U.S. Department 

Of Transportation 

Federal Highway 

Administration

400 Seventh St., S.W. 

Washington, D.C. 20590 

March 9, 1995 

Refer to: HNG-14/SS-53 

Mr. Robert H. Green 

Lancaster Composite 

1000 Houston Street 

P.O. Box 247 

Columbia, Pennsylvania 17512-0247 

Dear Mr. Green: 

Thank you for your letter of February 24 requesting Federal highway Administration’s 

(FHWA) acceptance of your company’s 102-mm lightweight concrete-filled fiberreinforced plastic sign supports set in steel sleeves. Your letter was accompanied by 

videotape and four crash test reports from the Southwest Research Institute dated 

February 1995. The full-scale and pendulum crash testing was conducted to assess the 

breakaway performance of single-post supports. The testing was done in accordance 

with the National Highway Cooperative Research Program Report 350 Recommended 

Procedures for the Safety Performance Evaluation of Highway Features. Requirements 

for breakaway supports are found in the American Association of State Highway and 

Transportation Officials’ (AASHTO) Standard Specifications for Structural Supports for

Highway Signs, Luminaires and Traffic Signals. These specifications have been adopted 

by the FHWA. 

A summary of the crash testing is presented below: 

Test Number LC-1 LC-2 LC-3 LC-4 

Soil Type Weak Standard Weak Standard 

Foundation Condition* Concrete Soil Concrete Soil 

Support Diameter, mm (in) 102 (4.0) 102 (4.0) 102 (4.0) 102 (4.0) 

Vehicle Mass, Kg (wt, lbs) 845 (1863) 845 (1863) 816** (1800) 816** (1800)

Impact Speed, km/h (mph) 100.5 (62.4) 100.0 (62.1) 35.3 (22.0) 35.3 (22.0) 

Velocity Change, m/s (fps) 0.6 (2.0) 2.01 (6.6) 1.49 (4.7) 1.0 (3.2) 

Stub Height, mm (in) 75 (3.0) *** 75 (3.0) *** 89 (3.5) 89 (3.5) 

*A sleeve was used in all tests. This sleeve consists of a 610-mm long schedule 40, 

102.3-mm inside diameter steel pipe to hold the 102-mm outside diameter signpost. 

Three 1500-mm steel reinforcing rods are welded to the sides of the sleeve, and they 
extend 610-mm below the bottom of the sleeve. The inside rim of the top of the sleeve 

was rounded to a 6-mm radius. The reinforcing rods permit this “drive sleeve” and post 

to be positioned upright during backfilling and compacting with standard soil. When the 

sleeves were encased in a concrete foundation for use in weak soil, the foundations were 

1067-mm deep and 457-mm in diameter at the perimeter and sloping up to the top of the 

“set sleeve”. In all cases, the top of the sleeve was set 25-mm above the ground line. 

**Pendulum tests using crushable aluminum honeycomb nose. 

***Not reported, but value estimated from post-test photographs. 

The results of these tests meet the change-in-velocity and stub-height requirements 

adopted by the FHWA. Your company’s lightweight concrete-filled fiber-reinforced 

plastic sign supports, up to a maximum diameter of 102 mm, are therefore acceptable for 

use on projects on the National Highway System (NHS) where breakaway systems are 

required, within the range of conditions tested, if proposed by a State. Drawings of the 

test installations are enclosed. 

Our acceptance is limited to the breakaway characteristics of the sign supports and does 

not cover the structural features. Presumably, you will supply potential users with 

sufficient information on design and installation requirements to ensure proper 

performance. We anticipate that the States will require certification from Lancaster 

Composite that the hardware furnished has essentially the same chemistry, mechanical 

properties, and geometry as that used in the tests above, and that it will meet the FHWA 

change in velocity requirements. 

It is our understanding that you are attempting to patent your company’s composite sign 

supports. If you are ultimately successful, the signposts would be proprietary products. 

For proprietary products to be used in projects on the NHS: (a) they would have to be 

supplied through competitive bidding with equally suitable unpatented items; (b) the 

highway agency would have to certify that they are essential for synchronization with 

existing highway facilities or that no equally suitable alternate exists; or (c) they would 

have to 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, a copy 

of which is enclosed. 

 Sincerely yours, 

 Jerry L. Poston, Chief 

 Federal-Aid and Design Division 

2 Enclosures 

Geometric and Roadside Design Acceptance Letter No. SS-53