MASH Implementation Work Zone Traffic Control Devices National Work Zone Management Conference Springfield Virginia, September 21, 2016 Nick Artimovich FHWA Office of Safety
Transcript
MASH Implementation Work Zone Traffic Control Devices
National Work Zone Management Conference
Springfield Virginia, September 21, 2016
Nick Artimovich FHWA Office of Safety
MASH 2009
• Incremental update to NCHRP Report 350 • No deadlines were established • MASH testing concentrated on generic hardware • In 2013 AASHTO TCRS established a task force to
MASH Update AASHTO/FHWA Joint Implementation Agreement for MASH
3
Presenter
Presentation Notes
AASHTO/FHWA Joint Implementation Agreement for Manual for Assessing Safety Hardware (MASH) Dated January 7, 2016
4
• The AASHTO Technical Committee on Roadside Safety (TCRS) will continue to be responsible for developing & maintaining the evaluation criteria as adopted by AASHTO. FHWA will continue its role in issuing letters of eligibility of roadside safety hardware for federal-aid reimbursement.
MASH Update AASHTO/FHWA Joint Implementation Agreement for MASH
Presenter
Presentation Notes
Through the AASHTO/FHWA partnership, the agreement was executed to define actions needed for full implementation of MASH over the course of several years. Per the agreement, the implementation of the forthcoming edition (anticipated Spring 2016) of the AASHTO Manual for Assessing Safety Hardware (MASH) will be as follows:
5
• Agencies are urged to establish a process to replace existing highway safety hardware that as not been successfully tested to NCHRP Report 350 or later criteria.
MASH Update AASHTO/FHWA Joint Implementation Agreement for MASH
Presenter
Presentation Notes
Agencies urged to establish a process to replace existing highway safety hardware that has not been successfully tested to NCHRP Report 350 or later criteria.
6
• Agencies are encouraged to upgrade existing highway safety hardware to comply with the 2016 edition of MASH either when it becomes damaged beyond repair, or when an individual agency's policies require an upgrade to the safety hardware.
MASH Update AASHTO/FHWA Joint Implementation Agreement for MASH
Presenter
Presentation Notes
Agencies are encouraged to upgrade existing highway safety hardware to comply with the 2016 edition of MASH either when it becomes damaged beyond repair, or when an individual agency's policies require an upgrade to the safety hardware.
7
• For contracts on the National Highway System with a letting date after the dates below, only safety hardware evaluated using the 2016 edition of MASH criteria will be allowed for new permanent installations and full replacements:
MASH Update AASHTO/FHWA Joint Implementation Agreement for MASH
Presenter
Presentation Notes
For contracts on the National Highway System with a letting date after the dates below, only safety hardware evaluated using the 2016 edition of MASH criteria will be allowed for new permanent installations and full replacements.
8
● December 31, 2017: w-beam barriers & cast-in-place concrete barriers ● June 30, 2018: w-beam guardrail terminals ● December 31, 2018: cable barriers, cable barrier terminals, & crash cushions ● December 31, 2019: bridge rails, transitions, all other longitudinal barriers (including portable barriers installed permanently), all other terminals, sign supports, & all other breakaway hardware(ie. WZ TCD’s)
MASH Update AASHTO/FHWA Joint Implementation Agreement for MASH
Presenter
Presentation Notes
Crashworthy WZ TCDs are, indeed, part of the "breakaway devices" that have a deadline of 12/31/2019. The NCHRP Project 03-119 may have something to say about that, but for now that is the deadline.
9
• NCHRP Report 350 was a research guideline that FHWA turned into its operational guidance
FHWA adjusted that guideline as necessary • MASH is an AASHTO standard Only AASHTO has the authority to adjust MASH guidance.
NCHRP Report 350 v MASH Focus on Work Zone Traffic Control Devices
Presenter
Presentation Notes
Crashworthy WZ TCDs are, indeed, part of the "breakaway devices" that have a deadline of 12/31/2019. The NCHRP Project 03-119 may have something to say about that, but for now that is the deadline.
Category 1 WZ Devices
Cones, Drums*, Road Tubes May be self-certified as crashworthy Compare to others, or conduct own informal testing *Lights are OK on drums. Cones and Road Tubes need to be tested if lighted.
10
Category 1 WZ Devices - Questions
Shall self-certification of Category 1 devices be permitted under MASH? Are there any of these devices that need to be MASH tested as a reference for manufacturer’s self-certification?
11
Category 2 WZ Devices
Barricades, Sign Stands, lighted cones, tubes Two devices hit in single run. Second at 90 deg. 1) Continue “2 for 1” ? 2) Require Ballast?
12
Category 2 WZ Devices - Questions
Portable sign stands Variable height Variable leg angle Numerous substrates Diamond & Rectangular Lights, flags, ballast 0, 1, or 2 springs at base How many tests needed?
13
Longitudinal Channelizers
Water-filled barriers and barricades need to be tested for highway use. Should ADA barricades be tested if not adjacent to vehicular traffic?
14
TEST!
TEST?
Category 4 WZ Devices
FHWA deferred crash testing of trailer-mounted devices based on:
Not in NCRHP Report 350 State of the art Crash history
MASH Tests 50, 51, 52, 53 now apply Should testing be required?
15
MASH Update – Existing Research Sign Structures & Temporary Work Zones
Existing MASH Research ……
Jennifer D. Schmidt, Ph.D., P.E. MwRSF, University of Nebraska
Presenter
Presentation Notes
At this time I would like to highlight some of the existing MASH research as conducted by MwRSF & my friend & colleague, Dr. Jennifer Schmidt whom is currently in Asia.
17
MwRSF Report No TRP-03-225-10 Safety Investigation and Guidance for Work-Zone Devices in Freight Transportation Systems Subjected to Passenger Car and Truck Impacts with New Crash Standards
MASH Update – Existing Research Sign Structures & Temporary Work Zones
MwRSF Report No TRP-03-225-10 Safety Investigation and Guidance for Work-Zone Devices in Freight Transportation Systems Subjected to Passenger Car and Truck Impacts with New Crash Standards. The sign support system parameters that were predicted to be most important for resulting in system failure under MASH with either test vehicle included mast stages, mast material, sign panel material, height to top of mast, flag staff material, and orientation.
18
● Most work-zone devices were designed for Ford Fiesta / Geo Metro geometries ● Current devices may not be compatible with MASH testing small car and pickup truck geometries ● Devices should be tested at orientation angles that may occur while in service (typ. 0° & 90°)
MASH Update – Existing Research Sign Structures & Temporary Work Zones
Presenter
Presentation Notes
● Most work-zone devices were designed to with Ford Fiesta / Geo Metro geometries ● Current devices may not be compatible with MASH testing small car and pickup truck geometries ● Devices should be tested at orientation angles that may occur while in service (typ. 0° & 90°)
19
FAILURE – Windshield penetration
MASH Update – Existing Research Sign Structures & Temporary Work Zones
Presenter
Presentation Notes
Failure – Windshield penetration
20
MASH Update – Existing Research Sign Structures & Temporary Work Zones
MASH Update – Existing Research Sign Structures & Temporary Work Zones
Presenter
Presentation Notes
Failure – Windshield & Floorboard Penetration
22
MwRSF Report No TRP-03-225-10
For information on this study, contact Dr. Jennifer Schmidt, MwRSF at 402-472-0870.
MASH Update – Existing Research Sign Structures & Temporary Work Zones
Presenter
Presentation Notes
This study shows Parameters deemed critical for potential system failure. MwRSF has indicted these parameters still would be in effect today. Under the Report Section 14 Summary, Conclusions & Recommendations {paraphrase the table} For information on this study, contact Dr. Jennifer Schmidt, MwRSF at the number provided here.
23
NCHRP Report 03-119 Application of MASH Test Criteria to Breakaway Sign Luminaire Supports and Crashworthy Work-Zone Traffic Control Devices
MASH Update – Existing Research Sign Structures & Temporary Work Zones
Presenter
Presentation Notes
NCHRP Project 03-119 is going to look at MASH testing of breakaway hardware and work zone traffic control devices. The objective of this research is to identify and evaluate the crash performance of breakaway sign and luminaire supports and crashworthy work-zone traffic control devices that are non-proprietary and commonly used. The evaluation should address their in-service safety performance, potential failure modes (and, if possible, design modifications that might address those failure modes), and their likelihood to comply with the current MASH crash test criteria. Funding: $599K Principal: Marzougui Effect Date: 9/28/15; Complt Date: 3/28/18
Phase I ● ID commonly used devices (Survey underway)
● compile and review available crash test results
● collect information on frequency of not performing as intended in a crash
● recommend designs
● technical interim report
NCHRP Report 03-119
MASH Update – Existing Research Sign Structures & Temporary Work Zones
Presenter
Presentation Notes
Accomplishment of the project objective will require at least these tasks: Phase I (1). Identify non-proprietary designs for breakaway sign and luminaire supports and crashworthy work zone traffic control devices that are commonly used in the United States by use of a survey or other means, estimate the prevalence of each of these designs. (2). Compile and review available crash test results (MASH and NCHRP 350) and FHWA Acceptance or Eligibility Letters for the designs identified in Task 1. Summarize the results for each design. (3). Collect information on the frequency of these designs not performing as intended in a crash and the impact of the adverse performance on the severity of the crash. For work-zone devices, consideration should be given to how the device is presented (e.g., position, orientation) when it is not in use but still in the clear zone. (4). Recommend designs for further evaluation in Tasks 6 & 7, based on, at a minimum, the prevalence of the design, the in-service safety performance, and the likelihood of meeting MASH test criteria. (5). Prepare a Phase I technical interim report to document the findings of the previous tasks, a draft outline for the final report, and an updated work plan for Phase II.
25
MASH Update Sign Structures & Temporary Work Zones
Phase II ● perform finite element modeling simulations
● conduct full scale crash tests
● identify potential changes to the designs
● can surrogate vehicle testing and/or finite element simulation be used?
● final report
NCHRP Report 03-119
Presenter
Presentation Notes
Accomplishment of the project objective will require at least these tasks: Phase II (6). For the designs specified in the Phase II work plan authorized by NCHRP, perform finite element modeling simulations to identify potential problems in meeting MASH test criteria. (7). For some of the designs studied in Task 6, conduct full scale crash tests to corroborate the simulation results. (8). If possible, identify potential changes to the designs studied in Tasks 6 and 7 and similar designs to improve their likelihood of meeting MASH test criteria. (9). Based on the results of Tasks 6 and 7 and the research team’s experience, make an assessment of whether and how surrogate vehicle testing and/or finite element simulation could be used to reduce costs of crash testing under MASH test criteria. (10). Prepare a final report documenting the entire research effort including an executive summary and the research team’s recommendation of research needs and priorities. Recommendations for updates to the MASH test criteria should be included as an appendix. A PowerPoint presentation should be included in the final deliverables describing the project background, objective, research method, findings, and conclusions that summarizes the project for an executive or management level audience.
