Plan
Page 99
Suggested Citation:"V. Full-Scale Crash Testing ." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2010. Volume I: Evaluation of Existing Roadside Safety Hardware Using Updated Criteria—Technical Report. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/22938.
×
Page 99
Page 100
Suggested Citation:"V. Full-Scale Crash Testing ." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2010. Volume I: Evaluation of Existing Roadside Safety Hardware Using Updated Criteria—Technical Report. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/22938.
×
Page 100
Page 101
Suggested Citation:"V. Full-Scale Crash Testing ." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2010. Volume I: Evaluation of Existing Roadside Safety Hardware Using Updated Criteria—Technical Report. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/22938.
×
Page 101
Page 102
Suggested Citation:"V. Full-Scale Crash Testing ." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2010. Volume I: Evaluation of Existing Roadside Safety Hardware Using Updated Criteria—Technical Report. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/22938.
×
Page 102
Page 103
Suggested Citation:"V. Full-Scale Crash Testing ." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2010. Volume I: Evaluation of Existing Roadside Safety Hardware Using Updated Criteria—Technical Report. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/22938.
×
Page 103
Page 104
Suggested Citation:"V. Full-Scale Crash Testing ." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2010. Volume I: Evaluation of Existing Roadside Safety Hardware Using Updated Criteria—Technical Report. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/22938.
×
Page 104
Page 105
Suggested Citation:"V. Full-Scale Crash Testing ." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2010. Volume I: Evaluation of Existing Roadside Safety Hardware Using Updated Criteria—Technical Report. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/22938.
×
Page 105
Page 106
Suggested Citation:"V. Full-Scale Crash Testing ." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2010. Volume I: Evaluation of Existing Roadside Safety Hardware Using Updated Criteria—Technical Report. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/22938.
×
Page 106
Page 107
Suggested Citation:"V. Full-Scale Crash Testing ." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2010. Volume I: Evaluation of Existing Roadside Safety Hardware Using Updated Criteria—Technical Report. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/22938.
×
Page 107
Page 108
Suggested Citation:"V. Full-Scale Crash Testing ." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2010. Volume I: Evaluation of Existing Roadside Safety Hardware Using Updated Criteria—Technical Report. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/22938.
×
Page 108
Page 109
Suggested Citation:"V. Full-Scale Crash Testing ." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2010. Volume I: Evaluation of Existing Roadside Safety Hardware Using Updated Criteria—Technical Report. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/22938.
×
Page 109
Page 110
Suggested Citation:"V. Full-Scale Crash Testing ." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2010. Volume I: Evaluation of Existing Roadside Safety Hardware Using Updated Criteria—Technical Report. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/22938.
×
Page 110
Page 111
Suggested Citation:"V. Full-Scale Crash Testing ." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2010. Volume I: Evaluation of Existing Roadside Safety Hardware Using Updated Criteria—Technical Report. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/22938.
×
Page 111
Page 112
Suggested Citation:"V. Full-Scale Crash Testing ." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2010. Volume I: Evaluation of Existing Roadside Safety Hardware Using Updated Criteria—Technical Report. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/22938.
×
Page 112
Page 113
Suggested Citation:"V. Full-Scale Crash Testing ." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2010. Volume I: Evaluation of Existing Roadside Safety Hardware Using Updated Criteria—Technical Report. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/22938.
×
Page 113
Page 114
Suggested Citation:"V. Full-Scale Crash Testing ." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2010. Volume I: Evaluation of Existing Roadside Safety Hardware Using Updated Criteria—Technical Report. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/22938.
×
Page 114
Page 115
Suggested Citation:"V. Full-Scale Crash Testing ." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2010. Volume I: Evaluation of Existing Roadside Safety Hardware Using Updated Criteria—Technical Report. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/22938.
×
Page 115
Page 116
Suggested Citation:"V. Full-Scale Crash Testing ." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2010. Volume I: Evaluation of Existing Roadside Safety Hardware Using Updated Criteria—Technical Report. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/22938.
×
Page 116
Page 117
Suggested Citation:"V. Full-Scale Crash Testing ." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2010. Volume I: Evaluation of Existing Roadside Safety Hardware Using Updated Criteria—Technical Report. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/22938.
×
Page 117
Page 118
Suggested Citation:"V. Full-Scale Crash Testing ." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2010. Volume I: Evaluation of Existing Roadside Safety Hardware Using Updated Criteria—Technical Report. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/22938.
×
Page 118
Page 119
Suggested Citation:"V. Full-Scale Crash Testing ." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2010. Volume I: Evaluation of Existing Roadside Safety Hardware Using Updated Criteria—Technical Report. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/22938.
×
Page 119
Page 120
Suggested Citation:"V. Full-Scale Crash Testing ." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2010. Volume I: Evaluation of Existing Roadside Safety Hardware Using Updated Criteria—Technical Report. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/22938.
×
Page 120
Page 121
Suggested Citation:"V. Full-Scale Crash Testing ." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2010. Volume I: Evaluation of Existing Roadside Safety Hardware Using Updated Criteria—Technical Report. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/22938.
×
Page 121
Page 122
Suggested Citation:"V. Full-Scale Crash Testing ." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2010. Volume I: Evaluation of Existing Roadside Safety Hardware Using Updated Criteria—Technical Report. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/22938.
×
Page 122
Page 123
Suggested Citation:"V. Full-Scale Crash Testing ." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2010. Volume I: Evaluation of Existing Roadside Safety Hardware Using Updated Criteria—Technical Report. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/22938.
×
Page 123
Page 124
Suggested Citation:"V. Full-Scale Crash Testing ." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2010. Volume I: Evaluation of Existing Roadside Safety Hardware Using Updated Criteria—Technical Report. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/22938.
×
Page 124
Page 125
Suggested Citation:"V. Full-Scale Crash Testing ." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2010. Volume I: Evaluation of Existing Roadside Safety Hardware Using Updated Criteria—Technical Report. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/22938.
×
Page 125
Page 126
Suggested Citation:"V. Full-Scale Crash Testing ." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2010. Volume I: Evaluation of Existing Roadside Safety Hardware Using Updated Criteria—Technical Report. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/22938.
×
Page 126
Page 127
Suggested Citation:"V. Full-Scale Crash Testing ." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2010. Volume I: Evaluation of Existing Roadside Safety Hardware Using Updated Criteria—Technical Report. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/22938.
×
Page 127
Page 128
Suggested Citation:"V. Full-Scale Crash Testing ." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2010. Volume I: Evaluation of Existing Roadside Safety Hardware Using Updated Criteria—Technical Report. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/22938.
×
Page 128
Page 129
Suggested Citation:"V. Full-Scale Crash Testing ." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2010. Volume I: Evaluation of Existing Roadside Safety Hardware Using Updated Criteria—Technical Report. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/22938.
×
Page 129
Page 130
Suggested Citation:"V. Full-Scale Crash Testing ." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2010. Volume I: Evaluation of Existing Roadside Safety Hardware Using Updated Criteria—Technical Report. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/22938.
×
Page 130
Page 131
Suggested Citation:"V. Full-Scale Crash Testing ." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2010. Volume I: Evaluation of Existing Roadside Safety Hardware Using Updated Criteria—Technical Report. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/22938.
×
Page 131
Page 132
Suggested Citation:"V. Full-Scale Crash Testing ." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2010. Volume I: Evaluation of Existing Roadside Safety Hardware Using Updated Criteria—Technical Report. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/22938.
×
Page 132
Page 133
Suggested Citation:"V. Full-Scale Crash Testing ." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2010. Volume I: Evaluation of Existing Roadside Safety Hardware Using Updated Criteria—Technical Report. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/22938.
×
Page 133
Page 134
Suggested Citation:"V. Full-Scale Crash Testing ." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2010. Volume I: Evaluation of Existing Roadside Safety Hardware Using Updated Criteria—Technical Report. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/22938.
×
Page 134
Page 135
Suggested Citation:"V. Full-Scale Crash Testing ." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2010. Volume I: Evaluation of Existing Roadside Safety Hardware Using Updated Criteria—Technical Report. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/22938.
×
Page 135
Page 136
Suggested Citation:"V. Full-Scale Crash Testing ." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2010. Volume I: Evaluation of Existing Roadside Safety Hardware Using Updated Criteria—Technical Report. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/22938.
×
Page 136
Page 137
Suggested Citation:"V. Full-Scale Crash Testing ." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2010. Volume I: Evaluation of Existing Roadside Safety Hardware Using Updated Criteria—Technical Report. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/22938.
×
Page 137
Page 138
Suggested Citation:"V. Full-Scale Crash Testing ." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2010. Volume I: Evaluation of Existing Roadside Safety Hardware Using Updated Criteria—Technical Report. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/22938.
×
Page 138
Page 139
Suggested Citation:"V. Full-Scale Crash Testing ." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2010. Volume I: Evaluation of Existing Roadside Safety Hardware Using Updated Criteria—Technical Report. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/22938.
×
Page 139
Page 140
Suggested Citation:"V. Full-Scale Crash Testing ." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2010. Volume I: Evaluation of Existing Roadside Safety Hardware Using Updated Criteria—Technical Report. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/22938.
×
Page 140
Page 141
Suggested Citation:"V. Full-Scale Crash Testing ." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2010. Volume I: Evaluation of Existing Roadside Safety Hardware Using Updated Criteria—Technical Report. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/22938.
×
Page 141
Page 142
Suggested Citation:"V. Full-Scale Crash Testing ." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2010. Volume I: Evaluation of Existing Roadside Safety Hardware Using Updated Criteria—Technical Report. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/22938.
×
Page 142
Page 143
Suggested Citation:"V. Full-Scale Crash Testing ." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2010. Volume I: Evaluation of Existing Roadside Safety Hardware Using Updated Criteria—Technical Report. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/22938.
×
Page 143
Page 144
Suggested Citation:"V. Full-Scale Crash Testing ." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2010. Volume I: Evaluation of Existing Roadside Safety Hardware Using Updated Criteria—Technical Report. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/22938.
×
Page 144
Page 145
Suggested Citation:"V. Full-Scale Crash Testing ." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2010. Volume I: Evaluation of Existing Roadside Safety Hardware Using Updated Criteria—Technical Report. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/22938.
×
Page 145
Page 146
Suggested Citation:"V. Full-Scale Crash Testing ." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2010. Volume I: Evaluation of Existing Roadside Safety Hardware Using Updated Criteria—Technical Report. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/22938.
×
Page 146
Page 147
Suggested Citation:"V. Full-Scale Crash Testing ." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2010. Volume I: Evaluation of Existing Roadside Safety Hardware Using Updated Criteria—Technical Report. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/22938.
×
Page 147
Page 148
Suggested Citation:"V. Full-Scale Crash Testing ." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2010. Volume I: Evaluation of Existing Roadside Safety Hardware Using Updated Criteria—Technical Report. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/22938.
×
Page 148
Page 149
Suggested Citation:"V. Full-Scale Crash Testing ." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2010. Volume I: Evaluation of Existing Roadside Safety Hardware Using Updated Criteria—Technical Report. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/22938.
×
Page 149
Page 150
Suggested Citation:"V. Full-Scale Crash Testing ." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2010. Volume I: Evaluation of Existing Roadside Safety Hardware Using Updated Criteria—Technical Report. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/22938.
×
Page 150
Page 151
Suggested Citation:"V. Full-Scale Crash Testing ." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2010. Volume I: Evaluation of Existing Roadside Safety Hardware Using Updated Criteria—Technical Report. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/22938.
×
Page 151
Page 152
Suggested Citation:"V. Full-Scale Crash Testing ." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2010. Volume I: Evaluation of Existing Roadside Safety Hardware Using Updated Criteria—Technical Report. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/22938.
×
Page 152
Page 153
Suggested Citation:"V. Full-Scale Crash Testing ." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2010. Volume I: Evaluation of Existing Roadside Safety Hardware Using Updated Criteria—Technical Report. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/22938.
×
Page 153
Page 154
Suggested Citation:"V. Full-Scale Crash Testing ." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2010. Volume I: Evaluation of Existing Roadside Safety Hardware Using Updated Criteria—Technical Report. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/22938.
×
Page 154
Page 155
Suggested Citation:"V. Full-Scale Crash Testing ." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2010. Volume I: Evaluation of Existing Roadside Safety Hardware Using Updated Criteria—Technical Report. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/22938.
×
Page 155
Page 156
Suggested Citation:"V. Full-Scale Crash Testing ." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2010. Volume I: Evaluation of Existing Roadside Safety Hardware Using Updated Criteria—Technical Report. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/22938.
×
Page 156
Page 157
Suggested Citation:"V. Full-Scale Crash Testing ." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2010. Volume I: Evaluation of Existing Roadside Safety Hardware Using Updated Criteria—Technical Report. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/22938.
×
Page 157
Page 158
Suggested Citation:"V. Full-Scale Crash Testing ." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2010. Volume I: Evaluation of Existing Roadside Safety Hardware Using Updated Criteria—Technical Report. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/22938.
×
Page 158
Page 159
Suggested Citation:"V. Full-Scale Crash Testing ." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2010. Volume I: Evaluation of Existing Roadside Safety Hardware Using Updated Criteria—Technical Report. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/22938.
×
Page 159
Page 160
Suggested Citation:"V. Full-Scale Crash Testing ." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2010. Volume I: Evaluation of Existing Roadside Safety Hardware Using Updated Criteria—Technical Report. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/22938.
×
Page 160
Page 161
Suggested Citation:"V. Full-Scale Crash Testing ." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2010. Volume I: Evaluation of Existing Roadside Safety Hardware Using Updated Criteria—Technical Report. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/22938.
×
Page 161
Page 162
Suggested Citation:"V. Full-Scale Crash Testing ." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2010. Volume I: Evaluation of Existing Roadside Safety Hardware Using Updated Criteria—Technical Report. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/22938.
×
Page 162
Page 163
Suggested Citation:"V. Full-Scale Crash Testing ." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2010. Volume I: Evaluation of Existing Roadside Safety Hardware Using Updated Criteria—Technical Report. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/22938.
×
Page 163
Page 164
Suggested Citation:"V. Full-Scale Crash Testing ." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2010. Volume I: Evaluation of Existing Roadside Safety Hardware Using Updated Criteria—Technical Report. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/22938.
×
Page 164
Page 165
Suggested Citation:"V. Full-Scale Crash Testing ." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2010. Volume I: Evaluation of Existing Roadside Safety Hardware Using Updated Criteria—Technical Report. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/22938.
×
Page 165
Page 166
Suggested Citation:"V. Full-Scale Crash Testing ." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2010. Volume I: Evaluation of Existing Roadside Safety Hardware Using Updated Criteria—Technical Report. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/22938.
×
Page 166
Page 167
Suggested Citation:"V. Full-Scale Crash Testing ." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2010. Volume I: Evaluation of Existing Roadside Safety Hardware Using Updated Criteria—Technical Report. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/22938.
×
Page 167
Page 168
Suggested Citation:"V. Full-Scale Crash Testing ." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2010. Volume I: Evaluation of Existing Roadside Safety Hardware Using Updated Criteria—Technical Report. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/22938.
×
Page 168
Page 169
Suggested Citation:"V. Full-Scale Crash Testing ." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2010. Volume I: Evaluation of Existing Roadside Safety Hardware Using Updated Criteria—Technical Report. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/22938.
×
Page 169
Page 170
Suggested Citation:"V. Full-Scale Crash Testing ." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2010. Volume I: Evaluation of Existing Roadside Safety Hardware Using Updated Criteria—Technical Report. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/22938.
×
Page 170
Page 171
Suggested Citation:"V. Full-Scale Crash Testing ." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2010. Volume I: Evaluation of Existing Roadside Safety Hardware Using Updated Criteria—Technical Report. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/22938.
×
Page 171
Page 172
Suggested Citation:"V. Full-Scale Crash Testing ." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2010. Volume I: Evaluation of Existing Roadside Safety Hardware Using Updated Criteria—Technical Report. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/22938.
×
Page 172

Below is the uncorrected machine-read text of this chapter, intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text of each book. Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.

99 V. FULL-SCALE CRASH TESTING 32-INCH NEW JERSEY SHAPE BARRIER – SGM11a Test Installation Description This version of the 32-inch permanent New Jersey Shape Barrier was designed to meet performance level two of the American Association of State Highway Officials (AASHTO) 1989 Guide Specifications for Bridge Railings. The design force of 54 kips was applied as a uniformly distributed line force 42 inches long located at least 29 inches above the roadway surface. A cross section of the barrier design is shown in Figure 38. Total height of the safety shape barrier is 32 inches. The thickness of the unit is 15 inches at its base and varies along the height, tapering to a minimum of 6 inches at the top. The slope at the bottom of the rail serves to minimize the damage done to vehicles impacting at low angles by causing the front tire to ride up on the parapet and the vehicle to redirect with limited contact between the body of the vehicle and the parapet. Figure 38. Cross Section of the 32-inch New Jersey Shape Barrier. Eight #4 longitudinal bars were used in the safety shape. The vertical stirrups were #5 bars at 8 inch spacing. The cantilevered deck overhang was 39 inches wide. The overall length of the barrier was 100 ft-1 inch.

100 The strength of the railing was computed using yieldline analysis procedures. The strength computations predict the length of the failure mechanism to be 8.1 ft and the total ultimate load capacity to be 74 kips. The analysis also shows the yieldline are confined to the upper wall portion of the parapet and do to extend into the bridge deck. The same barrier installation was used for both 4-12 and 4-11 crash tests since the barrier only sustained cosmetic damage during the 4-12 test. Photographs of the completed installation are shown in Figure 39. More detailed information on the barrier and the two crash tests is in Appendixes B and C (available on the NCAC website, www.ncac.gwu.edu/). Figure 39. 32-inch New Jersey Shape Barrier Prior to Testing. Test Number 476460-1b (MASH Test 4-12) Test Description Test Vehicle: 1999 Ford F-800 single-unit truck Test Inertia Weight: 22,090 lb Gross Static Weight: 22,090 lb Impact Speed: 57.4 mi/h Impact Angle: 14.4 degrees The 1999 Ford F-800 single-unit truck, traveling at an impact speed of 57.4 mi/h, impacted the 32-inch New Jersey Shape Barrier 20 ft from the upstream end at an impact angle of 14.4 degrees. Immediately upon impact, the right front tire began to climb the face of the barrier and lost contact with the ground surface. At 0.044 s, the left front tire and wheel assembly abruptly steered toward the barrier. At 0.151 s, the vehicle began to redirect, and at 0.166 s, the left front tire lost contact with the ground surface. The right rear outer tire blew out at 0.223 s, and the left rear tires became airborne at 0.252 s. At 0.263 s, the right rear edge of the

101 box van went over the top of the barrier. The vehicle began to travel parallel with the barrier at 0.433 s, and was traveling at a speed of 56.6 mi/h. The vehicle exited the view of the overhead camera at 0.779 s. At 1.132 s, the vehicle reached the end of the barrier oriented at 90 degrees of roll. By 3.325 s, the vehicle righted itself and came to rest upright 69 ft downstream of the end of the barrier and 10 ft behind the traffic face of the barrier. The 32-inch New Jersey Shape Barrier sustained cosmetic damage only, as shown in Figure 40. There were tire marks and gouges in the traffic face, and then about halfway down, along the top edge of the barrier and off the end of the barrier. Figure 40. 32-inch New Jersey Shape Barrier after MASH Test 4-12. As shown in Figure 41, the SUT cargo box and truck cab sustained extensive damage due to rollover. Both right and left frame rails were deformed, the right front U-bolts broke, the front axle was deformed, the drive shaft broke, and the right rear U-bolts broke. Both front tires and rims and the right rear inner and outer tires and rims were damaged. The right A-post was deformed and the windshield was broken. Also damaged were the front bumper, hood, right door and glass, cab, and roof. The right fuel tank was deformed (but not punctured), and the right side floor pan was also deformed. Maximum exterior crush to the right front corner of the bumper was 12.0 inches, and maximum occupant compartment deformation was 4.0 inches in the right floor pan area.

102 Figure 41. Test Vehicle after MASH test 4-12 on the 32-inch New Jersey Safety Shape Barrier. Data from the accelerometer, located at the vehicle center of gravity, were digitized for evaluation of occupant risk and are reported for informational purposes only. In the longitudinal direction, the occupant impact velocity was 8.2 ft/s at 0.223 s, the highest 0.010-s occupant ridedown acceleration was -4.3 Gs from 1.223 to 1.233 s, and the maximum 0.050-s average acceleration was -2.6 Gs between 1.621 and 1.671 s. In the lateral direction, the occupant impact velocity was 13.8 ft/s at 0.223 s, the highest 0.010-s occupant ridedown acceleration was -7.7 Gs from 1.123 to 1.133 s, and the maximum 0.050-s average was -4.1 Gs between 0.166 and 0.216 s. Theoretical Head Impact Velocity (THIV) was 16.3 km/h or 4.5 m/s at 0.215 s; Post- Impact Head Decelerations (PHD) was 7.8 Gs between 1.123 and 1.133 s; and Acceleration Severity Index (ASI) was 2.97 between 0.350 and 0.400 s. These data and other pertinent information from the test are summarized in Figure 42. The 32-inch New Jersey Shape Barrier began to redirect the 10000S vehicle. However, the vehicle rolled on top and over the barrier. The vehicle rolled 101 degrees, but subsequently came to rest upright after exiting off the end of the barrier and contacting the ground. No deflection or deformation of the safety shaped barrier was noted. No detached elements, fragments, or other debris were present to penetrate or to show potential for penetrating the occupant compartment, or to present hazard to others in the area. Maximum occupant compartment deformation was 4.0 inches in the floor pan area. The vehicle exited within the exit box.

103 Summary of Test Results The 32-inch New Jersey Shape Barrier failed to contain and redirect the SUT vehicle. The SUT rolled 101 degrees before exiting the end of the barrier. Subsequent contact with the ground enabled the vehicle to right itself as it came to rest. Had the test installation length been longer, the SUT would have continued to roll over the top of the rail. The 32-inch New Jersey Shape Barrier failed to demonstrate satisfactory performance in the MASH08 Test 4-12 crash test, as shown in Table 10.

104 0.000 s 0.246 s 0.489 s 0.735 s General Information Test Agency ......................... Test No. .............................. Date ..................................... Test Article Type ..................................... Name ................................... Installation Length .............. Material or Key Elements .... Soil Type and Condition ....... Test Vehicle Type/Designation ................. Make and Model .................. Mass Curb .................................. Test Inertial ....................... Gross Static ...................... Texas Transportation Institute RF476460-1 2008-02-19 Concrete Barrier 32-inch New Jersey Shape Barrier 100 ft-1 in Reinforced Concrete Concrete Deck, Dry 10000S 1999 Ford F-800 SUT 12,200 lb 22,090 lb 22,090 lb Impact Conditions Speed .................................... Angle ..................................... Exit Conditions Speed .................................... Angle ..................................... Occupant Risk Values Impact Velocity Longitudinal ........................ Lateral ................................ Ridedown Accelerations Longitudinal ........................ Lateral ................................ THIV ...................................... PHD ....................................... Max. 0.050-s Average Longitudinal ........................ Lateral ................................ Vertical ............................... 57.4 mi/h 14.4 degrees Out of View 8.2 ft/s 13.8 ft/s -4.3 Gs 7.7 Gs 16.3 km/h 7.8 Gs -2.6 Gs -4.1 Gs 29.7 Gs Post-Impact Trajectory Stopping Distance ......................... Vehicle Stability Maximum Yaw Angle ..................... Maximum Pitch Angle .................... Maximum Roll Angle ...................... Vehicle Snagging ........................... Vehicle Pocketing .......................... Test Article Deflections Dynamic ......................................... Permanent ..................................... Working Width ............................... Vehicle Damage VDS ............................................ CDC ............................................ Max. Exterior Vehicle Crush (inches) ............ Max. Occupant Compartment Deformation (inches) ............... 139 ft downstream 10.0 ft behind -17 degrees -8 degrees 101 degrees No No 0 0 12.1 ft N/A 01RFEW4 12.0 inches 4.0 inches Figure 42. Summary of Results for MASH Test 4-12 on the 32-inch New Jersey Shape Barrier.

105 Table 10. Performance Evaluation Summary for MASH Test 4-12 on the 32-inch New Jersey Shape Barrier. Test Agency: Texas Transportation Institute Test No.: RF476460-1b Test Date: 2008-02-19 MASH Test 4-12 Evaluation Criteria Test Results Assessment Structural Adequacy A. Test article should contain and redirect the vehicle or bring the vehicle to a controlled stop; the vehicle should not penetrate, underride, or override the installation although controlled lateral deflection of the test article is acceptable The 32-inch New Jersey Shape Barrier began to redirect the 10000S vehicle, however, the vehicle rolled on top of and over the barrier. The vehicle rolled 101 degrees, and subsequently came to rest upright. No deflection or deformation of the safety shaped barrier was noted. Fail Occupant Risk D. Detached elements, fragments, or other debris from the test article should not penetrate or show potential for penetrating the occupant compartment, or present an undue hazard to other traffic, pedestrians, or personnel in a work zone. No detached elements, fragments, or other debris were present to penetrated or to show potential for penetrating the occupant compartment, or to present hazard to others in the area. Pass Deformations of, or intrusions into, the occupant compartment should not exceed limits set forth in Section 5.3 and Appendix E of MASH08. Maximum occupant compartment deformation was 4.0 inches in the floor pan area. Pass G. It is preferable, although not essential, that the vehicle remain upright during and after collision. The 10000S vehicle rolled on top the barrier, rolled 101 degrees, and subsequently came to rest upright. Pass Vehicle Trajectory After impact, the vehicle shall exit the barrier within the exit box. The vehicle remained within the exit box. Pass

106 Test Number 476460-1-4 (MASH Test 4-11) Test Description Test Vehicle: 2007 Chevrolet Silverado 4-door pickup Test Inertia Weight: 5049 lb Gross Static Weight: 5049 lb Impact Speed: 62.6 mi/h Impact Angle: 25.2 degrees Of note, the same barrier installation was used for both 4-12 and 4-11 crash tests since the barrier only sustained cosmetic damage during the 4-12 test. The 2007 Chevrolet Silverado pickup, traveling at an impact speed of 62.6 mi/h, impacted the 32-inch New Jersey Shape Barrier near the one-third point of the barrier at an impact angle of 25.2 degrees. At 0.039 s after impact, the right front tire began climbing the barrier face and deflated, and at 0.066 s, the left front tire became airborne. The vehicle began to redirect at 0.088 s, and the left rear tire becomes airborne. At 0.165 s, the right rear of the vehicle contacted the barrier, and the vehicle began traveling parallel with the barrier at 0.199 s and was traveling at a speed of 54.6 mi/h. The left rear of the vehicle began to rise at 0.277 s, and the right front tire contacted the ground surface at 0.282 s. At 0.339 s, the front bumper bottomed out on the ground surface. The vehicle lost contact with the barrier at 0.471 s, and the vehicle was traveling at an exit speed of 52.6 mi/h at an exit angle of 4.0 degrees. At 0.534 s, the left front tire contacts the ground surface. Brakes on the vehicle were applied at 1.47 s after impact, and the vehicle subsequently came to rest facing the barrier 204 ft downstream of impact and 84 inches behind the traffic face. Damage to the 32-inch New Jersey Shape Barrier is shown in Figure 43. Tire marks on the barrier began 12 inches upstream from the point of impact and continued for a distance of 148 inches. No measurable deflection or deformation of the barrier occurred. The vehicle sustained damage to the right side, as shown in Figure 44. Damaged were the right lower A-arm, right tie rod end, right sway bar mount, right upper shock mount and shock. Also damaged were the front bumper, grill, right front tire and rim, right front fender, hood, right front and rear doors, right rear cab corner, right rear exterior bed, right rear tire and rim, rear bumper and tail gate. Maximum exterior crush to the vehicle was 14 inches in the side plane at the right front corner at bumper height. Maximum occupant compartment deformation was 2.0 inches in the lateral area across the cab at the right kickpanel.

107 Figure 43. 32-inch New Jersey Shape Barrier after MASH Test 3-11. Figure 44. Test vehicle after MASH Test 3-11 on the 32-inch New Jersey Shape Barrier.

108 Data from the accelerometer, located at the vehicle center of gravity, were digitized for evaluation of occupant risk. In the longitudinal direction, the occupant impact velocity was 14.1 ft/s (4.3 m/s) at 0.086 s, the highest 0.010-s occupant ridedown acceleration was -5.6 G from 0.185 to 0.195 s, and the maximum 0.050-s average acceleration was -6.8 G between 0.020 and 0.070 s. In the lateral direction, the occupant impact velocity was 30.2 ft/s (9.2 m/s) at 0.086 s, the highest 0.010-s occupant ridedown acceleration was -9.6 G from 0.171 to 0.181 s, and the maximum 0.050-s average was -15.7 Gs between 0.032 and 0.082 s. THIV was 36.0 km/h or 10.0 m/s at 0.085 s; PHD was 10.2 G between 0.171 and 0.181 s; and ASI was 1.85 between 0.032 and 0.082 s. These data and other pertinent information from the test are summarized in Figure 45. Summary of Test Results The 32-inch New Jersey Shape Barrier contained and redirected the 2270P vehicle. The vehicle did not penetrate, underride, or override the installation. No measurable deflection of the barrier occurred. No detached elements, fragments, or other debris were present to penetrate or to show potential for penetrating the occupant compartment, or to present hazard to others in the area. Maximum occupant compartment deformation was 2.0 inches at the right kickpanel. The 2270P vehicle remained upright during and after the collision event. Maximum roll and pitch angles were 29 and -16 degrees, respectively. Occupant risk factors were within the limits specified in MASH. The 2270P exited the barrier within the exit box. The 32-inch New Jersey Shape Barrier performed acceptably when impacted by the 2270P vehicle (2007 Chevrolet Silverado pickup) and evaluated in accordance with the safety performance evaluation criteria presented in MASH, as shown in Table 11.

109 0.000 s 0.231 s 0.462 s 0.693 s General Information Test Agency ......................... Test No. .............................. Date ..................................... Test Article Type ..................................... Name ................................... Installation Length .............. Material or Key Elements .... Soil Type and Condition ....... Test Vehicle Type/Designation ................. Make and Model .................. Mass Curb .................................. Test Inertial ....................... Gross Static ...................... Texas Transportation Institute RF476460-1-4 2009-01-30 Concrete Barrier 32-inch New Jersey Shape Barrier 100 ft-1 in Concrete Concrete Deck, Dry 2270P 2007 Chevrolet Silverado Pickup 5000 lb 5049 lb 5049 lb Impact Conditions Speed .................................... Angle ..................................... Exit Conditions Speed .................................... Angle ..................................... Occupant Risk Values Impact Velocity Longitudinal ........................ Lateral ................................ Ridedown Accelerations Longitudinal ........................ Lateral ................................ THIV ...................................... PHD ....................................... Max. 0.050-s Average Longitudinal ........................ Lateral ................................ Vertical ............................... 62.6 mi/h 25.2 degrees 52.6 mi/h 4.0 degrees 14.1 ft/s 30.2 ft/s -5.6 G -9.6 G 36.0 km/h 10.2 G -6.8 G -15.7 G -3.2 G Post-Impact Trajectory Stopping Distance ......................... Vehicle Stability Maximum Yaw Angle ..................... Maximum Pitch Angle .................... Maximum Roll Angle ...................... Vehicle Snagging ........................... Vehicle Pocketing .......................... Test Article Deflections Dynamic ......................................... Permanent ..................................... Working Width ............................... Vehicle Damage VDS ............................................ CDC ............................................ Max. Exterior Vehicle Crush (inches) ............ Max. Occupant Compartment Deformation (inches) ............... 204 ft -29 degrees -16 degrees 29 degrees No No 0 0 0 01RFQ5 01RFEW4 14.0 inches 2.0 inches Figure 45. Summary of Results for MASH Test 3-11 on the 32-inch New Jersey Shape Barrier.

110 Table 11. Performance Evaluation Summary for MASH Test 4-11 on the 32-inch New Jersey Shape Barrier. Test Agency: Texas Transportation Institute Test No.: RF 476460-1-4 Test Date: 2009-01-30 MASH Test 4-11 Evaluation Criteria Test Results Assessment Structural Adequacy A. Test article should contain and redirect the vehicle or bring the vehicle to a controlled stop; the vehicle should not penetrate, underride, or override the installation although controlled lateral deflection of the test article is acceptable The 32-inch New Jersey Shape Barrier contained and redirected the 2270P vehicle. The vehicle did not penetrate, underride, or override the installation. No measurable deflection of the barrier occurred. Pass Occupant Risk D. Detached elements, fragments, or other debris from the test article should not penetrate or show potential for penetrating the occupant compartment, or present an undue hazard to other traffic, pedestrians, or personnel in a work zone. No detached elements, fragment, or other debris was present to penetrate or to show potential for penetrating the occupant compartment, or to present hazard to others in the area. Pass Deformations of, or intrusions into, the occupant compartment should not exceed limits set forth in Section 5.3 and Appendix E of MASH. Maximum occupant compartment deformation was 2.0 inches at the right kickpanel. Pass F. The vehicle should remain upright during and after collision. The maximum roll and pitch angles are not to exceed 75 degrees. The 2270P vehicle remained upright during and after the collision event. Maximum roll and pitch were 29 and -16 degrees, respectively. Pass H. Longitudinal and lateral occupant impact velocities should fall below the preferred value of 30 ft/s (9.1 m/s), or at least below the maximum allowable value of 40 ft/s (12.2 m/s). Longitudinal occupant impact velocity was 14.1 ft/s, and lateral occupant impact velocity was 30.2 ft/s. Pass I. Longitudinal and lateral occupant ridedown accelerations should fall below the preferred value of 15.0 G, or at least below the maximum allowable value of 20.49 G. Longitudinal ridedown acceleration was -5.6 G, and lateral ridedown acceleration was -9.6 G. Pass Vehicle Trajectory For redirective devices, the vehicle shall exit the barrier within the exit box. The 2270P exited the barrier within the exit box. Pass

111 W-BEAM GUARDRAIL – G4(2W) Test Installation Description The G4(2W) W-beam guardrail system consists of 12 gauge W-beam rail elements attached to nominal 6 in x 8 in x 72 in wood posts spaced 6 ft-3 inches on center apart. The rail is offset from the posts using nominal 6 in x 8 in x 14-inch long wood block-outs. The rail and block-outs are attached to the post with A307 5/8-inch diameter bolts and nuts. The rail splice joints occurred at the posts and were lapped in the travel direction of traffic. The mounting height of the guardrail was 27-5/8 inches to the top of the W-beam element. The posts were installed 44 inches below grade in standard test soil, backfilled in lifts and mechanically compacted. The overall length of the test installation was 175.0 ft. Figure 46 shows a cross-section of the G4(2W) W-beam guardrail. Figure 47 shows photos of the completed installation. Appendix D (available on the NCAC website, www.ncac.gwu.edu/) shows drawings of the test installation and more detailed information on the barrier and crash test. According to Appendix B of MASH, soil strength was measured the day of the crash test. The minimum post loads required for post deflections of 5 inches, 10 inches, and 15 inches, measured at a height of 25 inches above ground, is 3940 lb, 5500 lb, and 6540 lb, respectively (90 percent of static load for the initial standard installation). On the day of the test, March 4, 2009, loads on the post at deflections of 5 inches and 10 inches were 8030 lb and 9727 lb, respectively. The load on the post as the post deflection reached 15 inches exceeded 9000 lb, at which point the load test was stopped. Thus, the strength of the backfill material met minimum requirements. Figure 46. Cross-Section of the G4(2W) W-Beam Guardrail.

112 Figure 47. G4(2W) W-Beam Guardrail Prior to Testing. Test Number 476460-1-5 (MASH Test 3-11) Test Description Test Vehicle: 2007 Chevrolet Silverado 4-door pickup Test Inertia Weight: 5009 lb Gross Static Weight: 5009 lb Impact Speed: 64.4 mi/h Impact Angle: 26.1 degrees The 2007 Chevrolet Silverado pickup, traveling at an impact speed of 64.4 mi/h, impacted the G4(2W) W-beam guardrail 10 ft-0 inches upstream of post 13 at an impact angle of 26.1 degrees. At 0.034 s after impact, the left front corner of the vehicle contacted post 12, which began to rotate in the soil. The left front tire and wheel rim contacted post 13, and the post fractured below ground at 0.053 s. The vehicle contacted post 14 at 0.065 s, and the vehicle just slightly redirected at 0.078 s, after which time the vehicle pocketed in the guardrail. At 0.122 s, the W-beam rail element ruptured, and at 0.129 s, the vehicle began to yaw clockwise. The vehicle contacted posts 15, 16 and 17 at 0.173 s, 0.252 s, and 0.378 s, respectively. At 0.630 s, the vehicle lost contact with the W-beam guardrail and was traveling at an exit speed and angle of 33.8 mi/h and 4.3 degrees, respectively, toward the field side of the installation. At 0.824 s, the left front area of the vehicle became visible and it was noted that the left front tire and wheel assembly had

113 separated from the vehicle. The vehicle began to roll at 1.263 s as the wheel rims on the left side dug into the soil. The vehicle rolled counterclockwise 180 degrees, and the vehicle subsequently came to rest upside down, facing the field side of the barrier, 16 ft toward the field side between posts 21 and 22 (69 ft downstream). Damage to the G4(2W) W-beam guardrail is shown in Figures 48 and 49. Post 1 was displaced laterally downstream 0.4 inch, and the W-beam rail element separated from post 8. Post 10 split vertically through the rail bolt hole and the soil around the post was disturbed. Post 11 was pushed toward the field side 1.0 inch at ground level and was leaning 3 degrees. Post 12 was pushed toward field side 2 inches at ground level, and was leaning 9 degrees. The W-beam rail element ruptured at the splice on the upstream side of the bolts at post 13 and the ruptured end deformed around post 15. Posts 13 through 15 fractured below ground level, and due to fracturing and splintering, specific post resting places were not identifiable. However, all debris was on the field side of the test installation. Post 16 was pushed toward the field side and downstream 0.5 inch at ground level and the W-beam rail element separated from the post. There were tire marks on the field side of post 16. Post 17 was pushed toward the field side and downstream 0.5 inch. The soil around post 18 and 19 was disturbed. Post 21 was split vertically at the rail bolt hole. The length of contact of the vehicle with the guardrail was 24.0 ft. Figure 48. G4(2W) W-Beam Guardrail after MASH Test 3-11. The vehicle sustained damage to the left side and top, as shown in Figure 49. The left upper and lower A-arms and the left frame rail were deformed. The left upper ball joint separated, the lower ball joint pulled out of the mount, and the steering knuckle sheared. Also damaged were the front bumper, grill, radiator, left front fender, left doors, left rear wheel rim (no loss of air in the

114 tire), left rear exterior bed, rear bumper and tailgate. The windshield, roof, right doors, and right rear exterior of the bed were deformed from the rollover. Maximum exterior crush to the vehicle was 6.5 inches in the side plane at the left front corner at bumper height. Maximum occupant compartment deformation was 2.88 inches in the vertical measurement from floor to roof in the driver’s side area. Figure 49. Test Vehicle and G4(2W) W-Beam Guardrail after MASH Test 3-11. Data from the accelerometer, located at the vehicle center of gravity, were digitized for evaluation of occupant risk. In the longitudinal direction, the occupant impact velocity was 21.6 ft/s (6.6 m/s) at 0.143 s, the highest 0.010-s occupant ridedown acceleration was -10.2 G from 0.240 to 0. 250 s, and the maximum 0.050-s average acceleration was -8.2 G between 0.066 and 0.116 s. In the lateral direction, the occupant impact velocity was 14.1 ft/s (4.3 m/s) at 0.143 s, the highest 0.010-s occupant ridedown acceleration was 9.6 G from 1.411 to 1.421 s, and the maximum 0.050-s average was 6.3 Gs between 0.036 and 0.086 s. THIV was 27.6 km/h or 7.7 m/s at 0.138 s; PHD was 10.5 G between 0.305 and 0.315 s; and the ASI was 0.97 between 0.037 and 0.087 s. These data and other pertinent information from the test are summarized in Figure 50. Summary of Test Results The G4(2W) W-beam guardrail did not contain the 2270P vehicle. The vehicle penetrated the guardrail after the rail element ruptured. Posts 13 through 15 fractured below ground level. However, all debris was on the field side of the test installation and did not penetrate or show potential for penetrating the occupant compartment, or to present hazard to others in the area. Maximum occupant compartment deformation was 2.88 inches in the left front cab area. The 2270P

115 vehicle remained upright during the collision event. However, the 2270P vehicle rolled after penetrating the guardrail. Maximum roll angle was 180 degrees. Occupant risk factors were within the limits specified in MASH. The 2270P vehicle came to rest behind the guardrail installation. It should be noted, the impact speed and angle for this test were 64.4 mph and 26.1 degrees, respectively. The impact speed and angle were within the acceptable limits prescribed in MASH. However, the impact condition represented an impact severity 16.4 percent greater than the target MASH condition (62.2 mph and 25 degrees). The G4(2W) W-beam guardrail did not perform acceptably when impacted by the 2270P vehicle (2007 Chevrolet Silverado pickup), as shown in Table 12. The 2270P Silverado pickup penetrated the rail element and then rolled 180 degrees.

116 0.000 s 0.234 s 0.469 s 0.820 s General Information Test Agency ......................... Test No. .............................. Date ..................................... Test Article Type ..................................... Name ................................... Installation Length .............. Material or Key Elements .... Soil Type and Condition ....... Test Vehicle Type/Designation ................. Make and Model .................. Mass Curb .................................. Test Inertial ....................... Gross Static ...................... Texas Transportation Institute RF476460-1-5 2009-03-04 Longitudinal Barrier G4(2W) W-beam guardrail 175 ft W-beam rail element on 6x8x72-inch long timber posts spaced 6 ft-3 inches apart with 6x8x14-inch long timber blockouts Crushed Limestone, Dry 2270P 2007 Chevrolet Silverado Pickup 5079 lb 5009 lb 5009 lb Impact Conditions Speed .................................... Angle ..................................... Exit Conditions Speed .................................... Angle ..................................... Occupant Risk Values Impact Velocity Longitudinal ........................ Lateral ................................ Ridedown Accelerations Longitudinal ........................ Lateral ................................ THIV ...................................... PHD ....................................... Max. 0.050-s Average Longitudinal ........................ Lateral ................................ Vertical ............................... 64.4 mi/h 26.1 degrees 33.8 mi/h 4.3 deg behind 21.6 ft/s 14.1 ft/s -10.2 G 9.6 G 27.6 km/h 10.5 G -8.2 G 6.3 G -3.7 G Post-Impact Trajectory Stopping Distance ......................... Vehicle Stability Maximum Yaw Angle ..................... Maximum Pitch Angle .................... Maximum Roll Angle ...................... Vehicle Snagging ........................... Vehicle Pocketing .......................... Test Article Deflections Dynamic ......................................... Permanent ..................................... Working Width ............................... Vehicle Damage VDS ............................................ CDC ............................................ Max. Exterior Vehicle Crush ....... Max. Occupant Compartment Deformation ............................. 69 ft downstream; 16 ft behind rail 87 degrees -18 degrees -180 degrees No Yes Ruptured Ruptured Ruptured 01LFQ5 01LFEW4 13.0 inches 2.88 inches Figure 50. Summary of Results for MASH Test 3-11 on the G4(2W) W-Beam Guardrail.

117 Table 12. Performance Evaluation Summary for MASH Test 3-11 on the G4(2W) W-Beam Guardrail. Test Agency: Texas Transportation Institute Test No.: RF 476460-1-5 Test Date: 2009-03-04 MASH Test 3-11 Evaluation Criteria Test Results Assessment Structural Adequacy A. Test article should contain and redirect the vehicle or bring the vehicle to a controlled stop; the vehicle should not penetrate, underride, or override the installation although controlled lateral deflection of the test article is acceptable The G4(2W) W-beam guardrail did not contain the 2270P vehicle. The vehicle penetrated the W-beam rail element. Fail Occupant Risk D. Detached elements, fragments, or other debris from the test article should not penetrate or show potential for penetrating the occupant compartment, or present an undue hazard to other traffic, pedestrians, or personnel in a work zone. No detached elements, fragments, or other debris were present to penetrate or to show potential for penetrating the occupant compartment, or to present hazard to others in the area. Pass Deformations of, or intrusions into, the occupant compartment should not exceed limits set forth in Section 5.3 and Appendix E of MASH. Maximum occupant compartment deformation was 2.88 inches at the vertical area of the left front cab area. Pass F. The vehicle should remain upright during and after collision. The maximum roll and pitch angles are not to exceed 75 degrees. The 2270P vehicle remained upright during the collision event. However, vehicle rolled after penetrating the guardrail. Maximum roll angle was 118 degrees. Fail H. Longitudinal and lateral occupant impact velocities should fall below the preferred value of 30 ft/s (9.1 m/s), or at least below the maximum allowable value of 40 ft/s (12.2 m/s). Longitudinal occupant impact velocity was 21.6 ft/s, and lateral occupant impact velocity was 14.1 ft/s. Pass I. Longitudinal and lateral occupant ridedown accelerations should fall below the preferred value of 15.0 G, or at least below the maximum allowable value of 20.49 G. Longitudinal ridedown acceleration was -10.2 G, and lateral ridedown acceleration was 9.6 G. Pass Vehicle Trajectory For redirective devices, the vehicle shall exit the barrier within the exit box. The 2270P penetrated behind the installation. N/A

118 W-BEAM GUARDRAIL – G4(1S) MEDIAN BARRIER Test Installation Description The G4(1S) W-Beam Median Barrier (American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO) Designation SGM04a with non-steel blocks) is a 27 inch tall, strong steel post, W-beam median barrier. The median barrier is constructed using 12-gauge W-beam guardrails attached to 6 ft long W6x8.5 steel posts spaced 6 ft-3 inch on center. The W- beam guardrails are offset from the posts using non-steel blockouts nominally 6 inch x 8 inch x 14 inch long. Either wood or an FHWA accepted plastic blockout may be used. For the test presented herein, wood blockouts were used. The height of the G4(1S) W-beam median barrier test installation was 27 inches. The length of need for the installation was 100 ft. The median barrier was terminated with ET-PLUS guardrail terminals. The front (impacted) rail was constructed with 37 ft-6 inch long terminals on each end and the rear rail was constructed with 50 ft long terminals on each end. The total overall test installation length was 200 ft. A cross section of the G4(1S) W-beam median barrier is shown in Figure 51. Photographs of the completed installation are shown in Figure 52. More detailed information of the barrier and the two crash tests can be found in Appendixes E and F (available on the NCAC website, www.ncac.gwu.edu/). The first test on the median barrier was with the small car (1100C vehicle). The installation was then repaired and used for the test with the 2270P vehicle. The test installation was installed in standard soil meeting AASHTO standard specifications for “Materials for Aggregate and Soil Aggregate Subbase, Base and Surface Courses,” designated M147-65(2004), grading B. In addition, in compliance with MASH, standard soil strength static tests were performed at the installation site the day of each crash test. According to Appendix B of MASH, soil strength was measured the day of the crash test. The minimum post load required for deflections at 5 inches, 10 inches, and 15 inches, measured at a height of 25 inches above ground, is 3940 lb, 5500 lb, and 6540 lb, respectively (90 percent of static load for the initial standard installation). On the day of the small car test, April 8, 2009, load on the post at deflections of 5 inches, 10 inches, and 15 inches was 7636 lb, 8697 lb, and 9303 lb, respectively. Thus, the strength of the backfill material met minimum requirements. On the day of the pickup test, April 14, 2009, load on the post at deflections of 5 inches and 10 inches was 8758 lb and 9606 lb, respectively. As the load approached 9800 lb, the winch truck lost traction and started slipping. Therefore, testing was halted. However, the strength of the backfill material met minimum requirements.

119 Figure 51. Cross Section of the G4(1S) W-Beam Median Barrier. Figure 52. G4(1S) W-Beam Median Barrier Prior to Testing.

120 Test Number 476460-1-10 (MASH Test 3-10) Test Description Test Vehicle: 2002 Kia Rio Test Inertia Weight: 2418 lb Gross Static Weight: 2584 lb Impact Speed: 61.4 mi/h Impact Angle: 26.0 degrees The 2002 Kia Rio, traveling at an impact speed of 61.4 mi/h, impacted the G4(1S) W-Beam Median Barrier 8.5 ft upstream of post 13 at an impact angle of 26.0 degrees. At 0.039 s after impact, the lower section of the left front tire began to cant under the rail element, and at 0.046 s, the vehicle began to redirect. The roof began to deform above the driver position at 0.051 s, the left front tire contacted the lower portion of post 13 at 0.077 s. At 0.137 s, the dummy’s head contacted the inside of the door just below the door glass. The rear of the vehicle contacted the W-beam rail element at 0.158 s, and at 0.171 s, the vehicle bumper contacted post 14. As the vehicle continued forward, the front end pitched down with the right front corner touching ground at 0.184 s, and subsequently reaching its lowest pitch at 0.200 s. At 0.229 s, the vehicle began to travel parallel with the median barrier and was traveling at a speed of 33.9 mi/h. At 0.422 s, the vehicle lost contact with the median barrier and was traveling at an exit speed and angle of 28.1 mi/h and 9.4 degrees, respectively. Brakes on the vehicle were applied 1.7 s after impact. The vehicle subsequently came to rest 183 ft downstream of impact with the left rear corner 70 inches toward the traffic side at post 29. Damage to the G4(1S) W-beam median barrier is shown in Figure 53. In the terminal, Post 1 was pulled downstream 0.25 inches at ground level. Post 11 was leaning toward field side 3 degrees and displaced through the soil toward field side 0.5 inch. Post 12 was leaning toward field side 5 degrees and displaced through the soil toward field side 1.5 inches. Post 13 was rotated counterclockwise 90 degrees, leaning downstream 45 degrees, and separated from both rail elements. The blockout was shattered with pieces resting at post 14. Post 14 was deformed at mid-height, leaning downstream 15 degrees, and separated from both rail elements. Length of contact of the vehicle with the guardrail was 15.7 ft. Working width was 32.1 inches. Maximum dynamic and permanent deformation was 11.25 inches at post 13. The vehicle sustained damage to the left side, as shown in Figure 54. The strut and tower and sway bar were deformed. Also damaged were the front bumper, grill, radiator and support, hood, left front fender, left doors, left rear quarter panel, and left rear bumper. The right front tire was deflated, and the left front wheel rim was deformed and the tire deflated. The windshield sustained stress cracks in the lower left corner and there was a wrinkle in the roof over the driver’s seat. Maximum exterior crush to the vehicle was 12.5 inches in the front plane at the left front corner at bumper height. Maximum occupant compartment deformation was 2.0 inches in the lateral measurement across the cab in the front driver’s area at the level of the floor pan.

121 Figure 53. G4(1S) W-Beam Median Barrier after MASH Test 3-10. Figure 54. Test Vehicle after MASH Test 3-10 on the G4(1S) W-Beam Median Barrier.

122 Data from the accelerometer, located at the vehicle center of gravity, were digitized for evaluation of occupant risk. In the longitudinal direction, the occupant impact velocity was 16.4 ft/s (5.0 m/s) at 0.098 s, the highest 0.010-s occupant ridedown acceleration was -16.5 G from 0.116 to 0. 126 s, and the maximum 0.050-s average acceleration was -9.8 G between 0.082 s and 0.132 s. In the lateral direction, the occupant impact velocity was 24.3 ft/s (7.4 m/s) at 0.098 s, the highest 0.010-s occupant ridedown acceleration was 10.5 G from 0.104 to 0.114 s, and the maximum 0.050-s average was 10.1 Gs between 0.032 and 0.082 s. THIV was 30.0 km/h or 8.3 m/s at 0.096 s; PHD was 17.8 G between 0.116 and 0.126 s; and ASI was 1.28 between 0.073 and 0.123 s. These data and other pertinent information from the test are summarized in Figure 55. Summary of Test Results The G4(1S) W-beam median barrier contained and redirected the 1100C vehicle. The vehicle did not penetrate, override, or underride the installation. Maximum dynamic deflection was 11.25 inches. No detached elements, fragments, or other debris were present to penetrate or to show potential for penetrating the occupant compartment, or to present a hazard to others in the area. Maximum occupant compartment deformation was 2.0 inches in the left front driver’s area at the level of the floor pan. The 1100C vehicle remained upright during and after the collision event. Maximum roll angle was 8 degrees. Occupant risk factors were within the limits specified in MASH. The 1100C vehicle exited the median barrier within the exit box. The G4(1S) W-beam median barrier performed acceptably when impacted by the 1100C vehicle (2002 Kia Rio), as shown in Table 13.

123 0.000 s 0.119 s 0.236 s 0.475 s General Information Test Agency ......................... Test No. .............................. Date ..................................... Test Article Type ..................................... Name ................................... Installation Length .............. Material or Key Elements .... Soil Type and Condition ....... Test Vehicle Type/Designation ................. Make and Model .................. Mass Curb .................................. Test Inertial ....................... Dummy ............................. Gross Static ...................... Texas Transportation Institute RF476460-1-10 2009-04-08 Median Barrier G4(1S) W-Beam Median Barrier 200 ft W-beam rail elements on steel posts with wood blockouts Crushed Limestone, Dry 1100C 2002 Kia Rio 2396 lb 2418 lb 166 lb 2584 lb Impact Conditions Speed .................................... Angle ..................................... Exit Conditions Speed .................................... Angle ..................................... Occupant Risk Values Impact Velocity Longitudinal ........................ Lateral ................................ Ridedown Accelerations Longitudinal ........................ Lateral ................................ THIV ...................................... PHD ....................................... Max. 0.050-s Average Longitudinal ........................ Lateral ................................ Vertical ............................... 61.4 mi/h 26.0 degrees 45.3 mi/h 9.4 degrees 16.4 ft/s 24.3 ft/s -16.5 G 10.5 G 30.0 km/h 17.8 G -9.8 G 10.1 G 1.6 G Post-Impact Trajectory Stopping Distance ......................... Vehicle Stability Maximum Yaw Angle ..................... Maximum Pitch Angle .................... Maximum Roll Angle ...................... Vehicle Snagging ........................... Vehicle Pocketing .......................... Test Article Deflections Dynamic ......................................... Permanent ..................................... Working Width ............................... Vehicle Damage VDS ............................................ CDC ............................................ Max. Exterior Vehicle Crush ....... Max. Occupant Compartment Deformation ............................. 183 ft dwnstrm 23 ft twd traffic 35 degrees -5 degrees 8 degrees No No 11.25 inches 11.25 inches 32.1 inches 11LFQ5 11FLEW4 12.5 inches 2.0 inches Figure 55. Summary of Results for MASH Test 3-10 on the G4(1S) W-Beam Median Barrier.

124 Table 13. Performance Evaluation Summary for MASH Test 3-10 on the G4(1S) W-Beam Median Barrier. Test Agency: Texas Transportation Institute Test No.: RF 476460-1-10 Test Date: 2009-04-08 MASH Test 3-10 Evaluation Criteria Test Results Assessment Structural Adequacy A. Test article should contain and redirect the vehicle or bring the vehicle to a controlled stop; the vehicle should not penetrate, underride, or override the installation although controlled lateral deflection of the test article is acceptable The G4(1S) W-beam median barrier contained and redirected the 1100C vehicle. The vehicle did not penetrate, override, or underride the installation. Maximum dynamic deflection during the test was 11.25 inches. Pass Occupant Risk D. Detached elements, fragments, or other debris from the test article should not penetrate or show potential for penetrating the occupant compartment, or present an undue hazard to other traffic, pedestrians, or personnel in a work zone. No detached elements, fragments, or other debris were present to penetrate or to show potential for penetrating the occupant compartment, or to a present hazard to others in the area. Pass Deformations of, or intrusions into, the occupant compartment should not exceed limits set forth in Section 5.3 and Appendix E of MASH. Maximum occupant compartment deformation was 2.0 inches in the driver’s side area at the level of the floor pan. Pass F. The vehicle should remain upright during and after collision. The maximum roll and pitch angles are not to exceed 75 degrees. The 1100C vehicle remained upright during and after the collision event. Maximum roll angle was 8 degrees. Pass H. Longitudinal and lateral occupant impact velocities should fall below the preferred value of 30 ft/s (9.1 m/s), or at least below the maximum allowable value of 40 ft/s (12.2 m/s). Longitudinal occupant impact velocity was 16.4 ft/s, and lateral occupant impact velocity was 24.3 ft/s. Pass I. Longitudinal and lateral occupant ridedown accelerations should fall below the preferred value of 15.0 G, or at least below the maximum allowable value of 20.49 G. Longitudinal ridedown acceleration was -16.5 G, and lateral ridedown acceleration was 10.5 G. Pass Vehicle Trajectory For redirective devices, the vehicle shall exit the barrier within the exit box. The 1100C exited the median barrier within the exit box. Pass

125 Test Number 476460-1-9 (MASH Test 3-11) Test Description Test Vehicle: 2007 Chevrolet Silverado 4-door pickup Test Inertia Weight: 5029 lb Gross Static Weight: 5029 lb Impact Speed: 64.0 mi/h Impact Angle: 25.1 degrees The installation used in the test with the small car (1100C vehicle) was repaired and used for this test with the 2270P vehicle. The 2007 Chevrolet Silverado pickup, traveling at an impact speed of 64.0 mi/h, impacted the G4(1S) W-beam median barrier 2 inches downstream of post 11 at an impact angle of 25.1 degrees. At 0.054 s after impact, the left front bumper contacted post 12, and at 0.059 s, the W-beam rail element buckled. Post 13 separated from the w-beam rail element at 0.082 s, and the vehicle bumper contacted post 13 at 0.118 s. At 0.124 s, post 14 separated from the W-beam rail element, and the front of the vehicle began to rise up on the W-beam rail element at 0.184 s. The left front tire and wheel began to ride up on post 14 at 0.189 s and the bumper of the vehicle contacted post 14 at 0.198 s. By 0.215 s, the front of the vehicle was airborne above the median barrier, and at 0.239 s, the vehicle lost contact with the barrier as it was airborne over the median barrier. The rear differential of the vehicle contacted the top of the rail at 0.284 s, and the left rear tire and wheel contacted the “field side” of the median barrier at 0.424 s. At 0.597 s, the right front tire contacted the top of the median barrier, and at 0.929 s, the tire blew out. The left front and rear tires contacted the ground surface on the “field side” of the median barrier at 1.221 s and 1.268 s, respectively, and the front bumper contacted the ground surface at 1.289 s. At 1.526 s, the right rear tire and wheel contacted the top of the median barrier and at 1.771 s, the tire blew out. The vehicle subsequently came to rest 40 ft downstream of the end terminal, and 24 ft toward “field side.” Damage to the G4(1S) W-beam median barrier is shown in Figure 56. In the terminal, post W was pulled downstream 0.13 inch, and post 1 was pulled downstream 1.0 inch. The soil around posts 2-9 was disturbed. Post 10 was pushed toward field side 0.38 inch at ground level and was leaning 4 degrees. Post 11 was pushed toward field side 2.25 inches at ground level and leaning 6 degrees. Posts 12 and 13 were deformed and separated from both rail elements, rotated clockwise 85 degrees, and leaning toward the field side 30 degrees. Post 14 separated from the rail element, pushed toward field side 1.13 inches, and leaning toward field side 5 degrees. Post 15 was pushed toward field side 0.38 inch, and leaning toward field side 5 degrees. Post 29 was pulled upstream 0.25 inch at ground level. Maximum permanent deformation of the W-beam rail element was 22.0 inches at a point 12 inches upstream of post 13. Length of contact of the vehicle with the guardrail during the initial contact was 18.92 feet. As the vehicle vaulted over the barrier and came down on top of the barrier, the vehicle was in contact with the barrier from post 18 to post 28. Dynamic deflection of the guardrail during the test was 23.2 inches.

126 Figure 56. G4(1S) W-Beam Median Barrier after MASH Test 3-11. The vehicle sustained damage to the left side, as shown in Figure 57. The front bumper, grill, left front fender, and left front tire and wheel rims were damaged in the initial contact. The left doors and exterior of the bed were scuffed. The drive shaft, left rear tire and wheel rim and rear bumper were damaged as the vehicle vaulted over the barrier. Maximum exterior crush to the vehicle was 12 inches in the side plane at the left front corner at bumper height. No deformation of the occupant compartment occurred. Figure 57. Test Vehicle after MASH Test 3-11 on the G4(1S) W-Beam Median Barrier.

127 Data from the accelerometer, located at the vehicle center of gravity, were digitized for evaluation of occupant risk. In the longitudinal direction, the occupant impact velocity was 17.2 ft/s (5.2 m/s) at 0.138 s, the highest 0.010-s occupant ridedown acceleration was -5.2 G from 1.280 to 1.290 s, and the maximum 0.050-s average acceleration was -5.4 G between 0.049 and 0.099 s. In the lateral direction, the occupant impact velocity was 17.1 ft/s (5.0 m/s) at 0.138 s, the highest 0.010-s occupant ridedown acceleration was 5.3 G from 0.139 to 0.149 s, and the maximum 0.050-s average was 6.0 Gs between 0.219 and 0.259 s. THIV was 24.3 km/h or 6.8 m/s at 0.135 s; PHD was 6.7 G between 0.139 and 0.149 s; and ASI was 0.68 between 0.048 and 0.098 s. These data and other pertinent information from the test are summarized in Figure 58. Summary of Test Results The G4(1S) W-beam median barrier did not contain or redirect the 2270P vehicle. The vehicle overrode the installation. Maximum dynamic deflection of the W-beam during the test was 23.2 inches. No detached elements, fragments, or other debris were present to penetrate or to show potential for penetrating the occupant compartment, or to present a hazard to others in the area. No occupant compartment deformation occurred. The 2270P vehicle remained upright during and after the collision event. Maximum roll angle was 32 degrees. Occupant risk factors were within the limits specified in MASH. It should be noted, the impact speed and angle for this test were 64.0 mph and 25.1 degrees, respectively. The impact speed and angle were within the acceptable limits prescribed in MASH. However, the impact condition represented an impact severity 15.3 percent greater than the target MASH condition (62.2 mph and 25 degrees). The G4(1S) W-beam median barrier did not perform acceptably when impacted by the 2270P vehicle (2007 Chevrolet Silverado pickup), as shown in Table 14. The 2270P Silverado pickup truck overrode the installation. Typically, when the G4(1S) W-beam barrier is impacted in a roadside application, the W-beam rail element deforms, the support posts are displaced through the soil, and the vehicle is redirected. During the impact sequence, the rail becomes detached from the post by means of the post bolt pulling out of the rail slot as the post displaces rearward. However, in the G4(1S) W-beam median barrier, the addition of the rear W-beam rail element provides additional stiffness, which restrains the lateral displacement of the posts. This rail is unable to detach from the posts, and therefore, is pushed down in height as the posts are displaced. In the test presented herein, a guardrail post was impacted by the left front tire and the vehicle climbed the post and w-beam rail element. A 30 inch tall version of the G4(1S) W-beam median barrier (AASHTO Designation SGM06a&b) incorporates a C6x8.2 rub-rail channel that is mounted 12 inches above the ground to the center of the rub-rail. The addition of the rub-rail will prevent the wheel from contacting the face of the posts, thus help mitigate vehicle-post snagging. The rub-rail will also increase the barrier stiffness, which should reduce post displacement and rail deflection. However, the rub- rail may still permit the pickup to climb the barrier. The researchers recommend evaluating the 30 inch tall G4(1S) W-beam median barrier (AASHTO Designation SGM06a) with MASH test 3-11.

128 0.000 s 0.184 s 0.367 s 0.551 s General Information Test Agency ......................... Test No. .............................. Date ..................................... Test Article Type ..................................... Name ................................... Installation Length .............. Material or Key Elements .... Soil Type and Condition ....... Test Vehicle Type/Designation ................. Make and Model .................. Mass Curb .................................. Test Inertial ....................... Gross Static ...................... Texas Transportation Institute RF476460-1-9 2009-04-14 Median Barrier G4(1S) W-Beam Median Barrier 200 ft W-beam rail element on steel posts with wood blockouts Crushed Limestone, Dry 2270P 2007 Chevrolet Silverado Pickup 4953 lb 5029 lb 5029 lb Impact Conditions Speed .................................... Angle ..................................... Exit Conditions Speed .................................... Angle ..................................... Occupant Risk Values Impact Velocity Longitudinal ........................ Lateral ................................ Ridedown Accelerations Longitudinal ........................ Lateral ................................ THIV ...................................... PHD ....................................... Max. 0.050-s Average Longitudinal ........................ Lateral ................................ Vertical ............................... 64.0 mi/h 25.1 degrees Out of view Out of view 17.2 ft/s 17.1 ft/s -5.2 G 5.3 G 24.3 km/h 6.7 G -5.4 G 4.7 G -2.4 G Post-Impact Trajectory Stopping Distance ......................... Vehicle Stability Maximum Yaw Angle ..................... Maximum Pitch Angle .................... Maximum Roll Angle ...................... Vehicle Snagging ........................... Vehicle Pocketing .......................... Test Article Deflections Dynamic ......................................... Permanent ..................................... Working Width ............................... Vehicle Damage VDS ............................................ CDC ............................................ Max. Exterior Vehicle Crush ....... Max. Occupant Compartment Deformation ............................. 40 ft dwnst frm end 24 ft behind 21 degrees 10 degrees -32 degrees No No 23.2 inches 22.0 inches 24.0 ft 11RFQ2 11RFEW2 12.0 inches 0 Figure 58. Summary of Results for MASH Test 3-11 on the G4(1S) W-Beam Median Barrier.

129 Table 14. Performance Evaluation Summary for MASH Test 3-11 on the G4(1S) W-Beam Median Barrier. Test Agency: Texas Transportation Institute Test No.: RF 476460-1-9 Test Date: 2009-04-14 MASH Test 3-11 Evaluation Criteria Test Results Assessment Structural Adequacy A. Test article should contain and redirect the vehicle or bring the vehicle to a controlled stop; the vehicle should not penetrate, underride, or override the installation although controlled lateral deflection of the test article is acceptable The G4(1S) W-beam median barrier did not contain or redirected the 2270P vehicle. The vehicle overrode the installation. Maximum dynamic deflection of the guardrail during the test was 23.2 inches. Fail Occupant Risk D. Detached elements, fragments, or other debris from the test article should not penetrate or show potential for penetrating the occupant compartment, or present an undue hazard to other traffic, pedestrians, or personnel in a work zone. No detached elements, fragments, or other debris were present to penetrate or to show potential for penetrating the occupant compartment, or to present hazard to others in the area. Pass Deformations of, or intrusions into, the occupant compartment should not exceed limits set forth in Section 5.3 and Appendix E of MASH. No occupant compartment deformation occurred. Pass F. The vehicle should remain upright during and after collision. The maximum roll and pitch angles are not to exceed 75 degrees. The 2270P vehicle remained upright during and after the collision event. Maximum roll angle was 32 degrees. Pass H. Longitudinal and lateral occupant impact velocities should fall below the preferred value of 30 ft/s (9.1 m/s), or at least below the maximum allowable value of 40 ft/s (12.2 m/s). Longitudinal occupant impact velocity was 17.2 ft/s, and lateral occupant impact velocity was 17.1 ft/s. Pass I. Longitudinal and lateral occupant ridedown accelerations should fall below the preferred value of 15.0 G, or at least below the maximum allowable value of 20.49 G. Longitudinal ridedown acceleration was -5.2 G, and lateral ridedown acceleration was 5.3 G. Pass Vehicle Trajectory For redirective devices, the vehicle shall exit the barrier within the exit box. The 2270P vehicle exited behind the barrier. N/A

130 PENNDOT W-BEAM TRANSITION Test Installation Description The W-beam transition (without drainage inlet) consists of 12.5 ft of two nested 12-gauge W-beam guardrails blocked out from the end of a concrete parapet using a 6-inch-diameter spacer tube followed by 12.5 ft of single W-beam guardrail. In addition, the transition incorporates a “flared-back” C6x8.2 rub rail. The height of the W-beam guardrail used in this transition was approximately 31 inches from the pavement surface. The centerline height of the rub rail from the pavement surface was approximately 13 inches. Texas Transportation Institute (TTI) received drawings from Pennsylvania DOT entitled “Standard Bridge Parapet to Guide Rail Transition, BC-739M, Sheet 1 of 2,” dated December 24, 1999, and “Type 2 Strong Post Guide Rail, RC52M,” dated September 30, 1998. Details for the moment slab to support the concrete parapet were also received. TTI used the details from these drawings to construct the test installation. TTI constructed 16.4 ft of Pennsylvania standard bridge parapet from details provided by Pennsylvania DOT. The standard parapet constructed was 42 inches in height and 18 inches in width at the base on the downstream end. At approximately 71 inches from the end of the parapet, the parapet flared back 10 degrees away from the traffic side and transitioned to a height and width of 32 inches and 12 inches, respectively, at the end of the parapet. The parapet was supported by a 13-inch-thick concrete moment slab. Vertical reinforcement in the parapet consisted of #5 enclosed stirrup bars located approximately 6 inches on centers. Longitudinal reinforcement in the parapet consisted of six #5 bars located in the lower portion of the parapet and four #6 bars located in the upper portion of the parapet. All reinforcement in the parapet was epoxy coated. A Type “B” insert was purchased from Brocker Rebar Company, York, Pennsylvania, and was installed in the parapet approximately 50-5/8 inches from the end of the parapet and at a centerline height of approximately 25 inches for anchoring the terminal connector to the parapet. Three 1-inch pipe sleeves were cast in the parapet approximately 50-3/8 inches from the end of the parapet (centerline distance) and at a centerline height of approximately 13 inches. These pipe sleeves were used for anchoring the rub rail to the parapet with three 7/8 inch diameter A325 bolts. The rub rail bolts fastened completely through the parapet. A 7 inch x 7 inch x 1/4-inch thick plate was used beneath the nuts on the field side of the parapet. The moment slab constructed for the project was approximately 15-ft-5-1/4 inches by 21-ft-8-3/8-inches x 13 inches thick. The slab was connected to an existing concrete runway located at the testing facility with 30-inch-long dowels located approximately 18 inches on centers. The parapet and slab were constructed so the parapet was oriented approximately 10 degrees with the existing edge of the runway. Top transverse reinforcement in the slab consisted of #6 hooked bars located approximately 6 inches on centers. Bottom transverse reinforcement in the slab consisted of #5 straight bars located approximately 12 inches on centers. Longitudinal reinforcement in the slab consisted of #4 straight bars located approximately 12 inches on centers in both the top and bottom layers in the slab with the exception of the second and third bars located from the field side edge of the slab. These bars were spaced approximately 6 inches apart. The parapet was anchored to the slab by #5

131 “V-shaped” bars that were cast in the slab and extended from the bottom layer of reinforcement in the slab upwards into the parapet. These bars were located approximately 6 inches on centers from the end of the parapet to a distance of approximately 14 ft from the end. Beyond this distance these bars were spaced 12 inches on centers. The transition was attached to the concrete parapet with a 10-gauge W-beam terminal connector welded to a steel plate. The connector attached to the parapet using four 7/8-inch- diameter ASTM A307 bolts in the Type B Insert. The rub rails were attached to the parapet with three A325 bolts. All posts used in the transitions and length of need W-beam guardrail were W6x8.5 steel posts. The posts nearest the concrete parapet (posts 16 through 19) used in the transition were 84 inches in length and embedded approximately 52 inches below grade. The remaining posts (posts 1 through 15) were 72 inches in length. Posts 9-13 were embedded approximately 40 inches below grade and posts 1 through 6 were embedded 43-3/8 inches below grade. The centerline of post 19 was located approximately 10-3/8 from the end of the concrete parapet. A 6-inch-diameter by 12-inch-long schedule 40 steel spacer tube attached to the nested W-beam guardrail was located approximately 18-3/4 inches toward the terminal connector from post 19. From post 19 to post 13, the post spacing was 18-3/4 inches. Posts were spaced 37-1/2 inches apart from post 13 to 9. From post 9 to 7 (W-beam guardrail length of need), the post spacing was 6 ft-3 inches. A LET end treatment was used beyond the length of need to anchor the W-beam guardrail. The rub rail used for this project consisted of a two-piece rub rail mounted 13 inches from the pavement surface to its centerline. Both pieces of the rub rail were fabricated from C6x8.2 steel channel. The pieces of the rub rail were spliced together at post 19 with a 1/2-inch-thick steel splice plate. From post 19, the rub rail was connected on each post and flared back at post 13 to the web of post 12 and was not attached. The nested W-beam guardrail and the rub rail (at post 19 through 13) were blocked out from the posts approximately 8 inches. Routed wood blockouts (nominally 6 inches x 8 inches x 22 inches) were used at posts 19 through 13. Standard routed wood blockouts (nominally 6 inches x 8 inches x 14 inches) were used at posts 12 through 1. The rub rail and the nested W- beam guardrail were attached to each post using 5/8-inch-diameter A307 “button head” bolts. A drawing of the transition are provided in Figure 59. Photographs of the completed installation are shown in Figure 60. More detailed information of the barrier and the crash test can be found in Appendix G (available on the NCAC website, www.ncac.gwu.edu/). In accordance with Appendix B of MASH, soil strength was measured the day of the crash test. The minimum post load required for deflections at 5 inches, 10 inches, and 15 inches, measured at a height of 25 inches above ground, is 3940 lb, 5500 lb, and 6540 lb, respectively (90 percent of static load for the initial standard installation). On the day of the test, March 31, 2009, load on the post at deflections of 5 inches, 10 inches, and 15 inches was 7090 lb, 7575 lb, and 7666 lb, respectively. Thus, the strength of the backfill material met minimum requirements.

132 Figure 59. Details of the Pennsylvania W-Beam Transition. Figure 60. W-Beam Transition prior to Testing.

133 Test Number 476460-1-3 (MASH TEST 3-21) Test Description Test Vehicle: 2007 Chevrolet Silverado 4-door pickup Test Inertia Weight: 5029 lb Gross Static Weight: 5029 lb Impact Speed: 62.8 mi/h Impact Angle: 25.7 degrees The 2007 Chevrolet Silverado pickup, traveling at an impact speed of 62.8 mi/h, impacted the W-beam transition 8.6 ft upstream from the end of the concrete parapet at an impact angle of 25.7 degrees. At 0.036 s after impact, the vehicle began to redirect, and at 0.071 s, the right front tire and wheel assembly began to rise. The vehicle began to travel parallel with the transition at 0.166 s, and was traveling at a speed of 55.8 mi/h. At 0.184 s, the left front tire and wheel assembly began to rise, and at 0.203 s, the left front tire touched ground. The vehicle lost contact with the transition at 0.295 s, and was traveling at an exit speed of 52.7 mi/h and an exit angle of 13.8 degrees toward the traffic side of the installation. Brakes on the vehicle were applied at 1.35 s after impact. The vehicle subsequently came to rest 183 ft downstream and 23 ft toward traffic lanes. Damage to the W-beam transition is shown in Figure 61. Post 12 was leaning toward field side 2 degrees from vertical, and post 13 was pushed toward field side 1.5 inches and leaning toward field side 4 degrees from vertical. Post 14 was leaning toward field side 5 degrees from vertical, and post 15 was pushed toward field side 1.5 inches and leaning toward field side 7 degrees from vertical. Posts 16 through 19 were leaning toward field side between 5-7 degrees from vertical, respectively. The vehicle snagged on the rubrail bolts on posts 14-18. The pipe spacer was deformed 0.25 inch. Length of contact of the vehicle with the guardrail was 13.0 ft. Maximum permanent deformation was 5.5 inches at post 17. Working area was 12.1 inches. Maximum dynamic deflection during the test was 3.8 inches. The vehicle sustained damage to the left side and top, as shown in Figure 62. The left A-arm pulled out of the front inner A-arm mount. The left front wheel rim was deformed and the tire deflated. Also damaged were the front bumper, grill, radiator and support, left front fender, left doors, left rear wheel rim (no loss of air in the tire), left rear exterior bed, and left rear bumper. Maximum exterior crush to the vehicle was 15.0 inches in the front plane at the left front corner at bumper height. Maximum occupant compartment deformation was 0.6 inches in the lateral measurement across the cab in the right rear passenger area at hip height.

134 Figure 61. PennDOT W-Beam Transition after MASH Test 3-21. Figure 62. Test Vehicle after MASH Test 3-21 on the PennDOT W-Beam Transition.

135 Data from the accelerometer, located at the vehicle center of gravity, were digitized for evaluation of occupant risk. In the longitudinal direction, the occupant impact velocity was 16.4 ft/s (5.0 m/s) at 0.092 s, the highest 0.010-s occupant ridedown acceleration was -8.1 G from 0.100 to 0. 110 s, and the maximum 0.050-s average acceleration was -7.7 G between 0.044 s and 0.094 s. In the lateral direction, the occupant impact velocity was 28.5 ft/s (8.7 m/s) at 0.092 s, the highest 0.010-s occupant ridedown acceleration was 16.4 G from 0.187 to 0.197 s, and the maximum 0.050-s average was 13.5 Gs between 0.044 and 0.094 s. THIV was 34.8 km/h or 9.7 m/s at 0.091 s; PHD was 16.4 G between 0.187 and 0.197 s; and ASI was 1.64 between 0.044 and 0.094 s. These data and other pertinent information from the test are summarized in Figure 63. Summary of Test Results The W-beam transition contained and redirected the 2270P vehicle. The vehicle did not penetrate, override, or underride the installation. Maximum dynamic deflection was 3.8 inches. No detached elements, fragments, or other debris were present to penetrate or to show potential for penetrating the occupant compartment, or to present a hazard to others in the area. Maximum occupant compartment deformation was 0.6 inches in the left rear area at hip height. The 2270P vehicle remained upright during and after the collision event. Maximum roll angle was 54 degrees. Occupant risk factors were within the limits specified in MASH. The 2270P vehicle exited the W-beam transition within the exit box. When impacted by the 2270P vehicle (2007 Chevrolet Silverado four-door pickup), the W-beam transition performed acceptably, as shown in Table 15.

136 0.000 s 0.139 s 0.278 s 0.416 s General Information Test Agency ......................... Test No. .............................. Date ..................................... Test Article Type ..................................... Name ................................... Installation Length .............. Material or Key Elements .... Soil Type and Condition ....... Test Vehicle Type/Designation ................. Make and Model .................. Mass Curb .................................. Test Inertial ....................... Gross Static ...................... Texas Transportation Institute RF476460-1-3 2009-03-31 Transition W-Beam Transition 86 ft W-beam rail element transition to PennDOT Concrete Parapet Crushed Limestone, Dry 2270P 2007 Chevrolet Silverado Pickup 5054 lb 5029 lb 5029 lb Impact Conditions Speed .................................... Angle ..................................... Exit Conditions Speed .................................... Angle ..................................... Occupant Risk Values Impact Velocity Longitudinal ........................ Lateral ................................ Ridedown Accelerations Longitudinal ........................ Lateral ................................ THIV ...................................... PHD ....................................... Max. 0.050-s Average Longitudinal ........................ Lateral ................................ Vertical ............................... 62.8 mi/h 25.7 degrees 52.7 mi/h 13.8 degrees 16.4 ft/s 28.5 ft/s -8.1 G 16.4 G 34.8 km/h 16.4 G -7.7 G 13.5 G 2.6 G Post-Impact Trajectory Stopping Distance ......................... Vehicle Stability Maximum Yaw Angle ..................... Maximum Pitch Angle .................... Maximum Roll Angle ...................... Vehicle Snagging ........................... Vehicle Pocketing .......................... Test Article Deflections Dynamic ......................................... Permanent ..................................... Working Width ............................... Vehicle Damage VDS ............................................ CDC ............................................ Max. Exterior Vehicle Crush ....... Max. Occupant Compartment Deformation ............................. 183 ft dwnstrm 23 ft twd traffic 53 degrees -7 degrees -54 degrees No No 3.8 inches 5.5 inches 12.1 inches 11LFQ5 11FDEW3 15.0 inches 0.6 inches Figure 63. Summary of rResults for MASH Test 3-21 on the PennDOT W-Beam Transition.

137 Table 15. Performance Evaluation Summary for MASH Test 3-21 on the PennDOT W-Beam Transition. Test Agency: Texas Transportation Institute Test No.: RF 476460-1-3 Test Date: 2009-03-31 MASH Test 21 Evaluation Criteria Test Results Assessment Structural Adequacy A. Test article should contain and redirect the vehicle or bring the vehicle to a controlled stop; the vehicle should not penetrate, underride, or override the installation although controlled lateral deflection of the test article is acceptable The W-beam transition contained and redirected the 2270P vehicle. The vehicle did not penetrate, override, or underride the installation. Maximum dynamic deflection during the test was 3.8 inches. Pass Occupant Risk D. Detached elements, fragments, or other debris from the test article should not penetrate or show potential for penetrating the occupant compartment, or present an undue hazard to other traffic, pedestrians, or personnel in a work zone. No detached elements, fragments, or other debris were present to penetrate or to show potential for penetrating the occupant compartment, or to a present hazard to others in the area. Pass Deformations of, or intrusions into, the occupant compartment should not exceed limits set forth in Section 5.3 and Appendix E of MASH. Maximum occupant compartment deformation was 0.6 inches at the left rear cab area at hip height. Pass F. The vehicle should remain upright during and after collision. The maximum roll and pitch angles are not to exceed 75 degrees. The 2270P vehicle remained upright during and after the collision event. Maximum roll angle was 54 degrees. Pass H. Longitudinal and lateral occupant impact velocities should fall below the preferred value of 30 ft/s (9.1 m/s), or at least below the maximum allowable value of 40 ft/s (12.2 m/s). Longitudinal occupant impact velocity was 16.4 ft/s, and lateral occupant impact velocity was 28.5 ft/s. Pass I. Longitudinal and lateral occupant ridedown accelerations should fall below the preferred value of 15.0 G, or at least below the maximum allowable value of 20.49 G. Longitudinal ridedown acceleration was -8.1 G, and lateral ridedown acceleration was 16.4 G. Pass Vehicle Trajectory For redirective devices, it is preferable that the vehicle exit the barrier within the exit box. The 2270P vehicle exited the W-beam transition within the exit box. Pass

138 SMALL SIGN SUPPORTS Test Installation Description Steel U-Channel Support A 4 lb/ft steel U-channel support manufactured by NuCor Steel Marion was erected in standard soil. The overall length of the sign support was 9 ft-8¾ inches. The sign support was attached to a 41 inches long 4 lb/ft steel U-channel ground stub. The sign support and ground stub were joined together using a 5 inch lap splice. Two 5/16 inch x 1½ inch grade 9 bolts were used in the lap splice and spaced 4 inch on-center. To prevent the U-channel sign support and ground stub from being over-nested or too firmly clamped together, two ½ inch long, ¾ inch diameter schedule 40 pipe spacers were placed between the ground stub and sign support at each of the two lap splice bolt locations. The overall lap splice length was 5 inches. A 36 inch x 36 inch x 5/8 inch plywood sign was attached to the support using two - 5/16 inch diameter x 3½ inch long grade 5 bolts with flat washers and nuts. The sign mounting bolts were spaced 6 inches from the edge of the sign blank. The bottom of sign mounting height was 84 inches. Figure 64 shows a cross section of the steel U-channel support. Figure 65 shows photos of the completed installations. More detailed information on the sign support system and crash test can be found in Appendix H (available on the NCAC website, www.ncac.gwu.edu/). Figure 64. Details of the U-Channel Sign Support.

139 Figure 65. U-Channel Sign Support prior to Testing. Perforated Square Steel Tube Support A 12 gauge perforated, 2 inch square steel tube (PSST) support manufactured by Northwest Pipe was erected in standard soil. The overall length of the sign support was 10 ft-4¾ inches. The sign support was anchored into a 36 inches long, 12 gauge perforated, 2¼ inch square steel tube ground stub. The sign support was inserted into the ground stub 10 inches. A 5/16 inch diameter corner bolt, nut, and washer was used to anchor the support to the ground stub. A 36 inch x 36 inch x 5/8 inch plywood sign was attached to the support using two 5/16 inch diameter x 3½ inch long grade 5 bolts with flat washers and nuts. The sign mounting bolts were spaced 6 inches from the edge of the sign blank. The bottom of sign mounting height was 84 inches. A cross section of the perforated square steel tubing support is shown in Figure 66. Photographs of the completed installations are shown in Figure 67. More detailed information regarding the sign support system and the crash test can be found in Appendix H. Soil Conditions According to Appendix B of MASH, soil strength was measured the day of the crash test. The minimum post load required for deflections at 5 inches, 10 inches, and 15 inches, measured

140 at a height of 25 inches above ground, is 3940 lb, 5500 lb, and 6540 lb, respectively (90 percent of static load for the initial standard installation). On the day of the test, February 16, 2009, load on the post at deflections of 5 inches, 10 inches, and 15 inches was 6700 lb, 7780 lb, and 7777 lb, respectively. Thus, the strength of the backfill material met minimum requirements. Figure 66. Details of the Perforated Square Steel Tubing Sign Support. Figure 67. Perforated Square Steel Tubing Sign Support prior to Testing.

141 Test Number 476460-1-2 (Mash Test 3-62) Test Description Test Vehicle: 2003 Dodge Ram 1500 quad-cab pickup Test Inertia Weight: 4958 lb Gross Static Weight: 4958 lb Impact Speed: 63.3 mi/h Impact Angle: 0 degrees The 2003 Dodge Ram 1500 quad-cab pickup, traveling at an impact speed of 63.3 mi/h, impacted the U-channel sign support at 0 degrees with the left quarter-point of the pickup aligned with the centerline of the support. At 0.012 s, the sign support fractured at the lower edge of the front bumper, and the support installation began to rotate around the front of the vehicle. Loss of contact with the support and the top front edge of the hood occurred at 0.038 s. The sign panel struck the roof near the top of the windshield at 0.086 s. Shortly after impact with the roof, at approximately 0.100 s, the lower sign panel mounting bolt failed as the sign and support rotated and slid off the rear of the pickup truck cab. Loss of contact with the sign support and panel occurs at 0.170 s while the vehicle was traveling at an exit speed of approximately 62.5 mi/h. After impacting the U-channel sign support, the pickup truck impacted the PSST sign support at an impact speed and angle of 61.7 mi/h and 0 degrees, respectively, with the right quarter point of the pickup aligned with the centerline of the support. The vehicle contacted the PSST sign support at 0.177 s. Tthe PSST began to fracture at the lower edge of the front bumper at 0.182 s and was fully separated by 0.208 s. As the post was fracturing, the sign panel attachment bolts also began to fail and the sign panel separated from the support. At 0.249 s, the sign panel contacted the roof and windshield. The support remained in front of and displaced forward of the pickup truck. As the vehicle exited view of the high-speed cameras, the sign panel was traveling atop the vehicle and the support in front of the vehicle. The vehicle came to rest 266 ft downstream of impact near the PSST support and 5 ft left of centerline. Damage to the U-Channel Sign Support is shown in Figure 68. The soil around the U- channel sign support ground stub was disturbed. The U-channel support fractured in two pieces, one 19-inch piece was resting 15 ft downstream of impact and 1 ft to the left of centerline, and the second piece, 98 inches long, was resting 111 ft downstream of impact and 14 ft to the left of centerline. Also, the sign panel separated from the U-channel and came to rest 37 ft downstream of impact and 2 ft to the right of centerline.

142 Figure 68. U-Channel Installation after MASH Test 3-62.

143 Damage to the PSST Sign Support is shown in Figure 69. The stub of the PSST sign support was displaced toward the field side 3 inches at ground level. The sleeve fractured across the impact side and field side, was deformed toward the field side 80 degrees, and pulled up out of the ground 1 inch. The PSST support traveled with the vehicle and came to rest in front of the vehicle, 271 ft downstream of impact and 11 ft to the left of centerline. The support was deformed 6.5 inches from the end to 27 inches. Also, the sign panel separated from the PSST support and came to rest 172 ft downstream of impact and 35 ft to the left of centerline. The vehicle sustained damage to the front, as shown in Figure 70. The front bumper, grill, hood, roof, right front door and left front door were deformed. The windshield was shattered in an area measuring 36 inches x 32 inches with a maximum deformation of 3.5 inches (from contact with the PSST sign support). The roof was crushed over the driver side in an area measuring 24 inches x 39 inches with a maximum deformation of 0.75 inches. Maximum exterior crush to the vehicle was 3.5 inches in the windshield, and 0.5 inches to the right front quarter point. Maximum occupant compartment deformation was 2.1 inches in the roof over the driver side rear passenger area from contact with the U-channel sign support, and 3.5 inches in the windshield from contact with the PSST sign support. Data from the accelerometer, located at the vehicle center of gravity, were digitized for evaluation of occupant risk. The impacts were separated and the values for each devise were computed. The time period for contact with the U-channel sign was between 0.000 s to 0.176 s. In the longitudinal direction, no occupant contact occurred, and the maximum 0.050-s average acceleration was -0.4 G between 0.051 and 0.101 s. In the lateral direction, no occupant contact occurred, and the maximum 0.050-s average was -0.3 Gs between 0.097 and 0.147 s. No THIV or PHD occurred; and ASI was 0.11 between 0.058 and 0.108 s. These data and other pertinent information from the test are summarized in Figure 71. The time period for contact with the PSST was between 0.177 s to 1.0 s. In the longitudinal direction, the occupant impact velocity was 4.3 ft/s (1.3 m/s) at 0.643 s, the highest 0.010-s occupant ridedown acceleration was -0.8 G from 0.813 to 0.823 s, and the maximum 0.050-s average acceleration was -0.2 G between 0.177 and 0.227 s. In the lateral direction, the occupant impact velocity was 2.3 ft/s (0.7 m/s) at 0.643 s, the highest 0.010-s occupant ridedown acceleration was -0.4 G from 0.648 to 0.658 s, and the maximum 0.050-s average was 0.1 Gs between 0.177 and 0.227 s. THIV was 5.3 km/h or 1.5 m/s at 0.642 s; PHD was 0.8 G between 0.813 and 0.823 s; and ASI was 0.10 between 0.161 and 0.211 s. These data and other pertinent information from the test are summarized in Figure 72.

144 Figure 69. PSST Sign Support after MASH Test 3-62.

145 Figure 70. Vehicle after MASH Test 3-62 with Small Sign Supports.

146 0.000 s 0.062 s 0.124 s 0.187 s General Information Test Agency ......................... Test No. ............................... Date ...................................... Test Article Type ..................................... Name .................................... Installation Height ................ Material or Key Elements ..... Soil Type and Condition ....... Test Vehicle Type/Designation ................. Make and Model................... Mass Curb .................................. Test Inertial ....................... Gross Static ...................... Texas Transportation Institute RF476460-1-2 2009-02-16 Sign Support 4 lb/ft U-Channel Sign Support 84 inches to Bottom of Sign Panel 4 lb/ft U-Channel, NuCor Steel Marion Crushed Limestone, Dry 2270P 2003 Dodge Ram 1500 Quad-Cab Pickup 4525 4958 4958 Impact Conditions Speed .................................... Angle ..................................... Exit Conditions Speed .................................... Angle ..................................... Occupant Risk Values Impact Velocity Longitudinal ....................... Lateral ................................ Ridedown Accelerations Longitudinal ....................... Lateral ................................ THIV ...................................... PHD ....................................... Max. 0.050-s Average Longitudinal ....................... Lateral ................................ Vertical ............................... 63.3 mi/h 0 degrees 62.5 mi/h 0 degrees No Contact No Contact N/A N/A No Contact No Contact -0.4 G -0.3 G 1.1 G Post-Impact Trajectory Stopping Distance .......................... Vehicle Stability Maximum Yaw Angle ..................... Maximum Pitch Angle .................... Maximum Roll Angle ...................... Vehicle Snagging ........................... Vehicle Pocketing .......................... Test Article Deflections Longitudinal Distance ..................... Lateral Distance ............................. Vehicle Damage VDS ............................................ CDC ............................................ Max. Exterior Vehicle Crush ....... Max. Occupant Compartment Deformation (inches) ............... 266 ft 0 degrees -1 degrees 1 degrees No No 98 ft 14 ft 12FL1 12FLEN1 0.75 inches 2.1 inches Figure 71. Summary of Results for MASH Test 3-62 on U-Channel Small Sign Support.

147 0.187 s 0.254 s 0.313 s 0.376 s General Information Test Agency ......................... Test No. ............................... Date ...................................... Test Article Type ..................................... Name .................................... Installation Height ................ Material or Key Elements ..... Soil Type and Condition ....... Test Vehicle Type/Designation ................. Make and Model................... Mass Curb .................................. Test Inertial ....................... Gross Static ...................... Texas Transportation Institute RF476460-1-2 2009-02-16 Sign Support 12 ga perforated , 2 in square steel tube 84 inches to Bottom of Sign Panel 2 inch PSST, Northwest Pipe Crushed Limestone, Dry 2270P 2003 Dodge Ram 1500 Quad-Cab Pickup 4525 4958 4958 Impact Conditions Speed .................................... Angle ..................................... Exit Conditions Speed .................................... Angle ..................................... Occupant Risk Values Impact Velocity Longitudinal ....................... Lateral ................................ Ridedown Accelerations Longitudinal ....................... Lateral ................................ THIV ...................................... PHD ....................................... Max. 0.050-s Average Longitudinal ....................... Lateral ................................ Vertical ............................... 61.7 mi/h 0 degrees Not obtainable 0 degrees 4.3 ft/s 2.3 ft/s -0.8 G -0.4 G 5.3 km/h 0.8 G -0.2 G -0.1 G 0.3 G Post-Impact Trajectory Stopping Distance .......................... Vehicle Stability Maximum Yaw Angle ..................... Maximum Pitch Angle .................... Maximum Roll Angle ...................... Vehicle Snagging ........................... Vehicle Pocketing .......................... Test Article Deflections Longitudinal Distance ..................... Lateral Distance ............................. Vehicle Damage VDS ............................................ CDC ............................................ Max. Exterior Vehicle Crush ....... Max. Occupant Compartment Deformation ............................. 266 ft 0 degrees 1 degrees 3 degrees No No 271 ft 35 ft 12FR3 12FREN3 3.5 inches 3.5 inches Figure 72. Summary of Results for MASH Test 3-62 on PSST Small Sign Support.

148 Summary of Test Results Both the U-channel and PSST small sign supports readily activated upon impact by the 2270P vehicle by fracturing at bumper height and at the ground stub interface. The detached sign supports rotated around the front of the vehicle, and the sign panels struck near or at the windshield and roof area and traveled with the vehicle. Contact of the U-channel support with the windshield and roof was minimal, and therefore the support did not penetrate nor show potential for penetrating the occupant compartment. The largest piece of this support weighed 33.6 lb, but the trajectory was relatively low, and should not cause undue hazard to others in the area. No occupant compartment deformation related to impact with the U-channel support occurred. The upper section of the PSST support and sign panel contacted and shattered the windshield which shattered. No tear of the windshield plastic lining occurred. However, the windshield was deformed inward 3.5 inches. MASH Section 5.3 and Appendix E limits deformation of the windshield to 3 inches. The 2270P vehicle remained upright during and after both collision events. Minimal roll and pitch were noted. Occupant risk factors were within acceptable limits. The 2270P vehicle came to rest behind the test articles. The 4 lb/ft steel U-channel support manufactured by NuCor Steel Marion successfully met the MASH evaluation criteria for test 3-62, as shown in Table 16. The 12 gauge perforated, 2 inch square, steel tube (PSST) support manufactured by Northwest Pipe failed to meet the MASH evaluation criteria for test 3-62 due to excessive occupant compartment deformation at the windshield, as shown in Table 17. The primary observed difference in the performance of the two sign support types is the manner in which the sign panel reacted during the impact sequence. Both sign support types fractured at bumper height and near the ground stub interface. The U-channel sign support installation kept the sign panel attached to the support for much of the impact event. The sign panel remained attached until the support and panel impacted the roof of the truck as an assembly. Upon separation, both the sign and support passed over the cab of the pickup truck. The PSST sign support installation released the sign panel from the support at approximately the same time the support failed at bumper height. The failure of the sign attachment changed the dynamics of the impact and permitted the sign panel to impact the windshield more directly. The PSST sign support stayed in the front of the vehicle and displaced forward with the vehicle with very little angular momentum. It is the belief of the researchers that had the sign panel remained attached to the support, the PSST sign support installation performance would have been similar to the U-channel performance and the PSST would have likely met the MASH performance evaluation criteria.

149 Table 16. Performance Evaluation Summary for MASH Test 3-62 on the 4 lb/ft U-Channel Small Sign Support. Test Agency: Texas Transportation Institute Test No.: RF476460-1-2 (U-channel) Test Date: 2009-02-16 MASH Test 3-62 Evaluation Criteria Test Results Assessment Structural Adequacy B. The test article should readily activate in a predictable manner by breaking away, fracturing, or yielding. The 4 lb/ft U-channel sign support readily activated upon impact by the 2270P vehicle by fracturing at the ground stub and bumper height. Pass Occupant Risk D. Detached elements, fragments, or other debris from the test article should not penetrate or show potential for penetrating the occupant compartment, or present an undue hazard to other traffic, pedestrians, or personnel in a work zone. The upper portion of the fractured sign support traveled with the vehicle. Contact of the U- channel support with the windshield and roof was minimal and the support did not penetrate or show potential for penetrating the occupant compartment. The largest piece of this support weighed 33.6 lb, but the trajectory was relatively low, and should not cause undue hazard to others in the area. Pass Deformations of, or intrusions into, the occupant compartment should not exceed limits set forth in Section 5.3 and Appendix E of MASH. No occupant compartment deformation related to impact with the U-channel support occurred. Pass F. The vehicle should remain upright during and after collision. The maximum roll and pitch angles are not to exceed 75 degrees. The 2270P vehicle remained upright during and after the collision event. Minimal roll and pitch were noted. Pass H. Longitudinal and lateral occupant impact velocities should fall below the preferred value of 3.0 m/s (10 ft/s), or at least below the maximum allowable value of 5.0 m/s (16.4 ft/s). No contact occurred. Pass I. Longitudinal and lateral occupant ridedown accelerations should fall below the preferred value of 15.0 Gs, or at least below the maximum allowable value of 20.49 Gs. No contact occurred. Pass Vehicle Trajectory N. Vehicle trajectory behind the test article is acceptable. The vehicle came to rest behind the test article. Pass

150 Table 17. Performance Evaluation Summary for MASH Test 3-62 on the PSST Small Sign Support. Test Agency: Texas Transportation Institute Test No.: RF476460-1-2 (PSST) Test Date: 2009-02-16 MASH Test 3-62 Evaluation Criteria Test Results Assessment Structural Adequacy B. The test article should readily activate in a predictable manner by breaking away, fracturing, or yielding. The Perforated Square Steel Tubing sign support readily activated upon impact by the 2270P vehicle by fracturing at the ground stub and at bumper height. Pass Occupant Risk D. Detached elements, fragments, or other debris from the test article should not penetrate or show potential for penetrating the occupant compartment, or present an undue hazard to other traffic, pedestrians, or personnel in a work zone. The upper portion of the sign support traveled with the vehicle. The upper section of the support and sign panel contacted the windshield near the roof line. Pass Deformations of, or intrusions into, the occupant compartment should not exceed limits set forth in Section 5.3 and Appendix E of MASH. No tear of the plastic lining of the windshield occurred, however, the windshield was deformed inward 3.5 inches. MASH Section 5.3 and Appendix E limits deformation of the windshield to 3 inches. Fail F. The vehicle should remain upright during and after collision. The maximum roll and pitch angles are not to exceed 75 degrees. The 2270P vehicle remained upright during and after the collision events. Minimal roll and pitch were noted. Pass H. Longitudinal and lateral occupant impact velocities should fall below the preferred value of 3.0 m/s (10 ft/s), or at least below the maximum allowable value of 5.0 m/s (16.4 ft/s). Longitudinal occupant impact velocity was 4.9 ft/s (1.5 m/s), and lateral occupant impact velocity was 2.0 ft/s (0.6 m/s) at 0.660 s after impact. Pass I. Longitudinal and lateral occupant ridedown accelerations should fall below the preferred value of 15.0 Gs, or at least below the maximum allowable value of 20.49 Gs. Longitudinal occupant ridedown acceleration was -1.5 G, and lateral occupant ridedown acceleration was 0.5 G. Pass Vehicle Trajectory N. Vehicle trajectory behind the test article is acceptable. Vehicle came to rest behind the test article. Pass

151 G3 WEAK POST BOX-BEAM GUARDRAIL Test Installation The G3 Weak Post Box-Beam guardrail system is a 27-inch tall, weak steel post, box- beam barrier. The barrier is constructed using tubular steel (TS6 inch x 6 inch x 3/16 inch) rails attached to 5 ft-3 inch long S3 x 5.7 steel posts (PSE08) spaced 6 ft on center. The individual line posts are each fitted with a ¼ inch x 8 inch x 24 inch soil plate (PLS01). Post embedment depth is 36 inches. The tubular steel rails (herein referred to as box-beam) are attached directly to the post and do not use an offset block. The length of need of the Modified G2 barrier test installation was 144 ft. The barrier was terminated with Wyoming Box End Terminals (WYBET). The total overall test installation length was 240 ft. The box-beam rail elements were attached to each post with a L5 inch x 3-1/2 inch x 3/8 inch x 4-1/2 inch long shelf angle attached to the post with a 1/2 inch diameter x 1-1/2 inch long hex bolt with washer and nut. The box-beam rail was attached to the shelf angle with a 3/8 inch diameter x 7-1/2 inch long hex bolt with washer and nut. All bolts were ASTM A307 and the hex nuts were ASTM A563. A cross-section of the G3 Weak Post Box-Beam guardrail is shown in Figure 72. Photographs of the completed installation are shown in Figure 73. Drawings of the test installation and more detailed information of the barrier and crash test can be found in Appendix I (available on the NCAC website, http://www.ncac.gwu.edu/). Figure 72. Cross-section of the G3 Weak Post Box-Beam guardrail.

152 Figure 73. G3 Weak Post Box-Beam Guardrail prior to Testing. The test installation was installed in standard soil meeting AASHTO standard specifications for “Materials for Aggregate and Soil Aggregate Subbase, Base and Surface Courses”, designated M147-65(2004), grading B. According to Appendix B of MASH, soil strength was measured the day of the crash test. The minimum post loads required for post deflections of 5 inches, 10 inches, and 15 inches, measured at a height of 25 inches above ground, is 3940 lb, 5500 lb, and 6540 lb, respectively (90 percent of static load for the initial standard installation). On the day of the test, May 15, 2009, loads on the post at deflections of 5 inches, 10 inches, and 15 inches were 7818 lb, 8545 lb, and 9242 lb, respectively. Thus, the strength of the backfill material met minimum requirements. Test Number 476460-1-6 (MASH Test 3-11) Test Description Test Vehicle: 2007 Chevrolet Silverado 4-door pickup Test Inertia Weight: 5004 lb Gross Static Weight: 5004 lb Impact Speed: 63.2 mi/h Impact Angle: 25.4 degrees

153 The 2007 Chevrolet Silverado pickup, traveling at an impact speed of 63.2 mi/h, impacted the G3 Weak Post Box-Beam guardrail 12 ft-1 inch upstream of the splice at the one- third point (35 inches downstream of post 12) at an impact angle of 25.4 degrees. At 0.047 s after impact, post 13 fractured and separated from the rail element, and the left front tire began to underride the rail element. The vehicle began to redirect at 0.044 s, and the left front tire blew out at 0.074 s. At 0.091 s, the vehicle contacted post 14 and the tire pulled the post under the vehicle. The rail element wedged between the tire and wheel well of the vehicle at 0.182 s. At 0.245 s, the vehicle was traveling parallel with the guardrail and was traveling at a speed of 56.1 mi/h. The rear of the vehicle slapped the rail element at 0.249 s. At 0.766 s, the vehicle lost contact with the rail element. However, the vehicle was out of view of the high-speed camera, and exit speed and angle were not obtainable. The vehicle subsequently came to rest upright, adjacent to the traffic side of the rail, parallel with the rail and 36 inches downstream of post 40 (168 feet–1 inch down from impact). Damage to the G3 Weak Post Box-Beam guardrail is shown in Figure 74. Post 1 was displaced through the soil toward field side 0.75 inch, and the tube post was displaced through the soil toward field side 0.5 inch. The first section of rail was pulled downstream 1.25 inches. Posts 6 and 7 were leaning downstream 4 and 5 degrees, respectively. Post 8 was displaced through the soil toward field side 0.25 inch and leaning downstream. Post 9 was displaced through the soil toward field side 2.0 inches and leaning 5 degrees downstream and 10 degrees toward field side. Post 10 rotated counterclockwise 20 degrees, was displaced through the soil toward field side 3.0 inches, and leaning 15 degrees downstream and 30 degrees toward field side. The box-beam rail element was separated from posts 11 through 20. Post 11 was displaced through the soil toward field side 3.0 inches, leaning toward field side at 18 degrees, and leaning downstream 35 degrees. Post 10 was displaced through the soil toward field side 3.25 inches, and leaning toward field side 20 degrees and downstream 25 degrees. Post 15 was leaning downstream 70 degrees and toward the field side 70 degrees. Posts 16 and 17 were leaning downstream 65 degrees. Posts 18 and 19 were leaning downstream 70 degrees and toward field side 70 degrees. Post 20 was leaning downstream 80 degrees. Post 21 was displaced through the soil toward field side 0.75 inches, leaning toward field side at 5 degrees. Post 22 and 23 were displaced through the soil toward field side 0.5 inch and 0.25 inch, respectively. Posts 29, 30, and 31 were displaced through the soil toward field side 0.25 inch, 0.375 inch, and 0.5 inch, respectively. Post 36 was leaning toward field side 5 degrees and downstream 20 degrees. Post 37 was leaning downstream 10 degrees. The last section of rail element was pushed downstream 0.44 inch, and post 39 was leaning downstream 5 degrees. Two rail brackets were resting on the traffic side of the rail; one was 18 inches in front of post 18, and the second was 27 inches in front of post 19. The length of contact of the vehicle with the guardrail was 51.1 ft. Maximum permanent deformation of the rail element was 39.5 inches. Working width was 5.6 ft. Maximum dynamic deflection during the test was 4.8 ft.

154 Figure 74. G3 Weak Post Box-Beam Guardrail after MASH Test 3-11. The vehicle sustained damage to the left side, as shown in Figure 75. The left upper and lower A-arms and left from frame rails were deformed, the tie rod end broke at the mount, and the upper and lower ball joints pulled out of the mounts. The front bumper, left front tire and rim, left front fender, left doors, left rear exterior bed, left rear wheel rim and rear bumper were also damaged. Maximum exterior crush to the vehicle was 14.0 inches in the front plane at the left front corner at bumper height. Maximum occupant compartment deformation was 0.75 inches in the lateral measurement across the cab in the driver’s side kickpanel. Data from the accelerometer, located at the vehicle center of gravity, were digitized for evaluation of occupant risk. In the longitudinal direction, the occupant impact velocity was 11.2 ft/s (3.4 m/s) at 0.135 s, the highest 0.010-s occupant ridedown acceleration was -5.7 G from 0.615 to 0.625 s, and the maximum 0.050-s average acceleration was -3.5 G between 0.053 and 0.103 s. In the lateral direction, the occupant impact velocity was 15.1 ft/s (4.6 m/s) at 0.135 s, the highest 0.010-s occupant ridedown acceleration was 7.2 G from 0.191 to 0.201 s, and the maximum 0.050-s average was 5.2 Gs between 0.025 and 0.075 s. THIV was 18.9 km/h or 5.2 m/s at 0.131 s; PHD was 7.2 G between 0.191 and 0.201 s; and the ASI was 0.65 between 0.025 and 0.075 s. These data and other pertinent information from the test are summarized in Figure 76.

155 Figure 75. Test vehicle after MASH test 3-11 on the G3 weak post box-beam guardrail. Summary of Test Results The G3 Weak Post Box-Beam guardrail contained and redirected the 2270P vehicle. The vehicle did not penetrate, underride or override the weak post guardrail. Maximum dynamic deflection of the rail during the test was 4.8 ft. Two rail brackets and the rail element detached from several posts, however, did not penetrate or show potential for penetrating the occupant compartment, or to present hazard to others in the area. Maximum occupant compartment deformation was 0.75 inches in the lateral area across the cab at the driver’s side kickpanel. The 2270P vehicle remained upright during and after the collision event. Maximum roll angle was - 14 degrees. Occupant risk factors were within the limits specified in MASH. The 2270P vehicle exited within the exit box. The G3 Weak Post Box-Beam guardrail performed acceptably when impacted by the 2270P vehicle (2007 Chevrolet Silverado pickup), as shown in Table 18.

156 0.000 s 0.183 s 0.364 s 0.638 s General Information Test Agency ......................... Test No. .............................. Date ..................................... Test Article Type ..................................... Name ................................... Installation Length .............. Material or Key Elements .... Soil Type and Condition ....... Test Vehicle Type/Designation ................. Make and Model .................. Mass Curb .................................. Test Inertial ....................... Gross Static ...................... Texas Transportation Institute RF476460-1-6 2009-05-15 Longitudinal Barrier G3 Weak Post Box-Beam guardrail 240 ft Box-Beam rail element on S3x5.7 posts spaced 6 ft. Crushed Limestone, Dry 2270P 2007 Chevrolet Silverado Pickup 4942 lb 5011 lb 5011 lb Impact Conditions Speed .................................... Angle ..................................... Exit Conditions Speed .................................... Angle ..................................... Occupant Risk Values Impact Velocity Longitudinal ........................ Lateral ................................ Ridedown Accelerations Longitudinal ........................ Lateral ................................ THIV ...................................... PHD ....................................... Max. 0.050-s Average Longitudinal ........................ Lateral ................................ Vertical ............................... 63.2 mi/h 25.4 degrees Not obtainable parallel 11.2 ft/s 15.1 ft/s -5.7 G 7.2 G 18.9 km/h 7.2 G -3.5 G 5.2 G 1.8 G Post-Impact Trajectory Stopping Distance ......................... Vehicle Stability Maximum Yaw Angle ..................... Maximum Pitch Angle .................... Maximum Roll Angle ...................... Vehicle Snagging ........................... Vehicle Pocketing .......................... Test Article Deflections Dynamic ......................................... Permanent ..................................... Working Width ............................... Vehicle Damage VDS ............................................ CDC ............................................ Max. Exterior Vehicle Crush ....... Max. Occupant Compartment Deformation ............................. 51.1 ft downstream; Adjacent traffic face 34 degrees 8 degrees 14 degrees No No 57.7 inches 39.5 inches 5.6 ft 11LFQ4 11FLEW4 14.0 inches 0.75 inches Figure 76. Summary of results for MASH test 3-11 on the G3 Weak Post Box-Beam guardrail.

157 Table 18. Performance Evaluation Summary for MASH Test 3-11 on the G2 Weak Post Box-Beam Guardrail. Test Agency: Texas Transportation Institute Test No.: RF 476460-1-7 Test Date: 2009-05-15 MASH Evaluation Criteria Test Results Assessment Structural Adequacy A. Test article should contain and redirect the vehicle or bring the vehicle to a controlled stop; the vehicle should not penetrate, underride, or override the installation although controlled lateral deflection of the test article is acceptable The G2 Weak Post Box-Beam guardrail contained and redirected the 2270P vehicle. The vehicle did not penetrate, underride, or override the installation. Maximum dynamic deflection of the rail was 4.8 ft. Pass Occupant Risk D. Detached elements, fragments, or other debris from the test article should not penetrate or show potential for penetrating the occupant compartment, or present an undue hazard to other traffic, pedestrians, or personnel in a work zone. Two rail brackets and the box-beam rail element detached from several posts, however, did not penetrate or show potential for penetrating the occupant compartment, or to present hazard to others in the area. Pass Deformations of, or intrusions into, the occupant compartment should not exceed limits set forth in Section 5.3 and Appendix E of MASH. Maximum occupant compartment deformation was 0.75 inches in the lateral area across the cab at the driver’s side kickpanel.. Pass F. The vehicle should remain upright during and after collision. The maximum roll and pitch angles are not to exceed 75 degrees. The 2270P vehicle remained upright during and after the collision event. Maximum roll angle was -14 degrees. Pass H. Longitudinal and lateral occupant impact velocities should fall below the preferred value of 30 ft/s (9.1 m/s), or at least below the maximum allowable value of 40 ft/s (12.2 m/s). Longitudinal occupant impact velocity was 11.2 ft/s, and lateral occupant impact velocity was 15.1 ft/s. Pass I. Longitudinal and lateral occupant ridedown accelerations should fall below the preferred value of 15.0 G, or at least below the maximum allowable value of 20.49 G. Longitudinal ridedown acceleration was -5.7 G, and lateral ridedown acceleration was 7.2 G. Pass Vehicle Trajectory For redirective devices, the vehicle shall exit the barrier within the exit box. The 2270P exited within the exit box. Pass

158 MODIFIED G2 WEAK POST W-BEAM GUARDRAIL Test Installation Description The Modified G2 Weak Post W-Beam guardrail is a 32-inch tall, weak steel post, W-beam barrier with rail splices mid-span between the posts. This barrier was successfully crash tested in accordance with NCHRP Report 350 and is the same barrier referred to in TTI Project Number RF473750-3 as the PennDOT Type 2 guiderail that was modified for that study.(14,15) The barrier is constructed using 12-gauge W-beam guardrails attached to 5 ft - 3 inch long S3 x 5.7 steel posts (PSE03) spaced 12 ft on center. The individual line posts are each fitted with a 1/4-inch x 8-inch x 24-inch soil plate (PLS01). Post embedment depth is 30 inches. The W-beam guardrails are attached directly to the post and do not use an offset block. The length of need of the modified G2 barrier test installation was 262 ft – 6 inches. The barrier was terminated with ET Plus guardrail terminals. The total overall test installation length was 325 ft. The W-beam rail elements were attached to each post with a 5/16 inch diameter ASTM F568, Class 4.6, 2-3/8 inch long, fully threaded bolt, with two 1-3/4 inch square washers between the traffic face of the rail element and bolt head, a 12-gauge W-beam backup plate is placed between the W-beam and post flange, and a round flat washer is placed on the web side of the post flange with two ASTM A563M hex nuts completing the anchoring assembly. In addition, a 9/16 inch diameter x 1-5/8 inch long ASTM F568, Class 4.6 shelf bolt with two ASTM A563M hex nuts are placed in the flange of the post to support the bottom edge of the guardrail. The purpose of the shelf bolt is to provide support for the guardrail and reduce the load placed on the 5/16-inch diameter post bolt. The test installation was installed in standard soil meeting AASHTO standard specifications for “Materials for Aggregate and Soil Aggregate Subbase, Base and Surface Courses”, designated M147-65(2004), grading B. In addition, in compliance with MASH, standard soil strength static tests were performed the day of the crash test at the installation site. A cross-section of the Modified G2 Weak Post W-Beam guardrail is shown in Figure 77. Photographs of the completed installation are shown in Figure 78. Drawings of the test installation and more detailed information of the barrier can be found in Appendix J (available on the NCAC website, www.ncac.gwu.edu/). According to Appendix B of MASH, soil strength was measured the day of the crash test. The minimum post loads required for post deflections of 5 inches, 10 inches, and 15 inches, measured at a height of 25 inches above ground, is 3940 lb, 5500 lb, and 6540 lb, respectively (90 percent of static load for the initial standard installation). On the day of the test, May 1, 2009, loads on the post at deflections of 5 inches, 10 inches, and 15 inches were 5424 lb, 6303 lb, and 7151 lb respectively. Thus, the strength of the backfill material met minimum requirements.

159 Figure 77. Cross-Section of the Modified G2 Weak Post W-Beam Guardrail. Figure 78. Modified G2 Weak Post W-Beam Guardrail prior to Testing.

160 Test Number 476460-1-7 (MASH Test 3-11) Test Description Test Vehicle: 2007 Chevrolet Silverado 4-door pickup Test Inertia Weight: 5004 lb Gross Static Weight: 5004 lb Impact Speed: 62.4 mi/h Impact Angle: 24.6 degrees The 2007 Chevrolet Silverado pickup, traveling at an impact speed of 62.4 mi/h, impacted the Modified G2 Weak Post W-Beam guardrail 21 ft-4 inches upstream of the splice at the one-third point (31 inches upstream of post 12) at an impact angle of 24.6 degrees. At 0.011 s after impact, the vehicle contacted post 12, which began to deform and rotate in the soil, at 0.036 s, the left front tire contacted post 12 under the rail element. At 0.049 s, the W-beam rail element separated from post 12. The vehicle began to redirect at 0.064 s, and the back-up plate from post 12 separated from the installation. At 0.103 s, the vehicle contacted post 13, and at 0.107 s, the left front tire blew out. The back-up plate from post 13 separated from the installation at 0.147 s, and the vehicle contacted post 14 at 0.155 s. At 0.177 s, the vehicle wheels steered sharply to the right, and at 0.213 s, the W-beam rail element separated from post 14. The vehicle contacted post 15 at 0.237 s, and the right front tire lost contact with the ground surface at 0.326 s. At 0.344 s, the vehicle was traveling parallel with the guardrail and was traveling at a speed of 52.7 mi/h. The vehicle continued to travel along the traffic face of the guardrail. The vehicle subsequently came to rest upright, adjacent to the traffic side of the rail, 12 inches upstream of post 27 (176 feet-5 inches downstream of impact). Damage to the Modified G2 Weak Post W-Beam guardrail is shown in Figure 79. Post 1 was pulled up from ground level 3 inches, displaced through the soil toward field side 6.5 inches and leaning downstream 6 degrees. Posts 2 was displaced through the soil toward field side 4.75 inches and leaning downstream 11 degrees. Post 3 was displaced through the soil toward field side 0.75 inches and leaning downstream 19 inches. Posts 3 through 8 were disturbed in the soil and leaning 16-20 degrees downstream. The W-beam rail element was separated from posts 8 through 19, with the rail element toward the field side of posts 10 through 18. Post 8 was displaced through the soil toward field side 1.25 inches, leaning toward field side at 4 degrees, and leaning downstream 17 degrees. Post 9 rotated counterclockwise 60 degrees and leaning toward field side 35 degrees and downstream 25 degrees. Post 10 rotated counterclockwise 45 degrees, and leaning toward field side 20 degrees and downstream 22 degrees. Post 11 was leaning toward field side 23 degrees and downstream 5 degrees. Post 12 was leaning 80 degrees downstream and toward field side. Post 13 rotated clockwise 120 degrees and leaning 75 degrees downstream and toward field side. Post 14 was leaning toward field side and downstream at 80 degrees. Post 15 rotated clockwise 180 degrees and leaning downstream and toward the field side 90 degrees. Post 16 rotated clockwise 90 degrees, and leaning downstream and toward field side 80 degrees.

161 Figure 79. G2 Weak Post W-Beam Guardrail after MASH Test 3-11. Post 17 rotated clockwise 90 degrees, and leaning downstream 80 degrees. Post 18 was leaning toward field side 5 degrees and downstream 60 degrees, and post 19 was leaning downstream 80 degrees. Post 20 was displaced through the soil 0.25 inch and leaning toward field side 1 degree. The soil around posts 21 and 22 was disturbed. The vehicle contacted the rail element again 40 inches downstream of post 23, and the rail element was separated from posts 24 through 26. Post 23 was displaced through the soil toward the field side 0.5 inch and leaning toward field side 5 degrees. Post 24 was leaning toward field side 10 degrees and downstream 60 degrees. Post 25 rotated counterclockwise 50 degrees and was leaning toward field side 15 degrees and downstream 40 degrees. Post 26 rotated counterclockwise 45 degrees and leaning toward field side 15 degrees and downstream 25 degrees. The length of contact of the vehicle with the guardrail was 83.5 ft. Maximum permanent deformation of the rail element was 5.8 ft. Working width was 9.0 ft. Maximum dynamic deflection during the test was 8.6 ft. The vehicle sustained damage to the left side, as shown in Figure 80. The front bumper, left front fender, left doors, left rear exterior bed, and rear bumper were damaged. The left front tire was cut and deflated. Maximum exterior crush to the vehicle was 5.5 inches in the side plane

162 at the left front corner at bumper height. Maximum occupant compartment deformation was 0.25 inches in the lateral measurement across the cab in the driver’s side hip area. Figure 80. Test Vehicle after MASH Test 3-11 on the G2 Weak Post W-Beam Guardrail. Data from the accelerometer, located at the vehicle center of gravity, were digitized for evaluation of occupant risk. In the longitudinal direction, the occupant impact velocity was 9.5 ft/s (2.9 m/s) at 0.206 s, the highest 0.010-s occupant ridedown acceleration was -3.4 G from 0.925 to 0. 935 s, and the maximum 0.050-s average acceleration was -2.2 G between 0.162 and 0.212 s. In the lateral direction, the occupant impact velocity was 10.5 ft/s (3.2 m/s) at 0.206 s, the highest 0.010-s occupant ridedown acceleration was 4.5 G from 0.307 to 0.317 s, and the maximum 0.050-s average was 3.1 Gs between 0.304 and 0.354 s. THIV was 13.9 km/h or 3.9 m/s at 0.199 s; PHD was 4.6 G between 0.307 and 0.317 s; and the ASI was 0.35 between 0.037 and 0.087 s. These data and other pertinent information from the test are summarized in Figure 81. Summary of Test Results The Modified G2 Weak Post W-Beam guardrail contained and redirected the 2270P vehicle. The vehicle did not penetrate, underride or override the weak post guardrail. Maximum dynamic deflection of the rail during the test was 8.6 ft. The rail element detached from several posts, however, did not penetrate or show potential for penetrating the occupant compartment, or to present hazard to others in the area. Maximum occupant compartment deformation was 0.25 inches in the lateral area across the cab at the driver’s side hip area. The 2270P vehicle remained upright during and after the collision event. Maximum roll angle was -12 degrees. Occupant risk factors were within the limits specified in MASH. The 2270P vehicle remained within the exit box. The Modified G2 Weak Post W-Beam guardrail performed acceptably when impacted by the 2270P vehicle (2007 Chevrolet Silverado pickup), as shown in Table 19.

163 0.000 s 0.183 s 0.364 s 0.638 s General Information Test Agency ....................... Test No. ............................ Date ................................... Test Article Type ................................... Name ................................. Installation Length ............ Material or Key Elements .. Soil Type and Condition ..... Test Vehicle Type/Designation ............... Make and Model ................ Mass Curb ................................ Test Inertial ..................... Gross Static .................... Texas Transportation Institute RF476460-1-7 2009-05-01 Longitudinal Barrier Modified G2 Weak Post W-Beam guardrail 325 ft W-beam rail element on S3x5.7 posts spaced 12 ft apart Crushed Limestone, Dry 2270P 2007 Chevrolet Silverado Pickup 4868 lb 5004 lb 5004 lb Impact Conditions Speed .................................... Angle ..................................... Exit Conditions Speed .................................... Angle ..................................... Occupant Risk Values Impact Velocity Longitudinal ........................ Lateral ................................ Ridedown Accelerations Longitudinal ........................ Lateral ................................ THIV ...................................... PHD ....................................... Max. 0.050-s Average Longitudinal ........................ Lateral ................................ Vertical ............................... 62.4 mi/h 24.6 degrees Stopped 0 degrees 9.5 ft/s 10.5 ft/s -3.4 G 4.5 G 13.9 km/h 4.6 G -2.2 G 3.1 G 1.6 G Post-Impact Trajectory Stopping Distance ......................... Vehicle Stability Maximum Yaw Angle ..................... Maximum Pitch Angle .................... Maximum Roll Angle ...................... Vehicle Snagging ........................... Vehicle Pocketing .......................... Test Article Deflections Dynamic ......................................... Permanent ..................................... Working Width ............................... Vehicle Damage VDS ............................................ CDC ............................................ Max. Exterior Vehicle Crush ....... Max. Occupant Compartment Deformation ............................. 83.5 ft downstream; Adjacent traffic face 43 degrees -4 degrees -12 degrees No No 8.6 ft 5.8 ft 9.0 ft 11LFQ3 11FLEW3 5.5 inches 0.25 inches Figure 81. Summary of Results for MASH Test 3-11 on the Modified G2 Weak Post W-Beam Guardrail.

164 Table 19. Performance Evaluation Summary for MASH Test 3-11 on the G2 Weak Post W-Beam Guardrail. Test Agency: Texas Transportation Institute Test No.: RF 476460-1-7 Test Date: 2009-05-01 MASH Test 3-11 Evaluation Criteria Test Results Assessment Structural Adequacy A. Test article should contain and redirect the vehicle or bring the vehicle to a controlled stop; the vehicle should not penetrate, underride, or override the installation although controlled lateral deflection of the test article is acceptable The G2 Weak Post W-Beam guardrail contained and redirected the 2270P vehicle. The vehicle did not penetrate, underride, or override the installation. Maximum dynamic deflection of the rail was 8.6 ft. Pass Occupant Risk D. Detached elements, fragments, or other debris from the test article should not penetrate or show potential for penetrating the occupant compartment, or present an undue hazard to other traffic, pedestrians, or personnel in a work zone. The W-beam rail element detached from several posts, however, did not penetrate or show potential for penetrating the occupant compartment, or to present hazard to others in the area. Pass Deformations of, or intrusions into, the occupant compartment should not exceed limits set forth in Section 5.3 and Appendix E of MASH. Maximum occupant compartment deformation was 0.25 inches in the lateral area across the cab at the driver’s side hip area.. Pass F. The vehicle should remain upright during and after collision. The maximum roll and pitch angles are not to exceed 75 degrees. The 2270P vehicle remained upright during and after the collision event. Maximum roll angle was -12 degrees. Pass H. Longitudinal and lateral occupant impact velocities should fall below the preferred value of 30 ft/s (9.1 m/s), or at least below the maximum allowable value of 40 ft/s (12.2 m/s). Longitudinal occupant impact velocity was 9.5 ft/s, and lateral occupant impact velocity was 10.5 ft/s. Pass I. Longitudinal and lateral occupant ridedown accelerations should fall below the preferred value of 15.0 G, or at least below the maximum allowable value of 20.49 G. Longitudinal ridedown acceleration was -3.4 G, and lateral ridedown acceleration was 4.5 G. Pass Vehicle Trajectory For redirective devices, the vehicle shall exit the barrier within the exit box. The 2270P remained in the exit box. Pass

165 G9 THRIE BEAM GUARDRAIL Test Installation Desciption The G9 thrie beam guardrail system consisted of a 12 gauge thrie beam rail mounted on 6 ft-6 inch long W6x8.5 steel posts spaced 6 ft-3 inches apart with 6 inch x 8 inch x 22-inch long routed wood blockouts. The blockout was attached to the post with 5/8-inch diameter bolts without washers. The mounting height of the thrie beam rail element was 31.625 inches to the top of the thrie beam element. The thrie beam guardrail length-of-need was 100 ft long and transitioned to 37 ft-6 inch ET W-beam terminals attached to each end. The total installation length was 187 ft–6 inch. A cross section of the G9 thrie beam guardrail is shown in Figure 82. Photographs of the completed installation are shown in Figure 83. More detailed information of the barrier and crash test can be found in Appendix K (available on the NCAC website, www.ncac.gwu.edu/). Figure 82. Cross-Section of the G9 Thrie Beam Guardrail.

166 Figure 83. G9 Thrie Beam Guardrail prior to Testing. According to Appendix B of MASH, soil strength was measured the day of the crash test. The minimum post load required for deflections at 5 inches, 10 inches, and 15 inches, measured at a height of 25 inches above ground, is 3940 lb, 5500 lb, and 6540 lb, respectively (90 percent of static load for the initial standard installation). On the day of the test, February 26, 2009, load on the post at deflections of 5 inches, 10 inches, and 15 inches was 5000 lb, 6100 lb, and 6700 lb, respectively. Thus, the strength of the backfill material met minimum requirements. Test Number 476460-1-8 (MASH Test 3-11) Test Description Test Vehicle: 2007 Chevrolet Silverado 4-door pickup Test Inertia Weight: 5019 lb Gross Static Weight: 5019 lb Impact Speed: 63.3 mi/h Impact Angle: 26.4 degrees The 2007 Chevrolet Silverado pickup, traveling at an impact speed of 63.3 mi/h, impacted the G9 thrie beam guardrail 11 ft-9 inches upstream of post 14 at an impact angle of 26.4 degrees. At 0.046 s after impact, the left front tire contacted post 13, which fractured. Post 14 fractured at 0.066 s, and the vehicle began to redirect at 0.076 s. At 0.127 s, post 15 rotated

167 and fractured. The right front and right rear wheel began to rise, at 0.132 s and 0.245 s, respectively. At 0.251 s, the vehicle began traveling parallel with the barrier, and was traveling at a speed of 49.3 mi/h. The vehicle began to roll counterclockwise toward the traffic rail at 0.317 s. At 0.395 s, the left front tire became visible and the tire and wheel rim had already separated from the vehicle. At 0.475 s, the vehicle lost contact with the guardrail and was traveling at an exit speed and angle of 45.3 mi/h and 17.8 degrees, respectively. The left front of the vehicle touched ground on the remaining left front wheel assembly at 0.524 s. As the vehicle continued to roll counterclockwise, the vehicle contacted the separated left front tire and wheel rim at 0.642 s, and the tire and wheel rim contacted and broke the left side rear-view mirror at 0.642 s. The vehicle reached a roll angle of 118 degrees at 1.74 s after impact. However, the vehicle subsequently rolled 360 degrees and came to rest upright, facing the barrier, 180 ft downstream of impact, and 47 ft forward of the traffic face. Damage to the G9 thrie beam guardrail is shown in Figure 84. Post 1 was pulled downstream 0.9 inch, and the soil around posts 2-10 was disturbed. Post 11 was pushed toward field side 0.25 inch at ground level and leaning at 2 degrees. Post 12 rotated counterclockwise 5 degrees, pushed toward field side 2 inches at ground level, and leaning 5 degrees. Post 13 separated from the rail element, rotated clockwise 85 degrees, and leaning toward field side 35 degrees and downstream at 30 degrees. Post 14 separated from the rail element, rotated clockwise 90 degrees, and leaning toward field side 45 degrees and downstream at 45 degrees. Post 15 separated from the rail element, rotated 95 degrees clockwise, and leaning toward field side 50 degrees and downstream at 35 degrees. Post 16 was pushed toward field side 5 inches at ground level, rotated clockwise 45 degrees, leaning toward field side 10 degrees and downstream at 5 degrees. Post 17 was pushed toward field side 1.1 inches, rotated clockwise 5 degrees, and leaning toward field side 4 degrees. Post 18 was pushed toward field side 0.1 inch, rotated clockwise 10 degrees, and leaning toward field side 1 degree. Post 19 and 20 rotated clockwise 10 degrees and posts 21-30 rotated clockwise 5 degrees. Post 31 was pulled upstream 0.75 inch. Maximum permanent deformation of the thrie beam rail element was 27.5 inches at post 14. Length of contact of the vehicle with the guardrail was 38.25 ft. Working area was 3.1 ft. Dynamic deflection of the guardrail during the test was 33.2 inches. The vehicle sustained damage to the left side, as shown in Figure 85. The left upper and lower A-arms were deformed, the upper ball joint separated and the left ball joint pulled out of the mount, the steering knuckle broke, and the left frame rail was deformed. Also damaged were the front bumper, grill, right and left front fenders, left doors, left rear wheel rim, left rear exterior bed, and rear bumper. The windshield, roof, right doors, and right rear exterior of the bed were deformed from the rollover, as well as the right side A, B, and C pillars. Maximum exterior crush to the vehicle was 6.5 inches in the side plane at the left front corner at bumper height. Maximum occupant compartment deformation was 3.56 inches in the vertical measurement from floor to roof in the right rear passenger area.

168 Figure 84. G9 Thrie Beam Guardrail after MASH Test 3-11. Figure 85. Test Vehicle after MASH Test 3-11 on the G9 Thrie Beam Guardrail.

169 Data from the accelerometer, located at the vehicle center of gravity, were digitized for evaluation of occupant risk and were computed as follows. In the longitudinal direction, the occupant impact velocity was 17.1 ft/s (5.2 m/s) at 0.134 s, the highest 0.010-s occupant ridedown acceleration was -6.9 G from 0.944 to 0. 954 s, and the maximum 0.050-s average acceleration was -5.1 G between 0.024 and 0.074 s. In the lateral direction, the occupant impact velocity was 17.4 ft/s (5.3 m/s) at 0.134 s, the highest 0.010-s occupant ridedown acceleration was 7.7 G from 0.136 to 0.146 s, and the maximum 0.050-s average was 6.0 Gs between 0.219 and 0.259 s. THIV was 24.3 km/h or 6.7 m/s at 0.130 s; PHD was 11.0 G between 0.131 and 0.141 s; and ASI was 0.77 between 0.101 and 0.151 s. These data and other pertinent information from the test are summarized in Figure 86. Summary of Test Results The G9 thrie beam guardrail contained and redirected the 2270P vehicle. The vehicle did not penetrate, underride, or override the installation. Maximum dynamic deflection of the thrie beam during the test was 33.2 inches. No detached elements, fragments, or other debris were present to penetrate or to show potential for penetrating the occupant compartment, or to present a hazard to others in the area. Maximum occupant compartment deformation was 3.56 inches in the right rear passenger area. The 2270P vehicle remained upright during the collision event. However, the 2270P vehicle rolled after losing contact with the guardrail. Maximum roll angle was 360 degrees. Occupant risk factors were within the limits specified in MASH. The 2270P vehicle exited within the exit box. It should be noted, the impact speed and angle for this test were 63.3 mph and 26.4 degrees, respectively. The impact speed and angle were within the acceptable limits prescribed in MASH. However, the impact condition represented an impact severity 15.3 percent greater than the target MASH condition (62.2 mph and 25 degrees). The G9 thrie beam guardrail did not perform acceptably when impacted by the 2270P vehicle (2007 Chevrolet Silverado pickup), as shown in Table 20. The 2270P Silverado pickup rolled 360 degrees.

170 0.000 s 0.193 s 0.388 s 0.678 s General Information Test Agency ......................... Test No. .............................. Date ..................................... Test Article Type ..................................... Name ................................... Installation Length .............. Material or Key Elements .... Soil Type and Condition ....... Test Vehicle Type/Designation ................. Make and Model .................. Mass Curb .................................. Test Inertial ....................... Gross Static ...................... Texas Transportation Institute RF476460-1-8 2009-02-26 Longitudinal Barrier G9 Thrie Beam Guardrail 187 ft-6 in Thrie beam rail element on 6 ft-6 inch long W6x9 steel posts spaced 6 ft-3 inches apart with 6 x8 x 22-inch long wood blockouts Crushed Limestone, Dry 2270P 2007 Chevrolet Silverado Pickup 4969 lb 5019 lb 5019 lb Impact Conditions Speed .................................... Angle ..................................... Exit Conditions Speed .................................... Angle ..................................... Occupant Risk Values Impact Velocity Longitudinal ........................ Lateral ................................ Ridedown Accelerations Longitudinal ........................ Lateral ................................ THIV ...................................... PHD ....................................... Max. 0.050-s Average Longitudinal ........................ Lateral ................................ Vertical ............................... 63.3 mi/h 26.4 degrees 45.3 mi/h 17.8 degrees 17.1 ft/s 17.4 ft/s -6.9 G 7.7 G 24.3 km/h 11.0 G -5.1 G 6.0 G 2.0 G Post-Impact Trajectory Stopping Distance ......................... Vehicle Stability Maximum Yaw Angle ..................... Maximum Pitch Angle .................... Maximum Roll Angle ...................... Vehicle Snagging ........................... Vehicle Pocketing .......................... Test Article Deflections Dynamic ......................................... Permanent ..................................... Working Width ............................... Vehicle Damage VDS ............................................ CDC ............................................ Max. Exterior Vehicle Crush ....... Max. Occupant Compartment Deformation ............................. 180 ft dwnst 47 ft twd traffic 206 degrees 6 degrees -360 degrees No No 33.2 inches 27.5 inches 0 01RFQ5 01RFEW4 6.50 inches 3.56 inches Figure 86. Summary of Results for MASH Test 3-11 on the G9 Thrie Beam Guardrail.

171 Table 20. Performance Evaluation Summary for MASH Test 3-11 on the G9 Thrie Beam Guardrail. Test Agency: Texas Transportation Institute Test No.: RF 476460-1-8 Test Date: 2009-02-26 MASH Test 3-11 Evaluation Criteria Test Results Assessment Structural Adequacy A. Test article should contain and redirect the vehicle or bring the vehicle to a controlled stop; the vehicle should not penetrate, underride, or override the installation although controlled lateral deflection of the test article is acceptable The G9 thrie beam guardrail contained and redirected the 2270P vehicle. The vehicle did not penetrate, underride, or override the installation. Maximum dynamic deflection of the guardrail during the test was 33.2 inches. Pass Occupant Risk D. Detached elements, fragments, or other debris from the test article should not penetrate or show potential for penetrating the occupant compartment, or present an undue hazard to other traffic, pedestrians, or personnel in a work zone. No detached elements, fragments, or other debris were present to penetrate or to show potential for penetrating the occupant compartment, or to present hazard to others in the area. Pass Deformations of, or intrusions into, the occupant compartment should not exceed limits set forth in Section 5.3 and Appendix E of MASH. Maximum occupant compartment deformation was 3.56 inches at the vertical area of the right rear passenger area. Pass F. The vehicle should remain upright during and after collision. The maximum roll and pitch angles are not to exceed 75 degrees. The 2270P vehicle remained upright during the collision event. However, vehicle rolled after losing contact with the guardrail. Maximum roll angle was 360 degrees. Fail H. Longitudinal and lateral occupant impact velocities should fall below the preferred value of 30 ft/s (9.1 m/s), or at least below the maximum allowable value of 40 ft/s (12.2 m/s). Longitudinal occupant impact velocity was 17.1 ft/s, and lateral occupant impact velocity was 17.4 ft/s. Pass I. Longitudinal and lateral occupant ridedown accelerations should fall below the preferred value of 15.0 G, or at least below the maximum allowable value of 20.49 G. Longitudinal ridedown acceleration was -6.9 G, and lateral ridedown acceleration was 7.7 G. Pass Vehicle Trajectory For redirective devices, the vehicle shall exit the barrier within the exit box. The 2270P vehicle exited within the exit box. Pass

Next: VI. Summary and Conclusions »
Volume I: Evaluation of Existing Roadside Safety Hardware Using Updated Criteria—Technical Report Get This Book
×
MyNAP members save 10% online.
Login or Register to save!
Download Free PDF

TRB’s National Cooperative Highway Research Program (NCHRP) Web-Only Document 157: Volume I: Evaluation of Existing Roadside Safety Hardware Using Updated Criteria—Technical Report explores the process that was followed in developing NCHRP Research Results Digest (RRD) 349: Evaluation of Existing Roadside Safety Hardware Using Manual for Assessing Safety Hardware (MASH) Criteria.

NCHRP RRD 349 explores the safety performance of widely used non-proprietary roadside safety features by using MASH. Examples of features evaluated include longitudinal barriers (excluding bridge railings), terminals and crash cushions, transitions, and breakaway supports.

  1. ×

    Welcome to OpenBook!

    You're looking at OpenBook, NAP.edu's online reading room since 1999. Based on feedback from you, our users, we've made some improvements that make it easier than ever to read thousands of publications on our website.

    Do you want to take a quick tour of the OpenBook's features?

    No Thanks Take a Tour »
  2. ×

    Show this book's table of contents, where you can jump to any chapter by name.

    « Back Next »
  3. ×

    ...or use these buttons to go back to the previous chapter or skip to the next one.

    « Back Next »
  4. ×

    Jump up to the previous page or down to the next one. Also, you can type in a page number and press Enter to go directly to that page in the book.

    « Back Next »
  5. ×

    To search the entire text of this book, type in your search term here and press Enter.

    « Back Next »
  6. ×

    Share a link to this book page on your preferred social network or via email.

    « Back Next »
  7. ×

    View our suggested citation for this chapter.

    « Back Next »
  8. ×

    Ready to take your reading offline? Click here to buy this book in print or download it as a free PDF, if available.

    « Back Next »
Stay Connected!