November 19, 2019 

 1200 New Jersey Ave., SE

  Washington, D.C. 20590

In Reply Refer To: 

HSST-1/B-325 

Mr. Ben Powell 

180 Ram Forest Rd. 

Stouffville, Ontario, Canada 

Dear Mr. Powell: 

This letter is in response to your April 12, 2019 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-325 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: 

• FLUX 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 FHW A, the Department of Transportation, 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 of tested 

conditions. 

Name of system: FLUX Barrier 

Type of system: Longitudinal Barrier 

Test Level: MASH Test Level 3 (TL3) 

Testing conducted by: TamTI 

Date of request: April 12, 2019 

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

attached form 

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 

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 B-325 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 FHW A 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 FHW A 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. 

Sincerely, 

~ft~ 

Michael S. Griffith 

Director, Office of Safety Technologies 

Office of Safety 

Enclosures 
Version 10.0 (05/16) 

Page 1 of 4 

Request for Federal Aid Reimbursement Eligibility 

of Highway Safety Hardware 

... 

a,

..,

..,

·e 

..c 

Date of Request: April 12, 2019 <-New  Resubmission I

Name: Ben Powell 

Company: Northern Infrastructure Products 

Address: 180 Ram Forest Rd. Stouffville, Ontario 

:::J 

II) Country: Canada 

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 

 Physical Crash Testing

 Engineering Analysis

Flux 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: Ben Powell Same as Submitter 

Company Name: Northern Infrastructure Products Same as Submitter 

Address: 180 Ram Forest Rd. Stouffville, Ontario Same as Submitter 

Country: Canada 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 Northern Infrastructure Products to perform fullscale crash testing of their Flux Barrier. There are no shared financial interests in the Flux Barrier between 

Northern Infrastructure Products and Texas A&M Transportation Institute (TTI), other than the costs involved in 

the actual crash testing and the reports thereof for this submission to FHWA. 
Version 10.0 (05/16) 

Page 2 of 4 

PRODUCT DESCRIPTION 

(e New Hardware or (' Modification to 

Significant Modification Existing Hardware 

The test installation consisted of a total of 165 proprietary repositionable concrete barriers (Flux Barrier). The 

total length of the barrier installation was approximately 562-ft 4-inches (171 .40 m). The barriers were installed 

on a 6-inch thick concrete apron. 

Each of the Flux Barrier barrier segments was constructed of precast concrete with steel reinforcement. Each 

measured 393/s inches (1000 mm) long (face-to-face), 34 inches (864 mm) tall, and 18 inches (457 mm) wide at 

the base. Two connecting pin hinge bars were integrally cast in and continuous through each segment. Each 

bar was bent to offset by approximately 1 inch (25 mm) such that the upstream bar ends nested between the 

downstream bar ends on the adjacent segment. 

The barrier segments were set on the concrete apron and joined via the hinge pins with any slack removed 

during installation. There were no bolts, pins, or adhesives securing the barriers to the concrete apron. 

CRASH TESTING 

By signature below, the Engineer affiliated with the testing laboratory, agrees in support of th is 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: Nathan D. Schulz 

Digitally signed by Nathan D. Schulz Engineer Signature: Nathan D. Schulz Date: 2019.04.11 11 :42:54 -05 '00' 

Address: 3135 T AMU, College Station, Texas 77843-3135 Same as Submitter D 

Country: USA Same as Submitter D 

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

Page 3 of 4 

Required Test 

Number 

Narrative 

Description 

Evaluation 

Results 

3-10 (11 00C) 

The results of the test conducted on 

November 13, 2018 are found in TTI Test 

Report No. 690902-PCL4&5. 

A 2009 Kia Rio, traveling at an impact speed 

of 62.4 mi/h (100.4 km/ h), contacted the 

Flux Barrier at an impact angle of 24.8 

degrees. 

The Flux Barrier contained and redirected 

the 11 00C vehicle. The vehicle did not 

penetrate, underride, or override the 

installation. Maximum dynamic deflection 

during the test was 41 .2 inches (1047 mm). 

No detached elements, fragments, or other 

debris was present to penetrate or to show 

potential for penetrating the occupant 

compartment, or to present hazard to 

others in the area. 

No occupant compartment deformation or 

intrusion occurred. 

The 1 lO0C vehicle remained upright during 

and after the collision event. Maximum roll 

and pitch angles were 8° and 4°, 

respectively. 

Occupant risk factors were within the limits 

of MASH. 

PASS 

3-11 (2270P) 

The results of the test conducted on 

November 8, 2018 are found in TTI Test 

Report No. 690902-PCL4&5. 

A 2012 RAM 1500 pickup truck, traveling at 

an impact speed of 62.5 mi/h (100.6 km/ h), 

contacted the Flux Barrier at an impact 

angle of 25.0 degrees. 

The Flux Barrier contained and redirected 

the 2270P vehicle. The vehicle did not 

penetrate, underride, or override the 

installation. Maximum dynamic deflection 

during the test was 62.7 inches (1593 mm). 

No detached elements, fragments, or other 

debris was present to penetrate or to show 

potential for penetrating the occupant 

compartment, or to present hazard to 

others in the area. 

No occupant compartment deformation or 

intrusion occurred. 

The 2270P vehicle remained upright during 

and after the collision event. Maximum roll 

and pitch angles were 14° and 5°, 

respectively. 

Occupant risk factors were within the 

preferred limits of MASH. 

PASS 

3-20 (1100() Test 3-20 is not applicable for this type of 

system. (i.e. not a Transition) Non-Relevant Test, not conducted 
Version 10.0 (05/16) 

Page 4 of 4 

Required Test 

Number 

Narrative 

Description 

Evaluation 

Results 

3-21 (2270P) Test 3-21 is not applicable for this type of 

system. (i.e. not a Transition) 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 

Laboratory Signature: Digitally signed by Darrell L. Kuhn 

'Date: 2019.04.11 18:09:18 -05'00 

Address: 3135 TAMU, College Station, Texas 77843-3135 Same as Submitter 

Country: USA Same as Submitter 

Accreditation Certificate 

Number and Dates of current 

Accreditation period : 

ISO 17025 Laboratory, 

A2LA Testing Certificate No. 2821.01 

Valid to April 30, 2019 

Olg,ully i,gned by 8«1 PoweN 

Submitter Signature*: Ben Powe11 :.::~..'.;::~i',7:-'zt"'""' ~te· 201904 1508S6· 16-04'00' 

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 

-, 

;;o 

z 

0 

0\ 

\Cl 

0 

\Cl 

0 

N 

I 

'"O 

n 

r 

+'>-

?,<> 

Vl 

N 

+'>-

0.000 s 

◄ 

- ► ► ~ 

0.200 s 

1 o,~, 'C!:JI) 

~ 

.i j, 

r 

"4 

0.400 s 0.600 s 

► """ 

!!!l ~i ·W j=.Jk===== ===-:~ ·===----~ 

I 

CJD T 

i

I 1r=--------=====~~~~ MALE EN D rEMALE END 

General Information Impact Conditions Post-Impact Trajectory 

Test Agency .. .... ... ... Texas A&M Transportation Institute (TTI) Speed ........ ... 62.5 mi/h (100.6 km/h) Stopping Distance 189 ft (58 m) dwnstrm 

Test Standard Test No.. MASH Test 3-11 Angle .... .. ... ... ..... ...... . ...... 25.0° 20 ft (6 m) twd traffic 

TTI Test No. 690902-PCL5 Location/Orientation ........ 4.4 ft (1 .4 m) upstream Vehicle Stability 

Test Date ... 2018-11-08 of centerline of joint Maximum Yaw Angle .... .. 52° 

Test Article between barrier Maximum Pitch Angle .. ... .......... 5° 

Type Portable Concrete Barrier segments 84-85 Maximum Roll Angle..... ...... 14° 

Name ... Flux Barrier Impact Severity .. 117 kip-ft (158 kJ) Vehicle Snagging ...... No 

Installation Length .. 562.3 ft (171.4 m) Exit Conditions Vehicle Pocketing ...... No 

Material or Key Elements .. 165 concrete barrier segments; each Speed .... 38.4 mi/h (61 .8 km/h) Test Article Deflections 

nominally 39.37 inches (1000 mm) long x Trajectory/Heading Angle 23.0° / 42.4° Dynamic.. ..... .. .... ... ...... 62.7 inches (1593 mm) 

34 inches (864 mm) tall , pinned end-to­ Occupant Risk Values Permanent... .............. . 61 .5 inches (1562 mm) 

end Longitudinal OIV .. 18.4 ft/s (5.6 mis) Working Width .. .. ..... .... ............. 80.7 inches (2050 mm) 

Soil Type and Condition ... Placed on Concrete Surface, Damp Lateral OIV... .. ... ... 19.4 ft/s (5.9 mis) Height of Working Width ..... 34.0 inches (864 mm) 

Test Vehicle Longitudinal Ridedown ..... 7.7 g Vehicle Damage 

Type/Designation 2270P Lateral Ridedown ... ... 7.5 g 11LFQ5 

Make and Model 2012 RAM 1500 Pickup THIV.. .................. ..... 29.0 km/h 11FLEW4 

Curb 4890 lb (2218 kg) PHO ... . 7.9g Max. Exterior Deformation ........ 18.0 inches (457 mm) 

N Test Inertial... 5009 lb (2272 kg) ASI. . ........... .... .. ... .... .. ... . 1.15 OCDI .... ........................... LF0000000 

0 Dummy 165 lb (75 kg) Max. 0.050-s Average Max. Occupant Compartment 

\Cl Gross Static 5174 lb (2347 kg) Longitudinal ....... -6.9 g Deformation None I Lateral .... ... . . 8.6 g 0 

w Vertical. ... ... .. 1.8 g I 

0 

00 Figure 6.6. Summary of Results for MASH Test 3-11 on Flu x Barrier. 
1000 

76 X 15mm CUT 

PLAN VIEW 

ISOMETRIC VIEW 

19mm CHAMFER 

460 

1000 

_----------=~== ------- : - I 

tr----------------------ii 

MALE END FEMALE END 

ELEVATION VIEW 

SECTION A ­

PRODUCT SECTION VIEW 

TYPE 

E 

E 

QTY 

1 

4 

CAST IN MATERIAL LI 3 1 

DESCRIPTION REMARK 

4TDN x 5 112'' SLA 

GRADE 50(ASTM 572) HOT MOVABLE BARRIER RUB PLATE ROLLED STEEL PLATE 

E 2 MOVABLE BARRIER PLATE GRADE 50(ASTM 572) HOT 

ROLLED STEEL PLATE 

19mm Q-iAMFER 

MOVABLE BARRIER PLATE DETAIL 

SCALE 1 : 8 

A! r IJlltj f,1 -J;€f,1:,1'--, )) 1,1:'..') ,.,,H,:'il;';fj~ ARF N mm CON CAST PIPE (CCP) STANDARD DRAWING ("IP.A ......Hi "';r. Ar.,f" ij()• ·n ~.(' At r C 11 AIJ' '! If. - ':i!J ·t.rr, ! ! l , 

,\L.._ ,1E,,- .\·, ;:-,c, Ji:.;iE;,_ 1,.''Jli:S•, ~;;,Ei. r1E_, Tet.EF,~•JCE':- TC cs.~ :,n I J801 E P(Y:.• RE ,..l,\'$';, - FI.\'; ~E'-' ~.-. A:1 -1 

RF1NF\.R( ·n -n ':'~A,-, ln 'R .-.f-1,•..rF -ir.n ..... :.."'..,'""J 1,u:::::. t,:.~ i..u

::. "I,/ I-' ~ Lll, _ :::> l"'e~j _,' '"I , 1,Aw.; ,\~ I, f•f 'tJ! .;1.; •, : I! I A. ..l•I ~•1• • FLUX BARRIER 

864X460X1000 

:.1R F~, •~t.•~JMF•j• ', ,_., "'(' q 'I ....J8t,.:.r;,Q E[,pi:;·,.,.e:1.·CE .,., .•·ai: 

:,M ",\ -. IR PRODUCT DETAIL 1,I ,•. ►' ,.11.A~.~.f A.•, '11-<'IJ~V.,' ~l• 

:;;.:~ Ci/.!l!d ij !:f.'I:. 

G'-'ACE J ,;,:.Ti.4 A.'; ~ 

r-1... T F•:1L.E::r•EEL PL.A.TE •FC-"TEC !-4"ARl!R 111·~•" 

YH SW 2e/JAN/18 SRE-M89 8 Rev7 1 OF 3 OE--.t R1PT1 ,-. 

299 Brock Road South. Pusl,nch ON NOB 2JO FAX 519 763 1956 1-800-668-7473 www concastp,pe com 

Figure 2.1. Details of the Flux Barrier. 

TR No. 690902-PCL4&5 4 2019-03-08