1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE. 

Washington, DC 20590 June 27, 2008 

In Reply Refer To: HSSD/B-162B 

Mr. Rick Mauer 

Nucor Steel Marion Inc 

912 Cheney Ave 

Marion, Ohio 43302 

Dear Mr. Mauer: 

This letter is in response to your request for Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) 

acceptance of a roadside safety system for use on the National Highway System (NHS). 

 Name of device/system: Nu-Guard 31 inch U-post guardrail 

 Type of device/system: Strong post W-beam barrier 

 Test Level: NCHRP Report 350 Test Level 4 (TL-4) 

 Testing conducted by: Holmes Solutions 

 Date of request: February 15, 2008 

 Date of final package: April 23, 2008 

 

You requested that we find this system acceptable for use on the NHS under the provisions of 

National Cooperative Highway Research Program (NCHRP) Report 350 “Recommended 

Procedures for the Safety Performance Evaluation of Highway Features.” 

Requirements

Roadside safety systems should meet the guidelines contained in the NCHRP Report 350, 

"Recommended Procedures for the Safety Performance Evaluation of Highway Features". 

FHWA Memorandum “ACTION: Identifying Acceptable Highway Safety Features” of July 25, 

1997 provides further guidance on crash testing requirements of longitudinal barriers. 

Description 

The Nucor Steel Marion Nu-Guard 31 inch high strong post W-beam guardrail system consists 

of standard 12 gauge W-beam attached directly to a 5 pound Nucor modified U post section. The 

steel line posts are hot rolled steel that is rolled into a U cross section approximately 2 inches 

deep and 3-1/2 inches wide. The total weight of the posts is 5 pounds per foot. Each post is 

punched with a 3/4 inch wide slot located 1 inch down from the top of the posts in the middle of 

the cross section. The slot has a total length of 6-1/2 inches. All posts were 78 inches long and 

hot dip galvanized. 

Washers manufactured from 1/4 inch mild steel plate with an outside diameter of 3-1/2 inches 

and a 1-inch diameter hole were installed between the guard rail and the legs of the U posts to 

provide a backing plate to the bolt. The washers have a hot dip galvanized finish. The rail 

Archived - 

For 

Research 

and 

Historical 

Purposes 

Only
2

elements are standard 12 gauge BMT (base metal thickness), 350 grade galvanized W-beam, 

conforming to AASHTO M180 Class A rail. The guardrail system uses standard FBB01 

5/8 x 1-1/2 inch galvanized splice bolt and nuts. The W-beams are held to the posts using 

galvanized 5/8 x 3-1/2 inch bolts with standard FBB01 splice nuts. 

Crash Testing

Testing for TL-3 had previously been carried out on the Nu-Guard 31 inch W-beam guardrail 

system to the requirements of Test 3-10 and Test 3-11 from NCHRP 350, these tests being 

identical to the requirements of Tests 4-10 and 4-11. The results of these tests were documented 

in Report 5707-07-b and included in FHWA Acceptance Letter B-162 dated September 11, 

2007. 

Your current request is for TL-4 acceptance and was accompanied by a report documenting 

testing in standard soil completed in accordance with Test 4-12 from NCHRP 350; using an 

8000S (8000 kg) truck traveling at a nominal 80 km/hr and impacting the barrier at the critical 

impact point at an angle of 15 degrees. The test data summary sheet of this impact is enclosed 

for reference. 

The roadside barrier configuration of the guardrail system contained and redirected the 8000S 

upright while sustaining moderate damage. The vehicle began to exit before the captured rail 

caused the vehicle to continue down the length of the barrier, during which time majority of the 

posts split open at the post bolt slot and separated from the W-beam. No significant debris was 

expelled from the barrier during the impact, with only plastic components being released from 

the front of the vehicle. A localized puncture in the face of the guardrail was observed at the 

point of impact, caused by contact with the truck foot plate. A maximum dynamic deflection of 

4 feet was recorded in the barrier. The total length of damage to the barrier caused by the contact 

of the vehicle was 79 feet, with 5 feet of the damage occurring upstream from the point of 

impact. 

Findings 

The results of the crash test met the evaluation criteria in the NCHRP Report 350. Therefore, the 

system described above and detailed in the enclosed drawings is acceptable for use as a TL-3 or 

4 system on the NHS under the range of conditions tested, when acceptable to a transportation 

authority.

Please note the following standard provisions that apply to the FHWA letters of acceptance: 

• This acceptance is limited to the crashworthiness characteristics of the devices/systems 

and does not cover their structural features, nor conformity with the Manual on Uniform 

Traffic Control Devices. 

• Any changes that may adversely influence the crashworthiness of the device/system will 

require a new acceptance letter. 

• Should the FHWA discover that the qualification testing was flawed, that in-service 

performance reveals unacceptable safety problems, or that the device/system being 

marketed is significantly different from the version that was crash tested, we reserve the 

right to modify or revoke our acceptance. 

Archived - 

For 

Research 

and 

Historical 

Purposes 

Only
3

• You will be expected to supply potential users with sufficient information on design and 

installation requirements to ensure proper performance. 

• You will be expected to certify to potential users that the hardware furnished has 

essentially the same chemistry, mechanical properties, and geometry as that submitted for 

acceptance, and that it will meet the crashworthiness requirements of the FHWA and the 

NCHRP Report 350. 

• To prevent misunderstanding by others, this letter of acceptance is designated as number 

B-162B and 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 at our office upon request. 

• The Nu-Guard barriers are patented products and considered proprietary. If proprietary 

devices/systems are specified by a highway agency for use on Federal-aid projects, 

except exempt, non-NHS projects, they: (a) 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. 

• This acceptance letter shall not be construed as authorization or consent by the FHWA to 

use, manufacture, or sell any patented device/system for which the applicant is not the 

patent holder. The acceptance letter is limited to the crashworthiness characteristics of 

the candidate device/system, and the FHWA is neither prepared nor required to become 

involved in issues concerning patent law. Patent issues, if any, are to be resolved by the 

applicant. 

Sincerely yours, 

David A. Nicol, P.E. 

Director, Office of Safety Design 

Office of Safety 

Enclosures 

FHWA:HSSD:NArtimovich:tb:x61331:6/12/08 

File: s://directory folder/nartimovich/B162B-nucor31inchTL4FIN.doc 

cc: HSSD (Reader, HSA; Chron File, HSSD; N.Artimovich, HSSD; 

 M.McDonough, HSSD) 

Archived - 

For 

Research 

and 

Historical 

Purposes 

Only
Archived - 

For 

Research 

and 

Historical 

Purposes 

Only
Archived - 

For 

Research 

and 

Historical 

Purposes 

Only