U.S. Deportment 1200 New Jersey Ave., SE 

of Transportation Washington , D.C. 20590 

Federal Highway 

Administration December 18, 2017 In Reply Refer To: 

HSST-1 / B-293 

Michael van der Vlist 

Laura Metaal Road Safety 

Rimburgerweg 40, 647 XX Kerkrade 

Netherlands 

Dear Mr. van der Vlist: 

This letter is in response to your August 23, 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 FHWA letter of eligibility is 

assigned FHW A control number B-293 and is valid until a subsequent letter is issued by FHW A 

that expressly references this device. 

Decision 

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

integral part ofthis letter: 

• SafeZone MASH TL-3 Standard 

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 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 crash worthiness 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 American Association of State Highway and Transportation 

Officials' Manual for Assessing Safety Hardware (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: SafeZone MASH TL-3 Standard 


Type of system: Rigid/Semi-Rigid Barriers 


Test Level: MASH Test Level 3 


Testing conducted by: Crashtest-service.com GmbH 


Date ofrequest: August 23, 2017 


FHWA concurs with the recommendation ofthe accredited crash testing laboratory as stated 

within 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. 

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. 

Standard Provisions 

• To prevent misunderstanding by others, this letter of eligibility designated as FHWA 
3 

control number B-293 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 Griffith 

Director, Office of Safety Technologies 

Office of Safety 

Enclosures 
en 

c: 

3 

3 

m 

-< 

9. 

0.... 

m 

en

::::r 

a;! 

21. 

]J 

CD 

en

c: 

6f 

1. Sequential Phol.ographs 

D CCI m ll::I::I c:JI ICCI 

·. ( •· •• 

.• 

O.OOGs 0.130s 0.260 s 0.457s 0.657 s 

2. Plan View 

•••'*-M•. c . ,...,,..... -_ • -se .......,., •

4. General lnlormallcm 6. Impact Condillon' THl'I 7 mis (22 ft/s) 

crashtest-service.com GmbH Tes1Agency Speed 101.6 km/h (63.1 mph) PHO 22.32 g ICTSl Angle 25 degrees ASI 1.2 TeslSlandard MASH Tesl TL3-10 

m (46.4 In) before 12. Test Article Damage CTS· Test No. 18649 Localion/Oflen1allon 1.23 1ransi1ionof barrieis V 

& VI Classihcalion Moderale Dale April 21 , 2017 

9. Exl1 Condillons es None 5. Test Article particular~

Speed 84.3 km/h (52 mph) 13. Test Arllcle Deflections Type Barrier not 

~· degrees Dynamic Oellection 1.13 m (44.5 In) Name Sale Zone oblainable 

Perma.nent Delfedion 0.85 m (33.5 In) Installation Lenglh 69.63 m 12741.3 In) 10. Posl·lmpect Trajectory 

Lenglh: 5.80 m (228.3 in) Dynamic Working Wld1h 1.52 m (59.8 In) Vehicle Stabolily Satislac1ory Key Elemenls • Barrier BaseWid:h: 0.45m (17.7 ln} m (2413in) Permanen1 Wor1<1ngWidth 1.30 m (51 .21n) u.:..hl: 0.81m 131 .9 in\ 61.3 downSlream 6. Soll Type and Condlllon Slopping Oislance 14. Vehicle Damage m (338in) 8.6 laleraltv behind Celss1hca1.lon Modera1e Type ol Soll Asphall 

Soil Vehicle Snagging None VOS 11LF03 s1rengh1 I 

cle Condi lion overcast. rJry 14.9' c Vehi Pocketing None CDC 11FDEW3 (58.82' F) 

11. Occupant Risk Max. Defoonation 69 mm (2.72 7. Test Vehicle Exterior In) 

lmpacl Velocly Max. Interior Defonna1ion 65 mm (2.56 Type/Designation In) llOOC Longltudlral 3.n mis (12.3711/s) Makeand Model 2012 KIA Rio OCCI LFOOOOOt 1 

La1e<al 4 .96 mis (16.27 11/s) Curb 1076 kg (2372 lb) 

Ridlldown Ao:elarations (1 O msae avg.) Tesl lnel1ial 1085 kg (2392 lb) 

Longltudlnaf ·3.17 g Dummy 75 kg (165 lb) 

lalOfal · 10.83 g GrossSlallc 1160 kg (2557 lb) 
"' 

7 "' ~.8 

3 ..

l 

~ ~ 

~ ..... 

..... 

:::j 

U1 

~ .'.:::!

..... 

m 

0) 

""' -...J 

en 

c: 

3 

3 

m 

< 

9. 0

m 

.. n

:::r 

~ 21. 

]J 

CD n

c: 

6f 

1. Sequential Photographs 

D !CCII CJ ICCll ml ICl:I ml CCII IC ICCll 

-

. ' . -----~~~~~- ' 

.... 

---­

e

.... .. .. 

:

.. 

0.000. 0.123 5 0.247 s 0.370 s 0.490 s 

2. Plan View 3. Cross-Sectional View 

e

E9 

Q !I. 

,J..;.I ~\\ · _,,. 

•• 11111(1•10••1 M ft W M p '!---­ Jl•ra8JI at.__ 1 51111 (!ilOl.nf 71S11111Q81• tt'"'I 

4. General Information 

8. Impact CondlUons THiii 7 mis 

(22 flls) 

crashlest-service.oom GmbH Test Agency Speed 104

.3 km/h 

(64 8 mph) PHD 

9.06 g 

ICTSI 

Angle 25 degrees ASI 

0.7 Test Standard MASH Test Tl 3· 11 m (59.1 in) belore 12. leSl ArticleDamage CTS-Tesl No. 18647 Location/Orientabon 1.50 lransit.on ol elemenlS aasslflcatlon Moderate Dale April 24. 2017 v & Vl 9. Exil Condltlons particvla.ri1ies None 5. Test Article 

Speed &4 km/h 

(52 mph) 13. lesl Article Oellecllons Type Barrier noc Angle degrees Dynamic Deflection 

1.70 m 

(66.9 In) Name Sale Zone oblai'lable 

O. Permanenl Defleclion 

1.17 m (46

,1 In) 

Installation Length 69.63 m 12741

.3 In) 

1 Post-Impact Tralectory 

Length: 5.80 m 

(228.3 In) Vehicle Stabi Dynamic Worl<ing Widlh 

2.06 m (81.1 In) lrly Satisfaclory Key 8emen1s • Barrier Base Wiclh: 0.45 m ( 17.7 In) m l2815 n) Permanenl Wor1<ing Widti 1.61 m (63.4 in) Heiaht: 0.81 m !31.9 lnl 71.5 dOwnstream Slopping Oislance 14. VehicleDamage 6. Soll Type and Condi1lon m(75 in) 1.9 lalerallll In l'onl Oassiflcatlon Typeol Soil Asphalt Moderale 

Vehicle Snagging None Soil Strenglh I VOS llLF03 

VehiclePOO<etlng None Conditloo 11FDEW3 clclJdy, dry, 15.4' C (59.72' F) CDC 

11. Occupant Risk 7. Test Vehicle t.'ax. Ell1eri0< Deformalion 279 mm 

(10.98 in) 

lmpacl Velocty Ma><. 1n1erior Defonnallon 13mm 

(0.51 In) Type!Deslgnatloo 2270P 

Longttudiral 4.37 mis 

(14.34 IVs) Make and Model OCOI 2013 Dodge Ram Pickup LFOOOOOOO 

Lal era I 

4.11 mis 

(13

.48 IVs) Curb 2329 kg (5135 I>) 

Ridedown Acceleraiiolli (1 omsec a'lg.) 'Tes1 Inertial 2303 kg (5077 lb) 

Longltudiral -408 g Dummy I kg (lb) 

Late<al ·9.17 g Gross Static 2300 kg (5077 I>) 

1 ~ &

3 Cii' 

ij' 

? !I .... c 

i -6 

i ~ 

&

~ ~ ! 

ID 

~i ~ 

ii GI O'

Q. g, ia GI

ID 3 !i CD ~ ::ll 

~ g· 

a 

ID 

st I

!. 

:I 

I

i 

g

a ::::I. 3

'! ~ ~ ~ =~ CD 

!1 


ii ~ 

;;;· 

~ 

"2 

!ii!: 

a. 

0 

::ll 

g 

i. 

s. 

s= 

(II 

a 

ii' 

I 

~ 

Ill"' 

~ CD 

~ 
CTS~ crashcesc-service.com 

Test report no. 11775-2887/18649 page35

I 

I 

t 

I 

! 

I 1 

' I • 

::i:: 

gH ~ 1 1 

J

• 1f 

- ­ [ 

-

- [ 

-

This is an unpublished report fQr the client mentioned above that may henoe not appear in any publication without the client's express 

parmlsslon. The views herein are those of the author and not nacesaarlly those of the client. 
croshtest-service.

CTs

com 

· 

Amelunxenstr.30 48167 Munster 

~ + 49 (0) 2506 70 990 70 

Fax + 49 (0) 2506 70 990 99 

Internet: www.crashtest-service.com 

E-Mail: info@crashtest-service.com 

GeschaftsfUhrender Gesellschafter crashtest-service.com GmbH • Amelunxenstral!.e 30 • 48167 Munster 

Dipl.-lng. Peter Schimmelpfennig 

AG Munster HRB 5944 

USt.-ldNr. DE212794970 USDOT, Federal Highway Administration 

Menna Yassin (Office of Safety) 

1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE Volksbank Munster 

Washington, DC 20590 IBAN DE 18 4016 0050 1004 3987 00 

USA BIG GENODEM1 MSC 

Sekretariat I Secretary: Durchwahl I Direct dial Vorgang I Reference Datum I Date 


Mrs. Holtkotter +49 2506/70 990 70 A2887 12.12.2017 


Statement MASH 2016 criteria (impact speed) 

Dear Mrs. Yassin, 

crashtest-service.com GmbH is an accredited testing laboratory for a many standard tests , for 

example DIN EN 1317 and MASH 2016. 

On April 24, 2017 and April 19, 2017, two accredited impact tests on behalf of Laura Metaal 

Eygelshoven B.V. (Netherlands) took place on the test site of crashtest-service.com GmbH 

(test report no. 11775-2887 /1864 7-2 and 11775-2887 /18664-2). The impact speed for both tests was 

determined to 104.3 km/h . 

This statement explains why from the point of view of crashtest-service.com GmbH both tests are to 

be regarded as compliant with the MASH 2016 standard. 
crashtest-service.com® Seite 2 

The MASH 2016 standard describes the tolerances on impact conditions in chapter 2.1.2 as below: 

" ... Testing agencies have demonstrated an ability to control impact speed within a range of ±2.5 mph 

(4.0 km/h) from the target condition and to obtain actual impact angles within ±1.5 degrees of the 

desired value. Therefore, these limits are selected as the maximum tolerance for impact speed and 

angle. For crash tests with a target speed of 44 mph (70. 0 km/h) or more, the actual impact speed 

should be no less than 2.5 mph (4 km/h) below the desired impact speed. For tests involving vehicle 

redirection, the impact angle should not be more than 1. 5 degree below the target value . ... " 

Thus, in this section there is only a lower limit of the impact velocity defined for a crash test with an 

impact speed of e.g. 100 km/h. 

Furthermore, there is an inconsistent declaration for the exact tolerance. In the first passage of 

chapter 2.1.2 the maximum tolerance is declared to be 4.0 km/h, in the following text (for impact 

speeds of 70.0 km/h or more) the tolerance is given to be 4 km/h (without a decimal place). Therefore, 

the impact speed of 104.3 km/h can be considered to be compliant with the given tolerance. 

Although a tolerance of ±4.0 km/h should be considered as required, nevertheless the two tests 

carried out with an impact speed of 104.3 km/h comply from a technical point of view with the 

standard MASH 2016 for the following reasons: 

In addition to the tolerance for the impact velocity, the standard MASH 2016 also specifies tolerances 

for the test inertial weight and the impact angle (max. impact angle 26.5°, max. test inertial weight 

2320 kg). 

Both mentioned tests have been performed with an impact angle of 25°. The weight of the vehicle in 

test 18647 (test report no. 11775-2887/18647-2) was determined to 2303 kg and in test 18664 

(test report no. 11775-2887 /18664-2) to 2264 kg. The permissible tolerances for both tests in terms of 

angle and weight were therefore not exploited. 

Considering the upper permissible values the maximum impact severity to which the system under 

test can be exposed to is clearly higher than the impact severity in both impact tests. The impact 

severity in test number 18647 (173 kJ) and in test number 18664 (170 kJ) are between the minimum 

(144 kJ; see table 2-2A) and the maximum possible energy level (193 kJ). 
crashtest-service.com® Seite 3 

Thus, the discussed speed surplus of 0.3 km/h does not lead to system-introduced energies that are 

not compatible with MASH 2016. 

For the above reasons both tests (test report no. 11775-2887/18647-2 and test report no. 

11775-2887 /18664-2) are from the point of view of crashtest-service.com GmbH in accordance with 

Mash 2016. 

Sincerely, 

crashtest-sei:vice. com