May 3, 20 19 

 1200 New Jersey Ave., SE

Washington, D.C. 20590 

In Reply Refer To: 

HSST-l/B-320 

Mr. Gary Lallo 

Hill and Smith, Inc. 

1000 Buckeye Park Road 

Columbus, OH 43207160 

Dear Mr. Lallo: 

This letter is in response to your October 17, 2018 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-320 and is valid until a subsequent letter is issued by FHWA 

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: 

• Zoneguard® Portable Barrier 

Scope of this Letter 

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

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

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

However, the FHW A, 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, FHWA 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 ofsystem: Zoneguard® Portable Barrier 

Type ofsystem: Portable Longitudinal Barrier 

Test Level: MASH Test Level 3 (TL3) 

Testing conducted by: Texas A&M Transportation Institute (TamTI) 

Date of request: December 31 , 2018 

FHWA concurs with the recommendation of the accredited crash testing laboratory on the 

attached form for length of need on asphalt surfaces 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 ofthe 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 crash worthiness of the system. 
3 

Standard Provisions 

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

control number B-320 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. 

• This FHWA eligibility letter is not an expression of any Agency view, position, or 

determination of validity, scope, or ownership of any intellectual property rights to a 

specific device or design. Further, this letter does not impute any distribution or licensing 

rights to the requester. This FHWA eligibility letter determination is made based solely 

on the crash-testing information submitted by the requester. The FHW A reserves the 

right to review and revoke an earlier eligibility determination after receipt of subsequent 

information related to crash testing. 

• If the 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 5 

Request for Federal Aid Reimbursement Eligibility 

of Highway Safety Hardware 

... 

cu 

·

...... 

......

.c 

e

::I 

1/'1 

Date of Request: October 17, 2018 C- New r Resubmission I 

Name: Gary Lallo 

Company: Hill & Smith, Inc. 

Address : 1000 Buckeye Park Road, Columbus, OH 43207 

Country: 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 Fl 

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 

Zoneguard® Portable 

Barrier 

AASHTO MASH TL3 

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: Gary Lallo Same as Submitter ~ 

Company Name: Hill & Smith, Inc. Same as Submitter ~ 

Address: 1000 Buckeye Park Road, Columbus, OH 43207 Same as Submitter ~ 

Country: USA Same as Submitter ~ 

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

Eligibility Process for Safety Hardware Devices' document. 

Texas A&M Transportation Institute (TTI) was contracted by Hill & Smith, Inc. to perform full-scale crash testing of 

the Zoneguard® Portable Barrier. There are no shared financial interests in the Zoneguard® Portable Barrier by 

TTI, or between Hill & Smith, Inc. and TTI, other than costs involved in the actual crash tests and reports for this 

submission to FHWA. 
Version 10.0 (05/16) 

Page 2 of 5 

PRODUCT DESCRIPTION 

(e New Hardware or 

~ Significant Modification 

(' Modification to 

Existing Hardware . 

The tested device is a proprietary temporary roadside safety barrier provided and manufactured by Hill & 

Smith, Inc. of Columbus, Ohio. The test installation consisted of five barrier units, each unit nominally 50 ft in 

length, for a total length of approximately 250 ft. Each 50 ft long barrier unit was comprised of three sections (a 

male end section, a central section, and a female end section). Each barrier section was 31 1⁄2 inches tall (without 

rubber pads) with a 27 9/16 inch wide sloped base. Each male and female end section was fitted with four 

proprietary upper interlocking U shaped channel speed joint connectors, with a sliding lock on one end. 

Engineer Name: 

Engineer Signature: 

Address: 

Country: 

Roger P. Bligh 

Digitally signed by Roger Bligh Roger Bligh Date: 2018.10.29 10:21 :44 -05'00' 

3100 SH 47, Bldg 7091, Bryan, Texas 77807 Same as Submitter D 

USA Same as Submitter D 

The Zoneguard'" barrier was installed on a 3-inch thick asphalt pad with the traffic side edge of the base 8 

inches from, and parallel to, the edge of the existing concrete apron. The barrier was secured to the asphalt 

pad with 1 1⁄4-inch diameter x 20-inch long pins every 33 ft-4 inches on center, with exception at each end of 

the installation. Other than the pins, there were no additional bolts, clamps, or adhesives securing the barrier 

to the asphalt pad. Additional details and information can be found on the drawings. 

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. 

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

Page 3 of 5 

Required Test 

Number 

Narrative 

Description 

Evaluation 

Results 

3-10 ( 11 00C) 

Test 3-10 involves a 11 00C vehicle 

impacting the test article at a target speed 

of 62 mph and a target angle of 25 degrees. 

The target CIP for the left corner of the front 

bumper was 3.6 ft upstream of the joint 

between segments 9 and 10. The results of 

the test conducted on January 23, 2018 are 

found in TTI Test Report number 690900-

HSl8. The test vehicle was traveling at an 

impact speed of 62.9 mi/has it made 

contact with the Zoneguard"' Barrier 2.7 ft 

upstream of the joint between segments 9 

and 10 at an impact angle of 24.8 degrees. 

After loss of contact with the barrier, the 

vehicle came to rest 216 ft downstream of 

the impact and 24 ft toward traffic lanes. 

The barrier contained and redirected the 

1 lO0C vehicle. The vehicle did not 

penetrate, underride, or override the 

installation. Maximum dynamic deflection 

during the test was 2.6 inches at the toe, 

and 9.7 inches at the top of the barrier, 

which was 1.0 inch inside of the original 

position of the field side toe. Maximum 

permanent deformation was 1.0 inch at the 

joint between segments 9 and 10. Working 

width was 28.6 inches at the toe (ground 

level). 

No detached elements, fragments, or other 

debris were present to penetrate or show 

potential for penetrating the occupant 

compartment, or present undue hazard to 

others in the area. 

Maximum occupant compartment 

deformation was 2.0 inches in the left front 

firewall area. The 11 00C vehicle remained 

upright during and after the collision event. 

Maximum roll and pitch angles were 13 and 

21 degrees, respectively. Longitudinal OIV 

was 18.4 ft/s, and lateral OIV was 25.3 ft/s. 

Maximum longitudinal ridedown 

acceleration was 8.0 g, and maximum lateral 

ridedown acceleration was 7.4 g. 

Maximum exterior crush to the vehicle was 

10.5 inches in the side plane at the left front 

corner just above bumper height. 

The device performed acceptably for MASH 

test 3-10. 

PASS 
Version 10.0 (05/16) 

Page 4 of 5 

Required Test 

Number 

Narrative 

Description 

Evaluation 

Results 

3-11 (2270P) 

Test 3-11 involves a 2270P vehicle 

impacting the test article at a target speed 

of 62 mph and a target angle of 25 degrees. 

The test sponsor prescribed target CIP was 

the centerline of the test vehicle aligned 

with a point 4.3 ft upstream of the pins 

adjacent to the joint between barrier 

sections 6 and 7. This was equivalent to a 

contact point by the left corner of the 

vehicle's front bumper located 11 .4 ft 

upstream of the pins adjacent to the joint 

between barrier sections 6 and 7. The 

results of the test conducted on November 

21, 2016 are found in TTI Test Report 

number 690900-HSl5. The test vehicle was 

traveling at an impact speed of 64.5 mi/h, 

and the left front corner of the bumper 

contacted the Zoneguard~ Barrier 10.8 ft 

upstream ofthe pins adjacent to the joint 

between barrier sections 6 and 7 

(equivalent to the centerline of the vehicle 

aligned 3.7 ft upstream of the pins) at an 

impact angle of 26.1 degrees. After loss of 

contact with the barrier, the vehicle came to 

rest 250 ft downstream ofthe impact and 

13 ft toward field side. 

The barrier contained and redirected the 

2270P vehicle. The vehicle did not 

penetrate, underride, or override the 

installation. Maximum dynamic deflection 

at the top of the barrier during the test was 

23.4 inches beyond the toe, and maximum 

permanent deflection was 10.0 inches at the 

toe. Working width was 50.9 inches. 

No detached elements, fragments, or other 

debris were present to penetrate or show 

potential for penetrating the occupant 

compartment, or present undue hazard to 

others in the area. 

Maximum occupant compartment 

deformation was 3.0 inches in the left 

firewall area near the toe pan. The 2270P 

vehicle remained upright during and after 

the collision event. Maximum roll and pitch 

angles were 20 and 17 degrees, 

respectively. Longitudinal OIV was 13.4 ft/s, 

and lateral OIV was 17.7 ft/s. Maximum 

longitudinal ridedown acceleration was 6.0 

g, and maximum lateral ridedown 

acceleration was 8.6 g. 

Maximum exterior crush to the vehicle was 

14.0 inches in the side plane at the left front 

corner at bumper height. 

The device performed acceptably for MASH 

test 3-11. 

PASS 
Version 10.0 (05/16) 

Page 5 of 5 

3-20 (11 00C) The product is not a transition system. Non-Relevant Test, not conducted 

3-21 (2270P) The product is not a transition system. 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.): 

Laboratory Name: Texas A&M Transportation Institute Proving Ground Laboratory 

Laboratory Signature: Digitally signed by Darrell L. Kuhn Darrell L. Kuhn Date: 2018.10.29 11 :44:45 -05 '00' 

Address: TTI, TAMU 3135, College Station, TX 77843-3135 Same as Submitter D 

Country: USA Same as Submitter D 

Accreditation Certificate 

Number and Dates of current

Accreditation period : 

ISO 17025 Laboratory 

Certificate Number: 2821.01 

Val id To: April 30, 2019 

ATTACHMENTS 

Attach to this fonn: 

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 

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

are relevant to understanding the dimensions and perfonnance of the device should also be submitted 

to facilitate our review. 

FHWA Official Business Only: 

Eligibility Letter 

Number Date Key Words 
--l

;;o 

z 

0 

0\ 

'°0 

'°

0 

0 

I 

::r: 

ifJ 

-

Vl 0.000 s 0.200 s 0.400 s 0.700 s 

EXISTING 10'-Q WIDE ASPHALT PAD - --------250' ---~1-----

150' 

12 4' rr:::::r:J-[ 13' 

> I r L_jj! -- ~ --- --i 

I ' ' - __J L Exit Path 

26.1° •• v?'

/5 

3 1· _.·( i / I 

~ Exit Angle Box, Impact Path 16.6' X 32.2' 

General Information 

Test Agency .. ... ................... Texas A&M Transportation Institute (TTI) 

Test Standard Test No ........ MASH Test 3-11 

TTI Test No ...... .................. 690900-HSl5 

Test Date ............. ....... ........ 2016-11 -21 

Test Article 

Type .. ................................. Longitudinal Portable Traffic Barrier 

Name ...... ... .... .... ... ... .... .... ... Zoneguard® Barrier 

Installation Length ...... ... ..... . 250 ft 

Material or Key Elements .. .. 15 units of 8 gauge (nominal) press-brake 

bent sheet steel, 16 ft-8 inches long, 32 

inches tall with a 279

/, s-inch wide sloped 

base 

Soil Type and Condition . .... Anchored on Asphalt, Dry 

Test Vehicle 

Type/Designation ................ 2270P 

Make and Model .............. .. . 2013 Dodge RAM 1500 Pickup 

Curb ........................ .... .. .... .. 4884 lb 

Test Inertial. ........................ 5056 lb 

N 

0 Dummy ......................... ...... No dummy 

Gross Static ........................ 5056 lb -...J 

I 

Impact Conditions 

Speed .. .... .. ............ ............. 64.5 mi/h 

Angle .. ................................ 26.1 degrees 

Location/Orientation ...... .. .... 149 inches upstream 

of joint 6-7 

Impact Severity ............ . .... .. . 136 kip-ft 

Exit Conditions 

Speed ................................. 56.8 mi/h 

Angle ......................... 3.1 degrees 

Occupant Risk Values 

Longitudinal OIV ................. 13.4 ft/s 

Lateral OIV. .. .............. 17.7 ft/s 

Longitudinal Ridedown ........ 6.0 g 

Lateral Ridedown .. ............ ..8.6 g 

THIV .. .................. .... .... ....... 24.9 km/h 

PHD ............. .. .....................9.0 g 

ASl ...................................... 1.07 

Max. 0.050-s Average 

Longitudinal ...... ... .... .... .. ..-5.6 g 

Lateral. ............................. 8.2 g 

Vertical...... .... ... ........-3.6 g 

Post-Impact Trajectory 

Stopping Distance.. .... .. ........ 250 ft downstream 

13 ft twd field side 

Vehicle Stability 

Maximum Yaw Angle .......... .. ..... 38 degrees 

Maximum Pitch Angle ................ 17 degrees 

Maximum Roll Angle ..... .. .. 20 degrees 

Vehicle Snagging ...... .. ......... .. .... No 

Vehicle Pocketing .................. .. .. No 

Test Article Deflections 

Dynamic, beyond toe .. .. ............ 23.4 inches 

Permanent, toe .......................... 10.0 inches 

Working Width .. .......................... 50.9 inches 

Vehicle Damage 

VOS ...... ............ .. ....................... 11LFQ4 

CDC ............... .. ............ .... .. .... .. .. 11 FLEW4 

Max. Exterior Deformation ...... .... 14.0 inches 

OCDI .... ... .... ... .... ... .... ... . LF0020000 

Max. Occupant Compartment 

Deformation ............................ 3.0 inches 

0 

N Figure 5.6. Summary of Results for MASH Test 3-11 on Zoneguard® Barrier Anchored with Round Headed Anchoring Pins 

-

V, 

I 

at 33 ft-4 inch Spacing, on center, on Asphalt Pavement. 
0.000 s 0.100 s 0.200 s 0.400 s 

◄ EXISTING 10'- 0 WIDE ASPHALT PAD

◄ n . ... 

►-

• 

' ' 

~,, ;

' ' ' ' •1 

• \ ~ 

General Information 

Test Agency .. .. .......... . 

Test Standard Test No ..... 

TTI Test No ....... ....... . 

Test Date .. ... ..................... . 

Test Article 

Type ................................. . 

Name ... ........ . 

Installation Length .. 

Material or Key Elements ... 

Soil Type and Condition ..... 

Test Vehicle 

Type/Designation .............. . 

N 

0 

Make and Model ............... . 

Curb .. .... ............................ . 

00 

I 

0 

\0 

Test Inertial ........ .. ............. . 

Dummy ......... .... ............ ... . 

Gross Static .......... .... .. ...... . I 

Texas A&M Transportation Institute (TTI) 

MASH Test 3-10 

690900-HSl8 

2018-01 -23 

Portable Barrier 

Zoneguard® 

250 ft 

15 sections of 8 gauge (nominal) pressbrake bent sheet steel, 16 ft-8 inches long, 

32 inches tall with a 279

/winch wide 

sloped base anchored to asphalt with 

anchors laterally spaced at 211⁄4 inches 

Placed on asphalt surface, damp 

1100C 

2010 Kia Rio 

2514Ib 

2447Ib 

165 lb 

2612Ib 

Impact Conditions 

Speed .. ....... ............. .. ........ 62.9 mi/h 

Angle .. .... .... .... ..... ... ..... .. ... . 24.8° 

Location/Orientation .. .... .... . 2.7 ft upstream of 

joint 9-10 

Impact Severity ................... 57 kip-ft 

Exit Conditions 

Speed . . ... ....... ........... 54.3 mi/h 

Angle ................................ 4.9° 

Occupant Risk Values 

Longitudinal OIV ... ... .......... 18.4 ft/s 

Lateral OIV ......................... 25.3 ft/s 

Longitudinal Ridedown ....... 8.0 g 

Lateral Ridedown .. .... .... .... . 7.4 g 

THIV .................................. 33.7 km/h 

PHD ...... .. .......... ..... ... .... .... . 8.1g 

ASI .............. ....................... 1.90 

Max. 0.050-s Average 

Longitudinal ............ ... ..... -9.0 g 

Lateral. ..... ..... .... ... ..... ...... 14.0 g 

Vertical. ..... .. .................... -5.1 g 

Post-Impact Trajectory 

Stopping Distance .. ...... . ... ... 216 ft downstream 

24 ft twd traffic 

Vehicle Stability 

Maximum Yaw Angle .. . .... 26° 

Maximum Pitch Angle .......... ..... 21 ° 

Maximum Roll Angle .. ........ ....... 13°· 

Vehicle Snagging.. .... ......... No 

Vehicle Pocketing .................... No 

Test Article Deflections 

Dynamic, at top .................. ... .... 9.7 inches 

Dynamic, at toe ......... .............. 2.6 inches 

Permanent, at toe ............. ..... .. . 1.0 inch 

Working Width.. ... . ... .... .... . 28.6 inches 

Working Width Height ............ At grade 

Vehicle Damage 

VOS .................. ............ ... ........ . 11LFQ4 

CDC .......................................... 11 FLEW3 

Max. Exterior Deformation ......... 10.5 inches 

OCDI... . ............ .. .. ....... LF0020000 

Max. Occupant Compartment 

Deformation ... 2.0 inches 

Figure 5.6. Summary of Results for MASH Test 3-10 on Zoneguard® Barrier.