U.S. Deportment 

of Transportation 

Federal Highway 

Administration 

Mr. Henry A. Ross 

Director of Governrnent Relations 

Plasticade 

7700 N. Austin Avenue 

Skokie, Illinois 60077 

Dear Mr. Ross: 

February 18, 2014 

1200 New Jersey Ave., SE 

Washington, D.C. 20590 

In Reply Refer To: 

HSSTIWZ-328 

This letter is in response to your request for the Federal Highway Administration (FHW A) to 

review a roadside safety system for eligibility for reimbursement under the Federal-aid highway 

program. 

Name of system: 

Type of system: 

Test Level: 

Testing conducted by: 

Date of request: 

Request completed: 

Decision: 

Strongwall ADA Pedestrian Barricade I Strongwall LCD 

Longitudinal Channelizing Device and ADA compliant 

Pedestrian Barricade 

MASH Test Level III 

E-TECH Testing Services 

June 21 , 2013 

December 14, 2013 

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

integral part of this letter: 

• Plasticade Strongwall ADA compliant Pedestrian Barricade I Strongwall Longitudinal 

Channelizing Device at either 32-inch height or 40-inch height. 

Based on a review of crash test results submitted by the manufacturer certifying 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), the 

device is eligible for reimbursement under the Federal-aid highway program. Eligibility for 

reimbursement under the Federal-aid highway program does not establish approval or 

endorsement by the FHW A for any particular purpose or use. 

The FHW A, the Department of Transportation, and the United States Government do not 

endorse products or services and the issuance of a reimbursement eligibility letter is not an 

endorsement of any product or service. 
Requirements 

To be found eligible for Federal-aid funding, 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). 

Description 

The device and supporting documentation are described in the attached form, including your 

request for waiver ofMASH Tests 3-70 and 3-72. 

Summary and Standard Provisions 

Therefore, the system described and detailed in the attached form is eligible for reimbursement 

and may be installed under the range of conditions tested. 

Please note the following standard provisions that apply to FHW A eligibility letters: 

• This finding of eligibility does not cover other structural features of the systems, nor 

conformity with the Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices. 

2 

• Any changes that may influence system conformance with MASH will require a new 

reimbursement eligibility letter. 

• Should the FHW A discover that the qualification testing was flawed, that in-service 

performance reveals safety problems, or that the system is significantly different from 

the version that was crash tested, we reserve the right to modify or revoke this letter. 

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

installation 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 the MASH. 

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

number WZ-328 and 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 at our office 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. The FHW A does not become involved in issues concerning patent law. 

Patent issues, if any, are to be resolved by the applicant. 
• The Plasticade Strongwall barricades are patented products and considered 

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 . 

Enclosures 

Sincerely yours, 

Michael S. Griffith 

Director, Office of Safety Technologies 

Office of Safety 

3 
Version 7.0 (3/13) 

Page 1 of 2 

Request for Federal Aid Reimbursement Eligibility 

Of Highway Safety Hardware I' Date of Request 6/21/ 2013 r. ~ew r Resubmission 

Name: I Henry A. Ross Signature: j(~ui u a ( ..l ..-. .... . QJ ' Company: Plasticade "' I ~ 

·--· ·e: Address: 7700 N. Austin Avenue. Skokie, IL 60077 .c '- - - - - ~ Country: USA 

I I 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. 

I 

I 

I 

: 

I 

System Type I Submission Type Device Name / Variant Testing Criterion Test I 

I Level 

'WZ': Crash Worthy Work r. Physical Crash Testing Plasticade Strongwall ( ASHTO MASH TL3 

ADA Pedestrian Barricade . Zone Traffic Control Devices r FEA & V&V Analysis and Longitudinal I 

Channelizing Device I 

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 resul.ts meet the appropriate evaluation criteria in the MASH. 

Identification of the individual or organization responsible for the product: 

!Contact Name: Henry A. Ross Same as Submitter [8) 

Company Name: ;Piasticade Same as Submitter [8) 

Address: j7700 N. Austin Avenue. Skokie, IL 60077 Same as Submitter [8) 

Country: jusA Same as Submitter [8) 

PRODUCT DESCRIPTION 

I 

I 

I 

' New Hardware I 

Longitudinal Channelizing Device tha.: also meets the requirements of an ADA compliant Pedestrian Barricade'j 

CRASH TESTING 

A brief descript ion of each crash test and its result : 

Required Test Narrative 

Number Description Evaluation Results 

1---3-7-0 (-1-1 0-0-C) _ __ ___ -·----------- ----------+~ -WA-IV-ER_R_E--0-U-ES_T_E_D-t 

3-71 (11 00() impacted a double row at 98.1 km/ h at angle of 25 degrees PASS 

-------~-------------~ 3-72 (2270P) WAIVER REQUESTED , 
Version 7.0 (3/ 13) 

Page 2 of 2 

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

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

.----------------------------~--------------------------------------~ E·Tech Testing Services, Inc. 'Laboratory Name: 

1 Laboratory Contact: 

Address : 

jCountry: 

'Accreditation Certificate 

'Number and Date: 

Attach to this form: 

John F. La Turner, P.E. jsame as Submitter 0 

3617B Cincinnati Avenue, Rocklin, CA 9576S jsame as Submitter 0 

USA !same as Submitter 0 

ATTACIIMENTS 

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

support of this request. 

2) 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 key to understanding the performance of the device should also be submitted to facilitate our 

review. 

FHWA Official Business Only: 

Eligibility Letter AASHTO TF13 

Number Date Designator Key Words 
December 13, 2013 

Nicholas A. Artimovich, II 

Highway Engineer, Safety Design Team 

Office of Safety Technologies, Rm E71-322 

Federal Highway Administration 

U.S. Department ofTransportation 

1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE 

Washington, DC 20590 

RE: Draft WZ-328 

Dear Sir: 

We recently completed testing of Plasticade' s Strongwall ADA Pedestrian Barricade/Strongwall 

Longitudinal Channelizing Barricade using the recommendations in AASHTO's Manual for Assessing 

Safety Hardware (MASH). 

As recommended in MASH, longitudinal channelizing devices are tested to determine the behavior of 

the devices during and after impact with both smallllOOC (2425 lb/1100kg) and heavy 2270P (5004 

lb/2270 kg) vehicles. The risk to occupants from detached elements, fragments, or other debris is 

assessed, as well as vehicle instability. A key potential risk factor is windshield deformation or 

penetration. 

Test 90 is designed to evaluate the behavior of the devices during high speed tests, using the llOOC 

vehicle. This test is recognized as the more critical test by FHWA and, depending on results and 

device/vehicle geometry, it may be unnecessary to perform Test 91, using the 2270P vehicle. If there is 

no evidence of vehicle instability or windshield penetration in Test 90, or any belief that these would 

occur to a pickup truck in a Test 91 situation, a waiver may be requested so that the Test 91 need not be 

performed. Test 90 was performed with the Strongwall ADA Pedestrian Barricade/Strongwall 

Longitudinal Channelizing Barricade with the understanding that Test 91 could be waived with 

appropriate results. This test showed satisfactory results with no apparent vehicle instability or 

windshield deformation or penetration. Based on the 1100C results and the following analysis of both 

vehicles' geometry, we request a waiver for Test 91. Here is a summary of the 1100C and 2270P vehicle 

geometries: 

7700 N. Austin Ave., Skokie, IL 60077 www.plasticade.com (800) 772-0355 Fax (847) 966-8074 
llOOC Vehide Paramete1·s 

E-l"EC11Teu # 

Test Desipation 

llab 

llodtl 

4123/2013 

76.4740-001 

MASH OS Te=tl-71 

Kia 

llOOC 

Year 1007 

Y I X KNADE123776:!:734S6 

Tlr. Siz.e: 13SnOIU4 

Odometer RtadJD& 61.7S3 

Enpe Type 4 CytlAder 

Enpe Size 1.6LT 

Transmission T~-pt Masma.l 

Pn-Test DamaJt NONE 

DlliiUily Typt None 

Dumm~ S.at NrA. 

] ! :t ~ : J< 

. / . .. r:. - -~ I I . ~ ~ ---+\---· ----i--1 

1 L .. _- . il~-~ . ....., , ~- - -: - ·· - . - • . 'r· ":"--' 

in. (em) in. 

A ~ 1160.0 I J I n.t> I 

B ~ ~ K ~ c ~ 1240.0 I L @] 

Dummy !\las.. 0.0 1b 0.0 (k&) D ~ ~ :.\I ~ 

LF 

LR 

T td Intrtiall\bs_'l Distribution 

lb 

78!1.2 .358 

4311.7 !!Ill 

ln 

i\ll 

1\IT 

RF 

RR 

lb 

1496 

436.5 

Cw·b 

lb (lq) 

ISOJ.S 68:! 

8576 319 

2l611 1071 

Ck3) 

340 

191 

E 

F 

G 

H 

~ 

~ 

~ 

~ \'Hidtl\lass 

Test lnntial 

Ib (k&) 

1538.8 6!18 

815 2 ' 3!17 

2414.0 lOllS 

~ N @] 

l mo I 0 ~ 

~ p @] 

~ Q [§] 

G.-oss Static 

lb (q) 

1538.8 69S 

&75.2 3!17 

'Z414.() lOllS 

(em) 

~ 

~ 

~ 

~ 

lt47.o 1 

lt4S.O I 

~ 

~ 

7700 N. Austin Ave., Skokie, ll 60077 www.plasticade.com {800) 772-0355 Fax {847) 966-8074 
2270P Vehicle Parameters . --- - ·--· .. ··--·· ... 

Test Date 512012011 Yeblclc Geometry Dimensions 

E·TECH Test# 

Test Designation 

Make 

Model 

Year 

YIN 

Tire Size: 

01-3044-006 

MA~H 08lw3-35J 

Dodge 

2270P 

2005 

ID7HA18DOSS306873 

26SnORI7 

Odomrter Reading 196,199 _ o=J 

Engine Type - _! r~linder I 

Engine Size 5.7 L I 

Transmission Type _ __ A_uto_mat _ic _ __,j 

Pre-Test Damage --- ·-- "~~ .. J 

Dummy Type None I 

Dummy Seat NfA ~ 

in. 

A [7Vl 

B @] 

c 1 14o.6 J 

D ~ Dummy Man 0.0 lb 0.0 (kg) E ~ 

LF 

LR 

Test Inertial Mass Distribution 

lb (kg) lb 

1410 9 640 RF 13ij4.5 

1078.0 489 RR 1084.7 

Curb 

lb (kg) 

Ml 2828.5 1283 

M2 2105.4 955 

MT 4933.9 2238 

(kg) 

628 

492 

F ~ 

G ~ 

H 1 29.5] 

Veblcle Mass 

Test Inertial 

lb (kg) 

2795.4 1268 

2162.7 981 

4958.1 2249 

(em) in. 

I :!oo.o J Iilli 

[!2.ii- K ~ 

rj5 ~ L [E) 

~ M ["15.7 ·1 

[Uo.o N ~ 

~ 0 @] 

jt55.7 p ~ 

~ Q ~ 

Gross Static 

lb (kg) 

2795.4 1268 

2162.7 981 

4958.1 2249 

(em) 

r 105.0 1 

~ 

r· IO.GJ 

~ 

I mo ! 

I 112.0 I L--...1 

~ 

~ 

7700 N. Austin Ave., Skokie, IL 60077 www.plasticade.com (800) 772.-0355 Fax (847) 966-8074 
The height of the vehicle hood relative to the height of the test device is critical to determining the 

potential for the device to contact the windshield. The Strongwall device has a total height of 39.4 

inches. The llOOC vehicle used for the high speed small vehicle test had a height from the ground to the 

forward edge of the hood of 28.0 inches (Measurement J). The relationship of the height of the device to 

the front of the small vehicle is shown here. 

7700 N. Austin Ave., Skokie, IL 60077 www.plasticade.com (800) 772-0355 Fax (847) 966-8074 
The corresponding ground to edge of hood measurement (Measurement J) for t he 2270P vehicle in a 

Test 91 scenario is 41.3 inches. In this scenario, the hood edge would be 13.3 inches higher than the 

llOOC vehicle and would be 1.9 inches higher than the device itself. The relationship of the height of the 

device to the front of the Test 91 pickup truck is shown here: 

7700 N. Austin Ave., Skokie, IL 60077 www.plasticade.com (800) 772-0355 Fax (847) 966-8074 
7700 N. Austin Ave., Skokie, ll 60077 www.plasticade.com (800) 772-0355 Fax (847} 966-8074 
7700 N. Austin Ave., Skokie, IL 60077 www.plasticade.com (800) 772-0355 Fax (847) 966-8074 
We conclude that based on the height differential of the pickup truck to the smaller test vehicle and the 

height relationship to the test article itself, Test 90 was, in fact, the worst case test and it is unlikely that 

the performance of Test 91 would result in a different outcome. 

We request a waiver on Test 91 and issuance of WZ-328. 

Thank yo~ 

Sincert 1214 

PLASTICADE 

Henry A. Ross, Director of Government Relations 

7700 N. Austin Ave., Skokie, IL 60077 www.plasticade.com (800) 772-0355 Fax (847) 966-8074 
June 21, 2013 

Mr. MichaelS. Griffith, Director 

Office of Safety Technologies 

Federal Highway Administration 

1200 New Jersey Avenue, S.E. 

Washington, DC 20590 

Dear Sir: 

Enclosed is our request for federal-aid reimbursement eligibility for the Plasticade Strongwall ADA 

Pedestrian Barricade and Longitudinal Channelizing Device. This device was successfully crash tested by 

E-TECH Testing Services, Inc. on May 14, 2013. A copy of the test report and a DVD with various videos 

and pictures of the device and the testing process are also enclosed. 

The device tested has a panel height that measures 40 inches. We request that our WZ letter of 

eligibility specifically allow another panel height of 32 inches, consistent with the devices shown in the 

enclosed literature. As you can see, both panels use the same weighted base. 

Please let me know if any additional information is required. 

Sincerely. 

p~ 

Henry 

Director

A. 

, 

Ro;; 

Government 

a 

Relations 

~ 

7700 N. Austin Ave., Skokie, IL 60077 www .plasticade .com (800)772-0355 Fax(847) 966-8074