U.S. Department

of Transportation 400 Seventh St., S.W.

Federal Highway Washington, D.C.

20590

Administration

Refer to: HSA-10/WZ-98

Mr. Moon K. Hong

Managing Director

Kong Young Lamps & Safety Company, Ltd.

C-3504 Dong II Technotown

889-1 Kwan Yang Dong

Dong An Ku, An Yang Si, Kyung Gi Do

431-060 Korea

Dear Mr. Hong:

Thank you for your letter of August 17 requesting Federal Highway Administration (FHWA)

acceptance of your company’s Auto L.E.D. Warning Beacon for Barricade Use as a crashworthy

traffic control device for use in work zones on the National Highway System (NHS). 

Accompanying your letter was a report of crash testing conducted by E-Tech Testing Services 

and a video of the tests. You requested that we find this device 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.”

Introduction

The FHWA guidance on crash testing of work zone traffic control devices is contained in two

memoranda. The first, dated July 25, 1997, titled “INFORMATION: Identifying Acceptable

Highway Safety Features,” established four categories of work zone devices: Category I devices

were those lightweight devices which could be self-certified by the vendor, Category II devices

were other lightweight devices which needed individual crash testing, Category III devices were

barriers and other fixed or massive devices also needing crash testing, and Category IV devices

were trailer mounted lighted signs, arrow panels, etc. The second guidance memorandum was

issued on August 28, 1998, and is titled “INFORMATION: Crash Tested Work Zone Traffic

Control Devices.” This later memorandum lists devices that are acceptable under Categories I, II,

and III.

A brief description of the device follows:

The Auto L.E.D. is a 360 degree warning light beacon powered by two 1.5-volt D-cell (3V total)

batteries. It weighs approximately 1 kg complete with batteries. Product specifications are

enclosed for reference. For purposes of testing the Auto L.E.D. was mounted to the Bent Type II

Plywood Panel Barricade also illustrated in the enclosures. The “worst case” 914 mm wide

barricade test article assembly was specified for testing. This barricade had previously been 

successfully tested to NCHRP Report 350 and found acceptable by the FHWA (Acceptance

Letter 
2

WZ-6 dated November 23, 1998). The design of this barricade was also released as a generic

design by FHWA in our Acceptance Letter WZ-54 on September 15, 2000. The test article mass,

including the warning light, is 11.8 kg.

Testing

Full-scale automobile testing was conducted on your company’s devices. Two stand-alone 

examples of the device were tested in tandem, one head-on and the next placed six meters

downstream turned at 90 degrees, as called for in our guidance memoranda. The complete device

as tested is shown in Enclosure 1. The crash test is summarized in the table below:

Test Number 36-0620-1

Test Article Auto LED Warning Beacon on Bent Type II Plywood Panel

Barricade

Height to Top of Top Panel 930 mm

Height to Top of Leg 1035 mm

Height to Top of Light 1150 mm

Flags or lights One light on each barricade

Test Article Mass (each) 11.8 kg (no ballast used)

Vehicle Inertial Mass 813 kg

Impact Speed, Head-on 102.5 kmh

Impact Speed, 90 degree 100.4 kmh

Velocity Change, Head-on 0.58 m/s

Velocity Change, 90 degree 0.58 m/s

Vehicle crush Slight damage to bumper, hood, and grill.

Occupant Compart. Intrusion None. No windshield contact by barricade or light

Windshield Damage None. No contact

Findings

In the head-on impact the light remained intact and connected to the barricade. In the 90 degree

impact the light was hit by the first barricade and came apart. No part of the light or batteries

impacted the windshield. Damage was limited to dents in the bumper, hood, and grille. No part

of either barricade or light impacted the windshield. 

The results of the testing met the FHWA requirements and, therefore, the devices described above

and shown in the enclosed drawings for reference are acceptable for use on the NHS under the

range of conditions tested, when proposed by a state. All warning lights, including the Auto

L.E.D. Warning Beacon for Barricade Use, must be securely attached to the barricade with

standard fasteners including the vandal-resistant cupped washer or equivalent.
3

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

! Our acceptance is limited to the crashworthiness characteristics of the devices 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 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 being marketed is

significantly different from the version that was crash tested, it reserves the right to modify

or revoke its acceptance.

! 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 they will meet the crashworthiness requirements of FHWA and

NCHRP Report 350. 

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

WZ-98 shall not be reproduced except in full. This letter, and the test documentation upon

which this letter is based, is public information. All such letters and documentation may

be reviewed at our office upon request.

! If the Auto L.E.D. warning light is patented it would be considered "proprietary." The use

of proprietary work zone traffic control devices in Federal-aid projects is generally of a

temporary nature. They are selected by the contractor for use as needed and removed

upon completion of the project. Under such conditions they can be presumed to meet

requirement "a" given below for the use of proprietary products on Federal-aid projects. 

On the other hand, if proprietary devices are specified 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 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, a copy of which is enclosed. 

 

Sincerely yours,

Frederick G. Wright, Jr.

Program Manager, Safety 

Enclosure

FHWA:HSA-10:NArtimovich:tm:x61331:11/14/01

File: WZ98-KongYoungFin.wpd 

cc: HSA-10 (Reader, HSA-1; Chron File, HSA-10;

 N. Artimovich, HSA-10)


Sec. 635.411 Material or product selection. 

(a) Federal funds shall not participate, directly or indirectly, in payment for any premium or royalty on 

any patented or proprietary material, specification, or process specifically set forth in the plans and 

specifications for a project, unless: 

(1) Such patented or proprietary item is purchased or obtained through competitive bidding with equally 

suitable unpatented items; or 

(2) The State highway agency certifies either that such patented or proprietary item is essential for 

synchronization with existing highway facilities, or that no equally suitable alternate exists; or 

(3) Such patented or proprietary item is used for research or for a distinctive type of construction on 

relatively short sections of road for experimental purposes. 

(b) When there is available for purchase more than one nonpatented, nonproprietary material, 

semifinished or finished article or product that will fulfill the requirements for an item of work of a 

project and these available materials or products are judged to be of satisfactory quality and equally 

acceptable on the basis of engineering analysis and the anticipated prices for the related item(s) of work 

are estimated to be approximately the same, the PS&E for the project shall either contain or include by 

reference the specifications for each such material or product that is considered acceptable for 

incorporation in the work. If the State highway agency wishes to substitute some other acceptable 

material or product for the material or product designated by the successful bidder or bid as the lowest 

alternate, and such substitution results in an increase in costs, there will not be Federal-aid participation in 

any increase in costs. 

(c) A State highway agency may require a specific material or product when there are other acceptable 

materials and products, when such specific choice is approved by the Division Administrator as being in 

the public interest. When the Division Administrator's approval is not obtained, the item will be 

nonparticipating unless bidding procedures are used that establish the unit price of each acceptable 

alternative. In this case Federal-aid participation will be based on the lowest price so established. 

(d) Appendix A sets forth the FHWA requirements regarding (1) the specification of alternative types of 

culvert pipes, and (2) the number and types of such alternatives which must be set forth in the 

specifications for various types of drainage installations. 

(e) Reference in specifications and on plans to single trade name materials will not be approved on 

Federal-aid contracts. 

ENCLOSURE 2