1200 New Jersey Ave., SE

Washington, D.C. 20590 

February 14, 20 18 In Reply Refer To: 

HSST-1 /B-297 

Mr. Russell Hood 

Safe Barriers Pte. Ltd. 

PO Box 148 Novena Post Office 

Singapore 913017 

Dear Mr. Hood: 

This letter is in response to your October 9, 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 FHW A letter of eligibility is 

assigned FHW A control number B-297 and is valid until a subsequent letter is issued by FHW A 

that expressly references this device. 

Decision 

The following device is eligible within the length-of-need, with details provided in the form 

which is attached as an integral part of this letter: 

• Defender Barrier 100 HC 

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 AASHTO' s MASH. Therefore, the device is eligible for 

reimbursement under the Federal-aid highway program if installed under the range oftested 

conditions. 

Name of system: Defender Barrier 100 HC 

Type of system: Longitudinal Barrier 

Test Level: MASH Test Level 4 (TL4) 

Testing conducted by: Holmes Solutions 

Date of request: October 8, 2017 

Date initially acknowledged: October 15, 2017 

FHW A concurs with the recommendation of the accredited crash testing laboratory on the 

attached form. Though the laboratory conducted Test 3-21 Transition test for an attachment 

between test article and an attenuator and included this test in this submission, this eligibility 

letter is for barrier length of need only. 

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 

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 
3 

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 FHWA 

. control number B-297 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 6 

Request for Federal Aid Reimbursement Eligibility 

of Highway Safety Hardware 

... 

QJ

....

.... 

·e 

Date of Request: October 4, 2017 r- New (' Resubmission I 

Name: Russell Hood 

Com pany: Safe Barriers Pte. Ltd. - Address: PO Box 148, Novena Post Office, Singapore 913017 .0 

:::J 

Ill Co untry : Singapore 

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 I! - ! - ! I 

System Type Submission Type Device Name / Variant Testing Criterion Test 

Level 

'B': Rigid/Semi-Rigid Barriers 

(Roadside, Median, Bridge 

Railinasl 

(e Physical Crash Testing 

(' Engineering Analysis 

Defender Barrier 100HC 

AASHTO MASH TL4 

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

that the product(s) was (were) tested in conform ity 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: Russell Hood Same as Submitter t8J 

Company Name: Safe Barriers Pte. Ltd. Same as Submitter t8J 

Address: PO Box 148, Novena Post Office, Singapore 913017 Same as Submitter t8J 

Country: Singapore Same as Submitter t8J 

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

Eligibility Process for Safety Hardware Devices' document. 

Holmes Solutions performs crash testing activities for Safe Barriers Pte. Ltd. For the completion of these services, 

Holmes Solutions receive payment in the form of professional fees. In no circumstance are these fees received 

linked to the performance of the product not the outcome of the tests. In accordance with the requirements of 

Holmes Solutions ISO 17025 accreditation, all testing activities are completed free from undue commercial 

influence. 

Holmes Solutions does not have, nor ever had, any financial interest in Safe Barriers or any of the products that 

they sell. Holmes Solutions does not receive and research funding or other forms of payment from Safe Barriers. 

Holmes Solutions have no business ownership or investment interest in Safe Barriers. No licensing agreements 

exist between Holmes Solutions and Safe Barriers. 
Version 10.0 (05/16) 

Page 2 of 6 

PRODUCT DESCRIPTION 

(e New Hardware or 

Significant Modification

(' Modification to 

Existing Hardware 

The Defender BarrierTM 100 HC (High Containment) is an anchored Test Level 4 longitudinal steel temporary 

barrier system with an integrated Test Level 3 transition consisting of : 

Steel Barrier Segments - Barrier segments are manufactured from Q235B grade steel with a nominal 3.0mm 

wall thickness. Each barrier measures 3960mm (155.9") long x 800mm (31.4") high x 680mm (26.7") wide and 

have a dry weight of 303kg (668.1 lbs). Each of the steel barriers connect together via interlocking flanges and a 

steel galvanized connecting pin at each end. The installed length of each barrier segment is 3900mm (153.5"). 

The two lifting points for the barrier are approximately 1350mm (53.15") apart. 

Connecting Pins - Galvanized connecting pins connecting the barrier segments are manufactured from Q235B 

steel and measure 30mm (1.18") diameter x 550mm (21 .6") long. The top of the pin has a 50mm (2") wide x 

9.5mm (0.37") thick plate welded 5mm down from the top end of the bar. Pins are fitted vertically down 

through interlocking lugs of the barrier segment forming a hinge type joint. 

Ground Anchor Pins - The ground anchor pins that anchor the barrier segments are manufactured from Q235B 

steel and measure 30mm (1 .18") diameter x 500mm (19.68"). The top of the pin has a 60mm (2.36") wide x 

20mm (0.78") thick plate welded 5mm down from the top end of the bar. Pins are fitted vertically down 

through purpose made holes for the ground anchor pins, which also function as drain holes. The ground 

anchor pins are not galvanized. The Defender BarrierTM 100 HC is anchored every 48.15m with 2 ground anchor 

pins, 1 ground anchor pin on each side of the barrier. 

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: Emerson Ryder 

Digitally signed by Emerson Ryder 

Date: 2018.02.09 15:44:12 +13'00' Engineer Signature: Emerson Ryder 

Address: level 2, 254 Montreal Street, Christchurch Same as Submitter D 

Country: New Zealand Same as Submitter D 

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

Page 3 of 6 

Required Test 

Number 

Narrative 

Description 

Evaluation 

Results 

4-10 (11 00C) 

Holmes Crash Test No. 131393.3-10 was 

performed on 29 March 2017. The Defender 

BarrierTM 100 HC successfully contained and 

redirected the 11 00c test vehicle impacting 

the test article at 24.9 degrees and a 

velocity of 97.4 km/h (60.5 mph). Maximum 

dynamic deflection was 1.80m (70.9"). 

The test vehicle impacted the test 

installation 300mm upstream of barrier joint 

9B. The CIP was chosen to maximize the 

potential to snag a wheel on the adjoining 

barriers and also to increase the OIV. 

The test article was anchored with 2 ground 

anchor pins (1 each side) at barrier 7 and 

barrier 19, with a distance of 48.1 Sm 

between anchors. 

The test article was anchored to 150mm (6") 

asphalt over 150mm (6") compacted subbase. 

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 trajectory remained within 

acceptable limits. 

PASS 
Version 10.0 (05/16) 

Page 4 of 6 

Required Test 

Number 

Narrative 

Description 

Evaluation 

Results 

4-11 (2270P) 

Holmes Crash Test No. 131393.3-11 was 

performed on 15 February 2017. The 

Defender BarrierT" 100 HC successfully 

contained and redirected the 2270p test 

vehicle impacting the test article at 24.8 

degrees and a velocity of 100.5 km/h (62.4 

mph). Maximum dynamic deflection was 

2.3m (90.5"). 

The test vehicle impacted the test 

installation 400mm upstream of barrier joint 

11 B. The CIP was chosen to test the 

containment and vehicle stability of the 

vehicle, while also imparting the most 

amount of load on the connection detail. 

The test article was anchored with 2 ground 

anchor pins (1 each side) at barrier 7 and 

barrier 19, with a distance of 48.15m 

between anchors. 

The test article was anchored to 150mm (6") 

asphalt over 150mm (6") compacted subbase. 

No debris or detached elements penetrated 

or showed potential to penetrate the 

occupant compartment. No fragments 

were distributed outside the 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 with 

acceptable limits. 

PASS 
Version 10.0 (05/16) 

Page 5 of 6 

4-12 (1 0000S) 

Holmes Crash Test No. 131393.4-12 was 

performed on 20 June 2017. The Defender 

BarrierTM 100 HC successfully contained and 

redirected the 1 0000S test vehicle 

impacting the test article at 14.9 degrees 

and a velocity of 90.2 km/h (56.0 mph). 

Maximum dynamic deflection was 2.47m 

(97.2"). 

The test vehicle impacted the test 

installation l .0m upstream of barrier joint 

9B. The CIP was chosen to test the 

containment and vehicle stability of the 

vehicle, while also imparting the most 

amount of load on the connection detail. 

The test article was anchored with 2 ground 

anchor pins (1 each side) at barrier 7 and 

barrier 19, with a distance of 48.1 Sm 

between anchors. 

The test article was anchored to 150mm (6") 

asphalt over 150mm (6") compacted subbase. 

No debris or detached elements penetrated 

or showed potential to penetrate the 

occupant compartment. No fragments 

were distributed outside the 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 with 

acceptable limits. 

PASS 

4-20 (1100() Non-Relevant Test, not conducted 

4-21 (2270P) Non-Relevant Test, not conducted 

4-22 (1 0000S) Non-Relevant Test, not conducted 

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.) : 
Version 10.0 (05/16) 

Page 6 of 6 

Laboratory Name: Holmes Solutions 

Laboratory Signature: Digitally signed by Emerson Ryder Emerson Ryder Date: 2018.02.09 15:46:22 +13'00' 

Address: level 2, 254 Montreal Street, Christchurch Same as Submitter D 

Country: New Zealand Same as Submitter D 

Accreditation Certificate 

Number and Dates of current 

Accreditation period : 

7559 

1022 

23 July 2009 to present day 

NZS ISO/IEC 17025:2005 

Submit Form 

ATTACHMENTS 

Attach to this form: 

l) 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 

Num ber Date Key Words 
--------

11,0mCIP 

- ,,,---- ,,.................. 4 ,Hm 

VCJTIOX 

.... 

~~ 

~ ... ... ......',, 

' ' 

' ',, 

Test Article: Safe Barriers STBS Defender -100 

Total Lenqth 78.0 m 

Keij Elements - Barrier 

Description 

Length of Barrier Installation 

Height 

Lenqth of Barrier Seqments 

Test Vehicle 

Designation 

Make/Model 

Dimensions (LxWxH) 

Curb Wt 

Test Inertial Wt 

Gross Static 

Impact Conditions 

Speed 

Angle 

Impact Point 

Exit Conditions 

Exit Speed: 

Exit Anqle: 

Test 4-10 

Ground Anchored STBS 

78.0 m length of need 

0.80 m 

3.9m 

1100C 

Nissan Tiida 

4375 mm x 1700 mm x 1560 mm 

1082.5 kg 

1087.5 kg 

1162.5 k 

97.4 km/h 

24.9 degrees 

300 mm upstream of barrier ioint 98 

46.8 km/h 

11° Est 

Test Number 131393.4-10HC 

Test Date 29 March 2017 

SO m 

Post Impact Vehicle Behaviour 

Vehicle Stability 

Sto 

Vehicle Pocketin 

Occupant Impact Velocitij (mis) 

Longitudinal 

Lateral (optional 

Occupant Ride-down Deceleration 

X-direction (g) 

Y-direction (g) 

THIV (optional) (m/s) 

PHO (optional) (g) 

ASI (optional 

Test Article Deflections 

Dynamic 

Permanent 

Workinq Width 

Vehicle Damage Exterior 

VOS 

CDC 

Maximum Deformation 

Good 

61.0 m 

None 

None 

0.1220 sec ondr. right ridL' of 11'tL"rior 

4.1 

4.6 

-3.1 (0.1415 - 0.1515 SL'C011d 0 . ) 

-5.9 (0.3616 - 0.3716 'L'c.011dr;) 

6.6 

6.1 (0.3559 · 0.3659 --;vco11dc) 

1.01 f0.0242 - 0.0742 .eco11 d-: 

Minor 

1.80 rn 

1.60 Ill 

1.80 Ill 

11 FL-2 

11LFEE2 

90 mm 

131Yl'.< Ut'W.U/1/[v1.?. ) 

l'<tq• l'l nt 73 
Vehicle Sna 

Vehicle Pocketin 

0.00 s 0.16 s 0.32 s 0.48 s 0.64 r 

85 m From CIP 

,xlT IOK 

10 m 

Test Article: Safe Barriers Ballasted STBS - Defender 100 

Total Lenath 97.5 m 

Ke1,1 Elements - Barrier 

Description 

Length of Barrier Installation 

Height 

Lenath of Barrier Seaments 

Test Vehicle 

Designation 

Make/Model 

Dimensions (LxWxH) 

Curb Wt 

Test Inertial Wt 

Gross Static 

Impact Conditions 

Speed 

Angle 

Impact Point 

Exit Conditions 

Exit Speed: 29 km/h 

Exit Anale: 6.0° 

Test Number 131393.4-11HC 

Test Date 15 Februan-1 2017 

Test 4-11 

Ground Anchored STBS 

97.6 m length of need 

0.80 m 

3.9 m 

2270P 

Dodge Ram 1500 Quad Cab 

6810 mm x 2016 mm x 1886 mm 

2230.0 kg 

2266.0 kg 

2266.0 k 

100.6 km/h 

24.8 degrees 

400 mm upstream of barrier ioint 118 

Post Impact Vehicle Behaviour 

Vehicle Stability 

Stoppina Distance 

Occupant Impact Velocit1,1 (m/s) 

Longitudinal 

Lateral foptional 

Occupant Ride-down Deceleration 

X-direction (g) 

Y-d irection (g) 

THIV (optional) (m/s) 

PHD (optional) (g) 

ASI [optional 

Test Article Deflections 

Dynamic 

Permanent 

Workina Width 

Vehicle Damage Exterior 

VDS 

CDC 

Maximum Deformation 

Good 

86.0 Ill 

None 

None 

0.1484 r:econdG right ridl· of ,nt<.,rior 

3.7 

3.7 

-11.9 (0.1717 - 0.1817 ~1.'Cor•dc:) 

-6.4 (0.7231 - 0 .7331 rvco11dr) 

6.3 

11.9 (0. 1717 · 0.1817 '.:UCul d,;) 

0.61 f0. 0366 - 0.0865 rc:co11d~ 

Moderate 

2.30 Ill 

1.96 m 

2.30 Ill 

11FL-2 

11LFEE2 

165 mm 

UU'J'< 11;,1~,' 11/1/I ,1 ?) 

I'· 1qn ,'H ot 13 
0.00 s 

Test Article: 

Total LenQth 

..,. \ 

'JI 

Ke~ Elements - Barrier 

Description 

Length of Barrier Installation 

Height 

Lenqth of Barrier Seqments 

Test Vehicle 

Designation 

Make/Model 

Dimensions (LxWxH) 

Curb Wt 

Test Inertial Wt 

Gross Static 

Impact Conditions 

Speed 

Angle 

Impact Point 

Exit Conditions 

Exit Speed: 

Exit Anqle: 

Test Number 

Test Date 

0.25 s 0.50 s 0.75 s 

_;~, 

•':\-- I 

''( 

,J ' J----,.,. 

- ~l \ 

~ ~ ~ -i~l 

, J I 

126 m From CIP 

Safe Barriers Ballasted STBS - Defender 100 

97.5 m 

Test 4-12 

Ground Anchored STBS 

97.5 m length of need 

0.80 m 

3.9 m 

10000S 

Hine Ranger 

9980 mm x 2490 mm x 3195 mm 

6160.0 kg 

10044.0 kg 

10044.0 k 

90.2 km/h 

14.9 degrees 

1.0 m upstream of barrier 98 

48 km/h 

3.0° Est 

131393. 4-12HC 

20 June 2017 

Post Impact Vehicle Behaviour 

Vehicle Stability 

Ste 

Vehicle Pocketin 

Occupant Impact Velocit~ (m/s) 

Longitudinal 

Lateral r optional 

Occupant Ride-down Deceleration 

X-direction (g) 

Y-direction (g) 

THIV (optional) (m/s) 

PHD (optional) (g) 

ASI roptional 

Test Article Deflections 

Dynamic 

Permanent 

Workinq Width 

Vehicle Damage Exterior 

VDS 

CDC 

Maximum Deformation 

·, ,~;! ', •! " I 

Good 

126.0 m 

None 

None 

1.0 s 

Fln I Resting Position 

"!7 1 

~-~JI 

0.3139 seconds right side of interior 

1.4 

1.9 

-3.6 (0.5231 - 0.5331 seconds) 

-2.4 (0.8533 - 0.8633 seconds) 

2.4 

3.7 (1.2407 - 1.2507 seconds) 

0.31 r 6.6370 - 6.6870 seconds 

Moderate 

2.47 m 

1.82 m 

2.63 m 

11FL-1 

11LFEE1 

100 mm 

131393.02RP.0717(v1.2) 

Page 37 of 73 
d 

[200] 

""""lo ~ o nc"!.., 

' ' fl) ' ' fl) ' ' 

,.,, rs r -Y n nn 

Effective Barrier Length 3900mm 

f :s: .•:_si_ :s: ! 

[39::i~J 

Steel Barrier Segment 

0100HC 

SHEET NO. DATE: 

www.safebarriers.com 1 of 6 4 Oct 17