U.S. Department 

Of Transportation 

Federal Highway 

Administration

400 Seventh St., S.W. 

Washington, D.C. 20590 

March 16, 1989 

Refer to: HNG-14/SS-09 

Mr. James W. Young 

Franklin Steel 

P.O. Box 671 

Franklin, Pennsylvania 16323 

Dear Mr. Young: 

This is in response to your February 21 letter to Mr. James Hatton requesting Federal 

Highway Administration (FHWA) acceptance of your company’s Eze-Erect Sign Posts. 

Your letter accompanied reports by the Southwest Research Institute, “Full-Scale Crash 

Tests of the Eze-Erect Sign Support, Volume 1: Strong Soil Tests” and “Volume 2: 

Weak Soil Tests.” 

Four tests were conducted using 1,800-pound automobiles. Two tests were in NCHRP 

230 S-1 “strong” soil and two in S-2 “weak” soil. Tests were conducted on 4-pound-perfoot posts manufactured of ASTM A-1-76 steel at 20 m.p.h. and 60 m.p.h. in each soil 

type. A summary of the tests and results is shown below: 

Test Number: F.S.1 F.S.2 F.S.3 F.S.4

Soil Type Strong Strong Weak Weak 

Impact Speed (mph) 20 60 18.9 59.3 

Occupant impact velocity (fps) 5.1 (film) 

4.8 (accel.) 

2.9 

1.3 

7.3 

2.4 

10.1 

6.7 

Occupant ridedown acceleration (g’s) 1.0 (film) 

NC (accel.)

NC 

1.3 

NC 

NC 

2.7 

1.5 

Velocity Change (fps) 5.5 (film) 

6.0 (accel.) 

4.7 

1.4 

6.5 

3.0 

2.6 

4.0 

Stub Height (in.) * * * * 

NC: No Contact: Occupant did not displace sufficient distance to contact vehicle interior 

and experience ridedown accelerations. 

*Stub heights were not reported. The post bases were driven to leave a 4-inch height 

remaining above ground to permit attachment of support posts. In test F.S.1, the post 

base was pulled out of the ground by the connecting strap to a height in excess of 4 
inches. This warrants some concern. However, the interpretation of “substantial 

remains” is not settled. Inasmuch as the post base was not pulled up during test F.S.2, the 

post bases were completely pulled out during the weak soil tests, thus leaving no stubs, 

and the stub remaining in test F.S.1 had no apparent adverse effect, the results of test 

F.S.1 are not considered sufficient to deny acceptance of the system. 

This information shows that the actual test and calculated changes in vehicle velocity for 

the 4-pound-per-foot Eze-Erect sign supports meet provisions of Section 7 of the 1985 

American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials “Standard 

Specifications for Structural Supports for Highway Signs, Luminaire and Traffic 

Signals.” Therefore, the tested Eze-Erect signposts, as well as your 2.0, 2.25, 2.5, 2.75, 

and 3.0-pound-per-foot posts, will be acceptable for use on Federal-aid projects, within 

the range of conditions tested if proposed by a State. The acceptance is limited to 

breakaway characteristics of the system and does not cover its structural features. 

Presumably, you will supply potential users with sufficient information on structural 

design and installation requirements to ensure proper performance. 

We anticipate that the States will require certification from Franklin Steel that the 

furnished supports, including breakaway fasteners, have essentially the same chemistry, 

mechanical properties, and geometry as those used in the tests and that they will meet the 

FHWA change in velocity requirements. 

 Sincerely yours, 

 

 L. A. Staron, Chief 

 Federal-Aid and Design Division