U.S. Department 

of Transportation 

Federal Highway 

Administration 

May 26, 2020 

1200 New Jersey Ave., SE 

Washington, D.C. 20590 

In Reply Refer To: 

HSST-1/WZ-405 

Mr. Felipe Almanza 

TrafFix Devices Inc. 

160 Avenida La Pata 

San Clemente California 92673 

Dear Mr. Almanza: 

This letter is in response to your January 28, 2020 request for the Federal Highway 

Administration (FHWA) 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 FHWA control number WZ-405 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: 

• TrafFix Metal Leg Barricade 

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 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: TrafFix Metal Leg Barrier 

Type of system: Work Zone 

Test Level: MASH Test Level 3 (TL3) 

Testing conducted by: KARCO 

Date of request: January 28, 2020 

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. 

Standard Provisions 
• To prevent misunderstanding by others, this letter ofeligibility designated as FHW A 

control number WZ-405 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 FHWA 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 ofvalidity, 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 FHWA reserves the 

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

information related to crash testing. 

Sincerely, 

Michael S. Griffith 

Director, Office of Safety Technologies 

Office of Safety 

Enclosures 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

I r- r 

I I I I 

rr 

~ 

~ 

~ 

~ 

Version 10.0 (05/16) 

Page 1 of 5 

Request for Federal Aid Reimbursement Eligibility 

of Highway Safety Hardware 

Submitter 

Date of Request: January28,2020 New Resubmission 

Name: RobbyRamirez 

Company: TrafFixDevices,Inc. 

Address: 160AvenidaLaPataSanClementeCA,92673 

Country: UnitedStates 

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&TestingCriterion-Enter from right to left starting with TestLevel ! -! - ! ! -! -! 

SystemType SubmissionType DeviceName / Variant TestingCriterion Test 

Level 

'WZ':CrashWorthyWorkZon PhysicalCrashTesting 

Engineering Analysis Metal LegBarricade 

AASHTOMASH 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: RobbyRamirez SameasSubmitter 

CompanyName: TrafFixDevices,Inc. SameasSubmitter 

Address: 160AvenidaLaPataSanClementeCA92673 SameasSubmitter 

Country: UnitedStates SameasSubmitter 

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

Eligibility Process for Safety Hardware Devices' document. 

TrafFixDevicesInc.and ApplusIDIADAKARCOEngineering LLCshareno financial interests between the two 

organizations.Thisincludes noshared financial interest but not limited to: 

i. Compensationincluding wages,salaries,commissions,professionalfees,or feesfor businessreferrals 

ii.Consulting relationships 

iii. Researchfunding or other formsof researchsupport; 

iv.Patents,copyrights, licenses,and other intellectual propertyinterests; 

vi.Businessownership and investment interests. 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

I 

r- r 

I I

Version 10.0 (05/16) 

Page 2 of 5 

PRODUCT DESCRIPTION 

New Hardware or Modification to 

Significant Modification ExistingHardware 

TheTrafFixDevicesMetalLegBarricadeisa temporarywork-zone trafficcontrol deviceconsisting of two (2) 

steel legassembliesand four (4) impact resistant plastic panels. 

Thesteel leg assembliesarecomposedof two (2)steelsupportsthat are bolted together at the top.When the 

legsarein thedeployed position thestand hasafootprint ofapproximately35in.(889mm)by24in.(610mm). 

Thepanelsare mounted to theleg assembliesby through bolting or riveting. 

Theplastic panelsare 24.0in (610mm) wideand0.5in.(13mm) thick.Thepanel’sedgesareraised to protect 

thereflectivesheeting during transportationandstacking.Thebarricadeuses8.0in.(203mm)or 12.0in.(305 

mm)tall top panelswith reflectivesheeting.Thebottom panelscan beeither 6.0in.(152mm)or 8.0in.(203 

mm)with or without reflectivesheeting.Thebottom 8.0in.(203mm)panel isavailable asastandard panelora 

sandfilled option that weighsapproximately 15lbs(6.8kg) when filled.Thebarricadewastested with asand 

bagandasand filled panel.Thebarricadecan beused with or without ballast. 

Thebarricadein thedeployed stateholds thepanelsat aheight to comply with theMUTCD.Thebarricadecan 

beconfigured asa type 1 or a type 2 barricade.Theas-tested device wasconfigured asaType2Barricade.A 

warning light wasmounted to thedevice during crash testing.Thebarricadecan beused with or without a 

warning light. The TrafFix Devices Metal Leg Barricade remained unchanged from the tested and passed 

NCHRP350version. 

CRASH TESTING 

Bysignaturebelow, theEngineeraffiliated with the testing laboratory, agreesin support of thissubmission 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 testsare necessary to determine the device meets 

theMASH criteria. 

Engineer Name: StevenMatsusaka 

EngineerSignature: 

Address: 9270HollyRoad,Adelanto,CA92301 SameasSubmitter 

Country: UnitedStates SameasSubmitter 

A brief description of each crash test and its result: 

Steven Matsusaka DigitallysignedbyStevenMatsusaka 

DN: cn=StevenMatsusaka,email=steven.matsusaka@idiada.com,c=US 

Date:2020.03.0215:35:28-08'00' 

RequiredTest 

Number 

Narrative 

Description 

Evaluation 

Results 

3-70(1100C) 

Designed to evaluate theability of asmall 

vehicle to activate any breakaway, fracture, 

or yielding mechanism. Per MASHTest 3-70 

isconsideredoptional for work-zone traffic 

control devicesweighing lessthan220 lbs 

(100 kg). The as-tested devices weighed 

approximately33 lbs(15kg)and therefore 

test 3-70 was notconducted. 

Non-RelevantTest,not conducted 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Version 10.0 (05/16) 

Page 3 of 5 

RequiredTest 

Number 

Narrative 

Description 

Evaluation 

Results 

Testreport numberP39096-01,conducted 

on 04/05/19. Test 3-71 involves an 1100C 

test vehicleimpacting the temporaryworkzone traffic control device at a critical 

impact angle of 90° and 0°. The test is 

designed to evaluate occupant 

compartment penetration,vehiclestability, 

and occupant risk criteria. The test vehicle 

wasa commercially available 2009 KiaRio 

with a test inertial weight of 2,399.7 lbs 

(1088.5kg). 

3-71(1100C) 

Thetest vehicle impacted thefirst barricade 

oriented at 90° at aspeed of 62.03 mph 

(99.83km/h).Therewasno penetration into 

the occupant compartment and no vehicle 

instability wasinduced.Thevehiclecleared 

the device in a controlled manner and 

continued to impact the second barricade 

oriented at 0° at aspeed of 59.79 mph 

(96.22km/h).Thebarricadewasactivated in 

apredictablemannerand did not penetrate 

the occupant compartment. The TrafFix 

Metal Leg Barricade did not induce vehicle 

instability, block the drivers vision, and did 

not createa debrisfield that would present 

undue hazards to other traffic, pedestrians, 

or personnelin a workzone.Theoccupant 

compartment was not penetrated and the 

deformation limits werenot exceeded.The 

TrafFixDevicesMetal LegBarricademetall 

the requirementsfor MASHTest3-71. 

PASS 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Version 10.0 (05/16) 

Page 4 of 5 

Testreport numberP39096-02,conducted 

on 04/05/19.Test3-72 involvesa2270Ptest 

vehicleimpacting the temporarywork-zone 

traffic control device at a critical impact 

angle of 90° and 0°. The test is designed to 

evaluate occupant compartment 

penetration, vehiclestability, and occupant 

risk criteria. The test vehicle wasa 

commerciallyavailable2013RAM1500 with 

a test inertial weight of 5,025.4 lbs (2,279.5 

kg). 

3-72(2270P) 

Thetest vehicle impacted thefirst barricade 

oriented at 90° at aspeed of 60.42 mph 

(97.23km/h).Therewasno penetration into 

the occupant compartment and no vehicle 

instability wasinduced.Thevehiclecleared 

the device in a controlled manner and 

continued to impact the second barricade 

oriented at 0° at aspeed of 59.53 mph 

(95.81km/h).Thebarricadewasactivated in 

apredictablemannerand did not penetrate 

the occupant compartment. The TrafFix 

Metal Leg Barricade did not induce vehicle 

instability, block the drivers vision, and did 

not createa debrisfield that would present 

undue hazards to other traffic, pedestrians, 

or personnelin a workzone.Theoccupant 

compartment was not penetrated and the 

deformation limits werenot exceeded.The 

TrafFixDevicesMetal LegBarricademetall 

the requirementsfor MASHTest3-72. 

PASS 

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: ApplusIDIADAKARCOEngineering,LLC. 

LaboratorySignature: Steven Matsusaka DN:cn=StevenMatsusaka, email=steven.matsusaka@idiada.com,c=US DigitallysignedbyStevenMatsusaka 

Date:2020.03.0215:35:41-08'00' 

Address: 9270HollyRoad,Adelanto,CA92301 SameasSubmitter 

Country: UnitedStates SameasSubmitter 

Accreditation Certificate 

Number and Dates of current 

Accreditation period : 

TL-371:July2019 -July2022 

SubmitterSignature*:RobertRamirez Digitallysigned byRobertRamirez 

Date:2020.03.0310:41:18-08'00' 
 

 

 

Version 10.0 (05/16) 

Page 5 of 5 

ATTACHMENTS 

Attach to this form: 

1) 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 
 

 

 

 

308.7 ft. [94.1 m)l------------------------1b 

GENERAL INFORMATION Impact Conditions Occupant Risk

Test Agency..................................... Applus IDIADA KARCO Impact Velocity Device 1........................... 62.03 mph (99.83 km/h) Longitudinal OIV............................... N/A*

Test No........................................ P39096-01 Impact Velocity Device 2............................. 59.79 mph (96.22 km/h) Lateral OIV.................................... N/A*

Test Designation.............................. 3-71 Device 1 Angle................................... 90.0° Longitudinal RA...........................N/A*

Test Date........................................ 4/5/19 Device 2 Angle................................. 0.0° Lateral RA.................................N/A*

Device 1 Kinetic Energy............................... 308.7 kip-ft (418.5 kJ) THIV.............................................. N/A*

TEST ARTICLE Device 2 Kinetic Energy.......................... 286.8 kip-ft (388.8 kJ) PHD......................................... N/A*

Name / Model........................................ Metal Leg Barricade ASI.............................................. N/A*

Type....................................................... Work-Zone Device Exit Conditions

Device Height .................................... 3.5 ft. (1.1 m) Device 1 Exit Velocity.................... 60.9 mph (98.1 km/h) Test Article Deflections

Key Elements....................................... Leg assembly, top and bottom panel Device 2 Exit Velocity..................... 58.5 mph (94.2 km/h) Debris Field (longitudinal) ....... 209.3 ft. (63.8 m)

Road Surface.................................... Concrete Vehicle Resting Position.................... 308.7 ft. (94.1 m) Downstream Debris Field (lateral)......... 31.0 ft. (9.4 m)

4.4 ft. (1.3 m) Left

TEST VEHICLE Vehicle Stability ..................................... Satisfactory

Type / Designation................................ 1100C Maximum Roll Angle................................. N/A* Vehicle Damage

Year, Make, and Model.................................. 2009 Kia Rio Maximum Pitch Angle............. N/A* Vehicle Damage Scale................... 12-FC-1

Curb Mass.............................................. 2,335.7 lbs (1,059.5 kg) Maximum Yaw Angle............N/A* CDC............................................. 12FCMW1

Test Inertial Mass.................................. 2,399.7 lbs (1,088.5 kg) * Not Applicable, device weighs less than 220 lbs (100 kg) Maximum Intrusion............................. 0.2 in. (5 mm) at floor pan

Gross Static Mass................................ 2,565.1 lbs (1,163.5 kg)

Figure 2 Summary of Test 3-71 

12 TR-P39096-01-A 
 

 

 

 

3 ft. [1 .0 m] 

X 

283.9 ft. [86.5 m] 

---~ 

GENERAL INFORMATION Impact Conditions Occupant Risk

Test Agency..................................... Applus IDIADA KARCO Impact Velocity Device 1........................... 60.42 mph (97.23 km/h) Longitudinal OIV............................... N/A*

Test No........................................ P39096-02 Impact Velocity Device 2............................. 59.53 mph (95.81 km/h) Lateral OIV.................................... N/A*

Test Designation.............................. 3-72 Device 1 Angle................................... 90.0° Longitudinal RA...........................N/A*

Test Date........................................ 4/5/19 Device 2 Angle................................. 0.0° Lateral RA.................................N/A*

Device 1 Kinetic Energy............................... 613.2 kip-ft (831.4 kJ) THIV.............................................. N/A*

TEST ARTICLE Device 2 Kinetic Energy.......................... 595.4 kip-ft (807.3 kJ) PHD......................................... N/A*

Name / Model........................................ Metal Leg Barricade ASI.............................................. N/A*

Type....................................................... Work-Zone Device Exit Conditions

Device Height .................................... 3.5 ft. (1.1 m) Device 1 Exit Velocity.................... 59.7 mph (96.1 km/h) Test Article Deflections

Key Elements....................................... Leg assembly, top and bottom Device 2 Exit Velocity..................... 58.2 mph (93.7 km/h) Debris Field (longitudinal) ....... 216.9 ft. (66.1 m)

Road Surface.................................... Concrete Vehicle Resting Position.................... 283.9 ft. (86.5 m) Downstream Debris Field (lateral)......... 39.0 ft. (11.9 m)

3.3 ft. (1 m) Left

TEST VEHICLE Vehicle Stability ..................................... Satisfactory

Type / Designation................................ 2270P Maximum Roll Angle................................. N/A* Vehicle Damage

Year, Make, and Model.................................. 2013, RAM 1500 Maximum Pitch Angle............. N/A* Vehicle Damage Scale................... 12-FD-1

Curb Mass.............................................. 4,857.8 lbs (2,203.5 kg) Maximum Yaw Angle............N/A* CDC............................................. 12FDAW1

Test Inertial Mass.................................. 5,025.4 lbs (2,279.5 kg) * Not applicable, device weighs less than 220 lbs (100 kg) Maximum Intrusion............................. 0.2 in. (5 mm) at floor pan

Gross Static Mass................................ 5,025.3 lbs (2,279.5 kg)

Figure 2 Summary of Test 3-72 

12 TR-P39096-02-A