LS-1 

CONT. 

NW I 0 1988 

REFER TO: 

MNG-14 

F. Ii. Fouad, P.E., Ph.D. 

Sherman International, Inc. 

Pole Division 

P.O. Box 1926 

Birmingham, Alabama 35201 

Dear Dr. Fouad: 

In your October 3 letter to Mr. Thomas 0. Will&t you requested. FHWA 

acceptance for use on Federal-aid projects of several fiberglass luminaire 

support poles manufactured by your company. This request was submitted 

subsequent to our June 15, 1988, acceptance of Sherman International 

Pole MB36-D-50-S6. Your current request is that the test~results for that 

pole be extrapolated to indicate acceptable performance of the 62 poles listed 

in the attachment to your letter. 

The primary factors in determining the acceptability of your poles are the 

pole diameter and the thickness of the fiberglass in the matrix at bumper 

height. The accepted pole had a diameter of 10.44 inches (extrapolated from 

the given 10.77-inch groundline diameter and the assumed 4.41-inch top 

diameter) and a cross section made up of three 0.05-inch layers of fiberglass 

mats (each mat has a nominal effective width of 37.5 inches, yielding a gross 

cross-sectional area of 5.63 square inches.) Sixteen poles have larger 

diameters with the same cross-sectional area of fiberglass, giving a maximum 

2-percent increase in net area through the hand hole. These 16 poles can be 

expected to offer approximately the same resistance to impact as the tested 

pole. Of the 45 poles with lesser diameters, 23 have cross-sectional areas of 

1.88 square inches or 3.75 square inches, and 38 have the same area as the 

tested pole. The poles of lesser cross-sectional area of fiberglass are 

significantly weaker than the tested pole and should breakaway in an 

acceptable manner. The remaining poles, those with reduced diameter and the 

same cross-sectional area of fiberglass, are worthy of further discussion. 

The reduced pole diameter and constant amount of glass fiber in the cross 

section combine to significantly increase the stiffness of the remaining 

poles. In your letter you suggest that the 4-inch wide hand hole, which is 

located a minimum of 12 inches above the ground line, reduces the cross 

section by a greater percentage in smaller diameter poles than it does in the 

tested pole. We agree with this conclusion. The cross-sectional area of the 

tested pole is reduced approximately 12 percent at the location of the access 

panel. The cross-sectional area of a representative small diameter pole, 

number TB30-B-50, is reduced by approximately 15.5 percent. The result of 

this is that the smaller diameter poles have less effective cross-sectional 

area of fiberglass than the tested pole. We note in your catalog, however, 

that the $-inch wide hand hole is "optional", the standard hole bejng 

2 l/2 inches wide. Since the test pole featured a 4-inch hand hole, the 

2 l/2-inch hand hole would not be acceptable in breakaway poles unTess 

confirmed with further crash testing. 
U-1 

CONT. 

On the basis of the information you have provided and our analysis described 

above, we find the 62 poles identified in the enclosed list meet the 

requirements of both the 1975 and 1985 AASHTO Standard Specification for 

Structural Supports for Highway Signs, Luminaires and Traffic Signals and wi?l 

be acceptable for use on Federal-aid highway projects when requested by a 

highway agency, provided they contain a 4-inch hand hole centered 

approximately at the tested height of 18 inches. This acceptance is limited 

to the breakaway characteristics of the poles and does not cover their 

structural features. Presumably you will supply potential users with 

sufficient information on structural design and installation requirements to 

ensure proper pole performance. 

We anticipate that the States will require certification from Sherman 

International that the poles furnished have essentially the same composition, 

mechanical properties, and geometry as the tested pole or the poles described 

on the enclosed list and that they will meet specified breakaway requirements. 

Sincerely yours, 

L. A.Staron 

Chief, Federal-Aid and Design Division 

Enclosure 
~,: El LS-1 

I 

JUN 1 5 1988 

REFER TO: 

HNG-14 

Fouad H. Fouad, Ph.D., P.E. ‘. _., . . : 

Sherman International Incorporation 

P-0. Box 1926 

Birmingham, Alabama 35201 

Oear Mr. Fouad: 

Your March 18 letter to Mr. Willett requesting acceptance for use on 

Federal-aid projects of a fiberglass pole manufactured by your company and the 

supplemental information you forwarded in April and in June has been reviewed. 

In support of this request, you submitted a copy of a report detailing the 

full-scale crash testing that was conducted. The report, FHWA/RD-87-065, 

Fiberglass Luminaire Supports, was prepared by Mobility Systems and Equipment 

Company under Contract No. DTFH61-86-Z-00073. YQU also submitted information 

on the mechanical properties of spun fiberglass reinforced plastic (FRP) 

laminate, a description of the spun pole manufacturing process, engineering 

design calculations for the tested pole, and a shop drawing of the tested pole 

(enclosed). 

Two identical test poles were impacted by 1,800-pound Volkswagen Rabbits at 

20 and 60 m.p.h. The tested poles are currently catalogued as MB 36-D-50-56, 

but were identified as XHD112-105-H at the time the testing was done. They 

each had a total length of 34 feet, 5 inches and were embedded 5 feet into the 

ground in an S-l (strong) soil. Their diameters decreased from 10.6 inches at 

the ground line to 4.4 inches at the top. Their wall thicknesses varied from 

.38 inches at ground line to .13 inches at the top. The total weight of each 

tested installation, including a 6-foot mast arm with a 50-pound weight, was 

193 pounds. 

In the 20 m.p.h. test, the longitudinal occupant impact velocity was 14.4 feet 

per second, slightly below the 15 feet per second maximum suggested in 

NCHRP Report 230. The 60 m.p.h. test resulted in a vehicular change in 

velocity of 10.3 feet per second, very near the desirable change in velocity 

of 10 feet per second recotmaended in the 1985 AASHTO Standard Specifications 

for Structural Supports for Highway Signs, Luminaires and Traffic Signals. It 

is noted, however, that, in the high speed test, the pole impacted the roof of 

the vehicle before it broke away, resulting in deformation of the passenger 

compartment. This gives us some concern, but we consider the degree of 

occupant compartment intrusion to be acceptable. 
a LS-1 

CONT 

2 

Therefore, based on the information in the test report, we concur that your 

fiberglass pole MB 36-D-50-56 (previously XHDllZ - 105-H) meets current FHWA 

breakaway requirements and those in the 1985 AASHTO Standard Specifications for 

Structural Supports for Highway Signs, Luminaires, and Traffic Signals. 

Thus, it will be acceptable for use on Federal-aid projects if proposed by a 

State highway agency. .'. 

Sincerely yours, 

d . LT. /dcLL. A. Staron 

Chief, Federal-Aid and Design Division 

Enclosure 

Federal Highway Administration 

HNG-14:DPowers/NArtimovich:gt:t+14-88:61320 

copies to: 

Regional Federal Highway Administrators (w/enclosure) 

HNG-1 HNG-10 HNG-14 Reader 3206 

Reader, 3212 Reader, 3128 File, 3128 
SHAFT INFORMATJQN 

n 

IpPA_4u_myelll(. 

CM LmGTH3633-i. _ll_n 

slti 

DLOR Ml. __ 

:mnR_____ 

oJJ”E -3-w 

CmPLlNo --u 

SUE -a 

- - 

elm. -- 

‘%c __- 

FEDERAL HW .dM, 

CAT. NO. ~835-D-yL-s6 

IANTI [ma MIIKRRI SPECS WIND VEL.100 e I.3 

1 HUWBERl b+‘pPn Bll 67 b/9/0’ TOT. LENGTH ?4’-5’ LUM. WEIGHT 50 a 

iv.1 DITE I BY I IEwaKS EMBED, DEPTH S’-0’ LUW. EPA 4 SD FT 

I I I TIP DIA. 4~1’ TDT. DEFL. 153 X 

WEIGHT 1x7 UL BY RUIUILE lee-@@ 
EXHIBIT 1 

LS-I CONT. 

Sheet 1 of 2 

LIST OF POLES SUBMITTED FOR APPROVAL 

SHERMAN POLE DIVISION 

CATALOG SHAFT G.L. # OF 

NUMBER LENGTH O.D. GLASS AREA 

# (FT) (IN) LAYERS (IN" 2) 

MB23-D-50-S6 23.00 8.51 

MB30-D-50-S6 29.58 9.72 

MB35-D-50-S6 34.42 10.77 

MB36-D-50-S6 36.15 11.14 

MB23-D-75-S6 23.00 0.51 

MB30-D-75-S6 29.58 9.72 

MB36-D-75-S6 36.15 11.14 

MB23-D-50-S6 23.00 8.51 

MB30-D-50-D6 29.58 9.72 

MB23-D-75-D6 23.00 8.51 

MB30-D-75-D6 29.58 9.72 

MB23-D-50-S8 23.00 8.51 

MB30-D-50-S8 29.58 9,.72 

MD33-F-50-S8 32.88 11.14 

MB39-F-50-S8 39.44 12.56 

MB33-F-75-S8 32.88 11.14 

MB39-F-75-S8 39.44 12.56 

MB23-D-50-D8 23.00 8.51 

MB33-F-50-D8 32.88 11.14 

MB23-D-75-DS 23.00 8.51 

MB33-F-75-D8 32.88 11.14 

MB23-D-50-SlO 23.00 8.51 

MB30-D-50-SlO 29.58 9.72 

MB33-F-50-S10 32.88 11.14 

MB23-D-50-DlO 23.00 8.51 

MB23-D-75-DlO 23.00 8.51 

: 

3 

3 

i 

3 

2 

3 

3 

3 

: 

3 

3 

3 

3 

3 

3 

3 

3 

: 

3 

3 

3 

3.75 

5.63 

5_63(Pole tested by 

5.63 FHWA) 

5.63 

5.63 

5.63 

3.75 

5.63 

5.63 

5.63 

3.75 

5.63 

5.63 

5.63 

5.63 

5.63 

5.63 

5.63 

5.63 

5.63 

5.63 

5.63 

5.63 

5.63 

5.63 
LS-1 CONT. 

Sheet 2 of 2 

LIST OF POLES SUBMITTED FOR APPROVAL CONT'D. 

SHERMAN POLE DIVISION 

CATALOG SHAFT G.L. # OF 

NUMBER LENGTH O.D. GLASS AREA 

# (FT) (IN) LAYERS (IN" 2) 

SB16-C-50 16.48 6.61 

SB20-C-50 19.75 7.10 

SB26-C-50 26.31 8.30 

SB30-C-50 29.58 9.01 

SB36-C-50 36.15 10.43 

SB39-C-50 39.44 11.14 

SB46-C-50 45.98 12.34 

SB16-D-50-D2 16.48 7.32 

SBZO-D-50-D2 19.75 7.81 

SB26-D-50-D2 26.31 9.01 

SB30-D-50-D2 29.58 9.72 

SB36-D-50-D2 36.15 11.14 

SB39-D-50-D2 39.44 11.85 

TB13-B-50 13.19 5.20 

TB16-B-50 16.48 5.91 

TB20-B-50 19.75 6.40 

TB26-B-50 26.31 7.60 

TB30-B-50 29.58 8.31 

TB36-B-50 36.15 10.43 

TB20-D-100 19.71 7.81 

TB26-D-100 26.31 9.01 

TB30-D-100 29.58 9.72 

TB36-D-100 36.15 11.14 

TB26-D-200 26.31 9.01 

TB30-D-200 29.58 9.72 

TB29-F-300 29.58 9.72 

MB23-D-50-S4 23.00 8.51 

MB30-D-50-S4 29.58 9.72 

MB36-D-50-S4 36.15 11.15 

MB23-D-75-S4 23.00 8.51 

MB30-D-75-54 29.58 9.72 

MB36-D-75-S4 36.15 11.14 

MB23-D-50-D4 23.00 8.51 

MB30-D-50-S4 29.58 9.72 

MB23-D-75-D4 23.00 8.51 

MB30-D-75-D4 29.58 9.72 

2 

2 

2 

2 

i 

3 

2 

2 

2 

: 

3 

1 

1 

2 

2 

3 

3 

2 

2 

: 

2 

3' 

2 

2 

3 

2 

2 

3 

2 

3 

: 

3.15 

3.75 

3.75 

3.75 

5.63 

5.63 

5.63 

3.75 

3.75 

3.75 

5.63 

5.63 

5.63 

1.88 

1.88 

3.75 

3.75 

5.63 

5.63 

3.75 

3.75 

5.63 

5.63 

3.15 

5.63 

5.63 

3.75 

3.75 

5.63 

3.75 

3.75 

5.63 

3.75 

5.63 

3.75 

5.63 
EXHIBIT 2 Is-1 CONT. 

Sheet 1 of 3 

TECHNICAL INFORMATION 

SPUN FIBERGLASS REINFORCED PLASTIC POLES 

I FATERIALS 

The two main components used in the manufacturing of the 

spun FRP pole are the polyester resin and the fiberglass 

fabric reinforcement. In addition a non-structural surfacing veil (mat) is used to provide protection to the 

surface of the pole. The type, trade name, and some of 

the physical characteristics of the basic materials used 

are given herein: 

(A) Polyester Resin 

Type: Unsaturated polyester resin solutions 

Manufacturer: GLS Fiberglass 

Trade Name: GLS 1002-MJC 

Viscosity: #3 60 rpm; 400-500 cps 

Unit Weight: 9.1 lbs/gallon; specific gravity = 1.10 

Vapor Density: Heavier than air 

Evaporation Rate: Slower than ether 

Boiling Range: 290-295 OF 

Percentage Volatile by Volume: 47.4% 

Flashpoint: 90°F ; LEL = 1.1% 

Gel Time: (mm:ss) = 16:OO 

Cure Time: (mm:ss) = 27:00 

Peak Exotherm = 357 OF 

(B) Glass Fabric 

Type: "E" glass (electrical grade); undirectional roving 

Manufacturer & Class: Syncoglas V672 or Syncoglas 42RKfM300 

Weight: 29 oz./sq.yd. 

Specific Gravity: = 2.54 

Thickness: = .05 in./layer 

(C) Surfacinq Veil 

Type: "C" glass (chemical grade) 

Manufacturer & Class: Nicofibers Surmat 100 

Weight: =2.2 oz./sq.yd. 

Thickness: = .025 in-/layer 
LS-I CONT. 

Sheet 2 Of 3 

II I.IECHAIgICAL PROPERTIES 

Listed below are typical physical and mechanical properties 

of the composite FRP laminate used in pole construction. 

The properties are based on a laminate that is composed of 

40% glass and 60% polyester resin. 

Specific Gravity: 1.7 

Tensile Strength (psi) 36,000 

Compressive Strength (psi) 30,000 

Flexural strength (psi) 35,000 

Shear Strength (psi) 6,000 

Elastic Hodulus (psi) 2,700,OOO 

Poisson's Ratio 0.16 
LS-1 CONT. 

Sheet 3 of 3 

III MANUFACTURING PROCESS 

Our manufacturing process may be summarized as follows: 

1) 

2) 

3) 

4) 

5) 

6) 

7) 

A predetermined number of glass fabric layers snd a 

surfacing veil are placed in a hollow steel mold. 

The mold is rotated slowly so the materials will 

unwind and conform smoothly to the wall of the mold. 

The mold is then rotated at a high speed (1200-1500 

rpm) during which the polyester resin and special 

catalyst are injected into the mold. 

During spinning the resin is being cured using 

radiant heaters which keep the mold at an elevated 

temperature. 

After the laminate achieves complete saturation the 

speed of the mold is reduced while the resin still 

continues to cure. 

The finished pole shaft is removed from the mold after 

completion of curing. 

The shaft is then trimmed and subjected to the special 

fabrication operations as required per shop drawings. 

Notes on Pole Manufacturinq 

1) 

2) 

3) 

4) 

5) 

The resin/glass fiber ratio (by weight) for the main 

reinforcing glass fabric is approximately 0.60. 

The resin/glass fiber ratio for the surfacing veil is 

approximately 0.90. 

The resin gel time varies between 15 to 20 minutes. 

The gel time is established and varied by controlling 

the dosage of MERP,(peroxide catalyst) 

The curing period is approximately as long as the gel 

time.