SUMMARY CHANGES FOR SUMMARY CHANGES FOR NCHRP REPORT 350 NCHRP REPORT 350

GUIDELINESGUIDELINES[NCHRP 22[NCHRP 22--14 (02)]14 (02)]

Keith A. Cota, Chairman Keith A. Cota, Chairman Technical Committee Technical Committee on Roadside Safetyon Roadside Safety

June 14, 2007June 14, 2007

BACKGROUNDBACKGROUND

•• Circular 482 Circular 482 –– (1962) (1962) –– First full First full scale crash test proceduresscale crash test procedures

•• Circular 191 Circular 191 –– (1978)(1978)•• NCHRP Report 230 NCHRP Report 230 –– (1980) (1980) •• NCHRP Report 350 NCHRP Report 350 –– (1993)(1993)•• NCHRP 22NCHRP 22--14(02) 14(02) –– Adoption Adoption

2007/08 ?2007/08 ?

350 Category Changes350 Category Changes

• Test matrices and conditions.

• Test installation.

• Test vehicle specifications.

• Evaluation criteria.

• Test documentation.

• In-service performance evaluation.

TEST MATRICES AND TEST MATRICES AND CONDITIONS CONDITIONS

• Small car impact angle (20 degree to 25 degree).• Impact speed for single unit truck test (80 km/h to 90

km/h).

• Occupant risk for length-of-need tests.• Impact angle for terminals and crash cushions (20

degree to 25 degrees).

• Gating terminal/crash cushion (Reduce angle from 15 degrees to 5 degrees).

• Mid-size car test (Add 1500A test vehicle for staged impact attenuation devices).

TEST MATRICES AND TEST MATRICES AND CONDITIONS (ContCONDITIONS (Cont’’d)d)

• Barrier testing heights (Establish max. for small vehicle and min. height for pickup test).

• CIP’s for terminals and redirective crash cushions (Test CIP at barrier change from redirective to gating or capture point) .

• CIPs for reverse direction impacts.• TMA optional tests to mandatory (Define max/min

truck weight, control ballast shifting and vehicle braking).

• Variable message sign and arrow board trailers (Require same test criteria as TMA’s) .

TEST MATRICES AND TEST MATRICES AND CONDITIONS (ContCONDITIONS (Cont’’d)d)

• Support structures and work zone traffic control devices (Add light truck test in addition to the small vehicle testing criteria).

• Longitudinal channelizing barricades (Add

new category and recommended test matrix).

•• EDR data collection EDR data collection (Provide data on impact conditions (Provide data on impact conditions

and accelerations from vehicle)and accelerations from vehicle)..

TEST INSTALLATION TEST INSTALLATION

•• Soil Condition Soil Condition (soil type, gradation, (soil type, gradation,

compaction and density)compaction and density) ..•• Embedment of Posts Embedment of Posts (not necessary (not necessary

with reporting of soil conditions)with reporting of soil conditions)

•• Components Components (provide documentation of (provide documentation of components used).components used).

•• Installation Lengths Installation Lengths (document length (document length of test installation).of test installation).

TEST VEHICLESTEST VEHICLES•• Test vehicles Test vehicles (change small vehicle and pickup).(change small vehicle and pickup).

•• Single unit truck mass Single unit truck mass (from 8000 kg to 10,000 kg).(from 8000 kg to 10,000 kg).

•• Light truck test vehicle Light truck test vehicle (Minimum c.g. height of 28 inches)(Minimum c.g. height of 28 inches)

•• Vehicle age Vehicle age (six years older or less).(six years older or less).

•• Truck box attachment Truck box attachment (limit detachment, reduce inconclusive (limit detachment, reduce inconclusive testing results)testing results) ..

•• Vehicle damage Vehicle damage (document external vehicle crush damage using (document external vehicle crush damage using NASS procedures)NASS procedures) ..

•• Crushable nose characteristics Crushable nose characteristics (develop updated surrogate (develop updated surrogate vehicle testing from 1981 Volkswagen Rabbit).vehicle testing from 1981 Volkswagen Rabbit).

•• TMA support vehicle TMA support vehicle (Report maximum weight of support (Report maximum weight of support vehicle). vehicle).

EVALUATION CRITERIAEVALUATION CRITERIA

•• Occupant risk Occupant risk (Modify calculations for Occupancy Impact (Modify calculations for Occupancy Impact Velocity and Ridedown Acceleration with vehicle yawing).Velocity and Ridedown Acceleration with vehicle yawing).

•• Windshield damage Windshield damage (Provides more quantitative criteria; apply (Provides more quantitative criteria; apply criteria to structural support devices the same for work zone decriteria to structural support devices the same for work zone devices).vices).

•• Occupant compartment damage Occupant compartment damage (Set objective criteria).(Set objective criteria).

•• Marginal pass Marginal pass (Strictly pass or fail criteria results).(Strictly pass or fail criteria results).

•• Maximum roll angle Maximum roll angle (Roll and pitch angle at 75 degrees).(Roll and pitch angle at 75 degrees).

•• Exit conditions Exit conditions (Report lane intrusions and exit angle with exit (Report lane intrusions and exit angle with exit box criteria).box criteria).

•• Vehicle rebound for crash cushions Vehicle rebound for crash cushions (reporting criteria) .(reporting criteria) .

TEST DOCUMENTATIONTEST DOCUMENTATION

•• CAD drawings CAD drawings (AutoCAD or Micro Station drawing files)(AutoCAD or Micro Station drawing files)

•• Test report Test report (More detailed documentation on conducted of the test (More detailed documentation on conducted of the test and the test results).and the test results).

ININ--SERVICE EVALUATIONSERVICE EVALUATION•• Encourage inEncourage in--service evaluation to service evaluation to

demonstrate satisfactory field performance.demonstrate satisfactory field performance.•• Pool resources (partnering) between State Pool resources (partnering) between State

proprietary device manufacturers.proprietary device manufacturers.•• Disseminate information through resource Disseminate information through resource

channels like National Technical Information channels like National Technical Information Services (NTIS), FHWA regional resource Services (NTIS), FHWA regional resource centers and State pooled fund consortiums.centers and State pooled fund consortiums.

•• Consider the establishment of new national Consider the establishment of new national center on incenter on in--service evaluation. service evaluation.

NCHRP 22NCHRP 22--14(02) 14(02) Full Scale Crash TestsFull Scale Crash Tests

•• Strong Post WStrong Post W--Beam System (with 5000 # Beam System (with 5000 # pickup truck) pickup truck) –– passed TLpassed TL--3 test criteria3 test criteria

•• Midwest Guardrail System (with 5000 # pickup Midwest Guardrail System (with 5000 # pickup truck & 2400 # small vehicle) truck & 2400 # small vehicle) –– passed TLpassed TL--3 test 3 test criteriacriteria

•• New Jersey Shaped Concrete Barrier (with 2400 New Jersey Shaped Concrete Barrier (with 2400 # small vehicle) # small vehicle) –– passed TLpassed TL--3 test criteria3 test criteria

•• FF--Shape temp. concrete barrier with 3Shape temp. concrete barrier with 3--loop loop connection (with 5000 # pickup truck) connection (with 5000 # pickup truck) –– passed passed TLTL--3 criteria3 criteria

NCHRP 22NCHRP 22--14(02) 14(02) Full Scale Crash Tests, ConFull Scale Crash Tests, Con’’tt

•• Iowa Transition (with 5000 # pickup Iowa Transition (with 5000 # pickup truck) truck) –– passed TLpassed TL--3 criteria3 criteria

•• Tangent Guardrail terminal (with 2400 # Tangent Guardrail terminal (with 2400 # sedan) sedan) –– passed TLpassed TL--3 criteria3 criteria

•• New Jersey Shaped Concrete Barrier (32 New Jersey Shaped Concrete Barrier (32 inches) (with 10,000 kg single unit truck) inches) (with 10,000 kg single unit truck) –– did not pass TLdid not pass TL--4 criteria4 criteria

Old vs. NewOld vs. New

WW--Beam GuardrailBeam Guardrail

Midwest Guardrail SystemMidwest Guardrail System

Evaluation of 25Evaluation of 25°° Impact Angle Impact Angle w/MGS Guardrail Mounted at 32w/MGS Guardrail Mounted at 32””

AASHTO/FHWA AASHTO/FHWA IMPLEMENTATION PLANIMPLEMENTATION PLAN

DRAFTDRAFT

Draft AASHTO/FHWA Joint Implementation Plan for theDraft AASHTO/FHWA Joint Implementation Plan for theManual for Evaluating the SafetyManual for Evaluating the Safety--Performance of Highway Performance of Highway

Features, 2007 Features, 2007

BackgroundBackground

NCHRP Report 350: Recommended Procedures for the Safety PerformaNCHRP Report 350: Recommended Procedures for the Safety Performance Evaluation of Highway Featuresnce Evaluation of Highway Featurescontains the existing guidelines for evaluating the safety perfocontains the existing guidelines for evaluating the safety performance of highway features, such as rmance of highway features, such as longitudinal barriers, terminals, crash cushions, work zone elemlongitudinal barriers, terminals, crash cushions, work zone elements, and breakaway structures. This ents, and breakaway structures. This document was published in 1993 and was formally adopted as the ndocument was published in 1993 and was formally adopted as the national standard by the Federal ational standard by the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) later that year with an implementaHighway Administration (FHWA) later that year with an implementation date of late 1998. tion date of late 1998.

The American Association of State Highway and Transportation OffThe American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO) created a Task Force on icials (AASHTO) created a Task Force on NCHRP 350 Implementation and in July 1998, AASHTO and FHWA agreeNCHRP 350 Implementation and in July 1998, AASHTO and FHWA agreed that most types of safety d that most types of safety features installed along the National Highway System must meet tfeatures installed along the National Highway System must meet the safetyhe safety--performance evaluation performance evaluation criteria contained in criteria contained in NCHRP Report 350NCHRP Report 350. One outcome of these task force efforts was the . One outcome of these task force efforts was the recommendation that AASHTO play a stronger role in the future derecommendation that AASHTO play a stronger role in the future development, approval, and maintenance velopment, approval, and maintenance of the evaluation procedures. The process of accepting hardwareof the evaluation procedures. The process of accepting hardware under NCHRP Report 350 on the under NCHRP Report 350 on the National Highway System has been undertaken by FHWA. AASHTO, thNational Highway System has been undertaken by FHWA. AASHTO, through its Technical Committee on rough its Technical Committee on Roadside Safety, has undertaken the role of establishing and updRoadside Safety, has undertaken the role of establishing and updating the evaluation criteria.ating the evaluation criteria.

The draft AASHTO The draft AASHTO Manual for Evaluating the SafetyManual for Evaluating the Safety--Performance of Highway Features 2007Performance of Highway Features 2007 ((MESPHF 2007MESPHF 2007) ) has been developed under NCHRP Project 22has been developed under NCHRP Project 22--14(02), "Improvement of Procedures for the Safety14(02), "Improvement of Procedures for the Safety--Performance Evaluation of Roadside Features." Performance Evaluation of Roadside Features." MESPHF 2007MESPHF 2007 contains revised criteria for safetycontains revised criteria for safety--performance evaluation of virtually all highway safety features,performance evaluation of virtually all highway safety features, based primarily on changes in the vehicle based primarily on changes in the vehicle fleet, and will replace fleet, and will replace NCHRP Report 350NCHRP Report 350. .

Requirements in Section 1408 of SAFETEARequirements in Section 1408 of SAFETEA--LU state that LU state that ““The Secretary, in cooperation with the Association The Secretary, in cooperation with the Association [i.e., AASHTO], shall publish updated guidance regarding the con[i.e., AASHTO], shall publish updated guidance regarding the conditions under which States, when ditions under which States, when choosing to improve or replace highway features on the National choosing to improve or replace highway features on the National Highway System, should improve or Highway System, should improve or replace such featuresreplace such features…”…”. .

Implementation PlanImplementation Plan

Implementation of the Implementation of the MESPHF 2007MESPHF 2007 on the on the National Highway System will be as follows:National Highway System will be as follows:

•• The AASHTO Technical Committee on The AASHTO Technical Committee on Roadside Safety is responsible for Roadside Safety is responsible for developing and maintaining the evaluation developing and maintaining the evaluation criteria as adopted by AASHTO. FHWA shall criteria as adopted by AASHTO. FHWA shall continue its role in the review and continue its role in the review and acceptance of highway safety hardwareacceptance of highway safety hardware..

Implementation Plan, ConImplementation Plan, Con’’tt

•• All highway safety hardware All highway safety hardware accepted prior to adoption of accepted prior to adoption of MESPHF 2007MESPHF 2007 using criteria using criteria contained in contained in NCHRP Report 350NCHRP Report 350may remain in place and may may remain in place and may continue to be manufactured and continue to be manufactured and installedinstalled..

Implementation Plan, ConImplementation Plan, Con’’tt

•• Upon adoption of Upon adoption of MESPHF MESPHF 20072007 by AASHTO, any new by AASHTO, any new highway safety hardware not highway safety hardware not previously evaluated shall previously evaluated shall utilize utilize MESPHF 2007 MESPHF 2007 for for evaluation and testingevaluation and testing..

Implementation Plan, ConImplementation Plan, Con’’tt•• Any new or revised highway safety Any new or revised highway safety

hardware under development at hardware under development at the time the the time the MESPHF 2007MESPHF 2007 is is adopted may continue to be tested adopted may continue to be tested using the criteria in using the criteria in NCHRP Report NCHRP Report 350350. However, FHWA will not issue . However, FHWA will not issue acceptance letters for new or acceptance letters for new or revised highway safety hardware revised highway safety hardware tested using tested using NCHRP Report 350NCHRP Report 350criteria after January 1, 2010.criteria after January 1, 2010.

Implementation Plan, ConImplementation Plan, Con’’tt

•• Highway safety hardware Highway safety hardware installed on new construction installed on new construction and reconstruction projects and reconstruction projects shall be those accepted under shall be those accepted under NCHRP Report 350 NCHRP Report 350 oror MESPHF MESPHF 20072007..

Implementation Plan, ConImplementation Plan, Con’’tt

•• Agencies are encouraged to Agencies are encouraged to upgrade existing highway safety upgrade existing highway safety hardware that has not been hardware that has not been accepted under accepted under NCHRP Report 350NCHRP Report 350or or MESPHFMESPHF 2007:2007:

oo during reconstruction projects, during reconstruction projects, oo during 3R projects, orduring 3R projects, oroo when the system is damaged beyond repairwhen the system is damaged beyond repair..

Implementation Plan, ConImplementation Plan, Con’’tt

•• Highway safety hardware not Highway safety hardware not accepted under accepted under NCHRP Report NCHRP Report 350 350 oror MESPHF 2007 MESPHF 2007 with no with no suitable alternatives available suitable alternatives available may remain in place and may may remain in place and may continue to be installedcontinue to be installed. .

TCRS Schedule for AdoptionTCRS Schedule for Adoption•• TCRS met on May 15 & 16, in Woods Hole, MA to TCRS met on May 15 & 16, in Woods Hole, MA to

review final draft document from NCHRP 22review final draft document from NCHRP 22--14(02) panel & finalize 14(02) panel & finalize ““Draft Implementation Draft Implementation PlanPlan”” with FHWA; with FHWA;

•• Ballot of TCRS results to be completed by July 15, Ballot of TCRS results to be completed by July 15, 2007; 2007;

•• Ballot to SCOD in Summer of 2007; TCRS to Ballot to SCOD in Summer of 2007; TCRS to review results at Sept. 2007 TCRS meeting in review results at Sept. 2007 TCRS meeting in Seattle, Wash; Seattle, Wash;

•• Ballot to SCOH in Winter of 2007/08;Ballot to SCOH in Winter of 2007/08;•• Complete NCHRP 22Complete NCHRP 22--14(03) with additional full 14(03) with additional full

scale crash testing of nonscale crash testing of non--proprietary devices proprietary devices using the new criteria (Completion in 2008/09).using the new criteria (Completion in 2008/09).

CONTACT INFORMATIONCONTACT INFORMATION

Keith A. Cota, ChairmanKeith A. Cota, ChairmanAASHTO AASHTO –– Technical Committee on Roadside Technical Committee on Roadside

Safety Safety New Hampshire DOTNew Hampshire DOTHazen Drive, PO Box 483 Hazen Drive, PO Box 483 Concord, NH 03302Concord, NH 03302--04830483Tel: 603Tel: 603--271271--16151615Email: kcota@dot.state.nh.usEmail: kcota@dot.state.nh.us