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

of Transportation Washington, D.C. 20590 

Federal Highway 

Administration 

January 10, 2018 HSST-1/ CC-134 

Mr. Gerrit A. Dyke 

Lindsay Transportation Solutions, Inc. 

180 River Road 

Rio Vista, CA 94571 

Dear Mr. Dyke: 

This letter is in response to your February 7, 2017 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 CC-134 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: 

• MAX-TensionTM Guardrail·Terminal System (MAXTM) TL2 

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' (AASHTO) Manual for Assessing Safety Hardware (MASH). 

However, the FHWA, the Department of Transportation, and the United States Government do 

not regulate the manufacture of roadside 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 FHWA, the Department ofTransportation, 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, FHW A 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 oftested 

conditions. 

Name of system: MAX-TensionTM Guardrail Terminal System (MAXTM)TL2 

Type of system: Crash Cushion 

Test Level: MASH Test Level 2 

Testing conducted by: Safe Technologies, Inc. 

Date ofrequest: February 7, 2017 

Date initially acknowledged: February 10, 2017 

Date of Final Package: November 21 , 2017 

FHW A 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 ofthe crash tests or other testing 

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

form. 

Notice 

This eligibility letter is issued for the subject device as tested. Modifications made to the device 

are not covered by this letter. Any modifications to this device should be submitted to the user 

(i.e., state DOT) as per their requirements. 

You are expected to supply potential users with sufficient information on design, installation and 

maintenance requirements to ensure proper performance. 

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 AASHTO' s 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 crashworthiness of the system. 
3 

Standard Provisions 

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

control number CC-134 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 635.411. 

Sincerely, 

Michael S. Griffith 

Director, Office of Safety Technologies 

Office of Safety 

Enclosures 
Version 10.0 (05/16) 

Page 1 of 1 

Request for Federal Aid Reimbursement Eligibility 

of Highway Safety Hardware 

Date of Request: November 21 , 2017 I (' New r. Resubmission 

Name: Gerrit A. Dyke, P.E., 

... 

QI

+J 

+J 

·e 

..0 

:J 

Ill 

Company: 

Address : 

Country: 

Lindsay Transportation Solutions, Inc. 

180 River Road, Rio Vista, CA 94571 

USA 

To : Michael S. 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 to left starting with Test Level ~ 

System Type Submission Type Device Name I Variant Testing Criterion 

Test 

Level 

'CC': Crash Cushions, 

Attenuators, & Terminals 

r. Physical Crash Testing 

(' Engineering Analysis 

MAX-Tension TL-2 

AASHTO MASH TL2 

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: Gerrit A. Dyke, P.E., Same as Submitter ~ 

Company Name: Lindsay Transportation Solutions, Inc. Same as Submitter ~ 

Address: 180 River Road, Rio Vista, CA 94571 Same as Submitter ~ 

Country: USA Same as Submitter ~ 

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

Eligibility Process for Safety Hardware Devices' document. 

Safe Technologies, Inc. (STI) performs testing and analysis services for Lindsay Transportation Solutions, Inc. 

(LTS). STI is a wholly owned subsidiary of LTS. STI is a fully accred ited crash test facility to ISO 17025 by A2LA 

and is recognized by the US Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) to perform full scale crash tests per NCH RP 

Report 350 and MASH criteria. 

The STI laboratory manager, technicians, and laborers are compensated by LTS for salaries and wages. STland 

staff does not rece ive any incentives, compensation, commissions, or professional fees corresponding to the 

outcome of any testing or analysis. 

STI or staff does not receive any research funding or other research support from LTS. STI and staff also do not 

have any financial interest in patents, copyrights, or other intellectual property associated with the products 

they test or analyze. 

KARCO Engineering, LLC. was contracted by LTS to collaborate with STI for this testing program. KARCO 

provided guidance, recommendations, and suggestions for testing and reporting practices. KARCO reviewed 

test data and reports to ensure accuracy and correct representation of test parameters and results. KARCO nor 

any KARCO employee has any financial interest in L TS, STI, or the product being tested. 
Version 10.0 (05/16) 


Page 2 of 1 

Version 10.0 (05/16) 

Page 3 of 1 

PRODUCT DESCRIPTION 

(e' New Hardware or 

• ·Significant Modification 

('.Modification to 

Existing Hardware 

The MAX-TensionTM Test Level 2 Guardrail Terminal System (MAX-TL2) is a non gating re-d irective end terminal 

for corrugated W-beam barrier systems in tangent configurations. The MAX-TL2 system utilizes tensioned 

cables, a telescoping panel, and a cutting tooth to absorb the kinetic energy and safely contain or redirect 

impacting vehicles. The system is comprised of a friction based energy absorbing impact head, two tension 

cables, a releasable post 1, a ground anchor assembly, and an energy absorbing coupler with integrated 

cutting tooth used in conjunction with standard AASHTO 12 Ga guardrail panels, posts, blockouts, and 

hardware. The system length is approximately 14ft 6in [4.4m) and has an effective length of approximately 

25.8 ft [7.9m], with the anchor assembly extending forward approximately 4.2 ft [l .3m]. The Length of Need is 

at Post 1. 

The MAX-TL2 can be applied directly to W-Beam guardrail systems at, or transitioned to, 31" rail height with 

panels and post spacing configured at mid-span splice. Transitions to strong post W-beam guardrail systems 

or other barriers where the splice is not mid-span can be accomplished using 3ft 1 1 /2in [0.95m], 9ft 4 1/2in 

[2.85m], or 15ft 7 1/2in [4.75m) panels after the MAX-TL2 system (minimum 25.8ft [7.9m) downstream of the 

first post) in accordance with Federal, State, and local standards. Transitions to other barrier systems such as 

thrie beam or rigid bridge or roadside barriers shall be in accordance with Federal, State, and local 

requirements and attached after the MAX-TL2 system (minimum 25.8ft [7.9m) downstream of the first post). 

The MAX-TL2 can be applied with a 0 to 2 ft [61 Omm) offset in accordance w ith FHWA recommendations 

and memorandum titled "Guidelines for the Selection of W-Beam Barrier Terminals" dated October 26, 2004. 

The MAX-TL2 may be configured using wood or composite blockouts with Bin [200mm) or 12in [305mm) 

depths. Reference Enclosure A, "MAX-Tension TL-2 System Configurations Justification". 

The MAX-TL2 may utilize standard AASHTO 8.Slb/ft or 91b/ft line posts after post number one. Reference 

Enclosure A. 

The MAX-TL2 may utilize standard 25ft [7.6m) AASHTO M-180 12 Gauge panels after the slider assembly 

(panel 2 and beyond). Reference Enclosure A. 

The MAX-TL2 may be painted, stained, or powder coated on surfaces that do not effect the function of the 

system in place of or in addition to galvanizing. Reference Enclosure A for details regarding surfaces that may 

be coated and the components or surfaces that should not. 

Any delineation pattern, tape, or decal may be placed on the Delineation Bracket attached to the MAX-TL2 

impact head. In addition, several variations of brackets may be utilized with the MAX-TL2. See Enclosure A. 

The MAX-TL2 may display identification decals, tags, or stamps for product identification, component 

tracking and quality control. The identification method and location shall not effect the capacity, function, or 

performance of the MAX-TL2. Reference Enclosure A. 

Two minor modifications to the system components are proposed in Enclosure A. The section titled 

"Stamped vs. Welded Traffic Side Slider Brackets" details an alternative manufacturing method for the coupler 

where it is stamped from a single sheet of steel instead of welding two components together. This component 

may be fabricated in either configuration with no effect on the capacity, function, or performance of the MAXTL2. 

Manufacturing drawings may be adjusted to ensure manufacturing capability and consistency with MASH 

tested and certified product. 

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: 

Engineer Signature: 

Joseph Nagy 

Joseph Nagy Digitally signed by Joseph Nagy 

Date: 2017.ll.2116:14:02-08'00' 

Address: 170 River Road, Rio Vista, CA 94571 Same as Submitter D 

Country: USA Same as Submitter D 
Version 10.0 (05/16) 

Page 4 of 1 · 

A brief description of each crash test and its result: 

Required Test 

Number 

Narrative 

Description 

Evaluation 

Results 

2-30 (11 OOC) 

The MAX-Tension TL-2 was judged to have 

successfully met all of the evaluation criteria 

for MASH Test 2-30 for non-gating end 

terminals. 

The MAX-Tension TL-2 end terminal 

satisfied the MASH structural adequacy 

criteria for its intended function as a nongating end terminal. The test article first 

captured and later redirected the 11 OOC 

vehicle in a controlled manner. The vehicle 

did not penetrate, underride, or override 

the installation. The test article exhibited 

controlled permanent and dynamic 

deflection in the test. 

All of the occupant risk criteria were 

satisfied in testing the MAX-Tension TL-2 

end terminal. Theoretical occupant impact 

velocities in the longitudinal and lateral 

directions were below the preferred limit of 

30.0 ft/s (9.1 m/ s). Ridedown accelerations 

in the longitudinal and lateral directions 

were well below the preferred limit of 15.0 

G. There was no test article debris detached 

during the test. 

There was minimal deformation to the 

occupant compartment of the 11 OOC test 

vehicle shown in Table 4. There was no 

intrusion into the occupant compartment. 

The test vehicle remained upright during 

and after the collision with minor roll and 

pitch. 

The MAX-Tension TL-2 end terminal was 

judged as satisfying the applicable MASH 

vehicle trajectory criteria. 

PASS 
Version 10.0 (05/16) 

Page 5 of 1 

Required Test 

Number 

Narrative 

Description 

Evaluation 

Results 

2-31 (2270P) 

The MAX-Tension TL-2 was judged to have 

successfully met all of the evaluation criteria 

for MASH Test 2-31 for non-gating end 

terminals. 

The MAX-Tension TL-2 end terminal 

satisfied the MASH structural adequacy 

criteria for its intended function as a nongating end terminal. The test article 

captured the 2270P vehicle in a controlled 

manner. The vehicle did not penetrate, 

underride, or override the installation. The 

test article exhibited controlled permanent 

and dynamic deflection in the test. 

All of the occupant risk criteria were 

satisfied in testing the MAX-Tension TL-2 

end terminal. Theoretical occupant impact 

velocities in the longitudinal and lateral 

directions were below the preferred limit of 

30.0 ft/s (9.1 mis). Ridedown accelerations 

in the longitudinal and lateral directions 

were below the preferred limit of 15.0 G. 

There was no test article debris detached 

during the test. 

There was no deformation to the occupant 

compartment of the 2270P test vehicle 

shown in Table 4. There was no intrusion 

into the occupant compartment. The test 

vehicle remained upright during and after 

the collision with minor roll and pitch. 

The MAX-Tension TL-2 end terminal was 

judged as satisfying the applicable MASH 

vehicle trajectory criteria. 

PASS 
The MAX-Tension TL-2 was judged to have 

successfully met all of the evaluation criteria 

for MASH Test 2-32 for non-gating end 

terminals. 

The MAX-Tension TL-2 end terminal 

satisfied the MASH structural adequacy 

criteria for its intended function as a nongating end terminal. The test article 

captured the 11 OOC vehicle in a controlled 

manner. The vehicle did not penetrate, 

underride, or override the installation. The 

test article exhibited controlled permanent 

and dynamic deflection in the test. 

All of the occupant risk criteria were 

satisfied in testing the MAX-Tension TL-2 

end terminal. Theoretical occupant impact 

2-32 (11 OOC) velocities in the longitudinal and lateral 

directions were below the maximum limit of PASS 

40.0 ft/ s (12 m/s}. Ridedown accelerations in 

the longitudinal and lateral directions were 

below the preferred limit of 15.0 G. There 

was no test article debris detached during 

the test. 

There was minimal deformation to the 

occupant compartment of the 11 OOC test 

vehicle shown in Table 4. There was no 

intrusion into the occupant compartment. 

The test vehicle remained upright during 

and after the collision with minor roll and 

pitch. The vehicle did not intrude into 

adjacent lanes. 

The MAX-Tension TL-2 end terminal was 

judged as satisfying the applicable MASH 

vehicle trajectory criteria. 

Version 10.0 (05/16) 

Page 6 of 1 
Version 10.0 (05/16) 

Page 7 of 1 · 

2-33 (2270P) 

The MAX-Tension TL-2 was judged to have 

successfully met all of the evaluation criteria 

for MASH Test 2-33 for non-gating end 

terminals. 

The MAX-Tension TL-2 end terminal 

satisfied the MASH structural adequacy 

criteria for its intended function as a nongating end terminal. The test article 

captured the 2270P vehicle in a controlled 

manner. The vehicle did not penetrate, 

underride, or override the installation. The 

test article exhibited controlled permanent 

and dynamic deflection in the test. 

All of the occupant risk criteria were 

satisfied in testing the MAX-Tension TL-2 

end terminal. Theoretical occupant impact 

velocities in the longitudinal and lateral 

directions were below the preferred limit of 

30.0 ft/s (9.1 mis).Ridedown accelerations 

in the longitudinal and lateral directions 

were well below the preferred limit of 15 G. 

There was no test article debris detached 

during the test. 

There was minimal deformation to the 

occupant compartment of the 2270P test 

vehicle shown in Table 4. There was no 

intrusion into the occupant compartment. 

The test vehicle remained upright during 

and after the collision with minor roll and 

pitch. 

The MAX-Tension TL-2 end terminal was 

judged as satisfying the applicable MASH 

vehicle trajectory criteria. 

PASS 
Version 10.0 (05/16) 

Page 8 of 1 

2-34 (11 OOC) 

The MAX-Tension TL-2 was judged to have 

successfully met all of the evaluation criteria 

for MASH Test 2-34 for non-gating end 

terminals. 

The MAX-Tension TL-2 end terminal 

satisfied the MASH structural adequacy 

criteria for its intended function as a nongating end terminal. The test article 

redirected the 1 1 OOC vehicle in a controlled 

manner. The vehicle did not penetrate, 

underride, or override the installation. The 

test article exhibited some permanent and 

dynamic deflection in the test. 

All of the occupant risk criteria were 

satisfied in testing the MAX-Tension TL-2 

end terminal. Theoretical occupant impact 

velocities in the longitudinal and lateral 

directions were well below the preferred 

limit of 30.0 ft/ s (9. 1 m/s). Ridedown 

accelerations in the longitudinal and lateral 

directions were well below the preferred 

limit of 15.0 G. There was no test article 

debris detached during the test. 

There was minimal deformation to the 

occupant compartment of the 11 OOC test 

vehicle shown in Table 4. There was no 

intrusion into the occupant compartment. 

The test vehicle remained upright during 

and after the collision with minor roll and 

pitch. The vehicle did not intrude into 

adjacent lanes. 

The MAX-Tension TL-2 end terminal was 

judged as satisfying the applicable MASH 

vehicle trajectory criteria. 

PASS 
Version 10.0 (05/16) 

Page 9 of 1 

2-35 (2270P) 

2-36 (2270P) 

The MAX-Tension TL-2 was judged to have 

successfully met all of the evaluation criteria 

for MASH Test 2-35 for non-gating end 

terminals. 

The MAX-Tension TL-2 end terminal 

satisfied the MASH structural adequacy 

criteria for its intended function as a nongating end terminal. The test article 

captured and redirected the 2270P vehicle 

in a controlled manner. The vehicle did not 

penetrate, underride, or override the 

installation. The test article exhibited 

controlled permanent and dynamic 

deflection in the test. 

All of the occupant risk criteria were 

satisfied in testing the MAX-Tension TL-2 

end terminal. Theoretical occupant impact 

velocities in the longitudinal and lateral 

directions were well below the preferred 

limit of 30.0 ft/s (9.1 mis). Ridedown 

accelerations in the longitudinal and lateral 

directions were well below the preferred 

limit of 15 G. There was no test article 

debris detached during the test. 

There was no deformation to the occupant 

compartment of the 2270P test vehicle. 

There was no intrusion into the occupant 

compartment. The test vehicle remained 

upright during and after the collision with 

minor roll and pitch. The vehicle did not 

intrude into adjacent lanes. 

The MAX-Tension TL-2 end terminal was 

judged as satisfying the applicable MASH 

vehicle trajectory criteria. 

The MAX-Tension TL-2 is applied only to 

corrugated W-profile guardrail barrier 

systems of equal lateral stiffness. Therefore 

this test is not relevant and was not 

conducted. 

PASS 

Non-Relevant Test, not conducted 
Version 10.0 (05/16) 

Page 1Cof 1 · 

2-37 (2270P) 

The MAX-Tension TL-2 was judged to have 

successfully met all of the evaluation criteria 

for MASH Test 2-37a for non-gating end 

terminals. 

The MAX-Tension TL-2 end terminal 

satisfied the MASH structural adequacy 

criteria for its intended function as a nongating end terminal. The test article 

redirected the 2270P vehicle in a controlled 

manner. The vehicle did not gate to the 

backside of the system. It did not penetrate, 

underride, or override the installation. The 

test article exhibited controlled permanent 

and dynamic deflection in the test. 

All of the occupant risk criteria were 

satisfied in testing the MAX-Tension TL-2 

end terminal. Theoretical occupant impact 

velocities in the longitudinal and lateral 

directions were well below the preferred 

limit of 30.0 ft/ s (9.1 mis). Ridedown 

accelerations in the longitudinal and lateral 

directions were well below the preferred 

limit of 15.0 G. There were some fragments 

of blackouts detached from the system that 

landed in the clear zone and did not pose a 

threat to the occupant compartment, other 

vehicles, pedestrians or personnel in a work 

zone. 

There was minimal deformation to the 

occupant compartment of the 2270P test 

vehicle as shown in Table 4. There was no 

intrusion into the occupant compartment. 

The test vehicle remained upright during 

and after the collision with minor roll and 

pitch. 

The MAX-Tension TL-2 end terminal was 

judged as satisfying the applicable MASH 

vehicle trajectory criteria. 

PASS 

2-38 (1500A) 

Calculations performed to demonstrate 

acceptable occupant risk values per MASH 

evaluation criteria. Reference Enclosure A, 

"MAX-Tension TL-2 Configurations 

Justifications" section titled "1500A Vehicle 

(MASH Test 2-38)". 

PASS 

2-40 (11 OOC) Not applicable. Non-Relevant Test, not conducted 

2-41 (2270P) Not applicable. Non-Relevant Test, not conducted 

2-42 (11 OOC) Not applicable. Non-Relevant Test, not conducted 

2-43 (2270P) Not applicable. Non-Relevant Test, not conducted 

2-44 (2270P) Not applicable. Non-Relevant Test, not conducted 

2-45 (1500A) Not applicable. Non-Relevant Test, not conducted 
Version 10.0 (05/16) 

Page 11 of 1 

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: Safe Technologies, Inc. 

Laboratory Signature: Joseph Nagy Digitally signed by Joseph Nagy 

Date: 2017.11.21 16:19:12 -08'00' 

Address: 170 River Road, Rio Vista, CA 94571 Same as Submitter D 

Country: USA Same as Submitter D 

Accreditation Certificate 

Number and Dates of current 

Accreditation period : 

1851 .01, Valid through March 31, 2018 

, D k 

Submitter Signature*: Gernt y e Digltally signed by Gerrit DykeDate: 2017.ll.2 1 16:19:59 

-08'00' 

Submit Form 

ATTACHMENTS 

Attach to this form : 


I) 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 Standards]. 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 performance of the device should also be submitted 

to facilitate our review. 

FHWA Official Business Only: 

Eligibility Letter 

Number Date Key Words 
t= O000 sec t= 0.100sec t= 0.300sec t= 0.500sec t= 0.800sec t= 1.500sec 

....... :.: ... ..... ,. __ _ I 

31' 

' ·­ ' 

r !X4() 118" 

6d 1/8 

29'-1 I " MAX-TENSIO N TL-2 

ii 1231• 75' - 17 112" - 6.3 3/4 G UARLJRAIL tNll l ti.IMINAL. IAN C tNI

29-11 1------- - ----- - - - ---.....;:1·n·-11",,...----------------­

General Information 

Test Agency .......... . ......... .. ................. ........... SAFE TECHNOLOGIES, INC. 

Test Number ................. ........... . ......... ........ MET230-C1 

Test Designation ........ .. ...... ............ . .................. MASH 2-30 

Date .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. ... . .. ... .. .. ... .. .. .. ... .. .. .. 8/2212017 

Test Article 

Name . Lindsay Transportation - MaX-Tension TL-2 


Type . Guardrail End Terminal 


Installation Length . ....... 129.9 ft (39.6 m) 


Width . .. .. .. . . . . .. .... ... .. ... . 17.5 in (444.5 mm) 


Height . .. .. . .... . .. ... .. ........................... .31 in (787 mm) 


Soil Conditions 

Type of soil... ......AASHTO Grade A/B Soil-Aggregate 


Soil strength ..... 11 ,7421b (52.2kN) 


Test Vehicle 

Type I Designation . .. . . .. ......... ... ..... ..1100C 


Make and Model . .. ........... . .. .... 2011 Hyundai Accent 


Curb Weight ................. .. ..... 2,462 lb (1 ,116.5 kg) 


Test Inertial Weight . . .. .. ................ ..............2,448 lb (1 ,110.5 kg) 


Gross Static Weight ..... 2,614 lb (1,185.5 kg) 


Impact Conditions 

Speed ........ ............. .. ........ . .. .. .. .. . ....... 44.3 mph (71 .3 kph) 


Angle .............................. .... ......... .... .... ........ 0 deg 


Location I Orientation ........... ........... . 1/4 offset 


Exit Conditions 

Speed (mph).. . . . .. 
 .. ..... N/A 


Angle (deg) ....................... 
 ..... N/A 


Post Impact Trajectory 

Vehicle Stability .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. . .... Satisfactory 

Longitudinal Stopping Distance (CG) ......... . .... .......... 28.4 ft (8.67 m) 


Vehicle Snagging/Pocketing .................. N/A 


Occupant Risk Values 

Longitudinal OIV .. .. .. . .. . .. . .. ... .. .. . .. .. . ..... 28.9 ft/s (8.8 mis) 

Lateral OIV ............... 
 .... 1.31 ft/s (0.4 mis) 

Longitudinal ORA ........ ... 
 .... 10 g's 

Lateral ORA ............... ........ ... 
 .. .. ....... ... .... 3.3 g's 

THIV . 
 .. .... .. .. .. .... .. ... .. ... 29.2 ft/s (8.9 mis) 

PHO ...... ....... . 
 . .... 10.2 g's 

ASI . 
 0.96 

Test Article Damage: ........ . .. . . ... Moderate 

Test Article Deflection 

Longitudinal system stroke ...... 5.58ft(1 .70m) 

Permanent lateral deflection .. .. .. .... 0.23 ft (0 07 m) 

Dynamic lateral deflection ......... 1.38 ft (0.42 m) 

Vehicle Damage 

VOS... ... ...... ....... 
· · ····· ..... 12-FR-4 

CDC ............................................ ..... 12FREN3 


Maximum Interior Deformation .. ..... 0.25 in (6.35 mm) - dashboar 

t= 0.000 sec t=0.100sec t= 0.300sec t= 0.500sec t= 0.800sec t= 1.200sec 

CJ==+=,,,!"! r

{ 155'- 6 l/ 2" } ·'V 

"'t ~• ~: 

I 3:" 

f!:O-=~==: i:-::---. - _.....___,[·--­ - :r- 30' - l/'.l' MAX-TENSION ~ .. GUARDRAIL END -HERM~~ ~l;,. :-~-c--.. .: ' ,"'{:..,--·•:o i· I . ;r_ i'I .l I; 1 - : 1° 

. ; 

~L 

j ii _ -----=--.a: ~ - _.._ '· '4 j . 1 • 

· ~ ·~- :. 1:- ~ ., ;)(10 ' "--­--­- --­•. 30' - irz·, l -_-"\'"~A:r- - -t 

i----- 1

' , -· - r -b. 3' -5"-­-

General Information 

Test Agency .. .. . . . . . .. . . SAFE TECHNOLOGIES, INC. 

Test Number.. ... .. .. .. . ... ... ...... ........ ..... MET170201 

Test Designation ......... . ....... . ......... . .............. MASH 2-31 

Date ........................ .... .. ...... .. ... ........... .. .... 2/1/2017 

Test Article 

Name ... .. Lindsay Transportation - MAX-Tension, TL-2 

Type ........................... . .... Guardrail End Terminal 

Installation Length ........ . ... . ....... 155.5 ft (39.8 m) 

Width . ........... ...... ..... .. . ..... 17.5 in (444.5mm) 

Height .. ................. . .... 31 .0 in (787mm) 

Soil Conditions 

Type of Soil ....... .................. ........................ AASHTO Grade A/B Soil-Aggregate 


Soil Strength ........ .... . ... . ....................... . ....... 14,764.6 lb (65.7 kN) 


Test Vehicle 

Type I Designation ....... . ... . .............................. 2270P 


Make and Model ............ ... ..... ......... .. ..... .. ...... 2012 Dodge Ram 1500 Quad Cab Pickup 


Curb Weight . . ... .. ... . . .. . .... .. . . . 5029.0 lb (2281 .0 kg) 


Test Inertial Weight .......... 5002.0 lb (2269.0 kg) 


Gross Static Weight .... .. ... ..... .. .. ... .. ......... 5002.0 lb (2269.0 kg) 


Impact Conditions 

Speed ....................................... .... ............... 41 .8 mph (67.3 km/h) 

Angle . . ....... O deg 

Location I Orientation . . . . F rent/Center 

Exit Conditions 

Speed (mph) ... . . ..... N/A 

Angle (deg) .. . ... N/A 

Post Impact Trajectory 

Vehicle Stability .............. ... .... ..... . . . ... Satisfactory 


Stopping Distance . .............. . ....... 13.4 ft (4 .1 m) 


Vehicle Snagging/Pocketing .................... N/A (see Figure 6) 


Occupant risk Values 

Longitudinal OIV .................. ........ .............. 23.3 ftls (7.1 mis) 

Lateral OIV .................. ............. .. ......... 0.7 ft/s (0.2 mis) 

Longitudinal ORA .. ... . . .. . .. .. ... . .. . . . .. . . .... 7.4 g's 

Lateral ORA . . . . .. . . . .. . ... .. .. . . . . ... ... . .... 1.5 g's 

THIV . . .. ... ... . . .. ..... .. ... . ................ 23.3 ftls (7 .1 m/s) 

PHO ........ . .. ..... .. .. .. ... ... ... .... . ..... 7.4 g's 

ASI ............... .................. ...... . .. .. .... . ... 0.55 

Test Article Damage: Moderate 

Test Article Deflections 

Longitudinal system stroke ........................ 10.5 ft (3.2 m) 


Permanent lateral deflection ....... .. ............... 0.43 ft (0.13 m) 


Dynamic lateral deflection ....... ... ...... .... .... .. 0.49 ft (0 15 m) 


Vehicle Damage 

VOS ......................... . ... 12-FC-5 

CDC ............................. . . 12FCEN2 

Maximum Deformation . . . .. . . . . . ..... No interior damage 
t= 0.000 sec t= 0.100 sec t= 0.200 sec t= 0.300 sec t= 0.500 sec t= 1.600 sec 

. ,. : ....-.. -~: lf 11T L J~~ L ,,.

'· 15°

5• .o 11s· 

68 1/8" 

29'-l l " MAX-TENSION TL-2 

GUA RDRAIL END TERMINAL. TANGENT 

r5 n314· 75 - 37 I/2 - 63 3/4 

f---­--------------il29'-Jl "f--- - ------­-­----i 29·11--­ ­

General Information 

Test Agency.. SAFE TECHNOLOGIES, INC. 

Test Number. . MET232-C1 

Test Designation ..... .. ......... . ..... MASH 2-32 

Date........................ ... . 8/15/201 7 

Test Article 

Name ............ ... Lindsay Transportation - MaX-Tension TL-2 

Type ........................... . .... Guardrail End Terminal 

Installation Length . . 129.9 ft (39.6 m) 

Width . ........ . ..... 17.5 in (444 mm) 

Height .. . .............. ... . .................... 31 .0 in (787 mm) 

Soil Conditions 

Type of soil ............. ...... ..... ...... AASHTO Grade NB Soil-Aggregate 

Soil strength ....... 13,465 lb (59.9 kN) 

Test Vehicle 

Type I Designation ............... .... .. ... . ..... 1100C 


Make and Model ...... 2011 Kia Rio 


Curb Weight . ................... ... 2,434 lb (1,104 kg) 


Test Inertial Weight . ....... 2,449 lb (1 ,111 kg) 


Gross Static Weight ..... 2,615 lb (1 ,186 kg) 


Impact Conditions 

Speed .................. ... .... .. ........ . ...................... 43.9 mph (70.6 kph) 


Angle ............................ ..... . 15.0 deg 


Location I Orientation .............. ... .. .. .. .. .. FronUCenter 


Exit Conditions 

Speed (mph) . ............. N/A 


Angle (deg)... . .. ..... .............. ..... .... .. .... N/A 


Post Impact Trajectory 

Vehicle Stability . ...... Satisfactory 


Longitudinal Stopping Distance (CG) ......... .. ... ........ 6.40 ft (1.95 m) 


Vehicle Snagging/Pocketing ... .... .. ....... N/A 


Occupant Risk Values 

Longitudinal OIV . .. .. .. ......... 31 .5 ft/s (9.6 mis) 


Lateral OIV ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... . ... ... .. . .... .. . ......... 0.98 ft/s (0.3 mis) 


Longitudinal ORA . . ..... .... ........ ... ....... . ..... 11 .2 g's 


Lateral ORA ... ... .. ... ... .... .... .. ... .... ... .. .... .. ... .... .. 2.5 g's 


THIV . ........ .. .. .. ...... ...... ...... .... ... ..... .. ....... 31 .5 ft/s (9.6 mis) 


PHO ............................. .... .. . .. ... ...... 11 .2 g's 


ASI .................. ........... ... . ... . . ... ..... 1.01 


Test Article Damage: ............. ... . ....... Moderate 

Test Article Deflection 

Longitudinal system stroke ..... .4.93 ft (1.50 m) 


Permanent lateral deflection ..... .......... ....... 1.51 ft (0.46 m) 


Dynamic lateral deflection . ........ . 2.59 ft (0.79 m) 


Vehicle Damage 

VOS ..................... . .................................. ....... 12-FC-4 


CDC .. ....... 12FDEW2 


Maximum Interior Deformation ...... ..... . ...... . .... 1.13 in (28.6 mm) - ceiling 

t= 0.000 sec t= 0.100sec t= 0.300sec t= 0.600sec t= 1.000sec t= 1.500sec 

.....

: -: 

1 : 1 : ~ 

······ :!" :..; 

.. JI ' ~ 

' i i ' ' i ' ' ' i , ' • 

sx 4() I /f5 

68 118' I 29'- 11 " MAX TE NSION TL ? 

GUARDRAIL END TERMlt'-AL. T ANGENl 

75" 72 3/4 75' ~ f.­ 1 37 l/'l ;- 63 314'--' ( 29' 11") 

29 I ' 

General Information 

Test Agency .................. .. ..... .................. .. ...... SAFE TECHNOLOGIES, INC. 

Test Number .................. .... ........ .. .... .. .... .... .. . MET233-C1 

Test Designation .... .. . ... . . .. .. .. .. . . .. .. . .. .... MASH 2-33 

Date.. . .. .... .. . .. ...... . ....... 8/14/2017 

Test Article 

Name .................. .. Lindsay Transportation - MaX-Tension TL-2 

Type . . ... . .... Guardrail End Terminal 

Installation Length .. .... 129.9 ft (39.6 m) 

Width ... ..... 17.5 in (444.5 mm) 

Height ................ . ........ . .... .. .............. ....... 31 in (787 mm) 

Soil Conditions 

Type of soil.. . ... AASHTO Grade NB Soil-Aggregate 

Soil strength ........ 13,234 lb (58 9 kN) 

Test Vehicle 

Type I Designation ............ .. . .. ... .... 2270P 

Make and Model ...... 2012 Dodge Ram 1500 

Curb Weight . . . .. . .... .. ..... ..................... 4,900 lb (2,222.5 kg) 


Test Inertial Weight .... . .... .. ............ ....... 5,005 lb (2,270 kg) 


Gross Static Weight ....................................... 5,005 lb (2,270 kg) 


Impact Conditions 

Speed . .. .... ......... .. . ...... 42.6 mph (68.6 kph) 

Angle . .. ............................. .. 15 deg 

Location I Orientation .. .. . F rant/Center 

Exit Conditions 

Speed (mph) . ... N/A 

Angle (deg) .. .... . . . .. ... N/A 

Post Impact Trajectory 

Vehicle Stability .................................... . .. ... Satisfactory 

Longitudinal Stopping Distance (CG) .. 13.3 ft (4.05 m) 

Vehicle Snagging/Pocketing .. . .. ......... ... N/A 


Occupant risk Values 

Longitudinal OIV ...... 24.9 ft/s (7.6 m/s) 

Lateral OIV .. .. .... .... ... . .. .. 1. 31 ft/s (0.4 mis) 

Longitudinal ORA ........ .. .... . ........ ... .. .... . ............. 8.9 g's 

Lateral ORA . .... 1.9 g's 

THIV ...... ...... .. .. . .... . .................. 24.9 ft/s (7.6 mis) 

PHO ...... . .... ..... .. .. ....................... .. ... .. ............. 9.0 g's 

ASI . . .... ...... .... ....... .... ... .............. 0.70 

Test Article Damage: .. ... . Substantial 

Test Article Deflection 

Longitudinal system stroke .......... . ........ .. ........ . ..... 6.23 ft (1.90 m) 

Permanent lateral deflection . . ... 0.76 ft (0.23 m) 

Dynamic lateral deflection . .. ...... ... ..... 1.77 ft (0.54 m) 

Vehicle Damage 

VOS ....................... .......... .. .. .. . 12-FC-3 

CDC .. . .... 12FCEW2 

Maximum Interior Deformation ............... . ... 0.44 in (11 .1 mm) - floor pan 
t= 0.000 sec t= 0.100 sec t= 0.200 sec t= 0.300 sec t= 0.400 sec t= 0.600 sec 

:· : ..-------. ::: ~ ~. ---------------------217'-l 1' J" 

' •­ t· . I·· 

11'~~-:~-'} h--..L ~-~ 

~X40"/5' 115° --·---: ~ ..J 

(>8 1/8" ' I • -ro I ' • '29'- 11" MAX-TENSIO N TL-2 I­ G UARDRAIL END TERMINA L. TA NGENT 

75 72 3/d 75 .., 37 l/'l - 63 3/d' I­ (1 '29'- 11") "v 29 11' 

General Information 

Test Agency .. ....... SAFE TECHNOLOGIES, INC. 

Test Number.. .. .. .......... .. .. .... ....... ...... MET234-C1 

Test Designation .. ..... MASH 2-34 

Date ................................ .. ..... ....... .. ..... 8/24/2017 


Test Article 

Name Lindsay Transportation - MaX-Tension TL-2 


Type ........................... .............. .. ..... Guardrail End Terminal 


Installation Length ................ .... 129.9 ft (39.6 m) 


Width ............................. .. .. ............. .. ... 17.5 in (445 mm) 


Height . ..... 31 .0 in (787 mm) 


Soil Conditions 

Type of soil ........... ........... ..................... .. ....... AASHTO Grade A/B Soil-Aggregate 


Soil strength .............. .. ....... .......... . ..... 9,636 lb (42.9 kN) 


Test Vehicle 

Type I Designation ... ... . .. . .. .. ........................ 1100C 


Make and Model ...... .. .. .. .. .. .... .. ............... 2011 Kia Rio 


Curb Weight ................... . ...... .. .. ... .. .. ....... .. .... 2,438.3 lb (1 , 106.0 kg) 


Test Inertial Weight ......................... 2,449.3 lb (1 ,111 .0 kg) 


Gross Static Weight .......................... ... .. .. .... . ..... 2,614.7 lb (1 ,186.0 kg) 


Impact Conditions 

Speed ...................... ....... .. ......................... ..... 43.8 mph (70.5 kph) 

Angle .. 15.0 deg 

Location I Orientation . ... 1.77 ft (0.54 m) downstream from post 1 

Exit Conditions 

Speed .. ...... ...... .. .. .. ... .. ... ..... . ... ... ....... .. .. ... 35.9 mph (57.8 kph) 

Angle .. .. .... ...... .... .. .. .. .. .. . .. .... .. ... .. .. .. . ..... .. ... 4.8 degrees 

Post Impact Trajectory 

Vehicle Stability . .. .. ............... Satisfactory 

Longitudinal Stopping Distance (CG) . . ... .. ....... Approximately 218 ft (66.4 m). 

stopped by containment barrier 

Vehicle Snagging/Pocketing ........ ... . ................... NIA 

Occupant risk Values 

Longitudinal OIV ................... ................... .. . .. ... 8.2 ft/s (2.5 mis) 

Lateral OIV . .. ............ .. ... 15.1 ft/s (4 .6 mis) 

Longitudinal ORA ...................... .. .. 2.7 g's 

Lateral ORA . .. 3.7 g's 

THIV ............... .. .. .. . 17. 1 ft/s (5.2 mis) 

PHO .... ....... .. .. ... .. ...... 4.6 g's 

AS! . 0.54 

Test Article Damage:. .. ........ Minimal 

Test Article Deflection 

Longitudinal system stroke .................. .. ........ . ...... . NIA 


Permanent lateral deflection ................................. 0.35 ft (0.11 m) 


Dynamic lateral deflection .. .. .. .. ... .. ........ .. ........ 0.52 ft (0 .16 m) 


Vehicle Damage 

VOS .............................. .. . 1-RFQ-1 


CDC ........................................... 01RFEN1 


Maximum Interior Deformation ...... .. ......... ..... 0.88 in (22.2 mm) - dashboard 

.·:

t= 

. 

0.000 sec t= 0.200sec t= 0.400sec t= 0.800sec t= 1.300sec t= 1.500sec 

r 130 s 

I­ i:J0' -1/2" )-­ --

~~~ · - [!• .·· c ] : 

~ · , 3'." 

+ I~. 

,I 

723 .. - L l 5x401 .. I ,Ii . 4 -J­ 75" - -J­ 1' 6S I ..

Ill.. ti 1' 

.t.i , '.'.I·~ 'I·. 

C.:J~~()Rl-l' L·r' l(J;1.1ttl' l ' ..... -! 

~ 

-.-1 . . 11 1· j 

,, 

. J .-.~ I 

l ~~-:=# /'-­ - 75" 

37~ "1 .' ~ . .. / 

( 633"1 8 .. - ~ - :~ / I / " 

, I. 

4 ' ·c.:.::~ .;;' 

., 

General Information 


Test Agency. ..................... .. ............ .... SAFE TECHNOLOGIES, INC. 


Test Number ................ .......... . ..... MET170224 


Test Designation ... ... . ...... .. .. .. .. .......... . ... .... MASH 2-35 


Date...................... ... .... .. ... ................... 2/24/2017 


Test Article 

Name ... .......... .. ........... .... ... ... .. ... .. Lindsay Transportation - MaX-Tension TL-2 


Type .. .... ... ... .. ............................ ..... . ..... Guardrail End Terminal 


Installation Length ....... .. ... ..................... .. . 129.9 ft (39.6 m) 


Width ... . .... ... ..... ........ ...... ........... ... .. . ... . 17.5 in (444.5 mm) 


Height ............. .......... .................... ....... 31 in (787 mm) 


Soil Conditions 

Type of soil. . ...... ...... .... .. ...... ... ..... .. . .. .. . AASHTO Grade A/B Soil-Aggregate 


Soil strength .. ...... ........ .... .. ............. ......... 15,708 lb (69.9 kN) 


Test Vehicle 

Type I Designation .............................. . ... 2270P 


Make and Model .... .. .......... ... . ... ............ 2011 Dodge Ram 1500 Quad Cab Pickup 

Curb Weight .... 4.986.0 lb (2,261 .5 kg) 

Test Inertial Weight .. .. .. ..... 5,019.0 lb (2,276.5 kg) 

Gross Static Weight .... 5,019.0 lb (2,276.5 kg) 

Impact Conditions 

Speed ........................... ... ........ . ... 42.5 mph (68.4 kph) 


Angle ...... .. ....... .. ....... .. ....... .. ... ... .. 25.0 deg 


Location I Orientation ..... ... .... ............... ...... BLON, Post 1 


Exit Conditions 

Speed ... .. ... ........ .. ..... .. ... ......... .... .... ... .......... . 15.6 mph (25.1 kph) 


Angle............. . ............. ..... ....... .......... ... .. 8.6 degrees 


Post Impact Trajectory 

Vehicle Stability ......... ...... .. ...... . .. .. ..... ..... . Satisfactory 


Stopping Distance ........................ ... . 58.25 ft (17.75 m) 


Vehicle Snagging/Pocketing ... ....... .. ..... . .. Minimal 


Occupant risk Values 

Longitudinal OIV ... 11 .5 ft/s (3.5 mis) 

Lateral OIV 13.8 ft/s (4.2 mis) 

Longitudinal ORA ................. ...... .............. .... .. .. ..8.0 g's 

Lateral ORA ..... ...... ...... .. ........ ....... .... ...... ...... .. .6.4 g's 

THIV .. . .. .. ..... ...... .......... ........ .. ..... ..... ... ... ..... ..... 17.4 ft/s (5.3 mis) 

PHO ..... .. ................ .... g.o g's 

ASI ...... .. ........ 0.57 

Test Article Damage...... .. ... ... Substantial 

Test Article Deflections 

Longitudinal system stroke NiA 


Permanent ....................... 1.08 ft (0.33 m) 


Dynamic .... ... ...... ... ....... .. ... 1.44 ft (0.44 m) 


Vehicle Damage 

VOS............................................ .. ... .... ... .... ...... 1-RFQ-4 


CDC...... . ............... . 01FREA4 


Maximum Deformation ... .. .. ... ... .. .. .. .................... No interior damage 

t= 0.000 sec t= 0.100 sec t= 0.200 sec t= 0.300 sec t= 0.500 sec t= 2.700 sec 

...... ~ 

:-~: .. _ rr ]I - -----er.:.. 

5X 4() 118' 

68 118" t • • • • • • • • • • • • 29- 11 " M AX-TENSION 

--TL-2 ocG Llll 

I G UARDRAIL END TERM INAL f­ -

IY ~ 17114 lY - 9 11'.) - t-,33/I. (129'- l 1") 

29 11·· 

General Information 

Test Agency .................. ... .. ... .. .................. .. .... SAFE TECHNOLOGIES, INC. 

Test Number ........... .... . ..... MET237a-C1 

Test Designation ...... . MASH 2-37a 

Date .......................... . .. .... . 8/18/201 7 

Test Article 

Name .................. ..... .. .. .. ....... .. ... .. .... .. Lindsay Transportation - MaX-Tension TL-2 


Type . .. .... Guardrail End Terminal 

Installation Length . .. .......... .. .... 129.9 ft (39.6 m) 

Width . .. .. .. ...... ...... 17.5 in (444.5 mm) 

Height . ..... 31.0 in (787.4 mm) 

Soil Conditions 

Type of soil ..... AASHTO Grade NB Soil-Aggregate 

Soil strength .. .. ............ .. ..... 16,037 lb (71.3 kN) 

Test Vehicle 

Type I Designation . .. ........ . .. .. .... ... .. .. .. 2270P 

Make and Model .... 2011 Dodge Ram 1500 

Curb Weight ............ .. . ... . 4,768 lb (2, 162.5 kg} 

Test Inertial Weight . .. .. .... 5,006 lb (2,270.5 kg) 

Gross Static Weight ....... ...... ..... . ..... .. .... 5,006 lb (2,270.5 kg) 


Impact Conditions 

Speed . . .......... . ... .. .. ... .. .. .. ... ....... 42.7 mph (68.7 kph) 

Angle . 25.0 deg 

Location I Orientation .......... .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .... 19. 7 ft (6.00 m) from post 1 

Exit Conditions 

Speed (mph) ............ . . ... 19.0 mph (30.6 kph) 


Angle (deg) .................... . .. 9.5 degrees 


Post Impact Trajectory 

Vehicle Stability .............................. .. .. ... ... .......... Satisfactory 


Longitudinal Stopping Distance (CG) ...... ... ..... . 60.2 ft (18.3 m) 


Vehicle Snagging/Pocketing .................. ..... . ........... Minimal 


Occupant risk Values 

Longitudinal OIV . .. ....... 16.4 ft/s (5.0 m/s) 


Lateral OIV . .. ............. ....... . .. ..... 12.1 ft/s (3. 7 mis) 


Longitudinal ORA . .. .................... 9.4 g's 


Lateral ORA .... .. .. .... ... .. ...... .. .. .. .... .. . ... .. . .. .. 7.5 g's 


THIV .. . . . . . .. .. . .. ... . .. .. .. .... .. .. . . .. .. . ... 19.4 ft/s (5.9 m/s) 


PHO . .... .... .. ...... ...... .. .... .... .. .. . ...... .. .. .. . ... 11 .9 g's 


ASI . ........ ... .. ... . .. . ... . ... . .. .. ... 0.52 


Test Article Damage: ........ ... .. ... . . .. .. Substantial 

Test Article Deflection 

Longitudinal system stroke .. ..... ... ... .. .. .. .. .... .. ... . . N/A 


Permanent lateral deflection . .. .. . .. . ... .. ....... 1.18 ft (0.36 m) 


Dynamic lateral deflection ........ . ... . .. .. ... .. ... ... ... . .... 2.16 ft (0.66 m) 


Vehicle Damage 

VOS .. .. .. . . . . . . .. .. . . . . .. .. . .. .. . .. . . . . . . ... .... .. ............... . 1-RFQ-3 

CDC .. .. . 01RFEW1 

Maximum Interior Deformation ......... .... . ................. 0.88 in (22.2 mm) - floor pan 
: 

N 

"-~ ~ .. 

E .•

I ~ 

l'0 

0::: >­

0 _J 

:r: rn 

u 2 

z w 

<{ tn 

tn _J <{ 

0 w tn _J 

rn 

<{ 

u 

x 

N 

,• 

<o 

" ,\ ~ f­

:::> f- 0::: 

" f:" tn 

. " f­

" 0 tn 

~· CL fu ~ 0

<{ 0 <{ 2 z (_')a:: w CL z :::J

N O f- 2 0 0 0::: tn 

>- 0::: f­ ~<{ (_') 

:::> tn <{ 

w (_') z 

_J 

w 

0 

~f- 0::: 

w o:::> _J wo 

3::.:::: CL 

:::> CLU 0 0 

f-_J u tn rn 0 (_') 

CL X z ..q- rn w 0::: 

[ Lug ·o ] (_') 0 z tn 

.. L -. l <{ rn _J <{ LI... 

w >­

(_')

0 0::: 

3 w 

z 

w x 

..qMAX-TENSION TL-2 GUARDRAIL END TERMINAL, TANGENT 

ROAD 

IYUNDIAY SHEET NO. DATE: 

Lindsay Transportation So lu tions. 180 River Rd .. Rio Vista CA . 94571, 888 - 800 - 3691 

www.theroodzipper.com 1 OF 2 
INTENDED USE 


The MAX-TensionTM TL-2 Guardrail End Terminal (MAX-Tension TL-2) is a re-directive, non-gating tension-based end 

terminal for corrugated W-Beam barrier systems in tangent configurations. It can be used to protect motorists from 

unforgiving terminations of longitudinal barriers. The MAX-Tension TL-2 system absorbs the energy and gradually 

decelerates an impacting vehicle when impacted head-on and contains and redirects a vehicle during side impacts. The 

BLON is at post l. The MAX-Tension TL-2 system integrates directly into a corrugated W-Beam guardrail system. 

The system consists of an impact head, energy absorbing coupler, two tension cables, soil anchor and ground strut, in 

addition to standard guardrail components such as posts, blockouts, and rails. The system can be installed on any 

guardrail system transitioned to a rail height of 31" [787) with mid-span splices. Contact the manufacturer for further 

information and installation instructions. 

The MAX-Tension TL-2 can be applied in the following configurations: 

• 8" or 12" blockouts, wood or composite 

• Standard AASHTO line post can be 8.5 or 9 lb/ft 

•Two standard AASHTO 12 Ga. 12-'6" 4-Space W-beam or one AASHTO 12 Ga. 12-'6" 4-Space W-beam and 

one 25'-0" 4-Space W-beam 

•Transition to 27 1/2" downstream guardrail with or without mid-span splice 

• Transition directly to thrie-beam or other bridge rail transition 

•Up to 2 ft. offset 

APPROVALS 

The MAX-Tension TL-2 Tangent system has been fully tested in conformance with MASH Test Level 2 and is eligible 

for Federal reimbursement. 

FHW A Eligibility Letters: :XXXX::XXX 

CONTACT INFORMATION 

Lindsay Transportation Solutions 


180 River Rd. 


Rio Vista, CA 94571 


www.barriersystemsinc.com 


Phone: 888-800-3691 or 707-374-6800 


Fax: 707-374-6801 


Email: info@barriersystemsinc.com 


MAX-TENSION TL-2 GUARDRAIL END TERMINAL, TANGENT 

• 

SHEET NO. DATE: !:!~ I ROAD

IYUNDSAY

Lindsay Transportation Solutions , 180 Ri ve r Rd., Rio Vista CA. 94571 , 888-800-3691 2 OF 2 www.theroadzipper.com