U.S. Department 1200 New Jersey Ave., SE 

of Transportation Washington, D.C. 20590 

Federal Highway 

Administration January 30, 2017 

In Reply Refer To: 

HSST-1/B-267 

Mr. Richard A. Clausius 

ArcelorMittal USA LLC 

3001 East Columbus Drive 

East Chicago, Indiana 46312 

Dear Mr. Clausius: 

' ;''. \( . 

This letter is in response to your August 24, 2016 request for the Federal Highway 

Administration (FHW A) to review a roadside safety device, hardware, or system for eligibility 

for reimbursement under the Federal-aid highway program. This FHWA letter of eligibility is 

assigned FHW A control number B-267 and is valid until a subsequent letter is issued by FHW A 

that expressly references this device. 

Decision 

The following devices are eligible, with details provided in the form which is attached as an 

integral part of this letter: 

• ArcelorMittal TL5 Steel Median Safety Barrier 

Scope of this Letter 

To be found eligible for Federal-aid funding, new roadside safety devices should meet the crash 

test and evaluation criteria contained in the American Association of State Highway and 

Transportation Officials' Manual for Assessing Safety Hardware (MASH). However, the 

FHWA, the Department of Transportation, and the United States Government do not regulate the 

manufacture ofroadside safety devices. Eligibility for reimbursement under the Federal-aid 

highway program does not establish approval, certification or endorsement of the device for any 

particular purpose or use. 

This letter is not a determination by the FHW A, the Department of Transportation, or the United 

States Government that a vehicle crash involving the device will result in any particular outcome, 

nor is it a guarantee of the in-service performance of this device. Proper manufacturing, 

installation, and maintenance are required in order for this device to function as tested. 

This finding of eligibility is limited to the crashworthiness of the system and does not cover other 

structural features, nor conformity with the Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices. 
2 

Eligibility for Reimbursement 

Based solely on a review of crash test results and certifications submitted by the manufacturer, 

and the crash test laboratory, FHWA agrees that the device described herein meets the crash test 

and evaluation criteria of the American Association of State Highway and Transportation 

Officials' Manual for Assessing Safety Hardware (MASH). Therefore, the device is eligible for 

reimbursement under the Federal-aid highway program if installed under the range of tested 

conditions as Length ofNeed (LON) barrier. 

Name of system: ArcelorMittal TL5 Steel Median Safety Barrier 


Type of system: Longitudinal Barrier 


Test Level: MASH Test Level 5 (TL5) 


Testing conducted by: Holmes Solutions 


Date of request: August 24, 2016 


Date initially acknowledged: August 28, 2016 


Date of completed package: November 11 , 2016 


FHWA concurs with the recommendation of the accredited crash testing laboratory as stated 

within the attached form. 

Full Description of the Eligible Device 

The device and supporting documentation, including reports of the crash tests or other testing 

done, videos of any crash testing, and/or drawings of the device, are described in the attached 

form. 

Notice 

If a manufacturer makes any modification to any of their roadside safety hardware that has an 

existing eligibility letter from FHWA, the manufacturer must notify FHWA of such modification 

with a request for continued eligibility for reimbursement. The notice of all modifications to a 

device must be accompanied by: 

o 	 Significant modifications - For the·se modifications, crash test results must be 

submitted with accompanying documentation and videos. 

o 	 Non-signification modifications - For these modifications, a statement from the 

crash test laboratory on the potential effect of the modification on the ability of 

the device to meet the relevant crash test criteria. 

FHWA's determination of continued eligibility for the modified hardware will be based on 

whether the modified hardware will continue to meet the relevant crash test criteria. 

Any user or agency relying on this eligibility letter is expected to use the same designs, 

specifications, drawings, installation and maintenance instructions as those submitted for review. 
3 

You are expected to certify to potential users that the hardware furnished has the same chemistry, 

mechanical properties, and geometry as that submitted for review, and that it will meet the test 

and evaluation criteria of the MASH. 

Issuance of this letter does not convey property rights of any sort or any exclusive privilege. This 

letter is based on the premise that information and reports submitted by you are accurate and 

correct. We reserve the right to modify or revoke this letter if: (1) there are any inaccuracies in 

the information submitted in support of your request for this letter, (2) the qualification testing 

was flawed, (3) in-service performance or other information reveals safety problems, (4) the 

system is significantly different from the version that was crash tested, or (5) any other 

information indicates that the letter was issued in error or otherwise does not reflect full and 

complete information about the crash worthiness of the system. 

Standard Provisions 

• 	 To prevent misunderstanding by others, this letter of eligibility designated as FHW A 

control number B-267 shall not be reproduced except in full. This letter and the test 

documentation upon which it is based are public information. All such letters and 

documentation may be reviewed upon request. 

• 	 This letter shall not be construed as authorization or consent by the FHW A to use, 

manufacture, or sell any patented system for which the applicant is not the patent holder. 

• 	 Ifthe subject device is a patented product it may be considered to be proprietary. If 

proprietary systems are specified by a highway agency for use on Federal-aid projects: 

(a) they must be supplied through competitive bidding with equally suitable unpatented 

items; (b) the highway agency must certify that they are essential for synchronization 

with the existing highway facilities or that no equally suitable alternative exists; or (c) 

they must be used for research or for a distinctive type of construction on relatively short 

sections of road for experimental purposes. Our regulations concerning proprietary 

products are contained in Title 23 , Code of Federal Regulations, Section 63 5 .411. 

Sincerely, 

Scott T. Johnson 

Acting Director, Office of Safety 

Technologies 

Office of Safety 

Enclosures 
Version 10.0 (05/16) 

Page 1 of 8 

Request for Federal Aid Reimbursement Eligibility 

of Highway Safety Hardware 

Date of Request: August 12, 2016 I \e New ('Resubmission 

Name: RICHARD A. CLAUSIUS 

... 

Q) Company: ARCELORMITIAL USA LLC 

i:: .E Address: 3001 EAST COLUMBUS DRIVE, EAST CHICAGO, INDIANA 46312 .Q 

:i 

Vl Country: USA 

To: M ichael 5. Griffith, Director 

FHWA, Office of Safety Technologies 

I request the following devices be considered eligible for reimbursement under the Federal-aid 

highway program. 

Device & Testing Criterion - Enter from right tQ left starting with Test Level ~ 

System Type Submission Type Device Name I Variant Testing Criterion Test 

Level 

'B': Rigid/Semi-Rigid Barriers 

(Roadside, Median, Bridge 

Railinqs) 

le: Physical Crash Testing 

(' Engineering Analysis 

ARCELORMITIAL TLS 

STEEL MEDIAN SAFETY 

BARRIER 

AASHTOMASH TLS 

By submitting this request for review and evaluation by the Federal Highway Administration, I certify 

that the product(s) was (were) tested in conformity with the AASHTO Manual for Assessing Safety 

Hardware and that the evaluation results meet the appropriate evaluation criteria in the MASH. 

Individual or Organization responsible for the product: 

Contact Name: RICHARD A. CLAUSIUS Same as Submitter ~ 

Company Name: ARCELORMITIAL USA LLC Same as Submitter ~ 

Address: 3001 EAST COLUMBUS DRIVE, EAST CHICAGO, IN DIANA 46312 Same as Submitter ~ 

Country: USA Same as Submitter ~ 

Enter below all disclosures of financial interests as required by the FHWA ' Federal-Aid Reimbursement 

Eligibility Process for Safety Hardware Devices' document. 

ArcelorMittal is the world's leading steel and mining company, with a strong presence in the USA. Guided by a 

philosophy to produce safe, sustainable steel, we are the leading supplier of quality steel and steel solutions in 

the automotive, construction, household appliances, and packaging global markets; with world-class research 

and development. The TLS steel median safety barrier is a proprietary high containment steel barrier system 

designed by ArcelorMittal with assistance from Gregory Industries, licensed to Gregory Industries for the North 

American Market, and crashed tested at Holmes Solutions (New Zealand). Neither ArcelorMittal nor its affiliates, 

nor Gregory Industries has any financial interest, control, or influence over Holmes Solutions who was 

contracted for crash testing services. Under no circumstances were the fees paid to Holmes Solutions related to 

barrier performance and/or the outcome of crash testing. 
Version 10.0 (05/16) 

Page 2 of 8 

PRODUCT DESCRIPTION 

Ci' New Hardware or 

• ·Significant Modification 

( Modification to 

Existing Hardware 

The ArcelorMittal TL5 Median Barrier System is a proprietary galvanized steel high containment barrier which 

consists of upper W-beam guardrail and lower Thrie beam guardrail supported with spacers on both sides of 

steel line posts. Both guardrails are spliced mid-span between posts, and lap splices are orientated away from 

the direction of approaching traffic. The top height of the W-beam guardrail is 59.6''. The top height of the 

Thrie beam guardrail is 35.2''. The height of the post is 59''. The Length of Need (LON) is 325 feet and consisted 

of 66 steel line posts. The steel barrier system consists of the following components: 

Posts & Spacers: C- Section steel line posts made from ASTM A1011 Grade 50 steel, have an overall length of 

118.0'', installed on 60" centers in an alternating orientation, and embedded 59" into the ground. The posts 

have an open slot along the length to accommodate attaching spacers, cables, and nuts. All posts have upper 

and lower (tube) spacers to offset the W-beam and Thrie beam section from the post, and are made from ASTM 

A500 Grade B steel. There is also a main spacer that sits over the top of the lower tube spacer, made from 

ASTM A1011 Grade 50 steel, and has a front opening which must be top oriented. 

Guardrails: Corrugated W-beam guardrail is made from ASTM A1011 Grade 80, 10 Gauge steel; and corrugated 

Thrie beam guardrail is made from ASTM A1011 Grade 80, 12 Gauge steel. These rails are 192.5" long with 

holes for splice joints on 180" centers. In addition, at each post location there is a 12" long Thrie beam backup 

plate attached to the system made from ASTM A1011 Grade 50, 12 Gauge steel. 

Cable Assembly: Four load transfer diagonal cables are located in series at the beginning and end of the 

Length of Need (LON). Due to the orientation and shape of the posts, two different length cables are required, 

both manufactured from %" W/R Guardrail cable. 

Fasteners: The guardrail is assembled using galvanized nuts, bolts, washers, and rectangular washer plates in 

compliance with ASTM, ANSI, or AISI standards. All spacers are connected with 5/8"x 2" bolts, 5/8" circular 

washers, and 5/8" nuts. All guardrails are connected with 5/8"x 2" bolts, rectangular washer plates, 5/8" circular 

washers, and 5/8" nuts. All lap joints are connected with 5/8" x 1 1.4'' splice bolts and 5/8" nuts. 

CRASH TESTING 

By signature below, the Engineer affiliated with the testing laboratory, agrees in support of this submission that 

all of the critical and relevant crash tests for this device listed above were conducted to meet the MASH test 

criteria. The Engineer has determined that no other crash tests are necessary to determine the device meets 

the MASH criteria. 

Engineer Name: Dr Ch~s Allington 

Engineer Signature: 

Address : Level 2, 254 Montreal St, Christchurch Same as Submitter D 

Country: New Zealand Same as Submitter 0 

A brief description of each crash test and its result : 
Version 10.0 (05/16) 

Page 3 of 8 

Required Test 

Number 

Narrative 

Description 

Evaluation 

Results 

5-10 (11 OOC) 

The ArcelorMittal center median barrier 

system successfully contained and 

redirected an 11 OOC test vehicle impacting 

the test article at 25.3 degrees and a 

velocity of 101 km/h (62.7 mph). 

No debris or detached elements penetrated 

or showed potential to penetrate the 

occupant compartment. No fragments were 

distributed outside of the vehicle trajectory. 

The trajectory of the vehicle was such that it 

did not present any undue hazard to other 

traffic, pedestrians or work zone personnel. 

The vehicle remained upright during and 

after the impact and vehicle stability was 

considered satisfactory. Occupant risk 

factors satisfied the test criteria and the 

vehicle exit trajectory remained within 

acceptable limits 

PASS 

S-11 (2270P) 

The ArcelorMittal center median barrier 

system successful ly contained and 

redirected a 2270P test vehicle impacting 

the test article at 25.1 degrees and a 

velocity of 100.0 km/h (62.1 mph). 

No debris or detached elements penetrated 

or showed potential to penetrate the 

occupant compartment. No fragments were 

distributed outside of the vehicle trajectory 

and therefore did not present any undue 

hazard to other traffic, pedestrians or work 

zone personnel. 

The vehicle remained upright during and 

after the impact and vehicle stability was 

considered satisfactory. Occupant risk 

factors satisfied the test criteria and the 

vehicle exit trajectory remained within 

acceptable limits. 

PASS 
Version 10.0 (05/16) 

Page 4 of 8 

Required Test 

Number 

Narrative 

Description 

Evaluation 

Results 

5-12 (36000V) 

The ArcelorMittal center median barrier 

system successfully contained and 

redirected a 36000 kg test vehicle impacting 

the test article at 15.1 degrees and a 

velocity of 78.5 km/h. 

No debris or detached elements penetrated 

or showed potential to penetrate the 

occupant compartment. No fragments were 

distributed outside of the vehicle trajectory 

and therefore did not present any undue 

hazard to other traffic, pedestrians or work 

zone personnel. 

The vehicle remained upright during and 

after the impact and vehicle stability was 

considered satisfactory. The vehicle exit 

trajectory remained within acceptable 

limits. 

PASS 

5-20 (11 OOC) 

This test is defined as optional in MASH. 

Based on the results obtained in Test 5-10, 

including the low level of embedment into 

the system, it was determined unnecessary 

to complete this test. 

Non-Relevant Test, not conducted 
5-21 (2270P) 

The terminal end region of the ArcelorMittal 

centre median barrier system is near 

identical to the LON barrier, with the 

exception of the deletion of the upper wbeam rail section. This upper rail section is 

primarily used to provide a restoring force 

to the 36,000V in the LON. An assessment 

of the system indicates that this upper rail 

provides limited additional benefit to 

barrier performance when impacted by the 

11 OOC or 2270P vehicle. 

The results obtained for Test 5-10 and Test 

5-11 showed the 11 OOC and 2270P vehicles 

did not engage with the upper rail section 

at all. Furthermore, the vehicles showed 

very limited embedment into the lower 

Thrie beam section. The performance of the 

LON system was solely dominated by the 

lower section of the barrier, which has an 

identical strength and stiffness to the 

terminal end regions. 

The upper rail slopes down from the full 

height to the low rail height before 

terminating behind the low rail. Based 

on the results obtained from Test 5-11 it 

is predicted that this region would have 

negligible influence on the stability of 

the vehicle or the safety of the vehicle 

occupants or other road users when 

impacted in Test 5-21. As such, it was 

determined that Test 5-2 1 was not 

relevant and was not completed. 

Non-Critical, not conducted 

Version 10.0 {05/16) 

Page 5 of 8 
The terminal end region of the ArcelorMittal 

center median barrier system is near 

identical to the LON barrier, with the 

exception of the deletion of the upper wbeam rail section. This upper rail section is 

primarily used to provide a restoring force 

to the 36,000V in the LON due to the 

vehicles higher COM should it obtain a high 

roll angle during the impact. The transition 

zone in the barrier has the upper rail 

transitioning from the full height to the low 

rail height before terminating behind the 

low rail. 

The results obtained for the LON test 5-12 

showed the 36,000V lightly engaged with 

the upper rail. The engagement observed 

was relatively light and the restoring force 

provided by the barrier to the vehicle was 

less than calculated in the original design 

parameters. 

An assessment was made as to the likely 

performance of the transition zone under 

test 5-22. It was noted that the primary 

purpose of this test is to assess the 

maximum strength of the transition region. 

Based of the results obtained for Test 5-12 it 

was apparent that the barrier has a high 

degree of residual strength after impact. 

5-22 (36000V) Accordingly, it was assessed that the Non-Critical, not conducted 

transition zone would maintain sufficient 

strength without the upper w-beam rail 

section, thereby satisfying Evaluation 

Criteria A. 

Very little debris was created by the barrier 

during Test 5-12 and it is predicted that the 

same would occur for Test 5-22, satisfying 

Evaluation Criteria D. 

The greatest potential variation in the 

performance of the 36,000V vehicle during 

Test 5-22 compared to Test 5-12 is 

predicted to be the roll angle. With the 

ramped end of the upper w-beam section, it 

is likely that the roll angle would be 

exaggerated compared to that observed in 

Test 5-12. However, the relatively low roll 

angle and overall vehicle stability observed 

of both the tractor and trailer units in Test 

5-12 indicate that the vehicle was stable 

and could sustain an increased roll with a 

low probability of roll-over. We also note 

that Evaluation Criteria G states it is not 

essential that the vehicle remains upright 

during this test. 

Based on the expected performance of the 

system it was considered that this test was 

non-critical. 

Version 10.0 (05/16) 

Page 7 of 8 
Version 10.0 (05/16) 

Page 8 of 8 

Full Scale Crash Testing was done in compliance with MASH by the following accredited crash test 

laboratory (cite the laboratory's accreditation status as noted in the crash test reports.): 

Laboratory Name: 

Laboratory Signature: 

Holmes Solutions 

" /A__ j -­ Address: Level 2, 254 Montreal St, Christchurch Same as Submitter D 

Country: New Zealand Same as Submitter D 

Accreditation Certificate 

Number and Dates of current 

Accreditation period : 

ISO/IEC 17025: !ANZ Certification Number: 1022 (23/07/2009 through to 

19/06/2016) 

Submitter Signature*: «--D~ C\_ ~ 

Submit Form 

ATTACHMENTS 

Attach to this form: 


1) Additional disclosures of related financial interest as indicated above. 


2) A copy of the full test report, video, and a Test Data Summary Sheet for each test conducted in 


support of this request. 

3) A drawing or drawings of the device(s) that conform to the Task Force-13 Drawing Specifications 

[Hardware Guide Drawing S.~]. For proprietary products, a single isometric line drawing is 

usually acceptable to illustrate the product, with detailed specifications, intended use, and contact 

information provided on the reverse. Additional drawings (not in TF-13 format) showing details that 

are relevant to understanding the dimensions and perfom1ance of the device shou ld also be submitted 

to facilitate our review. 

FHWA Official Business Only: 

Eligibility Letter 

Number I Date Key Words 

I 
0.000 sec 0.260 sec 0.520 sec 0.780 sec 

51 m Fl'Olll Cl~ 

-----------. 10.0 m ------------­

• Test Arti le 

•Total Len 

• Kev Elements ­ Barrier 

Description... ... .......... Thrie and W-beam safety barrier installed at 1.52 m centres 

Length .. . . .. .. . . . . . . . . . . .. 99.0 meters LON 

Rail Height........... ..... Thrie beam 894mm (35.2") W-Beam 1513 mm ( 59.6") • Occupant Impact Velocity 

,__.P~o=st~S~~c=in~~·~~~~-----~1=.5~m=e=te=r=s=n=o=nuna=· =t~5=ft~--------------1 Longitudinal ... ........ . . 

• Test Vehicle Lateral o tional .... .... 

Designation.... ....... .... llOOC • Occupant Ridedown Deceleration 

Make/ Model... ........... 2009 Nissan Tiida X-d.irection...... ............ . 

Dimensions (lwh)... .. .. 4260 L x 1690 W x 1540 H Y-d.irection.... .... ..... .... . . 

Curb Wt.. .. ... ..... ...... .. 1090 kg TI-ITV (optional)............ . 

Test Inertial Wt.. .......... 1104 kg PHD (optional) ................. 

Gross Static Wt. .... ........ 1179 k AS! o tional 

• Impact Conditions • Test Article Dama e 

Speed .................. ..... 101.0 km/ h (62.7 mph) • Test Article Deflections 

Angle . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25.3° Dynamic................... 

Im act Point ................ Post 22 of LoN 

• Exit Conditions 

Exit Speed .............. .... . 37.Skm/ h • Vehicle.Damage - Exterior 

t-====~~~~~~------=~- -----------------t VDS .......... .. ....... ... .. . 

1.04 sec 

Good 

@0.1162 seconds on right side of interior 

-8.2m/s 

5.8m s 

6.4 g 

-8.7 g 

(0.1211 - 0.1311 seconds) 

(0.1161 - 0.1261 seconds) 

37.7 km/h at 0.1162 seconds (10.5 m/s) 

10.3 g 

1.25 

Minor 

(0.1161 - 0.1261 seconds) 

0.0434 - 0.0934 seconds 

0.31 m (1.01 ft) 

0.095 m (0.31 ft) 

llFL-3 

11LFEE3 
0.00 sec 0.100 sec 0.200 sec 0.300 sec 0.400 sec 

58.5 m From CIP 

10 m -------......... 


• Test Article ArcelorMittal TL5 Center Median High Containment • Post Impact Vehicle Behaviour 

!---------------------------------------< • Total Length 121.5 m Vehicle Stability .......... ..
 Good 

• Key Elements - Barrier Stopping Distance ....... . . 58.5 metres from OP 

Description................ Thrie and W-beam safety barrier installed at 1.52 m • Vehicle Snagging None 

Length .... .. .. .. .. .. .. . ... 99.0 meters WN • Vehicle Pocketing None 

Rail Height.. ...... .. ...... Thrie beam 894mm (35.2") W-Beam 1513mm (59.6") • Occupant Impact Velocity @ 0.1225 seconds on right side of interior 

f--P_os_t_S_p_ac_in-'-g_.. _.. _.. _.. _.._.. _.. ______ 1_.s_m_e_te_rs_no_rruna_ · _I_(5_f_t) ___________ -l Longitudinal ............ . 
 -5.5 m/ s 

• Test Vehicle Lateral (optional) .. .. .. .. 6.7m/ s 

Designation. .......... .... 2270P • Occupant Ridedown Deceleration 


Make/Model.. .. .. .. .. .. .. 2011DodgeRam1500 Quad Cab X-direction.................. . 
 6.9 g (0.1243- 0.1343 seconds) 

Dimensions (lwh).. .... . 5720Lx2030Wx1880 H Y-direction .. .. .............. . 
 -7.9 g (0.2587 - 0.2687 seconds) 

Curb Wt.... ..... .. .. ... .... 2210.5 kg TIIlV (optional) ..... ...... .. 
 328 km/ h at 0.1220 seconds (9.1 m/s) 

Test Inertial Wt......... ... 2240.5 kg PHO (optional) ........ ........ . 
 8.1 g 

Gross Static Wt............. 2240.5 kg AS! (optional) 
 1.24 

• Impact Conditions • Test Article Damage Minor 

Speed .. .. . .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 100.0 km/h (62.1 mph) • Test Article Deflections 

Angle. ...... ...... ........... 25.1° Dynamic .... .... ... ... ... . . 0.49 m (1.60 ft.) 

!---------------------------------------< Impact Point .. .. . .. . .. . .. ... 330 mm Upstream of line post 22 from LoN Permanent.. .. .. ..... .. .. . 0.157 m (0.51 ft.) 

• Exit Conditions 
 Working Width.. .. ... .. . 0.49 m (1.60 ft.) 

Exit Speed .... . ... .. . .. .. .. .. 33.6 km/ h 
 • Vehicle Damage - Exterior 

Exit Angle .. .. .. . .. .. . ... .. 10.2° 
 VOS .. ........... .. ....... .. . 11FL-3 

f--•-=T=-e-st-,N'""u-m--,-be_r_________l_l...,.3.,..984,..-.03,...,..,TLS-,,,,..,,...1-l---------------i CDC ......................... 
 11LFEE3 

• Test Date 20 April 2016 Max. Deformation .. ..... . 220mm 

• Test Article ArcelorMittal 115 Center Median High Containment • Post Impact Vehicle Behaviour 

• Total Len th 121.5 m Vehicle Stability ... ... ... .. . 

• Key Elements - Barrier Stopping Distance........ . 

Description... Thrie and W-beam safety barrier installed at 1.52 m centres • Vehicle Snagging 

Length .. . .. ... .. .. . .. . . .. 99.0 meters LON • Vehicle Pocketin 

Rail Height. . . . . ... .. ..... Thrie beam 894mm (35.2" ) W-Beam 1513mm (59.6") • Occupant Impact Velocity 

t-P-:o=-st_S~a,....c:-in~-·._.._._ .._.. _.._.. _______1_. 5_m_e_te_rs_n_o_mm_· _a_l~(_5_ft~)--------------i Longitudinal .. .. .. ...... . 

• T

Designation... 36000 kg • Occupant Ridedown Deceleration 


Make/Model. . Kenworth 404s X-direction ... .. ............. . 


Dimensions (lwh)... ... . 16850 L x 2500 W x 3550 H Y-direction ... .... ..... .. .... . 


Curb Wt. .. ... . . . .... .... ... 14590 kg THIV (optional) ...... ...... . 


Test Inertial Wt.... ..... ... 35770 kg PHO (optional) ............. . 


Gross Static Wt... .......... 35770 k AS! (o tion 


est Vehicle 36000V Lateral o tional .. ..... . 

• Impact Conditions • Test Article Dama e 

S ed ........... ............ 78.5 km h 48. • Test Article Deflections 

Angle ............. 15.1° Dynamic. .. .... .. ..... .... . 

Im act Point . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 350 mm downstream of LoN Post 22 Permanent. .. ... ......... . f---'-------------------------------------< • Exit Conditions Workin Width......... . 

Exit Speed . . . ......... .. .. ... 23.4 km/ h (14.5 mph) • Vehicle Damage - Exterior 

Exit An le ....... 1.5° VOS .. ...... ..... .... .. ... .. . r­.-:T=-e-s-t~N~u-m...,be_r__________1_1_3-984­.0-2_T_L5_--12-----------------i CDC .... ..... . .... ......... . 

• Test Date 19 April 2016 Max. Deformation ....... . 

Good 

45.5 metres from CIP 

None 

None 

at 0.4816 seconds on right side of interior 

-2.6m/s 

2.5 m s 

1.3 g (1.5198 - 1.5298 seconds) 

-3.0 g (0.8947 - 0.9047 seconds) 

Moderate 

1.32 m (4.33 ft.) 

0.8 m (2.62 ft.) 

1.65 m 5.41 ft. 

llFL-2 

11LFEE2 

180mm 

0.00 sec 0.310 sec 0.620 sec 0.930 sec 1.24 sec 

45.5 m From CIP 

~-----------

I 

IllI~::: :~-- 20 m 

13.0 km/h at 0.4912 seconds (3.6 m/s) 

3.1 g (0.8947 - 0.9047) 

0.26 (1.6425 - 1.6925 seconds) 
DROP DOWN SECTION LOAD TRANSFER SECTION LONGITUDINAL BARRIER SECTION 

r-------------------­

: ~~~~~~~~~!ii!i§~~~iii!!~~~~~~~~~i~ !••··· :" I 

I 

I 

t___ ---------------­

I.. 180.0"[4570] .. I.. 240.0"( 6100] 

LOAD TRANSFER SECTION 

AND 

DROP DOWN SECTION 

.I .. 3420.0"[86870] 

LONGITUDINAL BARRIER SECTION 

TL-5 STEEL HIGH CONTAINMENT MEDIAN BARRIER 

ArcelorMitta 

~ 

I 

## 

SHEET NO. DATE: 

1 of 8 03/25/16