Page Al6

5336-3

L-— so. —

73

Figure 37. Schematic of Skid-Mounted Sign Support with Wooden Sign Panel (Test No. 453360-3)

“YL W Cr pur (ys) w 76°] Jo sIyBiay BuO TOq OF / Jo wooussasse
snp ‘Aisnowaid possnasmp sy “se wodsy qYHON Ul quOS 19s UD ‘mnypaa {fe 19w
2ary 01 pa8pn{ sem jared uBis uapoom mua uoddns uBts pormow-prs a wseurUms oy

‘souBy oyen wacelpe orm UOISNU! 105 jeNUDIOd ou Pamoys pue 19uNEUI 2IGRS “ooUS
Apanvjas © UL US IS91 sTeIpaUKIN stp parxXa oMYIA 9] “VONSANp jesse] op UI 8 6 pure
uonsanp feurpnntBuo] om ut 8 g'Q- S19M SuONRIZTII08 aBRIDAE sosUI-¢ UMUTXeM oyL “8 Z'Q-
Sem worTes319908 UMOP~LE aBUIBAG DOSU-)| WOH Sep pure “(5/5 9°Z) SMU B'0 SEM AstOO}IA s>eduN
quednoo0 jesaTe] 9y ‘8 | y- Sem WONEII]2008 UMOpapL aBRIDAR Dosm-9] wOUBTY am pur “(sy
TV S/H L'0 Sem Andojaa ioedum yredn200 peUTpradBuo] aq], Joos pue ‘pooy ‘edumq soy ap o
a8eurep pourmsns Jaman ay] “S9f>IGaA JaxNO Jo [OND Jo $0] OF PRI] PMD Yor 1uswaAed
2m) uo paroteas oste Sem pues "Fame otN UT suaqIOM oO} puN souN] WoRlpE TI UTEN FeTMCDUC o1
Prezey [enuaiod asod pmoo qonpa a8 Apres arom sreuBeY anos Buo] (Y SEI) W 65 {q apm
(3 0€) W 6 wore ow BuoTe amo sem speotumeg 2m WOH s1IGIq “>}OMYA am Jo stEdN9I0 O1
YSU TeRURod ou Buoys ssOJaI2T1 ‘uoUNTEduIO tedn220 oy GIN MLOJSP 104 PIP nq spoIYoA
‘mp 30 Joo amp parsedan voddns feonson pamizeyy pure jared ufis amp pue 1eduni uodn posses}
suoddns yeonssa oq] “oy amity Ui poruasaud st ism snp jo synsou axp Jo Asvurams jauq y

{qe> am Jo Joos am Jo sear om
‘Uy 1p [peurs sem ouIKL “suoddns an tum edu cow (mr ¢/'9) UU 6] poe (tT ¢°9) wr EF]
‘zodumq amp 01 susp oma auam aug] “gg SmBLy UY UMOgS OFfe SI 2fOm2A aN or oBeuEG “Bo0}
(8 S6t) & 6S Aq spun (y O€) m6 ware Ue WT aJORPA ap Jo quad ap Boope UMaNs arm pues POE
suqed ‘Pedar vodn pamasey voddns uBts porunour-poys amp ‘ge aunty UT U26 0q UFO Sy

“6€ amBly TE UMOgs are powrsd 1521 aM Jo sqdeBoroyd jrNTIMbeg Edun yo wod amp Jo y2]
> 1 (Y ZI) OF » pow Umop (y Sep) w EEL Sax on gaND ApManbosans spMPA aL Wed premso}
-agfrens Ajoanwja © vo Burjaaen sum a[omyan isa aq uomeordde aye0q 01 1oug “wedun 2948
‘sasut 056 18 porjdde azom aporyon stp wo sayesq ‘ous ism aveTpoUNINT op pames]o FORA om SY
“AUTH 8°95) TY ¥'16 1 PomoTs pea a[oryaA om PUR Dosw 971 Sem ‘s[OIDA Ap YM 19eINOD
opus uoddns pammoeg op wags “21 ‘uoddns uBis op quM TOROS Jo sso] ye Jum oy] -drgpid
2m Jo poq amy tw Sinpur] secoid pezonze mnun dnyoid an s2A0 ponumuos oddns amp Jo s90914
‘Samu 971 TW JO Poounog pure Deru GL Te qeD aM Jo seal qp MeaU Joos ap Yonns ua Uoddns
3 Jo waIUIBSs UaYOIq Y ‘s9SHq OMT F2AO pojaaen dnyDId amp oT ‘droyoKd xp Jo poy am AO
Pure dn oso1 uoddns 2m jo ssoard pow jeued aq), 2434 pono aaoge (y 9) ur g°t Afarrumxoxdde
Poe 1y819q sadumq re amssey 0} weBoq suoddns jwonsan om Soedun uodn Ajarerpourny

“(47 6°09) TYUH 0°86 JO poods ¥ Te BuTjonen
“noddns wSts am jo surj=tes0 op qium poulye afarqaA amp Jo SuTHEIIGO aA thm VO-peaq woddns
‘Bis panmow pos agp pawedan aporpaa sa aq 56 amily xpucddy wm waa am ajorqaa ap uo
‘VONFELO; poe suorsusUTC “gf AMBLy OT UMONS se “FINN droped 1AOMA) p86] B FEM IfORDA
a FAL “LE AMBLy wm UMoKE SI (y $) wD ZS"| Jo IBI9y & Tw Pormou jouEd BIE U2PooM (mt
Bp X UL gy) UNG SIZ] x WAN EIZ]  TPIM woddns wBrs parunow-prys ap Jo onBU=TDS y

Wttaq Seow ogy ap TM 9 aM OTE O1 poo OW
$1 a25—) paw ATuoreystres tuso}od osfe prom myfreq Suro (y-1) w-E1-Z & MUM voddns WSIS
oxy ¥ Ten popnisnos aq weD it Ts FED sm ur Aone pomsopsd woddns wBks ap sms,
5) @ 261 Jo WB19q SoAUNOM ¥ TIM GUO UN “SonIq 10K Jt ‘AiTeNbo uUOpFed prnom (Y {) WE
£17 Jo Br9q Sonunod w tuum woddns aBis poxy e rem ponsttaq HH Span EMO GT (YL) Or
£1'Z Jo 19Bt2q STHUNOM ¥ qi woddns wes poxy w or Atdde ose prods ws21 PERI emp Jo HITS
Amodpums iedun am moy feopiz suom parsprsuos #1 1y8i9q Sununow (y-s) wI-Z6"| ap sou
‘“anamoH{ “suonvondde weqin pue jem tpoq mi guoddns wBis poy ye 303 (YL) mH ET'Z JO TIBI
Sanonow joued ufts ¥ 9m oy sprepuns #11 postal sours sey rormdag oT) 18} 210N

yong dropid © se yam se 821 a Joy parsojas sem joued
BIS amp 203 (YS) OI Z5"1 Jo WIBIIq BoMEMOM & ‘MEL -2f9NFSA amp On VONEIa! UT Yoddns UBIS
2M Jo Ansmoo8 2 0 amp zw soBuossed [feu oq UMN J[ITGIA 3521 feoNUD auoW ¥ parsprsuCD
sem yonn dryoid # ‘osTy ‘wonmpaco jeonus 210mm ¥ sim pum ajompA Sunoedun ue Jo praTaspaUA
a Sonensued pow Sunsedun oj penoaiod soy8ry ¥ oney on parspisucs sem (Y $) W ZS'T
Jo 14819q SonUnow an1 “suoneondde ueqm oF (y {) OF E1'Z POR sare pems mt (YS) WH Z5"| JO
Jpued u8rs am Jo Wonog om or panos an mio myo wmETUTE 8 aAey oy parmbas ame suoddns
Pexy Uo paisai2 suBlg “suBIsep uoddns uBrs poxy ponosdde oq Jo 2u0 sv 67 20us .sprepurig

Uonannsuoy pue Spero, LOCKL ap ut amogs st uoddns urs parmou-prys aq]

(E-09€€SP “ON 39J.) 1HOdANS NOIS GAXIA FE


Attachment A,

LE IIT.1.A

Page A37

ACCEPTABLE CRASHWORTHY CATEGORY 3 HARDWARE (Truck-mounted Attenuators and Traffic Barriers) (Continued)

Acceptance

Manufacturer,

Devicets)

Letter # Developer,
And Date Agency, ete

Crashworthy Longitudinal Barriers (To NCHRP Report 230 OR 350 AS NOTED)

NCHRP 230 WORK ZONE BARRIERS MAY REMAIN IN USE UNTIL OCTOBER 1, 2002.) (Continued)

FHWA B-21 Energy Absorption TRITON Water Filled Barrier

3i/27092, systems

FHWA B-21A TL-2, TRITON end treatments

og /27/34,

FHWA B-26

17/94,

FHWA CC-47 TL-3 Acceptance

05/08/98

FHWA B-41 Iowa DoT TL-3, Iowa PCB Temporary CMB - F shape w/ pin & loop connection
10/10/97

FHWA B-15 Roadway Safety (NCHRP 230), DRAGNET Vehicle Arresting System

126/90 Service

FHWA B-41 Rockingham TL-3, Temporary CMB - F shape w/ slotted tube/T-bar Connection
10/20/37 Precast

FHWA B-30 Safety Barrier (NCHRP 230)

1/17/95 Systems

FHWA B-34 TL-3, GUARDIAN Water Filled Plastic Barrier

1/29/96,

FHWA B-36 Trinity TL:2, LOW-PROFILE Concrete Barrier for Work Zones

5/31/96 Industries / syro

FHWA CC-44 Steel - Texas TL:2, LOW-PROFILE Concrete Barrier END TREATMENT

3/06/98 A&M



Va" Or 3/6 Stee
Typical All Ponels

7,

b—— 31 sya" 4

Note: Dimensions Are Approa:mote

Page A33

MATERIALS

28-3" pve Conourr

f= 0 PYC 90 DEGREE ELBOWS

2-3 pve wees

3-9 648 4 025 ANODIZED AL UminUM
FACE PANELS

$- 14 OR 18" 90 DECREE PANEL mounts

N22 VT MO METAL SCREWS

4-2 STANOARD FIRE EXTINGUISHER CLIPS

4-2 CONCRETE awcHOR BOLTS

ce

SI

Design =


Page A42

ATTACHMENT A, TABLE III.1.8
ACCEPTABLE CRASHWORTHY CATEGORY 3 HARDWARE (Breakaway Sign Supports} (Continued) |
Accept. Manufacturer / Supplier Brief description of device(s)
Letter
SS-63 S Square Tube Products Perforated square steel tube sign supports
S8-63A S Square Tube Products Consolidated acceptance letter
6/20/97
SS-64 Marion Steel Metric "Rib-Bak 2" Posts
1/18/96
S8-65 Poz-Loc Slip Baset*
9/5,'96
SS-66 HwyCom Universal Anchor System for FRP & Poz Loc Posts
3/8/96
SS-67 Franklin Industries 60 KSI U-Channel Posts recertification
3/9/96
85-68 X-Cessories Squ Slip Base for Square Steel Tube posts *
9/18/96
SS-68A X-Cessories Squared Slip Base, Triple Square supports in Standard soil
12/20/96
Ss- Cessories Squared Slip Base for Retrofit Square Steel Tube Posts

ss-68c Cessories Squared 3-bolt slip base for perf. square steel posts. Accepted previously
10/22/97 via SS-S$2 on 2/8/65 under different name
38-69 Safety Quest, Inc U-Channel Slip Splice
9/18/96
$S-70 Richard Buhler Sleeve it N Go for 4x4 wood posts
9/25/96
8S-71 Davidson Plastics Flexi - Guide Delineator Posts
12/23/96
SS-72 Foresight Products V-Loc Sign Support System
1297
PennDot “Universal” Spacer Bar for splicing u-channels
SS-74 Granger and Assoc “ANYTWO” bracer bar for splicing u-channels
3/14/97
SS-75 Universal Anchor Universal Anchor System with HWYCOM and POZLOC posts
4/9/97 systems, Inc
88-76 New Hampshire DoT Certain thin walled Alumir
1/9/98
Chicago Heights Steel “Eze-erect” type breakaway system using Gr 3 bolts
88-78 SMI Steel - Southern Steel Flanged Channel Sign Posts up to} 7 43m
Post

Specifications for
3, velocity change

* Supports conform to FHWA breakaway requirements based on the 1985 AASH:.
Structural Supports for Highway Signs, Luminaires and Traffic Signals
permitted is 5.0 m/s (16.4 ft/s} per NCHRP Report 350.

** These small sign supports were only tested and/or found acceptable in Nc : 30 "Standard" soil
(Report 239 S-1 "Strong" soil.) Should a state wish to install this hardware ns vax’ soil, further crash
testing is recommended.



Attachment A, TABLE I1.2
BACKGROUND CRASH TEST INFORMATION FOR ©.

TEGORY 2 DEVICES (Continued

DEVICE MANUFACTURER OR SIZE | MATERIAL LIGHTS, ETC? | TEST Impact | TEST VEHICLE Accepted
DESCRIPTION SPEED VEHICLE DAMAGE
BARRICADES - Type 1, Type II, or Type III (Grey shading indicates failing tests
Avfrane Denver Type 1 Steel flat | 16.3kg | No Lights Head on, 97 2021 kq Winor dents No
Alum, or Ballast Perpen., km/h scrapes, and Results
Panel & Down scratches marginal
Hdwre no
longer
Used
Generic Type IT Steel 43.6kg | No Lights Head on, 97 4022 kg Minar dents No
angle or Ballast Perpen.& km/h, scrapes, and Results
2/4" ply Down scratches Marginal
Panel
Breakaway | Type III PVC Pipe cable Normal 76 2040 kg | 137 m Minor dents cat. 2
threaded km/h scrapes, and
through all scratches
pipes
cable Normal 68 1021 kg | 84 m Minor hood cat. 2
threaded km/h dents
through all
pipes
Type I1t | Texas 4x4 Wood, Plywood: 453360-2 202 BG kg 37m Windshield No
uprights, skid sign panel km/h penetrated
mounted
Type 111 | Texas 4x4 wood No sign 453390-4 102 a1é kg 56m Windshield No
uprights, skid yun penetrated
mounted
Type 1 Texas 3m wide, wood Plywood 453360-5 93 816 kg 63m Windshield No
A-frame supports sign. km/h penetrated
i ends
Square Generic Perf 44 mm Plastic 453790-3 102 16 kg 109 m Minor dents, cat
Perf Tube | Square Steel bases vail on km/h scratches and
Type IIT | Tubes 38 mm elements concrete scrapes
uppers

Oly abeg


B-10

The AASHTO / FHWA agreement permits the use of connections meeting NCHRP 230 guidelines
until they complete their normal service life. Connections that do not meet those criteria may be
considered for a retrofit. In addition in the current work zone pooled funded study it has been
proposed to develop a retrofit for strengthening existing PCB joint details. If successful that may
allow continued use of an existing PCB on the NHS until the end of its useful life. Any phase in
period beyond 2002 would depend on the particular circumstances of the State including how safe
is their current joint detail.

4.1 QUESTION -Will contractors be allowed to continue using their existing barriers (providing it is one
of the five barriers identified tested in the 1996 RDG) until a reasonable amount of time has passed
after the NCHRP Report 350 acceptance of a non-proprietary, reasonably priced temporary barrier?

Answer- ( See Question 1.0 for information on dates which may alter the answer that follows.) Old

barrier segments can be used until October 1, 2000, as long as they are still serviceable and
conform to the NJ or F shape. After October 1, 2000, they must be one of the five listed in the
“crash tested and operational” section of Chapter nine of the RDG (or otherwise meet the tensile
and moment requirements of the AASHTO / FHWA agreement.). The key element. of course, is the
connection between barrier segments. This was a major concern of the states that are participating
in the pooled-fund study "Crash Testing of Work Zone Traffic Control Devices." Ranked highly by
the group was the need to "retrofit" current barriers that do not meet the NCHRP Report 350
criteria. Through a combination of computer modeling and test simulation and actual crash testing
of practical designs, the highway community should have jointed temporary concrete barrier
designs available at the end of the study. This should occur well ahead of the 2002 deadline. If any
barrier segments that do not meet NCHRP Report 350 criteria are still serviceable by 10-1-02 they
may be candidates for this retrofit.

It is recommended that no new non-NCHRP Report 350 barriers be purchased or manufactured.
4.2 QUESTION - Large deflection of portable barriers in the adjacent work space is a concern.

ANSWER - Agree, that is why maximum allowable deflection should be considered when selecting
the type of barrier to use. When using PCB’s, the maximum allowable deflection should govern
whether to use stiffeners for joints or attachment of the barrier to the pavement or deck.

4.3 QUESTION - The 25-degree angle hit is questionable in real applications.
QUESTION - Installing a device exactly is often not practical in a real application as it was
tested (installing barriers on a curve, for example).

ANSWER - An appropriate answer to this is to quote from NCHRP Report 350,
“Recommended Procedures for the Safety Performance Evaluation of Highway Features.”

From the Summary:

“These procedures are devised to subject roadside safety features tw severe vehicle impact
conditions rather than to typical or average highway situanony 4/1 «vi the innumerable
highway-site and safety-feature application conditions that exis! are nized, it is
impractical or impossible to duplicate these in limited number 0! \1.2".iardized tests. Hence,



B-8

Ifa device is determined to be crashworthy, it will be the State's prerogative to accept or reject that
product, as it has always been. The FHWA will not take a position on State's selection from among
competing crashworthy devices.

2.12 QUESTION - Will the implementation of the NCHRP Report 350 procedures mean the banning of
wooden barricades?

ANSWER - The NCHRP Report 350 procedures are not material based, but performance based.
Accordingly, the appurtenance design is being evaluated and not solely the material. While we may
speculate about the potential crashworthiness of a class of appurtenance, crash testing and in-
service evaluation is the validation.

2.13, QUESTION - How will all of the varieties of barricades in current use be tested?

ANSWER - We look to the industry to recommend how highway safety can best be served when
crashworthy barricades are required. Ifa small number of standard crashworthy barricade
designs could be developed, the various manufacturers would have an easier time providing
crashworthy barricades. The standard designs should provide guidance on variations in size,
materials, fastener hardware, permissible auxiliary devices, etc.

The results of a survey conducted by the American Traffic Safety Services Association (ATSSA) will
be most helpful in determining the extent of the crash tests needed to qualify (or disqualify) the
range of currently used barricades. ATSSA intends to sort the barricades and other devices into
categories and the “worst case’ example(s) from each Category tested to qualify the remaining
devices in a category.

2.14 QUESTION - Type III barricades need to be strong enough to be easily relocated without breaking
or coming apart.

ANSWER - We agree that Type III barricades must withstand the rigors of movement at a construction
site, but we also believe that they can be designed so that they do not present an undue hazard to the
traveling public.

2.15 QUESTION - Manufacturing their own equipment allows a contractor to control their own work.
Will having crashworthy barricades prevent that?

ANSWER - As long as satisfactory quality control is used and the devices meet the requirements of
NCHRP Report 350, contractors and other entities can manufacture their own devices. For example,
there are generic Type III barricades mentioned in the Roadside Design Guide of perforated square
metal tubes, plastic tubular elements or wood that have been satisfactorily crash tested and seem
suitable for easy assembly.


B-6

Jn proposing self-certification, the FHWA is recognizing an acceptance procedure used in other
regulated product sectors for where level of risk is low. It is believed that this level of assurance
will adequately address safety and impose the least costs on industry and consumers.

FHWA will maintain lists of Category 2, 3, and 4 devices but we will not keep a list of the numerous
Category | devices. The intent of FHWA is not to simply transfer the keeping of an approval list
for Category | devices to the highway agencies or to industry associations. The details ofa self-
certification program are left to the highway agency discretion but we would expect it to be
commensurate with the risk to the traveling public. A list of accepted devices is not a necessary part
of a self-certification program. A national association may keep a list of Category I devices as a
service to their members at their discretion. Other associations have created similar programs
Jor their members to reduce the burden and increase the confidence of their member's customers.
Often a mark or label is used to identify each product as listed as certified by that association.

2.5 QUESTION - If a highway agency does not believe that the vendor's self certification
of a device is accurate, what can be done?

ANSWER - By the nature of the Category | devices we would expect this to be a rare occurrence.
First, the highway agency should review the basis (supporting information). Since the vendor's
self-certification is subject to approval by the individual highway agencies, if they find it
unsatisfactory they will discontinue accepting it. If the highway agency has an actual or suspected
product failure, they should perform tests or have an independent or “check” test performed.

2.6 QUESTION - A contractor has devices in his inventory that he believes meet Category | but is
having problems obtaining a letter of self-certification for them from the manufacturer. Does that
mean these devices cannot be used on the NHS after the October Ist date?

ANSWER - A vendor who is supplying the devices for use on a highway agency's project is
responsible for the self-certification. Therefore the contractor can self-certify his current inventory
of Category | devices as meeting NCHRP Report 350 standards if he is willing to be responsible for
the crashworthiness of the devices.

2.7 QUESTION What should be in the letter of self-certification?

ANSWER - The letter should contain at a minimum:

(D) A title, e.g, "Certificate of Crashworthiness”;

(ti) Name and address of vendor making the certification

(iii) Unique identification of the certificate (such as serial number) and of each page and the total
number of pages;

(iv) Description and unambiguous identification of the item tested;

(v) Identification of the basis for the self certification process used and to what Test Level of
NCHRP Report 350. This basis as listed in the July 25, 1997-memo as crash test experience with
similar devices or years of demonstrably safe operational performance. (Simplified crash testing
showing that a device poses no risk to vehicle occupants may be used to support the manufacturer's
certification. This simplified testing must, as a minimum, be documented by a written report,
observed by an independent, impartial observer, recorded on videotape, and include a means, other
than the test vehicle's speedometer, for determining the vehicle speed at time of impact.)


Page A20

38.1 (1 1/2) SQUARE TUBE

TOP view

Figure 42. Perforated Steel Tube Type III Barricade with Wood Panels

FRONT VIEW

Sol

“OSE Hodsy dYHON HI IOS
Ys BLO TONEN|EAD [Te Jour DALY O1 poSpnl osye sem WONIPUOD [10s 19M TNLM poIs3} syusUIs[9
[fer Uapoom Tim Bigqmy poriojied woy poresuiqes speoueg py] sdX] om ‘Areuums uy

‘Soue] oggeN w20¥Ipe OM WorsNAUT 103 fenUD0d
Om POMOYS Pure JoTTEUI sIquIs ‘Toours AJIAnBIaI 8 UT AS IS31 SIUIPOUTUNT oT payX aMyOA
SQL “WoRseNp [exe] ap Ur 8 /'9 pue CONSaNp [eupMBuo] aM wT 8 ¢-¢- ax suONEII]I09"
SBRIDAw DOSUI-Q¢ ALL WeIES yuednI00 feI=TE] OU SUM SELL “8 S'[- sem WonEz2[200. ~mopopur
aBaroaw oosts-O] wsog8ry ap pus (sy 9°Z) s/o EZ Sem Ar1D0[9n 19edun Juedno90 feuIpruIsUo]
aL ‘Jwounredmios ywedno00 orp oy VorsnNUT 10 uoENsuad ou seM au0y] “pooy pue ‘18
‘redumq oy 0} oBeurep sour poureysns 2f9IyoA ay], wore aqp UT sISyIOM O} prEzeY JoUTW ase
Pinos suoddns ywonz, pow pamoeg ay, “souv] jocelpe UT ougEN SuTuOIWO or prEZEY [eNUROd
asod 01 y8none oBse] jou arm swusuMFey woyy “Bu0] (Y ISI) G1 9p Aq apIm (Y S-9¢) HIT
Bore ue Suope UMOND sem Ipeotie st Woy stIqeq “wwouedutos yednss0 ay senoued jou
PIP_ Inq “poog amp tus oRUOD apete opeoEA am Jo syuSUiHes UsxOIq pue Dedun vodn pasreys
pect OML “9S amMBIy wT paussoud st isa sMp Jo sysox oy Jo Areuums Jouq y

‘Wo-parte sem 3m ses Y>| oq pu pooy poe ‘TTL8 ‘odumq
amp Buope soqzrerss pus swap asm amq] “ps amBiy UT UMOYS osfe s] apoA om oF Beare,
‘Buot (¥ IST) & op Aq apun (y s'9E) HF I] Bare OW UF a[oTYoA a Jo YT om BuOTE UMaNS
319M PUES puE sLIgoq edun uodn passnEYys speoueg om “ys omB1y WI wos oq WED SY

“SS amB1q U1 wnogs axe pouad ys21 amp Jo sydeiBooqd fenuanbog -yedun jo yurod yp
JO U>t (¥ 8°12) WI L°9 paw UMOp (y GLE) HOTT 1801 OF su <pUENbosqNS afOTGAA SY], “PABALIOS
ayBrens Suryoen sem ajoryaa op ‘oneondds oyesq oF ong “(G/U S*ZS) YM 5°76 01 POMOTS
eq [organ ofp se Sosur OL {18 STOMISA IT TUM J2EIUOD So] PUB [TDA om Jo JO am Buoe
‘spor woddns Teonson Yo! Sq (T/T O'gS) YUN p'¢6 Jo poods w ye FuNoAeN sem aPORyA 3
STA SasogiTe SuTeSeq paw TaM]2 [rer a Woy poremdos poddns feonson Bu ap ‘sosuI OF IW
“QOS SE TB O[>ITA AT JO pooy Imp porerucs yusmsj9 jret wapoom doy ayy IWBI9q zadumq 1
pamasey ose woddns peons9A Y>t ap ‘osu 61 we pus WqBroy dug ye pamsey yoddns jeoRA
aq mp ‘sosma p] ry Ids weeMZS fres LapooM appr ap edun sye Sos! ZI IW “STA
aH JO woy op punose poddeim puw pauuojop suoddns peors9a sy] -porsneys ua puw rds
juan] [Fer Uspoom amp ‘speoiireg oy Jo raDED|2 [rer FIMO] Tp persed spoaA amp SW

“(CU ¥'€9) YOXI L'Z01 JO poods v re Sutjonen ‘opeotureg amp Jo amTs21I29 op
(HM Poudre sforyoa ap Jo auras oep TIM WO-pesy apeottreq [1] odA | oNseld om parsedurt
MPA ISA SA] “96 aMB1y xpuaddy ur uoAIs am sJoryoA oq UO VONEUUOFUT puw SuOIsTSET
“ys amAy wy amos se Tuuds yo1AIID G86 ¥ SEM s]OIYOA 182 oq] ‘sjoued U2POOM
Paw duiqra jaois persopoed moy parwouqes sum speouumeq oy] “es amBLy U1 UMOYS St opeoLTEG
ap Jo oneulsqos y “soRpMs yuIMZAed J2!5009 ¥ JO PEASUT [IOs taxi WO Pooe sem speouTEg aM
‘“9't “GORTPUOS [TOs 1am JOPUN PISS SEN “T-OBBESH PUB C-N6LESp “SOU 1891 UT posn TEM OF JETTA
‘swustia[9 [fer uspoom mim Suiqns [ses porwojred Woy poeouqes apeoureq [I] ok] V

(Z-O88ESP “ON 189.1)
TONIPAOD Pos 394 ‘HUIMIA NY Vapooy qm BrIqny pyeiopieg CTP



Page A38

ATTACHMENT TABLE III.1.8
ACCEPTABLE CRASHWORTHY CATEGORY 3 HARDWARE (Breakaway Sign Supports) (Continued)
Accept Manufacturer / Supplier | Brief description of device(s)
Letter
88-1 PozZ-LOC anchor system - 2 3/8 in. O.D. posts, max .095 in. wall
TéH14/ BE thickness. **
SS-2 Trus Joist Corp MICRO=LAM - 14 7/8 X 7 7/8 in. box section plywood post. Tested in
8/19/86 S-2 soil
$8-3 Allied Tube & Conduit QWIK-PUNCH tube system - max size 2 1/4 x 2 1/4 in. x 12 ga. post
10/3/86 corp set in reinforced sleeve base
38-4 Minute Man Anchors, Breakaway coupling for use with 3 lb/ft steel flanged channel post
2/29/87 Ine. (superseded by new hardware on 3/10/88. See SS-6) **
ss-5 {Memo to Regions) a. Perforated square steel tube - 2 x 2 in. x 0.105 wall thick. max
6/15/87 size.+*
b. Single 3 lb/ft steel U-post. **
c. Dual 3 lb/ft steel U-post. **
d. Ariz. dual legged slip base $4x7.7 post
e. Texas dual leg slip base, W12x45 post
£. to g. repeated SS-i to SS-4 above
SS-6 Minute Man Anchors, Breakaway coupling for use with steel flanged channel supports. **
3/10/88 Inc.
ss-7 (Region 5 Memo) Wisconsin Large Sign Support System - slip base w/no upper hinge,
9/1/ee sign attachment clips provide for release, W12x22 posts tested
ss-8 Unistrut Corp. TELESPAR small sign supports max size 2 ¥ x 2% in. x 12 ga.
3/31/39
88-3 Franklin Steel EZE-Erect Sign Posts - max 4.0 lb/ft flanged posts
3/16/89,
4/7/89
SS-9A Franklin Steel Dual EZE-Erect in strong soil
LO/17 96
ss-10 HwyCom Corp 3-Inch Diameter, 1/8 in. wall, fiber-reinforced plastic post. (see
3/11/89 S$S-12)
ss-11 Allied Tube & Conduit Quick-Punch post - Max size 2.25 x 2.25" x 14 ga. in unreinforced
5/18/89 12 ga. sleeve base.
S8-12 HwyCom Corp Dual post installations of 3-inch FRP.
8/3/33
S$-13 Marion Steel Single to triple 3 ppf and single or dual 4 ppf Rib-Bak post
8/31/89 installations with ground splice. ++
10/2/89 Project by project acceptance of Florida's splice in both soil types
22/12/91
12/27/91
88-14 Marion Steel Rib-Bak Post with Minuteman Coupling <+
10/27/89
SS-15 (Memo to Region 1) Single 3" and 4" diameter Aluminum, : .- eil, direct burial
12/12/89 tube. **



Category 4 Devices

The last category, which is actually a subset of category 3, includes portable, usually trailer-
mounted, devices such as area lighting supports, flashing arrow panels, temporary traffic
signals, and changeable message signs used in or adjacent to the traveled way. The
AASHTO/FHWA agreement states that time is needed to conceive and evaluate alternative
measures for making these devices crashworthy, to examine the use and crash histories of
existing devices, and to review and, if needed, develop safer, cost-effective strategies for the
placement or replacement of these devices that will provide motorists with needed information
for driving in work zones. An announcement of an implementation date is anticipated by
October 1, 2000.

IV. Disclaimers

Neither this memorandum nor any other FHWA correspondence recognizing the
crashworthiness of work zone hardware implies conformity with the Manual on Uniform
Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD). A vendor of a new device should check to see that it
conforms to the MUTCD before proceeding with a full-scale crash testing program.

The crashworthy roadside safety hardware and work zone traffic control devices covered by
this memorandum are acceptable for use in work zones or other locations as appropriate on the
NHS, within the range of conditions tested, if acceptable to the States. Our acceptance is
limited to the crashworthiness characteristics of the devices and does not cover their other
structural requirements. Vendors are expected to supply potential users with evidence of
crashworthiness (a certification of crashworthiness for category 1 devices) and sufficient
information on design and installation requirements to ensure proper performance for all safety
hardware. We anticipate that the States will require certification from the vendors that the
hardware furnished has essentially the same chemistry, mechanical properties, and geometry as
that used in the crash testing, or that it is substantially similar to a tested device and that it will
meet the NCHRP Report 350 performance requirements as modified by the FHWA

Many of the devices covered by this memorandum are patented and therefore “proprietary.”
Temporary proprietary work zone hardware is usually selected by a contractor to meet general
requirements for the management of traffic through work zones. As such, the hardware can
be assumed to be exempt from the requirements for the use of patented or proprietary products
covered in 23 CFR 635.411. However, if such products are specified by name by a highway
agency for use on a Federal-aid highway project, except non-NHS projects, the requirements
of 23 CFR 635.411 must be met.

Wun Nlck

Henry H. Rentz

3 Attachments


DRAFT

Page A31

| lI

_
sos ll |
..

— 762 —-1

101

|

Figure 10. Skid-mounted Sign Support (Test 439107-10).
16

ber support)
Sixts2—

vo2"102x3353 ~
10 diom. pons

- Texas Tr
+ 439107-10
0803/97

+ Tratfic Control Device
+ Skid-mounted berricade  12FD2
+ 1.02 + 12FDEW2
102%102x3383 m tall wooden - 86
= Support w/1219x1219x13 sige
LR0100000
. 36
Mags (kg) Curb... 2... 808 (during 1.0 8 after impact)
Test Inertiot .... 820 Max. Roll Angie (deg)... N/A
Dummy 6.6... 78 Max. Pitch Angie (deg)... N/A
Gross Static... 896 Max, Yaw Angie (deg)... N/A

Figure 76. Summary of Results for Test 439107-10.

Livad


38 (1 1/2) TELSPAR—~

PERFORATED TUBING \

attached to upright
with splice plate

PLASTIC 1-BEAM
W/ 38 (1 1/2)

Dimensions are in millimeters (inches)

30.1

i |

HOLLOW CORE FLANGES

2.7 (0.105) } |

11.1 (7/16) DIA HOLES
25.4 (1) OC. 4 SIDES

PLASTIC I-BEAM PANEL.
W/ HOLLOW CORE
FLANGES

H| FULL LENGTH OF TUBE
TOP VIEW 38.1 (1 1/2) SQUARE TUBE

38.1 (1 1/2) SQUARE
PERFORATED TUBING

F 152 (6)

1562 (61 1/2)

44 (1 2/3) SQUARE

PERFORATED TUBING

~ attached to uprights
with splice plates

SEE DETAIL A

~attached to upright
with splice plates

SEE DETAIL A
- 44 (1 3/4) SQUARE
/ PERFORATED TUBING

Figure 41.

Varies 1219-3658 | 1524 (60) J
(48-144)
SIDE VIEW
FRONT VIEW

Perforated Steel Tube Type III Barricade with Plastic Panels

LIy abeg


BARRICADE DETAILS
Wood or Recycles —/] All lum i Nominal dimensi
feed or Recycles — lumber sizes are nominal dimensions Page A23

5 1x152x1524 1 1524

102x102 Wood or
Recycled Plastic Lumber
140 Tait

31x102x116B Wood Broce

102x102x1524 Hollow Core Plastic Post 102x102x1524
10 Diam. Bons Hollow Core Plastic Post

(2 per Support)

ia

25x205 Wood Roi

508

(2) 10 Diom. x 76 Long
Log Screws

at fee ] 10 Diam, Bolts
508 51415241524

Wood or Recycled
| Plastic Lumber
‘| 10 Diem. + 76 Long
Wood or Recycled Plastic SH 508 Lag Screw
Lumber, Skias f Mt
Siri b2ei524 | H] _1 f x

Le y62 XN i0 oom x 76 Long
1219 1524 log Screw

FRONT VIEW SIDE VIEW

51x102914
Wood or Recycled
Plastic Lumber 635

Figure 1. Type Ii Hollow Core Plastic Barricade as Used in Test 439107-1.

0.1498

id

‘yeirection -
Max. 0.060-¢ Average (o'¢)

x-direction . +N
yeirection -
r-Grection -

Figure 17. Summary of Results for Test 439107-1.


a
=
=
E
& 2 oo8
o $s sens
a 2 aoa
a2 e236
cd ®yLle a
Bo Kole 2.
WES wpe g3es
X52 56° gos
a “tse gga.
low tore c s
a0 -auF Bsze
ro
=) 8
=e
gre
la gas”
3 Z25s
N dynos
~ <i 5h
= e552
1 rise
‘ 2 xan F
i 5 3
2 °
—— 4 2 ££
z
‘ &
ot
2a
$5
Zon
3
wl
Sus :
7 . re 3
a je 0 apelin SS o
- | = “| Fee
$2
noe
ooo ks
Se
12s
- =

pe

1+-32-1/2'-+4
I
Ly
+ \
b
f 35-1/2" +4
pe-32-1/2"-4

flang:

; vee s His 3]
N
anges
L
9-1/2",
-
aN
ight

Plastic |-beam

w/1-1/2"
hollow core

93

Figure 45. Schematic of Perforated Tubing Type III Barricade with Plastic Rail Elements (Test No. 453790-3)

6

“0S€ Wodsy EAHON UT yoy 19s BUTS TONENFEAd [Te Jour sAEY Oy poBpnf sem syusTI[>
Trex onsejd qm Barqny poreroysod woy porwouqes speouteq If] 2d4 om ‘Areurums uy

‘soug] oyyen y20"(pe IM WorsNATT 0} feHUaod ou pemoys puB JOUEUE
aiqeis ‘Toows ApPAne[os w UT oI IS21 STWIPOUTUNT aT Pare SOMGDA SY L “WORIONP PASTE] op UT
8 ¢-Q- paw uoNSanp peurpmrBuo] amp ui 8 G'Z- DSM sUONBID]IN08 2BesAV SOSTI-N¢ TY WeTVCS
yuednsc0 erate] ou sem aay] “8 E'O- SEM TONBIZ[2008 UMOpepu oBersAw ooew-Q] wsyBIy oy}
poe (say 2°S) s/t 2°] sem AQ190]2A edu wednss0 yeuTpmBoo, aq] = Tu2aRsedwos juedno30
2H OFT vorsnNUT Jo UOHENeued ou sem aq) ing ‘syESTISI2 [res onew aM Pw 1wIU0I <q
Poyse9 SEM PISTSPUM Sy] “pooy puw ‘TTS “mdunq ap 01 saqDS pow KEEP PAPI IOTIA
am oy oSeureq “wave OT) UI S229I0M 0} 10 souE] JU20E/(pE UT SYTEN SuTEscSwO oF pumZEY feNUZOd
asod 0) yBnous Aaway Jo o8ze] Jou sian syoUBey SuTUTEU Ap JO wow PEE ARPA AN Jo Twoy
wt Suoye 2px saseq pu spoddns wow aq] “Suo] (Y 8S¢) H 60I Aq apem (y cc) H [| Paw oe
‘Suoye umoNp sem Speotueq a Woy sugeq WouNredur0s yedn200 aM sreRoUed 100 pIP nq
“pIaTySpUIM pre pooy stp tHIM losTuCS spemm pure suoddns jeoni2A ap Woy poreredas s1usuTo[9
Trex onsed ogy “gp amB1y ut powosaud st say sm Jo symsar om Jo Areurums joug W

“( 8°Z) umm 01 sem rodumq a
JO soMI09 JOY Yo] 9q ye OMIA om Jo JOUIxe om OF YsMUD UMUTTXEWY “PpouMsoo youNEdwIO
yoednsc0 oy) JO uOIsRnM Jo TONENsued Oo ‘I2AQMOY ‘PoyelD SEM PPSIYSpULM sy “poyssei9s
Poe porusp 239m pooy pus “us ‘sadam ay] ‘9p amily oI UMOYs osTe St SOTA ap oy oBeuE,
“Buo] (Y gs¢) m 601 Aq spun (Y SE) WT] ware Ue MT sforPA amp Jo qed om Suope UMeNS
Suam pues pow Suge “Sar [OUY [HUN s]MPA op TM pokes puw spomysA ayy oI aM punore
poddeim suoddns feons2a am ‘pesisay “UMOp pjoy 01 syoddns jeonssA stp 10} yBTY 001 sem
paeds wedun om ing ‘pougtssp se poreoys suoddns jeoni9a om Joy sind meas gy “Hedon wodn
suoddns jeons2, om wow porezedos syusuoyo [rex onseid ap ‘op ami Ut uses 9q WED SY

“Ly amB1j uy UMoys axe potted 1531 om Jo sqdexBon0qd
Tenuanbog yoedumt yo wntod om Jo yoy aT 01 (Y 0°97) UH GL PUB UMOP (Y O'10E) HI L'16 Iar
© sures Apuonbosqns s]oyoA og], “preauoj-1yrens Supyen sem aporyaa am ‘uonsondde syEIq
or zourg “(G/T 7'6¢) YEE 7°56 30 poods © re Suysnen ‘som 69 Te speoiuA sm THM IED
WO] VOMYIA BY], “OOsM YS Te ywouNS]> rex soddn om TIM pure sosUI Zp Je PaLMs00 JUIUID]9 [TEI
onseid a[ppra stp Aq 1mEOD PIPASPUTYA “PRA om Jo TAG ap punam podderm poe pouojp
suoddns jeonson pue ysuajo pres onsepd smo] ogy “suoddns peonsen om woy poreredos
Syusure|9 [rex onset soddn puw oppprar amp ‘suoddns yeonson op poredun spores ap sy

“(A 4°£9) TUT 0'ZOI 30 paods ¥ 18 BuToaen
“Speoureg amp JO SUTHISIEIO aqp TIM pouBiye SpOMBA emp JO SuTSTUTO oCp TIM wo-pEIy SpeOULTEG
oR pasedun sporyoa 1s NL “6 BMBIY xIpusddy wi waar are oporqoa oT UO TONBGLOSUT
Pue suorsusunq “oy amBiy mi uMmogs se ‘msds yfoUAsqD gRGI B SUM DOTA ISz OG]
“OUy ‘sao1Aaq XIGFeAL Woy poseyaind sem opeoureg oy], “Sp SmBry WT UMOYS st srUDHITO [Tez
onset them Smqns [oo1s poreiojied woy poreouqey speoumg [IT odX], 2p Jo ONFUEIDS Y

(E-O6LESP “ON IL) HUAMITY NY sysETY GM Bagh paresojiog TTP


MODEL #:

Specifications
“AIR SPILL’ BARRICADE

DSTA MRQB

Lesenption

and ballast plate

Fieuble reflective panel, post, rubber
base with quick release bracket

DSTA MRB

Flexible rellective panel, post, rubber
base with clamping bracket
and ballast plate

Base Width 12° (30.48 em) X Length 18" (45.72 cm}

Panel Width 8° (20.32 cm) thry 12" (30.48 cm)
Height 24” (60.96 cm) thru 36” (91.44 cm)

Post 1 3/4" (4.45 em) X 46" (116.84 cm)

Weight 23 Ibs (10 45 kg)

Options Additonal steel ballast plate
6" (15 24 em) X 15- 1/2" (39.97 cm) X 3/8" (95 cm) Weight. 12 tbs. (5 45 kg)

23 Ibs (10.45 kg)

Barricade can be ordered with a metal base
that increases the weight of the unit (0 32 Ibs. (14.55 kg)

Atype “A” - "B." -or °C" flashing light can be mounted

‘on both rubber base models

WHAT THEY’RE SAYING ABOUT THE “AIR SPILL” BARRICADE

(00 our recently completed contact, we suosiduied
vertical panals lot plasie arums and everyone was
very pleased ain ther performance Some ol the
Bavantages af@ ennancing consructon schedule
‘ue 0 ease of placing i hitby a venice, they do not
‘go careening nto wai oF the wore area they can be
Fepaites. Iney occupy smaier footprint or space thus
flowing larger wark avea ano pation driving area
‘General Contractor

This device pertormed very satstactonly. proven a
clear message 19 the motoring puoic struck. pa
is cause ite datiage Io he venice they se fa
(3 not launched io the woxk zone Ike 2 Dalrel
ones”

State DOT

“We would ro have bean able te complete he job as
quickly without the “Av Spl” barricades
Road Buiaer

‘Ar Spis were used wxclusively for vattic contol wun
phenomenal suecess considering the conditions
Encountered Trafhe conual at ramps wi inter
Shanges s0 clase 10 each olfer presented special
problems. Air Spills showed an added advantage
Sver barels 9 thal thew Gagonal stipes give the
Jdded advantage ol removing Me Goubl as 10 which
rection they should dnve on

Consulung Engineers:

Field research reveals at 12" « 24° verheal panels
ate move visible - day OF night than piaste ciuins

Program Repot 236 (NCHRP)

‘Navonal Cooperative Highway Research Program

TOORDER FOH PRICING.. FOR MORE INFORMATION.

ALL TOLL FREE
1-800-451-9636
or (716) 681-3000
FAX 716-681-1188

fone

FLASHER HANDLING CORP.
125 Taylor Drive « Depew, NY 14043-2014

US Patent Ne 4.798017 Foreign Patent 1303459 U.S Patent 0.231605

Distributed by:

US Patent 0-233608,

Flasher Handling’s
“AIR SPILL
BARRIC AD):

Work Faster and Smarter!

Av Spill) barncades get reve protectiun and safety an the jou taster
because ney'Te so easy te handle “Air Spill” units can be loaded off ur
(On fo trucks by One Man Most umpurtant, they are so stable nc sand
bagging s necessary when Ine units are ordered with ballast plates

The ret Wve panel aria pust at
patented quick release brackel that 1S operated by a foot peual The
bracket locks or releases the

vertical panel instantly

nei fnily » place By a unique

The “air spilling’ action ot the
exible panel and the rusoer
base with its bollext ballast
plates heup the “Aw Sp
barricade upnght sn winds,
up te 55 mph It struck
vehicle, Ihe panel releases tron
the bracket ang flutters 1¢ the
ground harmiessly It doe
become ¢ road hazard a!
offen is the case with a
barrel or drum,

by a

“Air Spill barricades direct wathic jet’
positely day and night. They

take up much less roadway than
barrels ang drums and iney
dont require sandbagging

TO ORDER..FOR PRICING. FOR MORE INFORMATION

CALL TOLL FREE
1-800-451-9636
or (716) 681-3000

FAX 716-681-1188

fone
FLASHER HANDLING CORP. ~~
125 Taylor Drv» Dapew, NY 14043-2053 2

Bei io sin



Page Ald

8s

“OSE wodsy CHHON UI UO; 395 BUND UOHENTEAS [Te your
2ARq 0} poSpnf sem joued uBis ouqesonserd tim voddns uBts a[qewod om ‘Areurums vy

“sougy oye
yuooelpe ory vormAUy 103 fenU=od ou pamoys pus ssuEEM o1qus “TooUNS AfPANeTe B UT oI
301 SeTPOUTU | PAIX oJOIIA oY, “UONSoNp fesse] Tp Ot B y'O- pue UORSaNp feuTprurBuo]
‘2M WB g'Q- stam SuOTBIa;2Q008 OBes2A¥ SesuI-O¢ 9qy 7 WeduN yHEdNDd0 eIZTE] JO peUTpryrBUO]
OU SBM SUIT] “SITSA I JO JOUXS Oy) 0} YSNID d[qemseoul OU SEM B94] Joo! pue
Pooy oq o1 sousreios JoUTET pouTEISNs apOTyOA Oy] “ware MN UI SIyZOM OF 10 STUB] W20e[pe oT
oygen Surmosuo 0) prezey jeTaod asod 0} ySnous 28g] you swam suey ayy “Buoj (y €°¢9)
W £61 Aq 2PM (Y O'81) H C's ware Ue BuoTe uMONN sem UBIS om Woy sUqe”] JouNFedu0D
ywedns00 2H OTM UOIsNNM! Jo UOHENoUEd OU sem ou>q) ING ‘Joos a IM reo spur
uoddns uBrs ap pue joued uSis suqeyonseyd om jo susuIBe1y “Sedum uodn possyeys yoddns
UuBrs oquyod ayy, ‘7 emMB1y UT poywosaad st ism sm Jo synsor — Jo Areurums jouq y

Weight: 26 Ib

48"x48" Vinyl
rollup sign
supported by

two 67” long
plastic cross—strips
3/16" thick

1/4" wide
TrafFix—Sign

fully extended)

47”
(68-1/2" whe

“peqn09 spew
S8eyj om 219qM Joos om HO pus poy ay UO saqsTEIDS ATUO ‘[OIFOA STP Jo JOUMXS amp OF YSIS
PIqemseour OU SEM SIG] “OE SNB1] UI UMOYS Ose SI Dora oy 01 aBeureq “Buo] (y ¢°¢9)
 €61 Aq opm (y O81) H 6's vore Ue OT a[OPDA o— Jo Ted ap BuoTe UmaNs arm WEES ap JO
syusmBery “Of amB1y wt woes 9q wes se qoedun Uodn poyemdas yoddns uBrs a1quu0d ay],

“TE amBty Ut MMOS ase pouad 1591 amp Jo syderBooyd jenuIbeg oedun jo
yotod orp Jo Bu op oF (Y ss) UI "| PUR UMOP (Y OEE) UI ZO] 3S9I 0} SUMED AMEMbosqns DOTA
ALL “PRENUos-ysres BurIIEN sem ooryoA om ‘vonRoNdde aywq 07 Jog “(G/U 9°65) Y/UTY
8°56 JO pods 8 ye Buronen ous woNETESsUI amp parejo aor pA op ‘osu 177 Ty ‘Joued ws op
Woy poreredas pur sj9mYoA stp JO oor 9G} pooeuOD sBey amp ‘sosur QOT Ty “Afoansodsar ‘osu
69 pure oesta OS 38 PITISpUIM op paroeyiCs sdins mowouosuTes pus jaued uBIs ouqeyonseld
FHL “S[MPA BMP Jo UO aM OF pouLioy jousd UBrs ouqeyjonsed om pue oseq a Woy
Porexedas uB}s ap Jo wonrod soddn amp ‘uioddns uBts aqeuod amp pasedun spor om Sy

a
q
x
7
~
'
x
na
TM~
1

fully extended)

(36-1/2" when

“(VT 6'09) VON 6'L6
Jo poods & ye Burjoawn ‘uoddns uBts om Jo ompaTEI om tM pouBtTe sporyaA oT Jo suyI2020
‘2 HM wo-pesq uoddns uBis om parsedun spoyaA 1994 UL “pG OMB xIpUaddy wt UoAIs ae

Figure 29. Schematic of Portable Sign Support with Plastic/Fabric Sign (Test No. 453790-1)

S19RGPA stp Uo UOPEMLOST pu suoUMNG “OF amBiy uw WNOTS se JULIE fOIAAT) gRGT BSE
SPORYPA 871 I, “67 SMNBLY OF wMoUS st (Y 1) WUT COE Jo TyBI9y & Te PorMOW UBS suqEyoNsEd
(mr gp x ur gp) umm 6 IZ] x UIE GZ] & IM Yoddns UBIs aJquyod am Jo onEUIOqDS Y

_ G-06LESP “ON 389.1) OBIS HQEA~PNEET gM LOddng UIs BIqR0g H7E

59


Attachment A, TABLE II.1
ACCEPTABLE CRASHWORTHY CATEGORY 2 HARDWARE

Page A5

Acceptance Manufacturer, Device(s)
Letter # Developer,
And Date Agency, etc.
FHWA WZ-1 WLI SafetyCade Vertical, or SafetyCade Barricade Type II,
6-19-97 Industries Plastic, with Warning Light Accepted TL-3
FHWA WZ-2 Impact Vertical Panel w/driveable base,
1-28-98 Recovery Portable Single and Double Vertical Panels,

Systems, Inc Fixed Single and Double Vertical Panels

Fixed Chevron sign Assemblies, Accepted TL-3

FHWA WZ-3 Various This memorandum is WZ-3. It finds the following tested

devices acceptable for use on the NHS. See Attachment
B, Table 2 for test data, and the drawings after the
tables for illustrations of the crashworthy devices.

TTI for Texas
D.O.T.

TTI tested numerous work zone traffic control devices.
All the devices listed here were successfully tested in
these two crash test programs and met TL-3 criteria.

The attached drawings illustrate the tested hardware but
do not necessarily provide enough information to
fabricate the device. The crash testing is fully
documented in the two reports?’? which should be
consulted for additional details of the hardware.

(TTI Report,
Note 1)

1) Spring Mounted Sign Support with Plastic/Fabric Sign’
(see Figure II.1, “Figure 21")

2) Portable Sign Support with Plastic/Fabric Sign}, with
flags added on top (see Figure II.2, “Figure 29")

3)D-4 Sign Trailer with Wooden sign Panel
(see Figure II.3, “Figure 33")

4) Skid Mounted Sign Support with Plywood Sign Panel
(see Figure II.4, “Figure 37")

5) Perforated Steel Tube Type III Barricade with Plastic
Panels (see Figure 11.5 “Figure 41" & “Figure 45")

6} Perforated Steel Tube Type III Barricade with 1x8
Wood Panels (see Figure 11.6 “Figure 42")

7) Schematic of Plastic Type III Barricade by Tex-Mex
Barricade (see Figure II.7 “Figure 57") [this hardware
may no longer be in production.]

8) Hollow Core Recycled Plastic Type III Barricade *
(see Figure II.8 “Figure 61")



Page A29

TOP VIEW A

; 238 ,
°
51410241219 Long Wood Brace | atrichtd Uses 0 Sue
BOLTS (2 PER SUPPORT) oO
ai if ] yoo
50.00 125 wu

STEEL POST

16 « 203
Penwoon aan
ze | H

Li
236 LONG X_3 IncK
Cacvanizeo “seer weoce J

€1

/ a

2300 4 27 wae
CaLvamizeo Stee socker | \!

he
set atta a !

i

FRONT VIEW SIE VIEW

DETAIL A

TYPE tlh GROUND MOUNT BARRICADE WITH POS-LOC SUPPORT

Figure 8. Ground-mounted Type III Barricade (Test 439107-7).

‘Texas Treneportation inetitute
439107-7

04/17/97

» Tratfie Control Device
+ Ground-mounted Type ii Barricade
244

581x102 mm wooden support
+ with 186x102 mm elements

Figure 58. Summary of Results for Test 439107-7.

Livad

Livad


Page A26

Section A-a

19 x 152 pore
Hollow Core
Plostic fois \ pt

760 Fiberglass ee i 503

8mm Corriage Bolts

id

Pp 714 —+4 1473

13mm
Ail- thread
Bolts

51x12 Wood

Log Screws

76mm x Smm Thick
Channel Each Side

bag _ _

Figure 4. Hycom Fiberglass Type III Barricade (Test 439107-5).

Cf

Figure 35. Summary of Results for Test 439107-5.


Page Al

Attachment A, TABLE I.1
ACCEPTABLE CRASHWORTHY CATEGORY 1 HARDWARE

Device?’ Composition [Maximum Mass* | Maximum g

Single Piece Traffic Cones Rubber 9 kg 920 mm
Plastic 9 kg 1220 mm

Tubular Markers’ Rubber 6 kg 920 mm
Plastic 6 kg 920 mm

Single piece Drums* Hi Density 35 kg 920 mm
Plastic
Lo Density 35 kg 920 mm
Plastic

Delineators® Plastic, Nn / Ae 122 mm
Fiberglass

1. No lights, signs, flags, or other auxiliary devices are allowed on
Category 1 devices. Some of these combinations may be found acceptable as
Category 2 devices.

2. Additional ballast at the base consisting of a rubber truck tire sidewall
or other similar, low - profile weights are acceptable. The mass shown here
is not a limiting value, rather it was the maximum mass of devices that have
been tested in the past.

3. Tubular markers may be affixed to the pavement or curb, or nounted upon a
low - profile, base with a flexible connection.

4. In this context, “single piece” refers to the construction of the body of
the drum exclusive of a separate base, if any.

5. Delineators are typically driven directly into the soil. Reflective
sheeting or a reflective button are allowed on Category 1 devices.

6. Delineators have rarely been subjected to full scale crash testing because
in many cases they are shorter and lighter versions of tested and acceptable
steel sign supports. For use in work zones, currently available plastic and
fiberglass delineator posts are light weight and well within the scope of
devices considered crashworthy.


ATTACHMENTS TO FHWA-HNG-14 MEMORANDUM INFORMATION: CRASH TESTED WORK ZONE

Attac.

TABLE
TABLE
TABLE
TABLE
FIG.
FIG.
FIG.
FIG.
FIG.
FIG.
FIG.
FIG.
Fig.
Pig.
Fig.
Fig.
Fig.
Fig.
Fig.
Fig.
Fig.
Fig.
Fig.
Fig.
TABLE

TABLE

Attac,

DUP wWN

TRAFFIC CONTROL DEVICES DATED
August 28, 1998

hment A - LISTS OF ACCEPTABLE WORK ZONE HARDWARE
T.1 Acceptable Crashworthy Category 1 Hardware
1.2 Background Information for Category 1 Devices
II.1 Acceptable Crashworthy Category 2 Hardware
TI.2 Background Information for Category 2 Devices
II.1 “Figure 21" Spring Mounted Sign Support

II.2 “Figure 29" Portable Sign Support

II.3 “Figure 33" Sign Trailer

II.4 “Figure 37" Skid Mounted Sign Support

II.5 “Figure 41" & “Figure 45" Perforated Steel Tube Type III
II.6 “Figure 42" Perforated Steel Tube Type III
Il.7 “Figure 57" Tex-Mex Type III

II.8 “Figure 61" Hollow-Core Plastic Type III

II.9 “Figure 1" Type III Hollow-Core Plastic

II.10 “Figure 2" Type III Steel Perforated Tubing
II.11 “Figure 3" Type III Steel Perforated Tubing
II.12 “Figure 4" HwyCom Fiberglass Type III

II.13 “Figure 5" Price Fiberglass Type III

II.14 “Figure 7" Spring-Loaded Portable Sign Support
II.15 “Figure 8" Ground-mounted Type III

II.16 “Figure 11" Vertical Panel Assembly

II.17 “Figure 10" Skid-mounted Sign Support

II.18 “Air Spill Barricade” vertical Panel

11.19 “A-8" Nevada PVC Type III

II.20 “A-9" Nevada PVC Type III

III.1.A List of Acceptable Crashworthy Category 3 Hardware
(Truck Mounted Attenuators (TMAs) and Traffic Barriers)
TII.1.B List of Acceptable Crashworthy Category 3 Hazdware

(Breakaway Sign Supports)

hhment B - WORK ZONE QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS
General

Channelizing Devices

Signs

Barriers

Crash Cushions and Truck Mounted Attenuators
Other; Contact Information

Al
A3
AS
Ag
Al3
Al4
AlS
Al6
Al7-19
A20
A2l
A22
A23
A24
A25
A26
A27
A28
A29
A30
A3l
A32
A33
A34

A35-37

A38-42

BL
Ba
Bo
BS
Bll
B13


3.3. TRANSPORTABLE SIGN SUPPORT (Test No. 453580-3)

A transportable sign support trailer was designed and fabricated by D-4 for use in
maintenance operations. The trailer allows the sign support to be transported from site to site and
set up with minimal effort. A schematic of the D-4 sign trailer with a 1219 mm x 1219 mm (48
in x 48 in) wooden sign panel mounted st a height of 1.52 m (5 ft) is shown in Figure 33. The
test vehicle was a 1987 Yugo GV, as shown in Figure 34. Dimensions and information on the
vehicle are given in Appendix Figure 93. The test vehicle impacted the sign trailer head-on with
the centerline of the vehicle aligned v“+h the centerline of the trailer, traveling at a speed of 98.6
kaw/h (61.3 mi/h).

At 12 msec after impact, the trailer wheels began to move. The sign panel support
released from the trailer support st 53 msec. By 104 msec, the sign panel and support separated
from the trailer. The sign panel and support went over the vehicle and made contact with the
roof at 138 msec. Loss of contact with the sign panel and support occurred at 160 msec at which
time the vehicle had slowed to 88.1 km/h (54.9 mi/h). The trailer remained in contact with the
front of the vehicle until brakes were applied at 3.0 seconds after impact. The vehicle
subsequently came to rest 99 m (325 ft) down and 2 m (6.5 ft) to the west of the point of impact.
The trailer continued another 7 m (23 ft) forward before coming to rest. Sequential photographs
of the test period are shown in Figure 35.

‘As shown in Figure 34, the sign panel and support separated from the trailer upon impact.
‘The sign panel and upper support structure came to rest 2 m (7 ft) down and 4 m (12 ft) to the
left side of the vehicle path. The sign support trailer came to rest 106 m (348 ft) down and 3
m (9 ft) to the right of the point of impact with a fragment 3.4 m (11 ft) west of the trailer. The
trailer was deformed and some of the welds broken. As can also be seen in Figure 34, the
vehicle sustained moderate damage to the front. The maximum crush at bumper height was 330
mm (13.0 in). The windshield was cracked starting at the edge of the roof near the center.
There were also two dents in the roof, the deepest approximately 8 mm (0.3 in). There were
dents and scratches on the hood and the bumper, grill and radiator were damaged.

A brief summary of the results of this test is presented in Figure 36. The sign panel and
upper support structure separated from the trailer upon impact and went up and over the vehicle,
contacting the roof just above the windshield, causing a few stress cracks. There was no
penetration of the passenger and the cracks did not impair driver vision. Debris
from the sign support trailer remained along the path of the vehicle posing minimal potential
hazard to other traffic or workers. The trailer was deformed and some of the welds on the frame
had separated. The vehicle sustained 330 mm (13.0 in) crush to the center front at bumper height
and the bumper was partially detached from the vehicle. The hood was scratched and dented,
the windshield was cracked and the roof deformed slightly. The longitudinal occupant impact
velocity was 2.0 m/s (6.6 fi/s) and the highest 10-msec ridedown acceleration was 0.4 g. There
‘was no occupant contact in the lateral direction during the test period. The maximum 50-msec
average accelerations were -3.2 g in the longitudinal direction and -0.3 g in the lateral direction.
The vehicle exited the immediate test site in a relatively smooth, stable manner and showed no
potential for intrusion into adjacent traffic lanes.

4

Sty abeg

a
———_——72

———_7 455
==
II

Figure 33. Schematic of D-4 Sign Trailer with Wooden Sign Panel (Test No. 453580-3)

66


Attachment A, TABLE 1.2
CRASH TEST INFORMATION FOR CATEGORY 1 DEVICES (Continued)

DEVICE MANUFACTURER size | MATERIAL | MASS | LIGHTS, TES impact | TEST DEBRIS | VEHICLE ACCEPTED
ETC? SPEED VEHICLE DAMAGE
PLASTIC DRUMS. Drum Body and Base are separate components. Note that
Lights, Signs, or other features attached to the top of the drum are not
acceptable for Category 1 devices at this time.
Drum Body | Various HDPE s kg | No sane cat. 2
Accessories
LDPE s kg | No eee cat. 1
Accessories
Drum Base | Various HDPE 35 kg | Incl cat. 1
Ballast***
LDPE 38 kg | Incl cat. 1
Ballast***
** No lights, signs, ballast, nor any other features may be attached to the top or sides of the drum body under this category. Only

closed-top drums will be permitted in this category.
*** Drum Base Ballast must be sand or rubber tire sidewalls. No ballasting of drum bodies will be permitted

+*** Due to the variety of available drums

the FHWA will not discriminate between them on the question of debris
manufacturers may be asked to show that their drums do not cause hazardous debris to workers or adjacent traffic.

Individual

py abeg



Page A21

33 Ib
27 Ib

ade:

vinyl Type Ill Barricade
Weight of upper portion:

a oly—vinv
36" U~channel

Product # 94-870

Tex-Mex Poly—
Total weight of barric

16"
58”
1/2

+

16"

mn

)

yh

36"

pr 43-1/2" 4

|

S4=1/2=} | 207
ih
¢

inserted throug
post and bas

p= 48" —— 4

vf
raise thick AL

hollow poly—vinyl

L
e

vinyl
5-1/2

Figure 57. Schematic of Plastic Type III Barricade by Tex-Mex Barricade (Test No. 453790-2)

"x5" x60"
hollow
1/2" PVC

poly
6-1/2" long

1/2" nm
6-1/2" long

inserted through
post and base

Laas

“OSE uodsy YHON UF quoy 12s wa uoHENyeAd ITE
your oneq 01 pofipnf sum apeoume xo-x2 Aq apeoumeg 1] adh | onseyd op ‘Arcus uy

‘Sue] oygeN yo20e(pe orm TorsnA J0J [wHUZOd ou pomoys pue soUUEUT
S1qms “Toomss Apnea: BUY SS 1599 STerpouTUNT am PorXa s[oMOA IYL “WONIANp [eT] o— ur
3 €-0- pow consanp jeurprariuoy aqp at 8 6 [- azam suoTeIs|2008 aBeI2Aw SasUI-Y¢ SY], WDeTICD
yoedno00 [esate] Ou SEM aI] “8 Z0- Sem UoNBI}2008 UMOpopU aBerIAB DoSuI-Q] ISaySTy omy
pur (sy $°2) sat g'0 Sem Antooea toedam wednoo0 peuIprarfuo] oy, “pooy pu sodumq oy or
sBeurep Jourar poureisns S]STYA OY] “ware aM UT SEIOM O1 prezEY IIs w asod Aeu suoddns
TORBA op “AaMoY ‘ssusy yuooe(pe UT oUTen Furu0oWo 0 prezey jeqUAOd aod oy yBnoud
Anvay 10 YBnous 28.2] you arm swomiBey woyy “Bol (Y 9/1) w ps Aq 2PIM (y OZ) 9
‘ware oe Buoys UMP sem opeotieg oq WO SugI” “Jwounredmos ywedns00 oy sensed jou
PIP inq ‘pooy amp TIM DeIUOD spe pu redun uodn seq a Wo poreredss apeotTeq ay JO
suoddns Teonsoa oq], “99 amBiy ur pommeaad st 131 smp Jo simsax om yo Arrurums Jouq V

oun poe oe “pooy am) Suoye soqorerss samp azam,
22000 qDE2 UO PoTTEp SBM PooY sq], “ss00] SEM sper S BALI 2B UO TYaTPEsy ap pus
Ape dn poysnd sem sodumq oq], “g¢ amB1y wt UMoys osfe st SORIA amp o1 aeureq “Buy
(¥ 941) a ps hq 2pm (y OZ) Wg vare Uw Ot ajoNA op Jo Rd op BuoTE UMANs omM pues PoE
sugeq qoedan uodn aseq om woxy poremados speouseq om ‘g¢ amBty UT U306 9q WHO Sy

“6S amB1y OF UMOTS ae
Pound isan arp jo sqderfoioyd penmonbog oedun jo rod op Jo yo] (y $'g) H 9°% pus UMop
(& 842) W cg 1593 0 sue ApTebosqns sporyan OU, “premuoj-148rens FurATEN seM IMA Ip
“onwortdde ayB1q 09 JOLLY “(G/T 8°65) T/A £°96 Jo poods w re BuTjonen ‘soem 69 Je sproUMG
3 tus oe SO] SOMA SAL -|STPA 3p ZA0 puw dn ponumu0. pe spore ap Jo pooy ap
{RIM PerCOS [My UT Sem speoUTEG OM “SosUI LS TY “PRA IP Jo Woy Ip 01 pouUOyap pus run
a0 se aseq oT) Woy popmmedss syoddns pronion 2p ‘speotumg op poroedum ajoryoa om sy

“(YTM 4°79) TUT €001 JO poods w ye Bayjonen ‘speoureg amp Jo suTso1U20 om
Thun pause sporyoa am Jo suTpsaEs0 aN TLA wo-peoq speouumg MI] adXy onseyd a parvedor
SPOMTPA 1891 SUL “pG amNBty xipuaddy wy waar aze-sporqon stp UO VonEMLOFN pue suoISUIUNG,
18S omBly WT UMogs se IMS Y[OIAITD BRGI B SEM SOMPA Wm ay] “Lg oMBry wt UMOTS
St! opeotureg xoW-x2], Aq pammoesnuwur speotimeq ]] adXt onseid om Jo onemqos V

(Z-O6LESY “ON 399.1) opuovireg xoW\-r9y, Aq opesuueg I dK] used H'T'F


Subject

From

To

Q Memorandum

US.Department
of Transportation

Federal Highway
Administration

INFORMATION: Crash Tested Work Zone Traffic pate August 28, 1998
Control Devices

Repiy to
Attn. of

Director, Office of Engineering HNG-14

Regional Administrators
Division Administrators
Federal Lands Highway Program Administrator

L_Introduction

The July 25, 1997, memorandum from the Director, Office of Engineering, Information:
“Identifying Acceptable Highway Safety Features,” established four categories for work zone
traffic control devices. These categories differentiate between the various types of work zone
hardware required to be crashworthy and indicate the need to qualify these features under
testing and acceptance guidelines of the National Cooperative Highway Research Program
(NCHRP) Report 350. The requirement to use NCHRP Report 350 accepted hardware is for
projects on the National Highway System (NHS) advertised after October 1, 1998, or later
depending on the type of device. Crashworthy hardware is also to be used by maintenance,
force account, and utility forces working on the NHS routes.

On August 28 the FHWA concurred with an agreement proposed by a task force of the
AASHTO to delay implementation of certain safety hardware, including many work zone
traffic control devices and barriers. The revised compliance dates for purchase of new work
zone devices that meet NCHRP Report 350 test and evaluation criteria are reflected herein.
Briefly, these dates are:

Category I devices, October 1, 1998;

Category II devices, October 1, 2000;

Category III devices (attenuators), October 1, 1998;

Category III devices (temporary barriers), New units must have tensile and moment
resistance after October 1, 2000. New units must meet NCHRP Report 350 criteria after
October 1, 2002.


The agreed dates are as follow:
Category 1 devices: October 1, 1998
Category 2 devices: October 1, 2000
Category 3 devices, Attenuators: October 1, 1998

Category 3 devices, temporary barriers: New units must have tensile and moment resistance afier
October 1, 2000. New units must meet Report 350 criteria by October 1, 2002.

Category 4 devices. The deadline date has been deferred. An announcement of the
implementation schedule for these devices is expected by October 1, 2000.

All new safety features on the NHS covered by the guidelines in the NCHRP Report 350 included in
projects advertised for bids or included in work done by force-account or by State forces on or after
the dates listed above are to have been tested and evaluated and found acceptable in accordance
with the guidelines in the NCHRP Report 350.

1.2 QUESTION - Why is it necessary to establish the crashworthiness of work zone appurtenances, since
pertormance of existing devices does not appear to be a problem? Devices are hit resulting in only
minor damage.

QUESTION - The need for the criteria is unclear. Thousands of devices have been hit and the vehicles
have left the scene, so is there really a problem? There have been no known incidences of a light
coming off a sign and coming through a windshield.

ANSWER - From the results in two States that recently conducted work zone (WZ) accident studies,
we know that the severity of the impacts with WZ appurtenances is generally what would be
expected. That is, the severity of the crash increases with the mass of the devices impacted. Impacts
with channelizing devices are less severe, those with sign supports more so and barriers the most.
Ina soon to be published study of WZ crashes, it was reported 22 of 495 crashes involved signs and
similar devices. Two crashes resulted in injuries requiring hospital treatment. In one, a vehicle
struck a portable sign on the shoulder. The sign broke the windshield , and the driver suffered
internal injuries. In the other, a portable sign blew down, leaning across a concrete barrier in the
travel lane. A vehicle struck the sign, breaking the windshield, with the driver receiving facial
lacerations. In another WZ crash study, 12 of 589 crashes studied involved Channeling Devices
(Barrel), three of which resulted in injuries.

In summary, there is evidence of a problem. This problem is with devices that are often placed in
the travel way or on shoulders where they can be easily impacted by errant drivers. There is also
technology that can address the problem at a minimal cost per device. Since we have a cost
effective solution to the problem, we believe we should implement it.


Page A7
Attachment A, TABLE II.1

ACCEPTABLE CRASHWORTHY CATEGORY 2 HARDWARE (Continued)

OO
W2-3 Flasher Air Spill Barricade. Flexible vertical panel fixed to a
Continued Handling 44.5-mm wide, 1170-mm tall fiberglass support. Support
is fixed to a low-profile rubber base. (See Figure II.18)
Services & VB-RFL. Vertical panel acceptable as a Category 2
Materials Co. device without lights. Tested with lights, but no
details of the light / battery are available. (More

information is needed before this vertical panel can be
found acceptable with lights.)

Nevada DOT Breakaway Type III Barricade (PVC Pipe, cable or rope
through all pipes). See FHWA Implementation Package
IP 75-6 “Breakaway Barricades”. See Figures II.19 and
II.20 (Drawings A-8 & A-9) of the final designs.

Wyoming DOT Wood Type III Barricade (150-mm square wood horizontals
and uprights, 3000-mm wide panels. See AASHTO Roadside
Design Guide Figure 9.18. Mass of tested unit was

150 kg, not 725 as shown.)

WZ-4 Woudenberg MSi Durastem Vertical Panel, with lightweight warning
5-29-98 Enterprizes light attached.

Notes:

1. Evaluation of Work Zone Barricades and Temporary Sign Supports, Mak, Bligh,

and Menges Report No. 5388-1 Sponsored by the Texas DOT.

2. Evaluation of Work Zone Barricades, Mak, Bligh, and Menges Report No. TX-
97/3910-S Sponsored by the Texas DOT.

3. The tested portable sign stands were supplied by Traffix Devices Inc. and
MDI-Windmaster. Roll-up sign sheeting was supplied by Reflexite. Plastic
barricade panels were also supplied by Traffix. The acceptable portable sign
stands all featured horizontal cross braces of lightweight fiberglass or
plastic elements. Recent testing of some portable sign stands at 90 degrees
shows that horizontal cross braces of tubular metal penetrate the windshild
and are not considered crashworthy without additional testing. Portable sign
stands with horizontal metal tubes (or other inflexible elements) supporting
flexible signs may not be used on the NHS in a position where they could be
struck at right angles.

4. Horizontal and upright components of the hollow core recycled plastic
barricades were supplied by Recycled Plastic Products, Inc.



Attachment A, TABLE II.1

Page A6

ACCEPTABLE CRASHWORTHY CATEGORY 2 HARDWARE (Continued)

TTI Report,
Note 2

1) Type III Hollow Core Plastic Barricade* (see Figure
II.9 “Figure 1.") (Vertical braces were added to support
the panels prior to putting them in place on the
barricade.)

2) Type III Perforated Tubing Barricade (3.7 m)

(see Figure II.10 “Figure 2.") (Vertical braces added,
as noted above. Base connection detail also modified.
Acceptable with 1x8 wood or hollow core plastic rails.)

3) Type III perforated Tubing Barricade (1.2 m)

(see Figure II.11 “Figure 3.") (Vertical braces added,
as noted above. Base connection detail also modified.
Acceptable with 1x8 wood or hollow core plastic rails.)

4) HwyCom Fiberglass Typ? III Barricade with plastic
panels (see Figure II.12 “Figure 4.") (Round 76-mm
diameter fiberglass pipes were used as the supports.)

5) Price Fiberglass Type III Barricade (see Figure II.13
“Figure 5.”) (89 mm x 32 mm x 6.4 mm fiberglass U-
channel supports were used.)

6) Spring-loaded Portable Sign Support? (see Figure II.14
“Figure 7”) (Tested with mounting height of 610-mm.)

7) Ground-mounted Type III barricade (see Figure II.15
“Figure 8.”) (Steel supports ground mounted in Poz-Loc
sockets. Also acceptable with fiberglass supports in a
“Universal” anchor, and with perf. square steel tubes in
anchors.)

8) Vertical Panel Assembly (three shown in Figure I1.16
“Figure 11.”) (Plywood panels mounted on wood, steel
angle, and plastic c-channel posts.)

9) Skid-mounted Sign Support. (See Fi
“Figure 10.") (No modifications, but was te



Page A40

ATTA E) TABLE III.1.B
ACCEPTABLE CRASHWORTHY CATEGORY 3 HARDWARE (Breakaway Sign Supports) (Continued
Accept Manufacturer / Supplier | Brief description of device(s
Letter
sS-32 {memo to Region 7) Western Red Cedar for Breakaway Wood Supports
10/28/92

Transpo Industries
Ine

201C and 361 Pole-Safe couplings for Motorist Aid Call Box Supports

Louisiana DOTD

Omni Directional Slip Base, 3.5" diameter post

Imperial, Ine

Aluminum tube 2.375" diameter

(Memo to Regions

Large and Small Sign Supports (See memo for details on various Wood
U-Channel, Perf.Sq.Steel Tube, Slip Base, FRP posts.)

88-37 Greenline Recycled Thermoplastic Delineator Posts
8/13/93
SS-38 Unistrut Corp Telespar Cast Iron Three-Bolt Slip Base
16/27/93

Xcessories Squared

Reference Xcessories Squared as the Manufacturer

Recycled Plastic
Prod., Inc

3.5" x 3.3" Recycled Plastic Small Sign Support

a1/a/aa

88-40 Unistrut Corp 2" Square Perforated Steel Tube, One Post, Direct Bury
10/27/93

s$-41 Richard Strizki Load Concentrating Coupling and Adjustable Anchor and Bracket
11/8/93 Assembly

SS-42z Marion Steel Co 1.12 PPF and 1.33 PPF A-36 Delineator Posts

34/10/93

$s-43 VSAR Systems Speed-E-Rect breakaway device for U-channels

a/1g/s4

SS-a4 corp. l4-gage A715 Gr 60 Perf. Square Steel posts *

3/30/94

88-45 (Memo to Region 3) Drilled Wood posts in concrete foundations, Pennsylvania designs **
5/11/94

S8-46 (Memo to Region 8) Unmodified Cedar Posts full dimension 4"x6"

6/17/94

SS-46

9/21/95

SS-47 South Dakota DOT Splicing 3PPF Marion post to 4PPF Franklin Stub

9/14/94

SS-48 SAFE, Inc Safe Foundation and Anchors base for breakaway couplings
9/23/94

S8-49 Galvacor 2 PPF U-channel A-36 steel delineator posts

10/26/94

SS-50 (memo to Region 3) Virginia's 5x5 unmodified single wood p an soil-cement foundation



Page A28

Light Attachment

Without Light
25x25 Square Tube
1219x1219 Fabric Pone! [- 25 Square Tub
wp? 6432 Hord Nylon Strap
| 25 Square Tube into _
| 32 Square Tube — 178 Long 2032

|

BACK VIEW TOP VIEW

rat

Figure 7. Spring-loaded Portable Sign Support (Test 439107-6).

3

aa

none

cn vew

Debrie Patter Spread
Longaudinel

12601
12FDEW)

Figure 52. Summary of Results for Test 439107-6.

Livad

Livad


B-3

1.3 QUESTION - The supply of crashworthy WZ devices is aconcem. Will the manufacturers of
approved products be able to meet the demands throughout the country?

ANSWER - We cannot speak for the manufacturers, but we do not expect wholesale shortages. If
there are spot shortages we will adjust to them. Most of the WZ devices are generic so we would
expect that anyone who is willing to enter the market could easily manufacture them

1.4 QUESTION - Will the FHWA use the results of tests conducted by one company to accept similar
hardware offered by another, and what makes one product “similar” to another?

ANSWER - We believe we should not require testing when we have the information in hand.
Therefore, if a product has been shown to be crashworthy via full scale or bogie testing, other
products that are identical or nearly identical can be assumed to perform in an acceptable manner
under impact. We have accepted certain small sign supports and some recycled plastic guardrail
offset blocks on this basis.

When public agencies sponsor testing, such as Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) managed
research studies or “‘pooled-fund” crash testing programs, there is a tendency to focus on
“generic” hardware rather than testing specific proprietary devices. When the occasional
proprietary device is tested under these studies, the results may be examined to see how far they
may be extrapolated to cover other existing hardware.

We agree that there is a question when it comes to determining if a product is “nearly identical” to
a previously tested product. Our assessment will be made by comparing the design drawings,
material specifications, and the as-tested information on an accepted device with the design details
and the material specifications for a candidate device. When these are not an exact match, we will
evaluate how we believe the differences might influence the test results and, we will be cautious

when the performance of the device is close to the acceptable limit. This will likely result in our
requiring testing.

1.5 QUESTION - It is not economically feasible to replace all necessary equipment by October 1, 1998.

ANSWER - Knowledge about the availability of crashworthy WZ appurtenances, including traffic
control devices, has been accessible since 1989 in the AASHTO Roadside Design Guide, and the
deadline for safety appurtenances to meet the requirements of NCHRP Report 350 was published in
1993. Notwithstanding, many agencies did not feel that they were prepared for this deadline. For
this and other reasons AASHTO and FHWA signed the agreement revising some dates for
implementing work zone traffic control devices. The new dates are listed in Question 1.0.

1.6 QUESTION - The October | deadline refers to what day?

ANSWER - The October | dates refers to the advertising date for contracts and for use by
maintenance and force account activities on the NHS.


Page A27

F it
' 318 x 508 mm
t i] Plastic C-channet
1 1
1
! 1] 88.9 mm Fivergioss
Usehannel
f 10 mm Ca
2101 mm 10 mm Carnage
Zi Bons (typ)
101.6 X 381 Plastic U=channel
1 t inserted in two
865.4 mm I 1] /S08 © 38.1"Postic U-channels
1 1
1 u
1 '
ks WW
2032 x 64 mm
825 mm ‘berboors
| 9 3 men
1207 mm
2.5 mm
501} mm f108.0_mm |
120.7 mm
i] s08 am] 100d Fed
1549 4 mm mm
sor} mm ae wo. on tach ane
= 2544 mm
635 mm]
tf
{405.7 me fa-622 5 1 69.9 mm
152.4 61.9 mm
1219.2 om 3: 1828 8 mr

Figure 5. Price Fiberglass Type III Barricade (Test 439107-12).

-}———22.25m-

Point of impact

Figure 41. Summary of Results for Test 439107-12.

Max. Yaw Angie (deg)

Livad

ia


Attachment A, TABLE 1.2

CRASH 'TES‘l) INFORMATION FOR CATEGORY 1 DEVICES
CATEGORY 1 WORK ZONE TRAFFIC CONTROL DEVICES (Less than 45 kg, Reduced test procedures of NCHRP 350 are
appropriate.)
DEVICE MANUFACTURER SIZE | MATERIAL | MASS LIGHTS, TEST SPEED VEHICLE | DEBRIS* | VEHICLE ACCEPTED
(mm) (kg} ETC? (km/h) (kg) (m) DAMAGE
CONES Services & Mat'ls Co | 914 |? 5.5 Yes, Loose | Ny - 65 | 97 2041 Insig Insig Cat. 1
W/O Light
. ” NY -114 | 48 2041 50 cat. 1
Generic gia |? 4.8 No NY-67 97 2041 Insig None cat. 2
. NY-113 48 2041 Insig None cat. 1
Road Safety Devices ? 8.0 8# sandbag | Ny-71 97 816 70 None cat. 1
. 8.0 Ballast ? | Ny-72 48 a6 Insig None cat. 1
36" cones tested weighed 18# or less. As of June 1, 1998, lights are not acceptable for Category 1 devices
DEVICE MANUFACTURER SIZE | MATERIAL | MASS LIGHTS, VESY SPEED VEHICLE | DEBRIS* | VEHICLE ACCEPTED
(mm) (kg) ETC? (km/h) | (kg) (m) DAMAGE
TUBULAR MARKERS
TP-42 ServiceéMaterials ? ? 6.1 No NY-66 97 2041 26 None Cat. 1
. wide ” 2 a i « | oy-1i2 4a 2041 1s None cat. 1
. wipe “ ? 6.1 (3.6 kg NY-73 97 B16 a7 None cat. 1
ballast)
” 2 2 ee i » | ny-74 48 a6 18 None cat. 1
+ his columa is an indication of what threat may be posed to workers when the device is struck by a vehicle in the work zone

ey abeg



€8

Dimensions are in millimeters (inches)

~~ 38.1 (1 1/2) a 38.1 (1 1/2)
° / deities Support ° YY Vertical Support
fe} Oo
° o| 44 (1 3/4) Tube Sleeve
o Q 10 (3/8) Dia. x $7 (2 1/4) L
° / Tbe ‘sieges ho} ASo ooh or Pin ) Long
(<) est Splice Plate
o} 13545) Dia. x 76 (3) Long lo | J 44 (1 3/4) Horizontal Broce
ce tor icoeel
co 6 (1/4) Di 64 (2 1/2) Li © o000000
254 (10) _ 6 (174) Dio x /2) Long a
coy rat
43 PY spice Plates (See Detail) o 19 (9/8) Dis, « 76 (3) Long
(3) 44 (1.3/4) : olts 156 (6 1/8)
Lad (biel stfpen
$0 00 oo Golo 00 04
4 (13/4) —/
136 Suppor!
DETAIL A soe mee DETAIL B
130 (5 1/8) j
| 44
T (2 “Wyé) (i 3/4) 13.172)
/4
t A36_ Steel are
13 (1/2)
25 (1) 21 (5/6)
76 (3) Le —-—- —_ Dia. Holes
25 (1)
do oO 11 (7/16)
13,072) Dia. Holes
i] “19 (3/4)
SPLICE PLATE Radius

Figure 41. Perforated Steel Tube Type III Barricade with Plastic Panels (continued)

8Iy a6eq


B-13

6. OTHER
6.0 QUESTION - How were work zones devices determined to be in category [V?

Answer - Category IV devices are devices which have proven to have significant value in the work
zone by contributing to safer traffic operation though these devices may cause great harm to
occupants of impacting vehicles. We believe that, as currently configured and deployed, these
devices provide a net benefit to motorists. Substantial crash experience to date shows that crashes
with these devices are rare. They have been identified by FHWA as portable, usually
trailer-mounted, devices such as area lighting supports, flashing arrow panels, temporary traffic
signals, and changeable message signs which are often used in or adjacent to the traveled way.

The AASHTO / FHWA agreement calls for these devices to be studied and an implementation date
announced by October 1, 2000.

We would not expect to identify any new category IV devices unless they have a proven substantial
operational benefit.

CONTACT

For further questions E-mail: — Harry W. Taylor E-mail - Harry. Taylor@fhwa.dot.gov
Nicholas Artimovich E-mail - Nick.Artimovich @fhwa.dot.gov

If you have questions that concern implementation within a specific State, please contact that
respective Division Office.


Attachment A, TABLE IIL.1.a

Page A35

SCCEPTABLE CRASHWORTHY CATEGORY 3 HARDWARE (Truck-mounted Attenuators and Traffic Barriers

Acceptance Manufacturer,
Letter # Developer,
And Date Agency, etc

Device is)

Truck Mounted Attenuators

~

FHWA CC-30 Connecticut DoT TL-2 Connecticut TMA
7/13/98 |
FHWA CC-32 Energy Absorption | TL-2, ALPHA 70 TMA

3/19/96 Systems, Inc.

FHWA CC-39 TL-3, ALPHA 100K TMA , {modified

4/24/97

FHWA CC-34 Trinity TL-2, MPS 350 TMA

6/12/96 Industries / Syro

FHWA CC-34A Steel TL-3 MPS 350 TMA

10/30/36

FHWA CC-36 Vanderbilt TL:2, Vanderbilt TMA

8/27/96 University

FHWA CC-36A TL-3, Vanderbilt TMA

6/17/97

Crash Cugh:

FHWA CC-25 Energy Absorption
2/10/95 Systems, Inc

FHWA CC-29
6/28/95

FHWA CC-35
6/21/96,
FHWA CC-35A
10/30/96,
FHWA CC-35B
10/17/96
FHWA CC-42
7/16/37
FHWA CC-43
12/01/97

L-2, NEAT Non-redirecting crash cushion

TL-3, ENERGITE III module

TL-3, QUADGUARD crash cushion

TL-3 QUADGUARD-WIDE system
TL-3, QUADGUARD-LOW MAINTENANCE Cartridge (LMC)
TL-3, QUADGUARD-WIDE / LOW MAINTENANCE CARTRIDGE

TL-3, QUAD-TREND transition end treatment

6/28/95

FHWA CC-41 BRAKEMASTER terminal/crash cushion
6/19/97 |
FHWA CC-27 TL-3, WATER TWISTER vehicle arresting system
5/1/95

FHWA CC-26 Roadway Safety TL-3 REACT 350 crash cushion

3/3/95, Service

FHWA CC-26A ( additional letter FHWA CC-26C 9/25/95
4/12/95,

FHWA CC-26B

a/1a/9s,

FHWA CC-50 TL-3 Wide REACT

06/16/98

FHWA CC-26D TL-3 REACT 350 CZ crash cushion

12/19/96,

FHWA CC-26E

6/25/97

FHWA CC-28 TL-3, FITCH UNIVERSAL MODULE crash cushion



»

ttachment A, TABLE IZI.1.A
ACCEPTABLE CRASHWORTHY CATEGORY 3 HARDWARE

Page A36

(Truck-mounted Attenuators and Traffic Barriers) (Continued)

Acceptance Manufacturer, Devices
Letter # Developer,
And Date Agency, etc
(Continued)
FHWA CC-33 Trinity Tb-3, CAT Terminal/Crash Cushion
5/01/96 Industries / Syro
Steel
FHWA CC-38 TL-3, ADIEM lightweight concrete crash cushion
3/03/97
FHWA CC-44 TL-2, LOW PROFILE BARRIER Sloped End Terminal
03/06/98
FHWA CC-52 TrafFix Devices TL-3_ Sand Barrel System
07/10/98
Terminals (To NCHRP Report 350
FHWA CC-37 Interstate Steel | TL-3, BEST 350
11/20/96, / Road Systems
FHWA CC-37A Inc.
2/19/97
FHWA CC-37B
2/19/97
PHWA CC-37¢
4/01/97
FHWA CC-40 TL-3, SEQUENTIAL KINKING TERMINAL (SKT-350
4/02/97
FHWA CC-31 Trinity TL-3, SLOTTED RAIL TERMINALS (SRT) for W-beam Guardrail
12/4/95 Industries / Syro
FHWA CC-51 Steel TL:3, ISRT-
06/18/98
FHWA CC-46 Road Systems, TL-3, Flared Energy Absorbing Terminal (FLEAT-350
4/02/98 Inc.
FHWA CC-48 Energy Absorption | TL-3, Redirecting Gating End Terminal (REGENT

ZONE BARRIERS MAY REMAIN IN USE UNTIL OCTOBER 1, 2002.)

(Generic) AASHTO Roadside 1. Pin and Loop (NCHRP 230
Design Guide 2. Channel splice (NCHRP 230
chapter 9 3. Vertical I-Beam (NCHRP 230
4. Lapped Joint (NCHRP 230
5. J-Hook Joint (see B-14 below) (NCHRP 230
FHWA B-3, Barrier Systems, (NCHRP 230), SERIES 200 Construction Zone Barrier (Moveable Concrete
7/15/86 Inc. Safety Shape
FHWA B-16, (NCHRP 230), QUICKCHANGE Moveable Median Barrier for use in permanent
10/24/91, installations
FHWA B-40 TL-3 NARROW QUICKCHANGE Moveable Barrier
8/27/97
FHWA B-14 Smith-Midland {NCHRP 230), J-HOOK connection for pre concrete median barriers
11/8/90 Corp.



3.0

31

3.2

4.0

B-9
3. SIGNS

QUESTION - There are many varieties of trailer-mounted sign supports. Will they have to be crash
tested?

ANSWER - Yes. The crashworthiness of trailer-mounted sign Supports is a concern. We understand
that some have been banned by certain States because of the potential hazard.

QUESTION - How will the sign substrate affect the performance of a portable sign support? Plywood
(now allowed) will perform differently from aluminum.

Answer - In crash tests of various types of portable sign systems, both the plywood and the
aluminum substrates separated from the sign support and penetrated the windshield. The fabric
sign panel performed satisfactorily when tested. Other substrates are currently being considered
for crashworthiness.

Jmprovements in the connections between sign panels and supports may address the problem of
separation for some type of supports. Also, the use of plastic sign substrates for use with plastic
drums has been successfully crash tested by the Texas Transportation Institute.

QUESTION- Should portable / temporary sign stands be crash tested at a 90 degrees angle as well as
head on?

Answer - NCHRP Report 350, in section A3.2.3, states:

“Because errant vehicles may approach a support structure, work zone traffic control device, ..
at various angles, it is recommended that the device be tested assuming the most severe direction
of vehicle approach consistent with the expected traffic conditions..."

Temporary sign stands are often used near intersections where traffic approaches from many
directions. Also, when along highways sign stands are sometimes turned 90 degrees to conceal the
message from the driver. In this orientation the cross brace that spreads the fabric sign panel is
critical. Full-scale testing has shown that tubular metal cross braces will penetrate the windshield,
whereas thin, flexible cress braces will not. Therefore any portable or temporary sign stand should
be evaluated to determine if the cross brace is a potential hazard.

4. BARRIERS

QUESTION - Concerning temporary concrete barrier--we (State DOT) don’t want to get rid of what
we have and use something new in 1998 that will meet Report 230; then in 2002 get rid of that, and
use something that will meet NCHRP Report 350. We want time to find something acceptable to use
that will meet 350. A phase-in period is desired. The life of a barrier could be ten years or more.

ANSWER - We agree it seems reasonable to begin using portable concrete harrier(PCB) joint
details that meet the requirements of NCHRP Report 350. There are some currently available for
use. As of July 1, 1998 they are the Iowa PCB (TL-3, F- shape w/pin & loop), Rockingham
Precast (TL-3, F - shape w/ slotted tube/T -bar connection) and the Low Profile barrier (TL-2).


w

520 |

Page A24

44 square
PERFORATED TUBING
ob

se rs

oc" Noe Skee \ | 0

oF
44 Square
Tee ‘Stews

°
10 Dia. 57 Long.
A307 “Boll Pin

1h) Ow, HOLES:
254 06. 4 SiS
FULL LENGTH OF TUBE

38.1 SQUARE TUBE

TOP view

DETAIL A

59510241219 Long Wood Broce

WOOD PANELS ATTACHED
TO” SUPPORTS USING
10 Ome 76

38.1 square
PERFORATED. TUBING ail

LONG "BOLTS (2 PER SUPPORT)

25 + 109 368
Bates

no | ih

1526

SEE oeTAL A

we

PERFORATED TUBING
oltgened 0 wort

3658

SIDE view

FRONT VIEW

TYPE_ Ill BARRICADE
PERFORATED STEEL TUBING WITH WOOD PANELS

Figure 2. Type III Steel Perforated Tubing Barricade (3.7 m) as Used in Test 439107-2.

Figure 23. Summary of Resuits for Test 439107-2.

Tid

r88we


B-12

ANSWER -Existing NCHRP Report 230 TMAs can be used on the NHS until the end of their useful
life (see question 5.3 below). Any new TMA’s purchased should meet NCHRP Report 350 criteria

5.3 QUESTION - What is the date that TMA's used on projects on NHS highways have to conform to
NCHRP Report 350? If Oct. 1, 2002, is correct, do TMA's fit under Category 3? If they do not fit
under Category 3. then what category do they fit under?

ANSWER - For the purpose of implementing the crashworthiness of WZ devices, TMAs may be
considered as Work Zone Crash Cushions. They are Category 3 devices that come under the
October 1, 1998, limit. Our intention is that TMAs (and other work zone attenuators) meeting
Report 230 guidelines may continue to be used until they are worn out and ready for replacement
with hardware conforming to NCHRP Report 350.

5.4 QUESTION - NCHRP Report 350 indicates in Section 2.4.1.3 on page 12 that it may be possible
to extrapolate results of a TMA test for supporting vehicles of differing masses. It goes on to indicate
that at the time of that writing no known validated procedures exist to make such extrapolations. Our
question is, if a TMA manufacturer has a lesser weight recommended for the support vehicle than what
they were tested at and they have based this weight off of some procedure, are they required to submit
this to the FHWA for approval? It is our understanding that one company already has a lesser weight
that can be used, but they did not have to have the approval of the FHWA.

ANSWER - Our procedures permits the use of devices / procedures that have been shown to meet
NCHRP Report 350 guidelines without FHWA Headquarters acceptance. Our acceptance letters are
a service to the industry that acknowledge the crashworthiness of a device so that a manufacturer
does not have to provide the same detailed documentation to every highway agency. If a highway
agency considers itself qualified to review the vendor's documentation in light of NCHRP Report
350, they are free to do so, preferably with the concurrence of the FHWA division office when NHS
routes are concerned. To your point of the lesser-weight host truck, this should only be a problem
with roll-ahead, which is not covered as an acceptance criteria in NCHRP Report 350. Our
acceptance letters usually indicate that the test host vehicle is the maximum mass vehicle we
consider acceptable with the covered TMA and, if not stated, is implied. If a contractor chooses to
use a lighter vehicle to mount the TMA, then the contractor is responsible for being aware of the
impact that vehicle will have on the roll-ahead distance and take appropriate action. Also NCHRP
Report 350 includes evaluation criteria for the support vehicle as well as the impacting vehicle for
TMA tests.


It is likely many other devices have been successfully tested over the years and have been
placed in service. However, we only have details on the devices included in this
memorandum. The American Traffic Safety Services Association (ATSSA) has compiled
additional crash test information and is preparing a request for acceptance of various devices
produced by its member companies. Manufacturers are welcome to submit reports of crash
testing conducted on their devices to the FHWA, Office of Engineering for our review.
Vendors should note that in order to accelerate the acceptance of crashworthy work zone
traffic control devices and reduce the costs of full scale crash testing, the FHWA will review
the results of informal crash testing for category 2 work zone traffic control devices that meet
the reduced instrumentation requirements of Section 3.2.3.2 of NCHRP Report 350. Although
this section specifies a maximum mass of 45 kg, FHWA will consider devices on a case-by-
case basis if it is evident that they will not cause a significant velocity change (generally this
would encompass stand-alone devices up to a mass of 100 kg). See the guidance contained in
our memorandum of July 25, 1997, referenced earlier for additional information. (Lights,
signs, and other auxiliary devices are permitted only if they were included on tested drum,
barricade, etc., and the results were acceptable .)

Category 3 Devices

Category 3 devices are subject to the full testing and reporting requirements of NCHRP
Report 350. Individual acceptance letters for NCHRP Report 230 and NCHRP Report 350
crashworthy truck mounted attenuators (TMAs) and traffic barriers--impact attenuators (crash
cushions), barrier terminals, and longitudinal barriers (temporary and/or permanent)--are listed
in Attachment A, Table III.1.A. They are listed by type of hardware, then in alphabetical
order according to manufacturer. Each item is listed with the FHWA acceptance letter number
and date of that letter, the NCHRP Report 350 test level to which it was tested (or “NCHRP
Report 230" if testing to the NCHRP Report 350 has not been done), and the name of the
device.

New work zone crash cushions (including TMAs) purchased after October 1, 1998, must meet
NCHRP Report 350 guidelines. The States can phase out existing barriers as they complete
their normal service life, except that barriers with joints that fail to transfer tension and
moment from one segment to another will not be acceptable after October 1, 2000, unless
demonstrated to be crashworthy. The five “Tested and Operational Connections” shown in
Chapter 9 of the AASHTO Roadside Design Guide will meet this requirement. New precast
temporary concrete barriers purchased after October 1, 2002, must meet the NCHRP

Report 350 criteria.

Because various sizes of breakaway sign supports are used in work zones, the entire list of
FHWA breakaway sign support acceptance letters is included as Attachment A, Table III.1.B
of this memorandum. The adoption of the NCHRP Report 350 did not affect the status of
breakaway supports that had been tested under the AASHTO Standard Specifications for
Structural Supports for Highway Signs, Luminaires and Traffic Signals.


These qu
\dpumity

OL PS

Hesear

ANS
rude
par
and

fevs
Rev
Ly,
the

i
very
dor
foatt

(

'

Questions and Answers
About

rash Testing of Work Zone Safety Appurtenances

owF comments are from State transp station agencies, industry, and the Federal Highway

1. General

\v public input involved in adopting the provisions of National Cooperative Highway
aa { NCHRP) Report 350 for the SHS?

fr public was tnvolved through a formal rulemaking process that culminated in a final
has te 1993, kederal Register, In tiat notice, the FHWA added NCHRP Report 350 at
al 13) of Title 23, Code of Fec'eral Regulations (23 CFR). Since then, the “Guides
' section of 23 CER, Part 625, wader which the NCHRP Report 350 was cited, has
The NCHRP Report 330 ty now cited in Section 16, Paragraph (a)(12) of the Non-
veplementto the Hederal-aid Policy Guide, Subchapter G, Part 625 (NS 23CFR 625)

vee process involved publishing the proposed rule and receiving public comments on

“iy July 25, 199° memorandum, ° Information: Identi

vole

') kederal Register stated that contingent upon the results of ongoing research and
vance evaluation. the FHWA anticipated that approximately five years after the
«HRP Report 350 all new installa’ions of traffic barriers and other roadside Safety
1 projects would be only those that have been judged to meet the testing and
rutin Report 390

11 ve date of the adoption of that r tle would imply an implementation date of August

ifving Acceptable Highway

the FHWA interpreted this mivstone to be the “advertising date" and changed
fate tw October 1, 1998, to conform to the beginning of the Federal fiscal year.

{4SHTO proposed an ayreement on revised implementation dates for Report 350
ns Sading work zone devices. KHWA concurred with this agreement and has changed the
© tt Category 2 and Category 3 devices. All deadlines regarding work zone traffic
«refer to the date by which all newly purchased devices must meet Report 350
prone hardware may be used until they meet the end of their normal service life


ATTACHMENT A, TABLE III.1.8

EPTABLE

fal
iat

CRASHWORTHY CATEGORY 3 HARDWARE (Breakaway Sign Supports) (Continued

Page A41

Manufacturer / Supplier

Brief description of device(s)

Unistrut Corp AS70 Perforated Square Steel Posts W/60 ksi yield
88-52 kcessories Squared Three-Bolt Slip Base (same as $S-24) (Letter was originally written
2/8/95 to Allied Highway Sales, but hardware is manufactured by Xcessories
Squared.)
SS-S2A Xcessories Squared Reference letters to Unistrut and Allied Highway Sales
10/22/97
88-53 Lancaster Composite Concrete-filled fiberglass posts
3/9/95
SS-S3A Lancaster Composite Direct Bury acceptance of some SS-53 posts in
3-19-96
SS-54 Chicago Heights Steel U-channel posts to 4 PPF in "EZE-Erect" configurations
3/28/95
$8-55 Colorado Dept. of 4x 6 Wood posts installed sideways
4/24/95 Transportation
SS-S6 Marion Steel Company “Lap Splice" for triple 3ppf and 4ppf in both soils
7/13/95
SS-56R Marion Steel Company Modify design to use "bar spacer”
3-14-96
SS-S7 SS-57 9/26/95 Minuteman coupler on Triple 3ppf and 4ppf (w/soil plate on Appf),in
9/26/ all soils.
$S-58 Flexstake Flexible delineator posts
9/27/95
88-59 Chicago Heights Steel Dual 3 ppf u-channel in strong soil
3-7-96
SS-59A Chicago Heights Steel Modify design to use "bar spacer"
4-19-96
88-60 Clifford Dent Couplings for sign supports
10/27/95
SS-60A Clifford Dent Larger bolts with same necked-down diameter
10/21/96
SS-60B Clifford Dent Additional bolt designs
6-/20/97
S$-61 (memo to Region 10) Revised Oregon multi-directional slip base
2-27-96
[LS-45 Transpo Industries Prototype Double Neck Coupling for signs and luminaires]
4/5/96
[LS-45A Transpo Industries Double-Neck Pole-Safe coupling for signs and luminaires
4/29/96
SS-62 Western Highway ULTI-MATE perforated square steel tube sign supports
6-3-96 Products



Attachment A,

TABLE 13.2

BACKGROUND CRASH TEST INFORMATION FOR CATEGORY 2 DEVICES

(Continued)

DEVICE MANUFACTURER OR S1Ze | MATERIAL MASS LIGHTS, ETC? | TEST IMPACT | TEST DEERIS VEHICLE Accepted
DESCRIPTION SPEED VEHICLE DAMAGE
BARRICADES - Type 1, Type II, or Type III (Continued) (Grey shading indicates failing tests)
Square Generic Perf. 44 mm Plastic 453880-1 101 820 kg 321 m Dents, ete cat. 2
Perf Tube | Square Steel bases rail on wet km/h Windshield
Type 111 | Tubes 38 mm elements soil cracked only
uppers
. ” . ” 38 mm Wooden rail | 453880-2 103 820 kg 46m Minor dents, cat. 2
bases elements on wet km/h scrapes and
38 mm soil scratches
uppers
Type IIr | Tex-Mex Plastic Plastic 453790-2 100 @20 kg Sam Minor dents, cat. 2
Barricade Rect. panels km/h scrapes, &
Tubular scratches
elements
Type III | Hollow Core Recycled Recycled 453790-4 102 820 kg 77 m Minor dents, cat. 2
Recycled Plastic plastic plastic km/h scrapes &
tubes. rail scratches
elements
Type III | Hollow core Recycled Recycled 453880-3 102 820 kg 48m Minor dents, Cat. 2
recycled plastic Plastic plastic km/h scrapes and
with wood base tubes rail scratches.
elements
Type IIl Solid Recycled Recycled Recycled 453790-5 101 820 kg 63m 259 mm dent. No
Plastic Plastic Plastic km/h into roof &
lumber rail penetrated
elements

Tly abeg



B-11

the approach has been to normalize test conditions: straight longitudinal barriers are tested
although curved installations exist; flat grade is recommended even though installations are
sometimes situated on sloped shoulders and behind curbs; idealized soils are specified
although roadside safety hardware are often founded in poor soil or frozen ground. These
normalized test conditions have a significant effect on a feature's performance but are of
secondary importance when comparing results or two or more systems.

Page 4, Section 1.4 PERFORMANCE LIMITATIONS, 2nd paragraph:

“For these reasons, safety features are generally developed and tested for selected idealized
situations that are intended to encompass a large majority, but not all of the possible in-
service collisions. Even so, it is essential that test results be evaluated and interpreted by
competent researchers and that the evaluations be guided by sound engineering judgement. *

Note: The Test Levels | through 3 in NCHRP Report 350 represent increasing severe impact
severities. In general, each impact severities is described by a combination of test vehicle(
weight), impact speed and impact angle. The decision in NCHRP Report 350 to vary impact
severities by holding the vehicle and angle constant while varying the speed was based on the
desire to limit the cost of testing rather than an attempt to mimic real life conditions.

Therefore, depending upon the site conditions a portable concrete barrier meeting TL-2 test
criteria may be appropriate.

5. CRASH CUSHIONS AND TRUCK MOUNTED ATTENUATORS

5.0 QUESTION - Please clarify the FHWA position on the use of NCHRP Report 230 qualified work
zone crash cushions after October |, 1998.

ANSWER - FHWA is no longer reviewing testing conducted under NCHRP Report 230 guidelines,
yo there will be no new crashworthy work zone crash cushions found acceptable that do not meet
the NCHRP Report 350 guidelines. The AASHTO / FHWA agreement calls for new units purchased
after October 1, 1998, to meet Report 350 guidelines. Existing TMAs and Work Zone crash
cushions may be used until they complete their normal service life.

5.1 QUESTION - Since existing NCHRP Report 230 TMA’s have been tested at the equivalent of Test
Level 2 will they still be allowed after October 1, 1998.

ANSWER - The Test Level 2 is the basic test level for TMA's in NCHRP Report 350. As such,
TMA’s designed to this test level can be used on the NHS. Review of crash performance shows that
1MA’s designed to this test level perform well. A transportation agency may use TMA's designed
to test level 3 if they want the higher performance

5.2 QUESTION - Ifa State wants to use vehicles with truck mounted attenuators in maintenance
activities or in force account work on the NHS, does FHWA expect these State-owned TMAs to be
upgraded to NCHRP Report 350 (or modified 350) criteria? Are existing non-NCHRP Report 350
TMAs not going to be allowed even if they are in good shape?


-
4
x
cr)
D
©
a

b+ 66-4

1V4XI V4
TUBULAR
STEEL

3957

w

g

x

&

>
-————— } ——_4

bo

h— sr

47

\ J NX 17X17X42" TUBULAR STEEL

Figure 21. Schematic of Spring Mounted Sign Support with Plastic/Fabric Sign (Test No. 453580-1)

oF

“OS¢ voday GYHON Ui Toy 195 wuNUD uoRENpwAS [Te 19M ABT OF pospne
sem joued uBrs ouquyonseyd mm poddns uBts o[qeu0d pemmour-Suuds op ‘Anruroms uy

“sougy o1yen yes0e{pe oT DoFsNAUT 10} feNUaod
ou pamogs pus suuwUI 21qeS ‘Rooms ApaAnEfeI B UT TIS yS9) BTeTPSUMMNT IM POX? FORaA
Sy “WoRsANp pessre] omp wi 8 ¢79- puw VONSANp feurprasuo] amp ui 8 p{- AIM SsuOTE:2|008
afeioae cosui-p¢ Umum oq] “pousd 159) aM Sump wonsomp yexsTe] aA UI HeMTOO wEdN3I0
ou sun org, “B ["]- Sem COTEID[2098 UMOpIpU aBuraAe DosuI-9] IIqBIy A pow (6/7 TL) S/H
TT sem Ayoojaa wedun swedno00 peurprarBuo] sq, Joo paw prargSspam ‘poy “Hdumnq wo a
oy afeurep poureisns ofA oy, “SEO Jo Oyen JMO OF PIEZEY TeTNOd sour Ajoo Bursod
‘DprA om Jo med amp Suoye poureuzss woddns uss a woy suqsq ‘yoounredwos 123aessed
2np OW BORSA Jo FSU TenUNEd MoYs 30U PIP Inq ‘Foor stp BuBIeD. “OTA ap ZA pow dn
quam poe poreredas uoddns us aquuod pormnow-Surads om yo wie woddns soddn pus joued uBts
sugquyonsed ou “pz amBiy ur pormasaad st ys21 simp Jo symsar mp Jo Auras youq v

“poqprens pus porusp 229m
Tu pue ‘sadumq ‘pooy ap pire digo [Twas & POAT PPTISpULM op ‘Wea! AP PMO} Joos Tp Tt
susp doop (ui ¢-[) unm Ze ev sem asaq] woddns ap yM soedun wo (Ut g°Z) UME QZ Jo Jdunq
gp Gy YsruD tMUMTKwUT w se DUN], “7 SMBLY MT UMOUS Oss st OPO Ip On Bea] “Buoy (y
0bZ) & €Z hq opm (Y OL) OH ¢ Bae UE UT forTPA ap Jo Gred o~ Buope uMaNS WM SUqET “ZZ
‘amf1j U1 u205 9q wes se yoedun vodn poreredos voddns uBts [quod ponmoul-Sunds oq,

*"€7 emB1y UT amos
‘are poured is omp yo sadesBoioyd yenunbog -paddors pey sparen mp ye (Y Gp) UST Expoue
Prewioy ponumuos poddns asvq oy] toudun Jo nod amp jo mam op or (Y O1) HE PUB UMOP (y
161) @ gg 359 07 sure Apuanbosgns spor sy], “Wed prexuoy-mBrens Afaaquyas e vO Buyjaaey
fem apr ws34 omy ‘uoNwondde oyeIq OF Jog wedun Jaye sosur QOS Te pordde azaM dOTqDA
2mp wo sayerq ‘as Ws3] STeIPOUTUN oMp Paws] sPOMPA om JY “TIGA op TAWA Buope spor poe
2]ONqsA stp Jo aBuureax7pan om uo dn Suny oseq woddns ogy *(q/Tm 7°35) Y/Y 9°¢6 JO Poods
8 ye SurpoaeN sem apOryDA ay se SosUT G]] JB LOwTUCD yo] [aued pue yoddns aq] “S2suI BG 1B
SPOTYSA oT Jo Joos Iq porseyuos paw dn poddyy paued uBrs pow uue woddns wddn oq], “SOSH GE
ye poseojar joued uBrs am Jo s9WI09 JAMO] SY], ‘poseoyou joued urs om Jo sUI00 saddn op pue
uae woddns samo] sq) wo payeredas uue woddns soddn xp ‘pedun mye sostr OZ Ty “pooy a
uo WuOJap 0} Uw8sq ue yoddns saddn op pue joued uss suqeyonsed om “edu uodr,

“CU S"19) TEX 0°66 JO paods
8 ye Suroaen ‘uoddns uBts om yo suTpa1E30 ap TM pouBie soryoa ap Jo suyaUI9 3TH TM
Uo-pesq woddns uBrs amp pawedun spomaa 191 UL “€6 2NB1y xtpusddy wt woArs am opoTy2A
3] Vo VOTEUUO;U pue SUOISUIUNG “ZZ aMBly T] UMOYS se ‘AD OBNA LRT BSBA ITPA 131
TUL “1% smBiy oy UMogs st (y [) UNE Cog Jo 14819q & Te parUMON UBS oUquyonsed (OI gp X TT
8p) WI GZ] X UTM 617] & TBM Woddns UBss a1qeLOd pormnow-Buuds om Jo onEUETDS y

(T-O8SESP “ON 1891) Jaaeg UBIg MUqeanFETY qu yoddng usig paunoW-Bmuds TTS


Through formal and informal crash testing, and because of years of experience, these
low-mass devices have shown that they will not cause an appreciable change in the speed

of an impacting vehicle and it is unlikely that any part of these devices will intrude into the
passenger compartment of a striking vehicle. See Attachment A, Table I.1, for a list of these
devices, including maximum mass and maximum height of the devices that were satisfactorily
crash tested. That information may assist vendors in making an analysis of their specific
devices. For details of specific tests that were conducted on some of these devices, see
Attachment A, Table 1.2. Please note that the data in Table 1.2 are for information purposes
only. Not all information for each test was available from the reports on file and some of the
entries are incomplete.

While the States may place additional conditions on features to be used in highway projects,
the FHWA suggests that States accept category 1 devices based on the self-certification by

the vendor. It is the responsibility of the vendor of the device to determine if, and to certify
that, their product is crashworthy--that it will meet the evaluation criteria of the NCHRP
Report 350. This certification may be a one-page affidavit signed by the vendor with
documentation supporting the certification (crash tests and/or engineering analysis) kept on file
by the certifying organization. This procedure was developed to reduce the regulatory burden
on the highway community in light of the great number of obviously similar crashworthy
devices being used today. If subsequent analysis or crash testing shows that a device is not
crashworthy as certified by the vendor, the device may be prohibited from use on the NHS.

Category 2 Devices

Like category 1 devices, certain other low mass traffic control devices qualify for a reduced
level of crash testing and/or reporting under NCHRP Report 350. Individual crash testing will
be required and FHWA letters of acceptance may be requested. Because of the great variety
of styles and sizes of devices and their attachments within category 2 the implementation date
has been delayed until October 1, 2000, to continue crash testing and to permit analysis of the
various devices.

Category 2 hardware that has been crash tested and that has received an acceptance letter from
the FHWA include various plastic barricades, vertical panel assemblies, portable sign
supports, and Type III barricades. The FHWA acceptance letters and the specific devices that
are considered acceptable are listed in Attachment A, Table II.1. Other acceptable category 2
devices that have been tested under State contracts are also listed in that table. Drawings of
most of the devices that passed the testing under these State contracts are illustrated in
Attachment A in Figures II.1 through II.20.

Although the intent of this memorandum is to list acceptable devices, we believe it is
important to note that failures of certain devices that are in common use have occurred during
crash testing. These tests are listed in Attachment A, Table II.2 and are highlighted with grey
shading. Information in the reports from these tests should provide useful starting points for
the design of crashworthy replacements for these failing devices.


i
i

V4" Or 3/16" Strap
Typical All Ponels

Note: Dimensions Are Approsin ate,

J)

Design #7

Page A34

MATERIALS

20° - 3" PVC ConouiT

4-2 Pvc 40 DEGREE ELaoms
42 pve wees

2-9 4484 025 ancorzed

CUMIN
FACE Panecs

oo a ona ag

FO OE CREE PANEL oun
Were

MO 14 METAL scRews
2 STANDARD Free ery

PN GUSMER Corps
2 CONCRETE ancnoe

Bours

La

7A

Clomp On Jorn
Typical Both Sides



Page A22
» 5 x 2-1/2

2 @ wood screws

Recycled Plastic
No.

3-3/8" x 3-3/8"

“ut

2x4x36 wood

‘ose woday EYHON UI quOy 196 eUENUD TONENTEAD [Te Ha SAY OF PoSpn{ sem Ieq UPOOM CTIA
[euateur onseyd popoXoor 109 morjoy wo parsouqus speoueg [IT dA] ap ‘Axeurams Uy

with Wood Bases

Total weight of barricade: 80 Ib

Weight of upper portion

: 23 Ib

‘soupy oggen yusoe(pe out orsRNUT Joy TEHUROd ou 4 ~MOgs pue roTUEUT 2IqQuIS “ToouTs
Ajaaneyas & Ot aus iso) sTeTpOUTUN! aT porns arya sq], “UonsoMp [ese] a at 8 E°O- pue
wonsamp feuTprySuoy amp ut 8 ¢-¢- 9AM SUONEII]2008 IeIDAN sosTI-YS AY] 19"ITOO quednos0,
[esore] ou sem ay], “8 p'9 Sem TOREIDFa008 UMOPapE oBeraAE Doour-)| WIFEY IA puL (s/7y E'S)
sm g'] sem Ayo yedun yuednsoo pemTprauo] aq] “Taunedwos ywednooo =p OTT UOISTT
Jo vonenoued ou sem az2T) Ing ‘ware PlaryspuA sp porseuod ‘aseq Uspoom ap Woy poTeredas
yorum syoddns yeonsoa onseyd og “pooy pus sodumg tp 07 soqoresss popnjout 2orqaA otf O1
ofeureq “gare if HI SIOWIOM 0} JO Sou] JUSTe(pe UT oyTEN BuTEICSUO o1 prEZEY JENIDOd asod o1
ynous o8ze] 10u o1am sjusuBey Surureuey sy) Jo sour pue yedunt jo yutod atp Jesu poureumN
‘258q UopOoMm Iq] “2]OTGIA stp TIM Buoye spor s20e1q Uspoom pure suoddns jeons9A onsuid
aL “Buoy (y 15Z) w LL Aq apm (y Ss) OZ] Bar Ue BuoTe UMONp sem apEoLTEQ IM) Woy
suigeq Jeounseduios yaedno00 ayy ayeN2ued you prp mq ‘opoTPA =p Jo PIISpuL pus pooy ap
TIA eITOS SpEMT pu oseq wspoom amp wo poremdos swrUSAS [re pus suoddns eonsA onsed
9109 MOTIOY WL “yg amBry ut porwssaud si ys9y stp Jo symsar amp Jo Areurums Jouq V

Type Ill Barricade -- Recycled Plastic Upright

“BJOIyDA aMp JO JOUIIIX

‘2a 0} Ysnu9 Jqemseour ou sem aay], “poLMoce juounredwios yednoso om Jo VoIsnAU! JO
uonensuad oN ‘poysreis oxam 2[oRPA ap Jo pooy puw sodemnq aq], “79 aunty UT WAOYS OsTe St
DprA amp oy aBeureq “Buoy (y 1SZ) LL Aq opm (y Ss) WI LI Bare we OT oforA am JO qed
omp Suoye unans ara pues pow sugeq ‘iedun uodn aseq uapoom amp wy poreredss syuIHH29
[fex paw syoddns yeonzon onseyd pojodsay 2209 Morjoy ap ‘79 amNBty UT W2es oq UE Sy

NJ
hy

“€9 amBly OT UMoYs axe powted is33 oN
Jo sqdexBojoqd jepuanbeg yoedun yo ymod om Jo y>q 2p OF (Y S) OF SI PUB Mop (¥ BhZ)
91 18x 01 sures Afpuanbosqns sforqan SUL “‘PRRAUOS-Brens BuPpEN sem oforpoa orp ‘uoneondde
ayeaq OF Jog “(H/T 1°BS) W/O $°¢6 JO poods # re Suonen ‘sosuI 1g fe 2peotireg aM TM
YORIUOO WSO} SONA ALL, “SITU Ly Te WI PTOTGSpun op OT sJOdiM amp payeyo syoddns [eonsDA

-1/2" tall

Recycled Plastic Material with Wooden Base (Test No. 453790-4)

26-1 /4%|
x! mm]
4x4 woody

N
A

an Jo doy ou, trun o[urs v sv oseq amp wo pormredss syusm2[9 [rex puw suoddns jeonsaA xp

x 3-3/8~]

Recycled Plastic

x 3/4°—<zf

Recycled Plastic

3-3/8"
3-1/2"

20'
——t
60"
Figure 61, Schematic of Type III Barricade Fabricated from Hollow Core

‘ogsur ¢{ 1e puw ‘Aeme ayouq soddns [wonzaA amp JOy soowg ap ‘edun rye DesuI OT TV

v “(qT €°€9) Y/UDY G TOT JO poods & ye Surfoaen ‘opeoutreq 2 JO STII
8 2M) TUM pousre sory aM Jo suTOTUIO stp TMA Uo-pesy speouueg Iq powedurr 9[1GoA
= Isa. UL, “96 aMBLy xqpusddy wt usar ame sporysa oq uO VoREMUOFN puB suoIsUDUTIC “79
amBtj OT wmogs se TuUdg y9[OUATID BRGI B SEM IOTGPA Is99 oY], “opEouizeq Uspoom II] WAL
3 ‘aM Jo TEIN O7 TEINS sw UORSNASUOS OU] “19 BM1y UE UMOYS St aseq TapooM B TLS [ELITE
oS ansed poloXoos a109 moyjoy wo poreouqey apeoiueq [I] edX] oy Jo onwUIyS V
x
iN

(P-O6LESY “ON 359.1) 28eq TAPPOA TIM [CHIL WseILq Pr942Iy 2105 MOTOH ST

18


The agreement also stated that, except for certain temporary concrete barriers which are
discussed in Section III below, “agencies can phase out existing devices as they complete their
normal service life.” In light of the durability of some work zone devices, States may, if they
wish, prohibit after some future date the use of devices that have failed when crash tested or
have not been tested or evaluated for crashworthiness even before the end of their normal
service life. Additional guidance on implementing crashworthy roadside safety hardware and
work zone traffic control devices is contained in my memorandum dated August 28, on the
subject “National Cooperative Highway Research Program Report 350 Hardware Compliance
Dates.”

Il. Purpose and Organization

This memorandum is an FHWA acceptance letter and includes lists of the work zone traffic
control devices that have been determined to be crashworthy and acceptable for use on the
NHS. Attachment A contains these lists, along with more information and details for some of
the listed devices. Some of the category 1 and 2 devices listed as acceptable were tested in the
past using test conditions that, in some aspects, were different from those required by NCHRP
Report 350. However, the test results were such that we are confident in accepting these
category 1 or 2 devices at NCHRP Report 350 Test Level 3 (TL-3).

Section III, below, reviews the basis for determining the acceptability of work zone hardware
for use on the NHS according to the four categories detailed in our July 25, 1997,
memorandum. Note that the crash test summaries in Attachment A include information on
some devices that have been tested and found unacceptable.

Attachment B contains a series of questions and answers developed in response to inquiries
from industry and our field offices. This information was developed as guidance by the
Offices of Highway Safety and Engineering, and may be found on the Internet at
http://www. ohs. fhwa.dot.gov/design.

Please note that the term “vendor” is used in this memorandum to represent any person or
organization (commercial or governmental) that designs, manufactures, sells, or deploys
highway safety hardware or traffic control devices. The term “State” is used to represent any
transportation agency, utility company, or other agency that specifies temporary traffic control
devices for use by their contractors or by their own forces.

Ill. Crashworthy Traffic Control Devices
Category 1 Devices

Low-mass, single-piece traffic cones, tubular markers, single-piece drums, and delineators are
category 1 devices and are, by definition, considered crashworthy devices meeting NCHRP
Report 350 TL-3 criteria. At this time, no auxiliary lights or signs may be attached to devices
certified under category 1 devices. As little, if any, additional crash testing 1s required the
compliance date for implementing crashworthy category 1 devices remains October 1, 1998.


7

2.0

B-4

QUESTION - Will data from the pooled - fund study on work zone devices be made available to the
industry?

ANSWER - The member States of the pooled-fund study will be the first to receive the results of the
testing. We will endeavor to provide this information to the other highway agencies and industry
once the pooled-fund States have been informed.

2. CHANNELIZING DEVICES

QUESTION - Who is responsible for testing various combinations of devices such as drums, lights,
and flags etc., and which combination(s) should be tested.

ANSWER - The providers of the traffic control devices (ICDs) are responsible for the testing of the
individual devices and/or the combinations they are used in. Since lights may detach and impact
the windshield or may remain attached to the TCD and be knocked clear by the vehicle, it would
seem that all parties would benefit from a cooperative effort between the manufacturers of the TCDs
(manufacturers of basic devices and the optional devices) to determine crashworthy combinations
and to have the “worst case” examples tested.

We appreciate the concerns regarding the difficulty of identifying “generic” configurations of
optional features for crash testing purposes and the potential costs of testing many alternative
designs. We believe there are a number of options open for reducing the costs of testing,
specifically of warning lights:

a. Ifthe light breaks loose from the TCD and impacts the windshield there must be no
penetration of the passengers’ compartment. If a relationship between the size, shape,
structure, and mass of the lights and the probability of the light penetrating the
windshield could be established, this could be used to qualify lights that can be assumed
to be less hazardous. Laboratory testing equipment is available that could launch
individual lights into a windshield. A standard could then be developed for lights that
would be safe regardless of the attachment to the TCD.

b. For those lights that fall outside of the crashworthy standard because of density, mass, or
configuration (i.e., sharp corners on the battery pack or mounting hardware), then a
standard attachment specification would be needed to assure that the light does not come
Sree of the basic TCD. A crash test of representative TCDs with the heaviest light or
light/battery device firmly attached would then be required. It will probably also be
necessary to demonstrate that a specific TCD has the capability to “hold on” to the light
during an impact. (Recent testing has shown that relocating the battery assembly to the
base of the device yielded successful results.)

c. Ifasurrogate test can be developed to show that the strength of the connection of the
light to the TCD is sufficient to prevent separation during impact. this test can be used by
the various basic TCD vendors to show that their device will he acceptable when used
with the light. This surrogate testing should be markedly lesy expensive than crash


rat

2463.8 om
508 1 1016 mm

es Post

10 mm Carriage
its (tye.)
9144 mm

VA angie

2.387 6 mi
)27 4 127 x 635 mm

mm 38.1 x 50.8 mm

Plastic om
38) mm

ZTE

3048 x 2032 « 127 mm

on Sign Pane! (1yp.)

609.4 mm

Side View

Marker 2

Morker 3

Front View

Figure 11. Vertical Panel Assembly (Test 439107-11).

Page A30

y-direction

Figure 81. Summary of Results for Test 439107-11.

Max. 0.080-6 Average (g's) Post-mpact Behavior
x-direction . aN (during 1.0 0 after impact)
ay ‘Max. Rol Angie (deg)...
NIA ‘Max. Pitch Angle (deg) -

Max. Yaw Angle (dog).

. 12Fet
+ S2FCEWT

LIvad

Livad


ATTACHMENT A, TABLE III.1.8
CCEPTRBLE CRASHWORTHY CATEGORY 3 HARDWARE (Breakaway Sign Supports) (Continued)

Page A39

Accept Manufacturer / Supplier | Brief description of device(s

Lecter

s$-16 Minute Man Breakaway MMB-1HD breakaway device for use with 3 #/ft. steel flanged channel
12/29/89 "U"-posts

Transpo Industries

Type A and Type B breakaway couplings. (If installed by direct
burial, then Type AUX for S-1 soil only
(Posts limited to 45 #/ft below the hinge.)

Minute Man Breakaway

MMB-1HD breakaway device for use with two 3 #/ft flanged channel
posts in strong soil
letter)

(see SS-21 for weak soil acceptance

Allied Tube and Conduit

Square-Fit signpost systems

Franklin Steel

2 to 3 pound-per-foot flanged channel "U" posts

Minute Man Breakaway

MMB-1HD breakaway device with two 3 #/ft flanged channel "U" posts
in both strong and weak soil

10/22/92

Trus Joist Corporation Type "L" MICRO=LAM with revised saw cut
a/a/sa
88-23 (memo to Reg.) New Jersey Breakaway Couplings
3/14/92
88-24 Unistrut Corp Triangular Slip Bases for Square Tube Sign Supports
s/iyan
SS-248 Xcessories Squared Reference Xcessories Squared as the manufacturer
0/22/97
88-25 (memo to Regions) a. Single or dual 4"x4" wood, undrilled
6-4-9 b. Single 6"x8" wood with 3.0" holes
c. Single 6"x6" wood with 2.0" holes
d. Single 4"x6" wood with 1.5" holes
e. Dual W6x12 steel post on slip base
(up to 18 ppf for dual supports OK)
SS-26 Unistrut Corp Telespar square perf. tube small sign supports without
2/11/92 sleeve around base post
$$-27 Montana D.O.T Round wood post supports
5/15/92
88-28 (memo to Region 4) 3 4" Diam. Thin Walled Aluminum Tube
5/26/92 Single Spliced (6" c-c) Marion Steel or Franklin Steel 4 ppf U
channel post
SS-29 A.B. Chance Helical Screw Foundations for Motorist A:i Tall boxes
7/18/92
88-30 Hapco Division Cast Aluminum Shoe Base for Motor:st A:i “1.1 box Supports
9/17/92
10/5/92
SS-31 Allied Tube and Conduit | Single Perforated Square Steel 7... - ga in 7 ga anchor



Page A25

44 souane

/ PERFORATED TUBING
“ollaened 10 uBrght
with splice piotes

2

38.1 Savor
Tube Sleeve

44 Square
Tube Sleeve

1524

10. Dw. « 57 Long
A307 “Boll oF Pin

Top view 2540 4 SIDES

do FULL LENGTH OF TUBE

38.1 SQUARE TUBE ETAL A

WOOD PANELS ATTACHED,
1Q. SUPPORTS. USING

10 DA x 76
LONG BOLTS (2 PER SUPPORT)

38.1 square ——
PERFORATED TUBING

29 x 203 « 1219

wb BS

2-4 524
SEE OETAL
44 SOUARE
PERFORATED TUBING
loched 10 upright
in apne plates
sal
L___jaip —_
2 |

FRONT VIEW SIDE VIEW

Figure 3. Type III Steel Perforated Tubing Barricade (1.2 m) as Used in Test 439107-3.

89.99 Exterior
° 12F01
12FDEW!
nat
FS0000000
o °
Model : Max. 0,060-8 Average (o's) Post-Impect Behavior
Maas (kg) Curb... xedirection {during 1.0 8 after impact)
Test Inertial y-direction ‘Max. Roll Angle (deg)... N/A
Dummy... redirection... 5. Max. Pitch Angle (deg) NIA
Gross Static. Max. Yaw Angie (deg)... N/A

Figure 29. Summary of Results for Test 439107-3.

id

Livad


Attachment A, TABLE II.2
BACKGROUND CRASH TEST INFORMATION FOR CB’

RY 2 DEVICES

CATEGORY 2 WORK ZONE TRAFFIC CONTROL DEVICES (Less than 45 kg, Reduced test procedures of NCHRP 350 are
appropriate.)

DEVICE MANUFACTURER SIZE | MATERIAL MASS LIGHTS , TEST SPEED VEHICLE | DEBRIS* VEHICLE ACCEPTED
(mm) (kg) ETC? Gem/h} (kg) (m) DAMAGE

VERTICAL | Vertical Panels should be flexibly mounted on low-profile bases. Cinder blocks, tire rims, and other obstacles higher than 4 inches

PANELS may not be used as bases

VB-RFL Services & 10.2 Bolted on NY-202 97 616 59 Minor Cat. 2

Materials Co

. o tw . 10.2 . ” . 48 16 46 Minor cat. 2
Air Spill | Flasher Handling Rubber 33 None NY-99 97 2041 54 None cat. 2
base and Incl
fiberglass | sand
support bags
. wo fw ” . " . » ” NY-100 32 2041 None cat. 2
° « . . . ” ao 2041 48 None cat. 2
« wo ” * ” . None 32 2042 ? None cat. 2
. vw dw ” . ” . None 80 2042 27 None cat. 2
« w do ” ~ ” . None NY-104 80 2042 24 Dents cat. 2
~
2
a
o

6v


2.1

N
wv

24

B-5

testing, and can be used when minor changes to the geometry or chemical composition of
the TCD are made. The mass of the light must still be significantly less than that of the
drum so as not to alter the center of gravity of the drum casing it and the light to fly up
and damage the windshield.

QUESTION -By what date do Category | and 2 devices used on projects on NHS highways have to
conform to NCHRP Report 350?

ANSWER - ( See Question 1.0 for information on dates. Newly purchased Category | and 2 devices
will need to comply on projects advertised the agreed upon dates. Contracts currently in
preparation for award after this date should inform contractors that the TCDs they intend to use on
NHS routes are to comply. The states do not typically include TCD fabrication details in their
specifications or special provisions, and there will be no need to do that in the future except to
require that crashworthy devices be used on the NHS.

QUESTION - When the Department (State Department of Transportation) is accomplishing work on
NHS highways utilizing our own State forces, what date do our Category 1 and 2 devices have to
conform to NCHRP Report 350?

ANSWER - Standards for NHS routes apply no matter where the funding comes from or who is

doing the work, ( See Question 1.0 for information on dates.)

QUESTION -FHWA was asked, “Will the FHWA delay the full implementation of the National
Cooperative Highway Research Program (NCHRP) Report 350 criteria for work zone devices by one-
year to October I, 1999.”

ANSWER - ( See Question 1.0 for information on dates.

QUESTION - Will the FHWA maintain a list of Category 1, 2, 3 & 4 devices that conform to NCHRP
350? We realize that the FHWA memorandum indicates that no list will be kept for Category 1
devices. However, we recommend that they do unless FHWA can work with ATSSA to have them do
it. It will be much better and easier for one organization to accomplish this instead of each individual
State having to obtain the self certification statement from each manufacturer. If the FHWA does not
intend to maintain a list for the other three categories cither, we believe that should also be handled the
same way as the Category | is handled--by one organization.

QUESTION - We feel frustrated that FHWA hasn't really looked into the inspection (enforcement)
needs of the states. Such as: how does an individual state (or states) keep an up-to-date listing of
accepted or approved devices such that all industry contractors and subcontractors can have the same
list available for their use?

ANSWER - These questions address concerns with using self-certification (alo called
manufacturers’ declaration of conformity) as one of two acceptance processes for Category |
devices. FHWA chose this process because the administrative and regulatory burden for FHWA,
State and local highway agencies, and industry is commensurate with the potential low risk of the
devices. Also this process responds to feed back about implementing the crashworthiness of WZ
features that we do not inhibit innovation.


B-7

(vi) A signature and title, or an equivalent identification of the person(s) accepting responsibility
Jor the content of the certificate (however produced), and date of issue;
(vii) A statement that the certificate shall not be reproduced except in full.

2.8 QUESTION - Can a Category | device be self-certified by a vendor as safe solely on the basis of
height and weight?

ANSWER - No. Category | devices will be allowed based upon the vendor's self-certification if the
device meets a specification proved safe by crash or surrogate testing, crash testing, or safe
operational performance. The self-certification is based on an analysis and determination by the
vendor that the size, weight, material and shape are similar to devices proven safe. We expect the
vendors would have an analysis on file to support their self-certification

2.9 QUESTION - Is there crash test information available to assist vendors in analysis of their Category |
device?

ANSWER - Test reports on Category | devices will be available in July 1998 on the FHWA Office
of Highway Safety's homepage - http://www.ohs.fhwa. dot.gov/design. A video or videos will be
available from the FHWA-NHTSA National Crash Analysis Center for a fee. The center's homepage
iy http-//gwuva.gwu.edu/ncac/.

2.10 QUESTION - Many traffic control contractors manufacture their own Type III barricades. This will
be costly; those costs will be passed on to the State Departments of Transportation.

ANSWER- [We assume that the above comment means that since many TCD contractors currently
manufacture their own devices it will be more costly for them to begin using crashworthy work
traffic control devices. ]

Jt may be marginally more costly to begin using a crashworthy device rather than a noncrashworthy
device. For example, if a TCD contractor begins to manufacture a crash-tested generic design, the
additional cost will be that of revising the manufacturing process. Ifa TCD contractor decides to
have their own type III barricade design crash-tested the only cost is that of the crash test(s). This
of course will be amortized over the number of barricades built.

There may be an increase in the effort spent in quality control from the existing level so that a
contractor can ensure that each device is manufactured correctly:

2.11 QUESTION - There is a lack of uniformity among work zone traffic control devices. What if the
States use devices that have not been found acceptable by the FHWA?

ANSWER - The provision in our July 25 memorandum permits a State to use a “home grown”
device it has determined to be crashworthy according to the NCHRP Report 380 FHWA
headquarters acceptance is not a requirement.


Attachment A, TABLE II.2
BACKGROUND CRASH TEST INFORMATION FOR CATEGORY 2 DEVICE,

(Continued)

PORTABLE SIGN SUPPORTS (Grey shading indicates failing tests)

DEVICE MANUFACTURER OR SIZE MATERIAL MASS LIGHTS, TEST IMPACT TEST DEBRIS VEHICLE Accepted
DESCRIPTION ETC? SPEED VEHICLE DAMAGE

Spring {unknown mér.) Metal Plywood 453360-2 87 916 kg | 21 Windshield No

Mounted frame sign km/h penetrated

Spring (unknown mfr.) Metal Fabric sign 453580-1 99 B16 kg 73m Minor dents Cat 2

Mounted Frame km/h scrapes, and

scratches”

Easel (unknown mfr.) Metal Plastic/fab | 453580-2 89 816 kg | 32 m Windshield No
Support frame ric sign km/h penetrated

Rigid (unknown mfr.) Metal Plastic/fab | 453790-1 98 aie kg | 20 m Minor dents cat. 2
frame frame ric sign km/h scrapes, and

scratches

Trailer Texas Gen Serv Wooden sign | 453580-3 99 816 kg 106 m Windshield cat. 2
panel ku/hi cracked
wheels slightly
Fixed Wood Type III on Wood Plywood 453360-3 98 816 kg 59m Minor cat. 2
Wood skids sign panel km/h
at 2.13 m
Perf Type LIL Sign on Plywood 453880-5 aba Bie kg 91m Signif. No
Square Barricade with perf tubes sign panel kin/h damag
Steel Wood Panels att to at 1.5 m windshield
Tube cross penetrated
panels
Sign on Plywood 453880-7 108 816 kg Ba a Windshield No,
perf tubes sign panel Jem: shattered but | Results
att to at 1.5 m not penetrated | Margina
frame ko Poor
Hollow Type TIT < | Sign on Aluminum A53880-6 99 kmh | 816 kg a3om 70 mm dent to | Na
core barricade with plastic Sign Panel roof, wind Results
plastic Solid Plastic posts att at 1.5m shield ok marginal
Base to frame to Poor

* Worker Threat
** No lights, signs, ballast, nor any other features may be attached to the top or sides of the drum body under this category. Only closed-top
drums will be permitted in this category

*** Drum Base Ballast must be sand or rubber tire sidewalls. No ballasting of drum bodies will be permitted

ve** Due to the variety of available drums, the FHWA will not discriminate between them on the question of debris. Individual manufacturers may be
asked to show that their drums do not cause hazardous debris to workers or adjacent traffic