FULL-SCALE 18,000 LB. VEIDCLE CRASH TEST ON THE

KANSAS 32 INCH CORRAL RAIL

James C. Holloway, E.I.T. Research Associate Engineer

Ronald K. Faller, E.I.T. Research Associate Engineer

by

Submitted to

Ron Seitz, P.E. Road Design

Brian O. Pfeifer, E.l.T. Research Associate Engineer

Edward R. Post, Ph.D. , P.E. Professor of Civil Engineering

Kansas Department of Transportation Docking State Office Building Topeka, Kansas 66612-1568

Project RES 1 (0099) P450 TRANSPORTATION RESEARCH REPORT TRP-03-26-91

Midwest Roadside Safety Facility Civil Engineering Department

W348 Nebraska Rail University of Nebraska-Lincoln Lincoln, Nebraska 68588-0531

July 1991

DISCLAIMER STATEMENT

The contents of this report renect the views of the authors who are responsible for the

facts and the accuracy of the data presented herein. The contents do not necessarily reflect the

official views or policies of the Kansas Department of Transportation or the Federal Highway

Administration. This report does not constitute a standard, specification, or regulation.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

The authors wish to express their appreciation and thanks to the following people who

made a contribution to the outcome of this research project.

Kansas Department of Transportation

Ron Seitz, P. E. , Road Design Squad Leader

Federal Highway Administration

Bill Wendling, P.E., Safety Program Engineer

Nebraska Department of Roads

Dalyce Rennau, Materials and Test Division Research Engineer

University of Nebraska-Lincoln

Tom Grady (E.E. Technician) Tom Hoffman (Instrument Maker llI)

Midwest Roadside Safety Facility

Syed Ataullah (Graduate Research Assistant) Jim Luedke (c. E. Student) Terry Atkins(C.E. Student) Virgil Oligmueller (C.E. Student) Craig Rockwell (C.E. Student) Greg Prang (M. E. Student)

Private

Jim Dunlap (Dunlap Photography)

11

ABSTRACT

One full~sca1e crash test was conducted on the Kansas 32 in. Corral Rail. Test KSCR-i

was conducted with an 18,040 lb. test vehicle at 15 degrees and 51.5 mph. The point of impact

was located midway between the fourth and fifth posts relative to the upstream end. The post

spacing was 10 ft - 0 in. The installation was 100 ft long and was constructed with a simulated

bridge deck.

The test was evaluated according to the safety criteria in the National Cooperative

Highway Research Program (NCHRP) Report 230 and the American Association of State

Highway and Transportation Officials "Guide Specifications for Bridge Railings", 1989. The

safety performance of the Kansas 32 in. Corral Rail was determined to be satisfactory.

ill

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Page

DISCLAIMER STATEMENT .. ... . ... . . . . .... . .. . .... . ......... .

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ..... . ..... . . ...•. . . . .. • . . . .. . • ....... II

ABSTRACT .................... . . . . . .......... . .. . . .. . • .. III

TABLE OF CONTENTS ...... •. ....... . ... . ........ . ..... .. ... IV

LIST OF FIGURES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . VI

LIST OF TABLES ......... . ...... . ............. . ... . .... . ... viii

1 INTRODUCTION .................•...... • • . .... • . ......... 1

1.1 Problem Statement .... . •......•.............. . ........ 1

1.2 Objective of Study ....•........ . ...... • . ..... • ... .. ... 1

2 TEST CONDITIONS ........ . ....... • .............. . ..... . .. 2

2. 1 Test Facility ........ . ....... . ....................... 2

2.1.1 Test Site . . . . . . . . . . . . . . • . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 2

2.1.2 Vehicle Tow System. . . . . . . . . . • . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2

2.1.3 Vehicle Guidance System ... , . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 2

2.2 Kansas 32 in. Corral Rail Design Details .................. . ... 6

2.3 Test Vehicle ...................... . ..•......•....... 12

2.4 Data Acquisition Systems ........... .. •........ ,........ . 19

2.4.1 Accelerometers .......... ....•................. . 19

2.4.2 High-Speed Photography .. . ... . ...... .. ............ 19

3 PERFORMANCE EVALUATION CRITERIA ............. . .. . ........ 25

IV

Page

4 TEST RESULTS ......... •. ...... • ............. . ... . . . . ... 28

4. 1 Test No. KSCR·I ...................... . .............. 28

5 CONCLUSIONS ............... ... . .. . .. . .. ••. . . .. . . .. . . ... 41

6 RECOMMENDA TrONS ... . . . . ..... .. .. ..•• . . . .. •... . .... .. .. 44

7 REFERENCES .... . ....... .• .......•..... .. ............... 45

8 APPENDICES .......... ...... ... ....... . .. . ...... . ........ 46

A. Concrete Compressive Strengths .... . ............. . ..... . ... 47

B. Relevant Correspondence . .............. . ............ .. ... 49

C. Accelerometer Data Analysis ...... . ................... . ... 52

v

LIST OF FIGURES

Page

I. Full-Scale Crash Test Facility ....................... . ........ 3

2. Cable Tow and Guidance Systems . ... .

3. Tow Vehicles and Fifth Wheel ...... .

4. Details of the Kansas 32 in. Corral Rail .........•.......... . .......

4

5

7

8 5. Cross section of Deck assembly

6. 32 in. Kansas Corral Rail .... . . . . . . . . . . • . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 9

7. 32 in. Kansas Corral Rail (continued) .. 10

8. Bridge rail and Deck Construction. . .. . . . . . . . . . . . 11

9. Test Vehicle ................ ... . .. • .. .. ...... . .... . . . .... 13

10. Test Vehicle Dimensions .....

11. Locations of center of gravity ..

14

15

13. Target Locations .......................... . .. . .. . .... . .... 18

14. Accelerometers and the onboard vehicle metraplex unit . .... .............. 20

15. Flow Chart of Data Acquisition System ............................ 21

16. Data recorder and 386/AT computer ..... . .. . .

17. Layout of High-Speed Carneras ........ .

22

24

18. Test KSCR-I Summary and Sequential Photographs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . • • . . . . . 29

19. Full-Scale Vehicle Crash Test, KSCR- I .............•.... .... .. ... . 30

20. Full Scale Vehicle Crash Test, KSCR-I (conI.) ...•.....•............. 31

21. Parallel Time-Sequential Photographs ......• . ... . ... . . . . ... 32

22. Rail Damage Between Posts No.4 and No.5. . . . . . . . . . • . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34

VI

23. Rail Damage at point of impact ....... • ...

24 . Rail and Post damage at Post No.5 ....... .

25 . Post No.5 damage at splice and deck cracking.

26. Damage from vehicle riding along the rail ....

VII

Page

35

36

37

38

LIST OF TABLES

Page

1. Crash Test Conditions and Evaluation Criteria for the Permanent Precast CMB . . . .. 26

2. AASHTO Evaluation Criteria

3. Safety Performance Results .

27

42

4. Summary of Test Results ....................... , ....... . ..... 43

Vlll

1 INTRODUCTION

1.1 Problem Statement

The Kansas Department of Transportation (KDOT) was interested in using the Kansas

Corral Rail on bridges in its Interstate Systems. For this to be possible, the system had to pass

the PL-2 performance level tests described in AASHTO (1). The 27-in. Kansas Corral Rail had

previously been tested with an 1,800 lb. vehicle and a 4,500 lb. vehicle (2) in accordance with

NCHRP 230 el). The AASHTO "Guide Specification for Bridge Railings" (l) requires that a

bridge rail at the PL-2 performance level have a minimum vertical height of 32 in. Therefore,

the height of the Kansas Corral Rail was increased to 32 in. to comply with this requirement.

An 18,000 lb. vehicle test was then conducted to complete the test matrix for the PL-2

performance level.

1.2 Objective of Study

The objective of the research study was to evaluate the safety performance of the Kansas

32 in. Corral Rail by conducting a full ·scale vehicle crash test in accordance with the "Guide

Specifications for Bridge Railings," AASHTO U), and "Recommended Procedures for the Safety

Performance Evaluation of Highway Appurtenances, " NCHRP 230 OJ. Thus, a full-scale vehicle

crash test was performed to evaluate the structural adequacy, occupant risk, and redirectional

characteristics of the bridge rail.

2 TEST CONDITIONS

2.1 Test Facility

2. J.l Test Site

The test site facility was located at Lincoln Air~ Park on the NW end of the west apron

of the Lincoln Municipal Airport. The test facility , shown in Figure I , is approximately 5 mi.

NW of the University of Nebraska-Lincoln.

An 8 ft high chain-link security fence surrounds the test site facility to ensure that no

vandalism occurs to the test articles or test vehicles which could possibly disrupt the results of

the tests.

2.1.2 Vehicle Tow System

A reverse cable tow, with a 1:2 mechanical advantage, was used to propel the test

vehicle. The distance traveled and the speed of the tow vehicle are one-half that of the test

vehicle. A sketch of the cable tow system is shown in Figure 2. The test vehicle was released

from the tow cable approximately 20 ft before impact with the Kansas 32 in. Corral Rail. The

tow vehicle and the attached fifth-wheel are shown in Figure 3. The fifth-wheel, built by the

Nucleus Corporation, was used in conjunction with a digital speedometer to increase the

accuracy of the test vehicle impact speed.

2. 1.3 Vehicle Guidance System

A vehicle guidance system, developed by Hinch ~), was used to steer the test vehicle.

The guidance system is shown in Figure 2. The guide flag, attached to the front left wheel and

the guide cable, was sheared off 20 ft before impact with the Kansas 32 in. Corral Rail. The 3/8

in. diameter guide cable was tensioned to 3,000 lbs. , and supported laterally and vertically every

2

.-

....

• flltf STATION

CRASH FACILITY

.tJo4N\1AL LAn Of CH.t.NGf .. ··'v Jun WINY 171·151t 0.2· W

5.66, T60 IWY 11. · J~L

_5100. nOO, "400 rwt 14 .)2 1

5100, Tl70,

Figure I. Full-Scale Crash Test Facility

3

G(N[hl AVIATION

.... ''-'''0'''0

' /

• •

• lLEV ... 1311 117"

"

'< ,-0 ' ,

( ..... ,..\ . ....... ,

\ 1200

'&;><1' .. " "00,

m v ll1j

HW,

•

GUIDE FLAG SHEARED OFF

PULLEY

CHUTE <TDIJ CABLE RELEASED>

~AD-END ANCHOR

3/8' DIA GUIDE CABLE

TOIJ VEHICLE

5/16• DIA TOIJ CABLE

CRASH TEST VEHICLE

Figure 2. Cable Tow and Guidance Systems

4

1•2 MECHANICAL ADVANTAGE

NO SCALE

-'

Figure 3. Tow Vehicles and Fifth Wheel

5

100 ft by hinged stanchions. The hinged stanchions stood upright while holding up the guide

cable. As the vehicle was towed down the line, the guide-flag struck each stanchion and knocked

it to the ground. The vehicle guidance system was approximately 2,000 ft in length.

2.2 Kansas 32 in. Corral Rail Design Details

A detailed drawing of the Kansas 32 in. Corral Rail is shown in Figure 4. Photographs

of the actual installation are shown in Figures 5 and 6. The total length of the installation was

100 ft. The installation consisted of three major structural components: simulated concrete bridge

deck, concrete bridge rail, and concrete posts.

The installation was constructed with a simulated bridge deck in order to test the rail to

deck connection, in addition to the rail itself. A cross-section of the simulated bridge deck is

shown in Figure 7. The 8 in. thick deck had a total width of 4 ft - 10.5 in. which produced a

2 ft - 1.5 in. overhang. The deck was reinforced with two No.5 transverse bars spaced at 6 in.

centers. The top bar had 2.5 in. of cover and the bottom bar had 1 in. of cover. Two No.5

longitudinal bars were placed between the transverse bars and spaced at 12 in. centers. The

transverse bars were attached to the existing concrete apron. The connection detail is also shown

in Figure 7. Grade 60 epoxy coated reinforcement was used in the deck. The reinforcement

layout is shown in Figure 8.

The second major component of the installation was the concrete bridge rail, consisting

of ten 10 ft sections, each with six longitudinal No.5 bars. This reinforcement was also epoxy

coated Grade 60 rebar. The layout is shown in Figure 8. The rail was 12 in. wide and had a

bottom height of 13 in. and a top height of 32 in. A 0.5 in. open joint was located between each

10 ft section of rail at the center of each post. There was no end treatment of the rail.

6

!

, ,

" § ~

'" <l ~

;,. ~ '- C§

® ®

/0 ~

'NT' IT yp/(;tJllrt!flor S«IlonJ .

2'/.n ~ Sf)O •• "'/.' +J.RII 5P!2 ",;m .'R4. W'Ot;en -;;;; • r~"

lTyp.l I . 6R15 fEF! I

1 I

, , ,

2-· <2

Traffic Face

, I' -a"

' II II I ,

,

I I

. 1

6 s{JQ.ar ,.IN, 7'-6N r+JRII se2f!.'(!ll1

+J RII (Typ. 1

1 --1 1

T'TPICN.. ELlVATIIJII 1£~irEf'(j dMdet1 f/;JtXhf(1j.On/yJ

* t;HH rEF!

1 -·)R9 l/n~$~

(Typ. )

IV," CI.

I

1

I

I 10"

11 ~' (Mini

'-· JRII· \

.:. ~ 0"

'-, '-

/

~ Conslruel/on

,_ [ J v, " CI.

I.. E' ITypJ -

.diii

)K 5-.5SCI

["" "yp.' *6R/ ;f IEF!

I ~ 1 II II " •

I , ~ , , ,

a\ , , , • , , , "I I 1 I I I .. 7 ,

(-§~ I r.pN I H'

(Typ:O(I/ if/U;" post) ,

21,4 " CI.

rTypJ

. JRIO V

· 6RIJ l/ . 6R14 or . 6R15

"'3R9 .,... I In Pairs I

~p .7R4

I' --<L.!:1

5,,1 ~"l';Drlp G;"""e Jalnl LOI1O.slab f )-, I

bars

TYPICAL INTERIOR POST

Figure 4. Details of the Kansas 32 in. Corral Rail

7

Figure 5. Cross section of Deck assembly

8

/~--- oj", to h " ~ _ .,; . , ,

Figure 6. 32 in. Kansas Corral Rail

9

Figure 7.32 in. Kansas Corral Rail (continued)

10

" - , ,

-, .-, --- ,

Figure 8, Bridge rail and Deck Construction

II

The third component of the installation was the concrete post. There were nine full­

section posts and two half-section posts. The full-section posts were 10 in. wide by 3 ft long

with a 13 in. height. The posts were spaced at 10 ft centers. The full section posts were

reinforced with eight vertical No. 7 bars along the traffic face and eight vertical No. 4 bars

along the backside of the post.

The concrete used for all of the above components was a Nebraska 47-B Special Mix

with a minimum compressive strength of 4,0<X) psi. This was a comparable mix to that of the

KDOT specifications. Five percent air entrainment was used in the mix. The concrete

compressive strengths of the (1) concrete deck and (2) concrete rail and posts at the time of the

test were 5,360 psi and 4,560 psi respectively. The results of the concrete compressive tests are

shown in Appendix A.

The rail and posts were poured on December 12, 1990. Due to the cold temperatures at

the time of casting, the installation was covered and heated to insure proper curing of the

concrete.

2.3 Test Vehicle

The test vehicle was a 1984 GMC 7000 Series single unit truck having a test inertial

weight of 18,040 Ibs. The test vehicle is shown in Figure 9, and the vehicle dimensions are

shown in Figure 10.

The ballast used for the test vehicle consisted of a reinforced concrete block which was

bolted to the walls and the floor of the box. The location of the ballast is shown in Figure II.

The reinforcement used was ASTM A325 all-thread rod. The vertical reinforcement was 5/8 in.

rod and the transverse reinforcement was 1/2 in. rod. This reinforcement design was capable of

12

". • •

a " • , =

Figure 9. Test Vehicle

13

1---@)------1

""do( J.<lS .. __ Gl:1J;._ZD.DO Se ries

Total VelQ~t . ilI ... 040 1 b. rroni' V.'ght ..l. ... 2~JLl b . Rnr Axle VeJgM J. 1.:!.§.O 1 b . Bo.llut 4 , 840 lb .

D".,.1I.11 L .. ng'th .~tQLJL __ 0".,. .. 11 V1dth ~Jl __ _ Dvt',.all F,.on1 H.Jght JJl., 0 Cab L.ngth _~_.Jl ____ _ Gap Length -L..!!. _____ _ Trd..,./Box LIWIG1h ..2..fi.l. .. O ...... lody Hwfght .lO.L....D ba,. Gr-ound a • .,·cu.c. 3.b.-.O RooF Mttght DlfF.,..."t ... , gJ ... 5 front Q1aeunel Clnr&l\CC 20. 0

11 ~ Cir1M'Id ttl'CU"'VIC. 11-5 .2 r,.on-t Dv.,.t.ng 30.5

Figure 10. Test Vehicle Dimensions

14

108 . 0 R.ar Ovwrh&ng __________ _

",.on1 Track Width l.fl....j)_

front ~p." V~ Ji2~Jl Roof' Wth 52.....2.. ______ _

Typtat rr. Sln And »IaMb,. ~2_·_S 'JIve. Bu. }~.~~..:JL ___ _ C.G. He"",' 49 • Q

e.G. LongI'tI.drwll lbtcLnn !1}-:..! Rool-Hood Dlstanc:. _~2 ... _0 __ Roo' He"",' ~.li...Q _____ _ Hood H.tlght -6..2. .. 0. ____ _

1

0 s E s 11 ~~' lC0 0®r IT

0 ~ ® ® ... r. .. S<ALE

@ l1li1 _ ...... .-fll. .... '" 1JOoCtw ...

(I) o-,. ..... u l..""8tn _}.lil .. !L _______ _ C5 ~1\.u1.M e.G. L~ ~ 13 5 . 0 () r,.01111 Ov~ J.u. .. ~ _____________ _ m l.WMllari •• c.Ji. ~t _ 4 6 . 5 _

() ........ 1 ..... ,--'-' ~24...,_ 0'-,-:---;;";;-() I&UH1 c.Ji. L~ ~. ~

I» TaW"' ..... " e.G. twWot b.!L..O: _____________ _ () hl1 ... 1 e.G. 1tetgP11 "!1'~, 0IL. ________ _

() lata.! ......... C.IL ~ ~ lll...!

Figure 11. Locations of center of gravity

15

sustaining loads equivalent to 20 times the mass of the concrete block. The reinforcement

arrangement and the concrete block are shown in Figure 12.

The suspension method was used to calculate the center of gravity. This method is based

on the principle that the center of gravity of any freely suspended body is in the vertical plane

through the point of suspension. The vehicle was successively suspended in three positions, and

the respective planes containing the center of gravity were established. The intersection of these

planes located the center of gravity. This location is shown in Figure II.

Twelve 12-in. square, black and white checkered targets were placed on the vehicle.

These targets were used in the high speed film analysis. Two targets were located on the center­

of-mass , one on the top and one on the side of the test vehicle. The remaining targets were

located such that they could be viewed from both the perpendicular and overhead cameras. The

target locations are shown in Figure 13.

The front wheels of the test vehicle were aligned for camber, caster, and toe-in values

of zero so that the vehicle would track properly along the guide cable.

Two 5B flash-bulbs were mounted on the roof of the test vehicle to record the time of

impact with the Kansas 32 in. Corral Rail on the high-speed fLlm. The flash bulbs were fired by

a pressure tape switch mounted on the front face of the bumper.

16

Figure 12. Concrete block used for ballast

17

}---(7) --+--@ ~+-- (9)-..,

Figure 13. Target Locations

CD 123 , 0 ® 49 . 0

<» 60 0 (]) 96 0

~ 50 0 ® 60 , Q cr> 72 eD

@ 60 0

18

'J 96.0 D 50.0

I 4

§;n 6 60 0

G 27 . 5

MOTto NO SCALE

2.4 Data Acquisition Systems

2.4.1 Accelerometers

Four Endevco triaxial piezoresistive accelerometers (Model 7264) with a range of +/~

200 g's were used to measure the accelerations in the longitudinal and lateral directions of the

test vehicle. Two accelerometers were mounted in each of the two directions so that there would

be two accelerometer [faces for validation of results. The accelerometers were rigidly attached

to a metal block mounted at the center-of-mass. The accelerometers are shown in Figure 14. The

signals from the accelerometers were received and conditioned by an onboard vehicle Metraplex

Unit, which is also shown in Figure 14. The multiplexed signal was then radio transmitted to

the Honeywell 10 1 Analog Tape Recorder in the central control van. A flow chart of the

accelerometer data acquisition system is shown in Figure 15, and photographs of the system

located in the centrally controlled step van are shown in Figure 16. State-of-the-art computer

software, "Computerscope and DSP" , was used to analyze and plot the accelerometer data on

a Cyclone 386/AT, which uses a high-speed data acquisition board.

2.4.2 High-Speed Photography

Three high-speed 16 mm cameras were used to fUm the crash test. The cameras operated

at approximately 500 frames/sec. The overhead camera was a Red Lake Locam with a wide

angle 12.5 mm lens. It was placed approximately 64 ft above the concrete apron. The parallel

camera was a Photec IV with an 80 mm lens. It was placed 300 ft downstream from the point

of impact and offset 3 ft from a line parallel to the barrier rail. The perpendicular camera was

a Photec IV with a 55 mm lens. It was placed 165 ft from the vehicle point of impact. A

schematic of all three camera locations is shown in Figure 17.

19

Figure 14. Accelerometers and the onboard vehicle metraplex unit

20

. .-.~~cit vco Ll'ICNvC=O

P",zor-.a&'tJ v, P .. ZQr.SU'tJ .... "cc. l'r"o~.'trr iloCc,l.r_'t.I'"

oc:M1 7264-20 oeM l 7Z64-20

j j lI.tr"lpl.x 300 S.,. ...

~IQ"Q I CondItlOrIrIg S.c1ron (up 'to 28 Acc,l.rMl*t.,..) Condltlon.r- Ct.Mf5 340c,.340b,J40d

r- . - . - .. _ . . - .. - . -(7

r" MuI~luln; s.ctlon Acc,-\.,.orw'UNI P.,.. c.t'I~1 4 (:hoM,i • . """

SouU ... rn c..UFoJ""Nfl. !tcro ... .,. "-Ch~l r,.uSN"tu,.

CoPtpat.,t, .ftn C,n"",r Phon. Antennu T.s'

Vmct.

Solol'ttwf-I'I c:. l lf'or-1'I1A. !tero." .... c.l'l1r1t.1 "-Chat'llWl R,clIl'vrr C ........

Cail'lPo1lb!. WItt'! C.l llJIi o.l" PhON' Ant'MU V ..

i HorwyuU Mo.1 101 14 ChtlJ'lN'l MQgnetlc

TolW bco,..,.

I Mnro.plu loa s,,..,..

rM n..,odul , tor-...... Plot\n 120 ~~ I1."od' • . ". ~ ~t.~

JIllb)

Chlll~!.o C~~. 180

C)'ber Jtuurch C)'f:lone 316/ "1 ~.,.

Vt 'Wtt'" C~,.It .. HI""d'I .,.y Iot;h Spud tVD Iov-II

QZ W't '''' .. otr.l'taan) (Up 10 I )fU s-pt ••• t.)

Dat. .. 1. $to"," 20 II'NW'H 3. lnu;re. t.d 4. lIlot1.aI

j T£ST KSUL. 1$

L Ve+IId. CMII~Sp..aI ~ DcCl.4)lIIlIt ~I'C~~

CCQ4)t.l'lt .ct V.l I" Qco.-nt .,.. ...

~.,,1toft

Figure 15. Flow Chan of Data Acquisition System

21

Figure 16. Data recorder and 386/AT computer

22

A 20 ft wide by 100 ftlong grid layout was painted on the concrete slab surface parallel

and perpendicular to the barrier. The white-colored grid was incremented with 5 ft divisions in

both directions to give a visible reference system which could be used in the analysis of the

overhead high-speed film.

The film was analyzed using the Vanguard Motion Analyzer. The camera divergence

correction factors were also taken into consideration in the analysis of the high-speed film.

2.4.3. Speed Trap Switches

Eight tape pressure switches spaced at 5 ft intervals were used to determine the speed of

the vehicle before and after impact. Each tape switch fired a strobe light as the left front tire of

the test vehicle passed over it. The average speed of the test vehicle between the tape switches

was determined by knowing the distance between pressure switches, the calibrated camera speed,

and the number of frames from the high-speed film between flashes. In addition, the average

speed was determined from electronic timing mark data, recorded on the oscilloscope software

used with the 386/AT computer, as the test vehicle passed over each tape switch.

23

I . , ." '

L

l., -'- ' .,

~~

S> I-­...L "-

.:'. 1 , C)

C)

'"

Figure 17. Layout of High-Speed Cameras

24

Q:

" -.J :::>

~t;j <\,J

""'"" Q ..... Q:0

:t~ --...

3 PERFORMANCE EVALUATION CRITERIA

The safety performance objective of a highway appurtenance is to minimize the

consequences of a vehicle leaving the roadway to create an off-road incident. The safety goal

is met when the appurtenance (Kansas 32 in. Corral Rail) smoothly redirects the vehicle away

from a hazard zone without subjecting the vehicle occupants to major injury producing forces.

Safety performance of a highway appurtenance cannot be measured directly , but it can

be evaluated according to three major factors: (1) structural adequacy, (2) occupant risk, and

(3) vehicle trajectory after collision. These three factors are defined and explained in NCHRP

2300). Similar criteria are presented in AASHTO ill.

Currently, there is not a specific test designation for the 18,CX>O lb. crash test in the

NCHRP 230 Report (3.). Therefore, there is not a specific set of evaluation criteria to meet from

the NCHRP 230 Report 0.). Thus, the evaluation criteria used to evaluate the crash test was

taken from AASHTO 0). The test conditions for the matrix are shown in Table 1. Also, the

specific evaluation criteria used to determine the adequacy of the barrier are listed in Table 2.

After each test, the vehicle damage was assessed by the traffic accident scale (TAD) (5.)

and the vehicle damage index (VDI) (§).

25

Table I. Crash Test Conditions and Evaluation Criteria for the Kansas 32 in. Corral Rajl

T"" T"" Appurtenance T"" Spoe<! Angle Required Desirable Agency Designation Vehicle (mph) (deg) Criteria I Criteria l

AASHTO PL·2 Bridge 18 ,000 50 15 3. a.b,c 3. d,e.f,h (1989) Ib Truck

I Criteria described in Table 2.

26

Table 2. AASHTO Evaluation Criteria

A. The test article shall contain the vehicle; neither the vehicle nor its cargo shall penetrate or go over the installation. Controlled lateral deflection of the test article is acceptable.

B. Detached elements, fragments or other debris from the test article shall not penetrate or show potential for penetrating the passenger compartment or present undue hazard to other traffic .

C. Integrity of the passenger compartment must be maintained with no intrusion and essentially no deformation.

D. The vehicle shall remain upright during and after collision .

E. The test article shall smoothly redirect the vehicle. A redirection is deemed smooth if the rear of the vehicle does not yaw more than 5 degrees away from the railing from time of impact until the vehicle separates from the railing.

F. The smoothness of the vehicle-railing interaction is further assessed by the effective coefficient of friction , Il, where Il = (cosO - Vp/v)/sin9.

« Assessment 0.00 - 0.25 Good 0.26 - 0.35 Fair

> 0.35 Marginal

H. Vehicle exit angle from the barrier shall not be more than 12 degrees. Within 100 ft plus the length of the test vehicle from the point of initial impact with the railing , the railing side of the vehicle shall move no more than 20 ft from the line of the traffic face of railing.

27

4 TEST RESULTS

4.1 Test No. KSCR-I

Test KSCR-I was conducted with an 18,040 lb. GMC 7000 Series single unit truck. The

actual impact conditions were 51.5 mph and 15 degrees. The location of impact was 5 ft

downstream from Post No.4, which was midway between Post No.4 and Post No.5. This

location was determined to be the most critical section. A summary of the test results and

sequential photos is shown in Figure 18. Additional sequential photos are shown in Figures 19.

20, and 21.

After the initial impact with the rail, the front right portion of the fender crushed inward.

Approximately 0.15 sec after the initial impact with the rail, the front axle detached from the

undercarriage on the passenger side of the vehicle. Then the cab began to ride up the raiL

Following this series of events, the cab regained its position parallel to the rail at 0.34 sec, as

the box began to rotate clockwise towards the rail. This shifting of the box forced the cab of the

vehicle to follow the same motion and also rotate clockwise towards the rail in the same manner.

At approximately 0040 sec, when both the cab and box were rotated clockwise towards the rail ,

the vehicle was sliding parallel to the rail. As this slid ing motion occurred, the rear end of the

vehicle yawed away from the rail. This sequence of events can be seen in the parallel sequential

photos (Figure 21).

A maximum roll angle of approximately 50 degrees was measured as the truck reached

the downstream end of the rail (1.2 sec after impact). At thi s point the vehicle began to rotate

counterclockwise toward the ground. The vehicle came to rest approximately 2.5 sec after

impact. This location was 145 ft downstream from impact.

28

N

""

Impact 0.625 se c 0 . 938 se c 1.250 sec

35' k ~

~------- - -------- ----- - I, ;1: ;1; :1, :1' iii :I;:JC21 / ~I~ ='

Test No. Dale Installation To~l Length (ft) Concrete Barrier

Material

Concrete Rail Length (ft) Width (in.) .

Height (in.)

KSCR· I 2122/91

32 in. Corral Rail .. , 100

.. . . . . . . . . . • . . ..... Nebraska Class 47-B-Special Mix

100 12

Top (in.) ....... . . . .. .. .. . . .. .• . ..... 32 Bollom (in.) . . . . . . . . . . . . • . . . . . . . . . . I3

Concrete Posts Length (ft) Width (in.) .

Height (in.) Concrete Bridge Deck

Length (ft) Width (ft) , ... . .. . Height (in.)

Vehicle Model . . .. .

. , , . , , , , . 3 10 13

100 5 9

1984 GMC (7000 Series)

Figure 18. Test KSCR-I Summary and Sequential Photographs

Weight

Test Inertia Ob.) Gross Static (1b.) .

Vehicle Speed Impact (mph)

IMPACT

18,040 18,040

Exit (mph) .. . .. . ...... . . • . . . . • .. . _ .. 51.5 27.0

Vehicle Angle Impact (deg.) ..

Exit (deg.) .. . .. . .... . .... . Snagging Vehicle Stability Occupant Impact Velocity

Longitudinal (rps) Lateral (tps)

Occupant Ridedown Decelerations Longitudinal .. Lateral (g's) . . .

Vehicle Damage TAD VOl

Vehicle Rebound Distance (ft) Bridge Rail Damage

15.0 ., '" 0.0

None .. Marginal

15.0 . 10m

6.13 1.36

I·RFQ-4 OIRFESI

o Excessive

1 . 875 sec

':-

l,a .[.D, I ~ ~ ~ 8 ~ ...

" ~ / "---:'J

~t~ _ ~ .... :+. Ccn:J1r!C/oo

1 5.1 !fd, O, /p "'_ w~

TYP/C4L INTERIOR PO~

/

I •

.

-Figure 19. Full-Scale Vehicle Crash Test , KSCR-1

30

Figure 20. Full Scale Vehicle Crash Test. KSCR-I (cont.)

31

I Ifl r " "J

'" r

•

. "

, "' "

Figure 21. Parallel Time-Sequential Photographs

32

Rail damage that occurred from the full scale vehicle crash test was quite excessive. The

damage that occurred at the point of impact, which was midway between posts 4 and 5, is shown

in Figure 22. The total permanent set at this location was 2.5 in. A diagonal failure of the rail

occurred at this point due to the impact load. The damage to the rail underneath the point of

impact and on the backside of the rail is shown in Figure 23. The amount of concrete spalling

underneath the rail was approximately 2 in. deep by 4 ft long.

The other major damage occurred downstream from impact at post No. 5. Damage to

the traffic face of the rail at post No. 5 is shown in Figure 24. The total amount of concrete that

was removed from this failure was 18.5 in. wide, 19 in. high (entire rail height), and 5 in. deep.

The same failure viewed from the backside of the rail is shown in Figure 25. This failure

occurred before the gap in the rail at midpoint of Post No. 5. A vertical crack in the deck also

occurred near the location of the post on the upstream end. Deck cracking also occurred at post

No. 4. These deck cracks continued underneath the deck to the support.

The third major damage area resulted from the vehicle riding along the rail (Figure 26).

Spalling and concrete chipping occurred continuously until the end of the rail. This damage

occurred to the traffic face, the top and the back face of the rail.

The vehicle damage is shown in Figure 27. The damage included crushing of the

passenger side bumper and grill. The front wheels and axle were totally removed from their

original position and ended up lodged underneath the truck which may have contributed to the

vehicle coming to a rest only 145 ft downstream from impact. Passenger side hood and fender

damage was minimal. The TAD (,2) and VDI@ damage classifications are shown in Figure 18.

33

Figure 22. Rail Damage Between Posts No.4 and No.5

34

Figure 23. Rail Damage at point of impact

35

Figure 24. Rail and Post damage at Post No. 5

36

, , "'",

"

Figure 25. Post No.5 damage at splice and deck cracking

37

.... ---- -- .

.-

-

Figure 26. Damage from vehicle riding along the rail

38

.. ~-.. \

Figure 27. Vehicle Damage

39

The longitudinal occupant impact velocity was determined to be 15.0 fps and the lateral

occupant impact velocity was 10.0 fps. The longitudinal occupant ridedown deceleration was 6. 1

g' s and lateral occupant ridedown deceleration was 1.4 g 's. The determination of these results

using longitudinal and lateral accelerometer data is shown graphically in Appendix C. The

results are also summarized in Figure 18 and in Table 4.

40

5 CONCLUSIONS

One full-scale crash test was conducted to evaluate the safety performance of the Kansas

32 in. Corral Rail. The test was conducted with a 1984 7000 Series GMC single unit truck

weighing 18,040 Ibs. with an impact angle and velocity of 15 degrees and 51.5 mph,

respectively.

The test was evaluated according to the safety performance criteria given in AASHTO

(1). The safety evaluation summary using this set of criteria is presented in Table 3. The results

of the test are summarized in Table 4.

The analysis of the crash test revealed the following:

1. The concrete rail did successfully contain the vehicle.

2. Neither the vehicle nor its cargo penetrated or went over the installation.

3. No detached elements or fragments penetrated the passenger compartment.

4. The integrity of the passenger compartment was maintained .

5. The test vehicle remained upright during and after the collision.

6. The test article did smoothly redirect the vehicle.

7, The vehicles exit angle of 0 degrees was less than the limit of 12 degrees.

Based upon the items listed above, the results of Test KSCR-l are acceptable according

to the AASHTO Ul guidelines.

41

Table 3 . Safety Performance Results

EVALUATION CRITERIA RESULTS

REQUIRED

A. The test article shall contain the vehicle; neither the vehicle nor its cargo shall penetrate or go over the installation. Controlled lateral S deflection of the test article is acceptable.

B. Detached elements, fragments or other debris from the test article shall not penetrate or show potential for penetrating the passenger S compartment or present undue hazard to other traffic.

C. Integrity of the passenger compartment must be maintained with no S

intrusion and essentially no deformation.

DESIRABLE

D. The vehicle shall remain upright during and after collision. S

E. The test article shall smoothly redirect the vehicle. A redirection is deemed smooth if the rear of the vehicle does not yaw more than 5

S degrees away from the railing from time of impact until the vehicle separates from the railing.

F. The smoothness of the vehicle-railing interaction is further assessed by the effective coefficient of friction, p., where p. = (cosO - Vp/v)/sinO.

" Assessment • 0.00 - 0.25 Good 0.26 - 0.35 Fair

> 0.35 Marginal

H. Vehicle exit angle from the barrier shall not be more than 12 degrees. Within 100 ft plus the length of the test vehicle from the point of initial

S impact with the railing, the railing side of the vehicle shall move no more than 20 ft from the line of the traffic face of railing.

S - Satisfactory M - Marginal u - Unsatisfactory G - Good

• The vehicle never became parallel to the barrier so the coefficient of friction could not be calculated.

42

Table 4. Summary of Test Results

Test Item Result

Vehicle Weight 0b.) 18.040

Vehicle Impact Speed (mph) 51.5

Vehicle Exit Speed (mph) 27.0

Vehicle Impact Angle (deg.) 15.0

Vehicle Exit Angle (deg.) 0.0

Vehicle Rebound Distance (ft) 0

Vehicle Damage (fAD) (1) I-RFQ-4

Vehicle Damage (VDI) (B) OIRFESI

Longitudinal Occupant Impact Velocity (fps) 15.0

Lateral Occupant Impact Velocity (fps) 10.0

Longitudinal Occupant Ridedown Deceleration (g's) 6. 1

Lateral Occupant Ridedown Deceleration (g's) 1.4

Did snagging occur? No

Did vehicle remain upright? Yes

43

6 RECOMMENDATIONS

The Kansas Corral Rail has met the criteria for all three of the vehicle classifications of

the PL-2 performance level in the AASHTO guide specifications (1).

Therefore, it is recommended that the Federal Highway Administration approve this

appurtenance as a safe design and qualify it for use on Federal Aid Projects.

44

7 REFERENCES

1. "Guide Specifications for Bridge Railings," American Association of State Highways and Transportation Officials, Washington, D.C., 1989.

2. "Bridge Rail Designs and Performance Standards", Volume 1: Research Report, Federal Highway Administration Report No. FHWAlRD-87/049, February 1987.

3. "Recommended Procedures for the Safety Performance Evaluation of Highway Appurtenances," National Cooperative Highway Research Program Report 230, Transportation Research Board, Washington, D.C., March, 1981.

4. Hinch, J., Yang, T-L, and Owings, R., "Guidance Systems for Vehicle Testing," ENSCO, Inc., Springfield, VA, 1986.

5. "Vehicle Damage Scale for Traffic Accident Investigators," Traffic Accident Data Project Technical Bulletin No. I, National Safety Council, Chicago, lL, 1971.

6. "Collision Deformation Classification, Recommended Practice 1224 March 80," SAE Handbook VoL 4, Society of Automotive Engineers, Warrendale, Penn., 1985.

45

8 APPENDICES

46

APPENDIX A.

CONCRETE COMPRESSIVE STRENGTHS

47

REPORT OF CONCRETE CORES

UNIVERSITY OF NEBRASKA BARRIER TESTING

Project: Kansas Bridge Crash Test

Examined For : Compressive Strength

Date Placed Tested Location Strength - PSI

LO - 26-90 10-30- 90 Bridge Deck 4490

10- 26-90 11-26-90 Bridge Deck 5360 .,.

12-11-90 12-18-90 Bridge Rail 3760

12-11-90 2- 7-90 Bridge Rail 4560

.,. Core taken at 4 days age and cured in laboratory until tested

Remarks: The bridge deck cores were taken at 4 days of age and cured in the lab. The bridge rail cores were taken 1 day prior to testing.

Dalyce Ronnau Engineer for Research & Tests

Fo r NDOR Materials & Tests Division

48

APPENDIX B.

RELEVANT CORRESPONDENCE

49

University of Nebraska Lincoln

August 15 , 1990

Department 01 CNiI Engineering

W348 Nebraska Hall Unc:oln, NE 68588-0531

TO: State Highway Departments o f Nebraska , Kansas , and Missouri

FROM: Midwest Roadside Safety Facility , Civil Engineering Department . University of Nebraska-Linco ln

SUBJECT: Research Proposal For The Midwest Regional Pooled Fund Program (Year 1 )

The Midwest Roadside S'afety Facility (MwRSFl proposes t o c o nduct six full-scale vehicle crash tests using three different concre te bridge rail systems for a total of $ , as shown in Table 1. This includes two 18 , 000 lb., one 1,800 lb., and three 5 , 4001b. vehicle tests.

The three systems which will be constructed, removed , and disposed are as follows:

(1) the 3D" high barrier rail (Missouri) (2) the open concrete rail (Nebraska ) (3) the 32" high corral rail (Kansas)

The estimated construction . removal , etc . , costs were determined from the preliminary provided plans. The preliminary work schedule is shown in Table 2.

MISSOURI Three full-scale vehicle crash tests are required to satisfy the PL-2 Performance Level on the 30" high barrier rail.

NEBRASKA The open concrete rail was previously tested under NCHRP 23 0 (FHWA / RD-89-119). but , a modification using less reinforcement would require the 5,400 lb. test at the expansion joint to satisfy the PL-1 Performance Level . An 1 . 800 lb. vehicle test would n o t be required. If a failed performance evaluation would occur . a redesign would follow , along with a 5.400 lb. test.

The previous testing was high , open concrete rail.

conducted at ENSCO consisting of a 29" The results of the tests are as follows:

Test 1769-F-I-86: 4.669 lb. test vehicle 57.6 mph a nd 26 degrees barrier contact - 11 ft. impact velocity (ips) - (accelerometer)

longitudinal . . . 17 . 2 <30 ok lateral .. . ..... 31 . 2 >20?

ridedown acceleration (g's) - (accel . ) longitudinal ... -2.8 <15 ok lateral . ... . . . -14.3 <15 ok

University of Nebraska-Lincoln University 01 Nebraska al Omaha Untver5ity of Nebraska Medical Center

50

Test 1769-F-2-S6: 1 , 971 lb. test vehicle 59.S mph and 21 degrees barrier contact - 12 ft. impact velocity (fps) - (accelerometer)

longitudinal ... 2l.S <30 ok lateral ........ 24.1 >20?

ridedown acceleration (g's) - (eccel.) longitudinal ... -4.9 <15 ok lateral ....... -10.5 <IS ok

KANSAS A 27" high corral rail was previously tested under NCHRP 230 (FHWA/RD-87-049) which was cited as a basis for not requiring the 1,SOO lb. and 5 , 400 lb. vehicle tests. Thus, only an 18,000 lb . vehicle test is required to satisfy the PL-2 Performance Level.

The previous testing was conducted at Southwest Research Institute consisting of two designs, (1) the KBR Series and (2) the MKS Series. The KBR Series consisted of the 27" high , Kansas corral rail without curb. The MKS Series comes from a modification t o the Kansas corral rail due to an addition of . longitudinal beam steel and stirrups in both the beam and posts. The results of the MRS Series are as follows:

Test MRS-I: I,S50 lb. test vehicle 59.0 mph and 18.9 degrees barrier contact - 7.S ft. impact velocity (fps) - (film/accelerometer)

longitudinal ... 9.2 / 14.0 <30 ok lateral . ... . . .. 19.5/ 1S.2 <20 ok

ridedown acceleration (g's) - (accelerometer) longitudinal ... 1.4 <15 ok lateral ....... -14.S <15 ok

Test MKS-2: 4,690 lb. test vehicle 59.2 mph and 24.9 degrees barrier contact - 12.2 ft. impact velocity (fps) - (film/accelerometer )

longitudinal ... 6.7 / 13.9 <30 ok lateral ........ 19.3 / 24.9 <20 ok

ridedown acceleration (g's) - (accelerometer) longitudinal . .. -1.7 <15 ok lateral ....... -13 . 9 <15 ok

5 1

APPENDIX C.

ACCELEROMETER DATA ANALYSIS

C-I Sketch of Accelerometer Locations

Page

53

C-2 Graph of Longitudinal Deceleration, Ace. #2 . . . . . . . . . . . • . . . . . • . . 54

C-3 Graph of Longitudinal Occupant Impact Velocity . Ace. #2 ..... . .. . .. 55

C-4 Graph of Longitudinal Occupant Displacement, Ace . #2 .... . ..... .. . 56

C-5 Graph of Lateral Deceleration, Ace. 113 ............ . .....••... 57

C-6 Graph of Lateral Occupant Impact Velocity, Acc. #3 ........ _ . . . . . . 58

C-7 Graph of Lateral Occupant Displacement , Ace. #3 .... ......... , . . 59

C-8 Graph of Latera] Deceleration , Ace . #4 .............•..... . ... 60

C-9 Graph of Lateral Occupant Impact Velocity, Acc. #4 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 61

ColO Graph of Lateral Occupant Displacement, Acc. #4 ................ 62

52

C -1 Sketch of Accelerometer Locations

l'

FRONT OF

vEt'ICLE

53

I' I I·:

, 'J

e , , (.

" ~ H

" . ':' .. ~ .. '"' ..

'" U .. .. < ."

" :l ,. H

~ '-' . " H

" ~ '"' :: , '"'

'I • (0

I.' , ., " , :2 " . ,-, " " ", , , .

TIME (sec)

FIGURE C- l. GRAPH OP LONGITUDINAL DECELBRATION, Ace . '2

II)

0. ~

i:: H u s

U1 = U1 t ..: p. z H

5 ~

B u 0

....... lfilt,.....ll\l•fl.<t iiOtl•!!tiOII •IItfOIOIMIOIUOliOifi"! ... ' !IOIIIiiMIUOJif!•-......... "'!"'---..... --.......... d~Ot! ... tiiOI•IatliiiOIII .... IIIIOifiMio!MI+ ... Itll.llfiOIIII!I!fl!flflllfOtlt!MI IOW!tll•IIOOflfll<tOih!!l(fotllftM~fOO tl'+ j;jtlill;!ll o•ollflli111toOo6jlllf1!10 I !OII1jol00ji!lt11111 .. 1lNIJII o!OIIII!ti01Qifllll!MIIIIIollflfiiJIIfiiiOoti"'IOIIIIo.ilol!l'lotl •i•OI<! oOI4jllollolo!IO .. !•OIIIOI>!oololl ljooloot11011fl•llillti"IOI.IItiHIOte1111 .. jojoOifl·l-"11llllllllloll .. lll101o!lfi .. WillNI .. II!I•I •.n:: l·i 1· .:: 1.1~ c H f"ll ··l ··:, 1.~ 1 1· .1 .::: 1'·'1 ;· 1. :· T' ....... ..... - ·-·· ··-·----·.. ...... ... . ... . .... -· .... ......... ..... ... ,_, ... - . ' - .. -.... - ·~· .. .. ... -- -- ........ ..... .... -... - - ... -

, .. ·-----...----.. ·--.-------~--..... ··· -·--- .. _. - ... ~ ...... . - · ........... -· . ·~ ·- ................ ...... .. _ .. ,. .. . ... .. .. .......... -. _ , ........ ____ ..... .

-:- 1 .. • • u

1 (l ' 0

1,,1 i 1.,1 -

.. ·--···-···· r-----.. _ ... -.. - .- .. ···-·-·······-.. -·- -····-.. ·- ···--- -·- .... ··--- -

,,.,.,.. .... ~ •• '•,, ,.,, ................... , ... ,t-•

~... . ... -.. • l ,.

,J /

.. --.:~-----l'

/ 1"""1 .l"

11-L/loo!..:. 5..~v-+-----lf-----,.r"' l ,•'f

l i

MO O•>oo-0•0 .. ·~--· ................................ _. >00-hO;::;:~ ..... .a!~~-00 .. 0 0• '0'

f4'''' ... ·- ····· ,, .... ,,..,.

~····" r• .. ' ~ .. •• '"''

,.,.·· ··'"'

• ..• j .4' ···- ·-··· ....... '.,,

, ... •"' .. /11 , ____ ._ .. , ............... -. .... _ , _ __ ··-· ·-··-··----·· .. ···-...... .,_ ............. - ............................ , .. , ___ ,_ -· ...... _, __ ,._,.,_, .......................... .

""--··-- ·- I Q:.3.Q II I 0 1) ' I. (1 1 1::. u 0 ,':. 1) • '+ 1.) 1 ~~.

/.£0 (?J, £"" S /rl /Soj (7S, 71 Stn i S 0

)

TI ME ( sec)

(Dv)* = I f/-,s-~ r ;>.:5 I

····· , ............. _, ... ··

I) 1

FIGURE C-3. GRAPH OF LONGITUDINAL OCCUPANT IMPACT VELOCITY , Ace. 12

........ ... , ... ,, ,, ..

I I I ~·

o·-·- ·t - "''j..,..,,, j I • '

............... - .. =::·:·l: .. -~ ...... ·- .. .... _.,_-

. I ' '-' I , I .

llllloiiiiO.Iollllllll "tl!loll •!l4 ... nlloll<hi1WI•I•·I•Iflllll,._ooliiiiM ............ ~----O'-NP ............... !t!lo!IOioljfl .. l\llollo!llllfloi ... Mioiollltli\lt! ... ,.tlllflllo!I'IIO!'I-If •• IWifif•1611!!1!141•1M .. '-I .... !oi ... MI .. •O! .. i .. !olti .. l tlt'l!tll!llll!ll•ll.loll4jo .. IMI•OIIII<I .. IM!tlolt11111t!•it1Pi t illfoi!Oilill!llnUI'I .. I•IOoiii!JIIIIWhtlllllr<IO!o!lolllloiM!•I•'I ollt1011oiottol•l•l•'''i•ltlf•l oi•I• I .. IMII•Ioltl .. l'lMIII "•lfiMI•IIil .... +l_l .. lol loi!Oi!l<looMI ..... Ioi141 .. !-IW..-011110ittl01101101•'

~~~ t;:;· L, t~'l "I" T 1 ' 1::. I: l ·.l ·r E:: 1':;~ ~1 : () I';' (I C.::: 1. 11-"' f'• l ·l'l [I 'I: :;; P 1.. f"l C 1::: I l l I I ' I --~-·--.. ·----· ..... - -----.... - ... ·------- .. ,_, ___ , ___ .. , ... _ ,, ......... "" ..... -................................... __ ........................... - .... -.. -.. ----····- ....... . . ..... -·--.. ·-----.. - --·--__ ,, .............................................................. ........................... " ..... _...... •.. "'"'"

_ I I I) (I ·- ·-····"'""''"""" ... '" ------~------................................ _ ............... ..... ............................ '" •. ' ............................. .

I II 1,1 I l ,f - ·--,....,, .... _.,

t (1 (i 1 ( 1 "'" .... , ,,,,,_, ,_,..,.,,, ·• •·•·-••• ""'·--·-·• .,,,,_,,,,,.,. .. .,,,, ............................ , ... ., ... , ... , .. - .. .

, ••••• . f ..,4"'"" , ... ~•· .. 11-"~......:.....::'·V~~--I--------,:::o-+o···•···J·,

, ..

.... ,.···· ·.4·-· , __ ,. __ ... _ .... _ ........ ;~::;.;~• ... ~: :·· ....

•'''

........................ , .. ······'

,,.,.-····''' •"'

,, .. ,_. ,..i····' ........

... _ ...... 1 ·~· •' ,,.,..-r'

·•···

··' ,.j···'' ... , ...

It'' .......... , •• .j ' ...

. ~ .... .. ·

~· _. ......... , ... _ ....... .. I) , 1:1 .. - ................ ''''~"'•""""'t::;: :::~::~:·;:::~:~:::•.:::: :: . ............ , ...... - .......................................................................... , .............. ~.··--·-· ~· ........................... -......... - ..... ·~ _, .............. , • ............. _ ........................ 4 ................... ~... , ....... , .., ., ,_,, ............... - ••

' -··-;:::; •..•. ,.:~: ::~ ,., .••"'

-:: ...... -.-.... - 1'-·---.. ·-·-.. ·~--.. : ........... - "",:···- .p..:. .. .?..Q ... '""" ............. ., .. ,_, ___ ,,., ........ -................ _, __ ....... ~---.. ·-··· _, -- • ' ., • I ,.I I I I 1 I.J I .:~ 1, ' I .::: 1..1 I 11 .: I I 1::' 1) I ·=· t) • 7 ( I I ·~: I,, ' ·::· I u ;1, I .I I. f

•.• t'

,...,,.,..,,..._Oflf+illljooll!itll<,.ill l ll' ..... lii•I~Mifl ..... lwlioll~ltlioj oiPioiMI"I'Itloll·o-•I•II"I" ... Niti .... UI&f-.11M.IW"II•IWitllollill"i .. IO!"I"IIIillllilltollllllllflfiMIOIIIO-Po•OOI!IIioo•IIIIIIIO--Io-lltl!oo .. .-loi"IIO!t' .. o'-•-----~·-OIII..,OioOIIII.IWOiolfoolltlltiiii'IOII•I~IIIt'"'"'~''"" '''llltoltoo"o•IMIII•tiii•I'"IOIM'"'''''"''"'"""''""'',.'" .. "''IIII''"' 'IIII'IMI •!"Iti"''"IIII"'III .. INOI·I·IIII•II•"'''"''"

TIME (sec)

FIGURB C-4. GRAPH OF LONGITUDINAL OCCUPANT DISPLACEMENT , Ace. 12

, , , ',. ", I ':'.

- - - .-'.

- ~, , oj ,- -• '-- . --" -l'i H i---~ - , .) - _. _. - -- -DO

II 17 j U> '" .. ~ u

-~ .. " j , (t

d1 - - - .

'" M dlAj~, :::!

~yw I ..

, ~ffl Ir~ '~] IW VJ(I, .. V

J ... I r Itf '" " . (,

- I ," 1-----1----11 - --_._-,---+ --1._--

j().?4 ,', .''' ,', ,', 0 '" I' " ,,,-- " "< 1 . ••

TIME (sec)

FIGURE C- S. GRAPH OF LATERAL DECELERATION, Ace . '3

• " ... ~ H

g ..., ., > .. U

'" ... " .. ..

H

~ .. " U g

--

" (. f-

" " ----

l in ~I .l I', (. .

s ' .. - .~ /

/ " c'

-"

(, " l

(t:N)t. :!...f,vf.ysln~+"'d (Vs/na)odu.'

I (IN) t . /(), O/,P-5 I

'" ,

=

LATERf-IL e· e CUPrl rlT

-

----- - -V'

1- - - -,

(2,24 < ,)

10,31 7J"5Int5°) (7S.7/sfl"'l ~

,',

-

-

-

"

J:t1Pr:;' - 1 " E LO C I r , • f-- - - -- - -

-- -- -

- - - - - ;:>"""~ .

............ ...-" ...........

.~~-

------- -

-- .- -

-

. - .. .. I) 5 " , "

TIME (sec)

FIGURB C- 6. GRAPH OF LATERAL OCCUPANT IMPACT VELOCITY. Ace. '3

,-.( P J " _. _. . -. -

- ...-.... _ ... .... -"'"" . .

.-" "~ .' I- .. / " . ---

-

--

- I--

.. " " • , , "

~ 8 u 0

Fi' E L rJI T T '·•' F' ·:r t·· J T Ei~ r~: T 0::• r;• 0•::: 0:::: I.J F" 1'' 11·1 T

,., "ltltl.ll .. l'411o1M ... ,..Ioll'lllol_.._. _,.........._..___ IIOIII.IfiHifllllllolltlt<llli.MIOIIil .. llol i"'MIIIhltl ...... lllfiiiiAII I"IItlllllll!lll f .. ll•ttllllllll.ltlt·ttt.~totflli>! .. IM ... AII Ml~llll .. ll .. lfllttatojl!llllllfl•lloi!OIIU ... lll!tllil•ll'l.l.oltiMIIIt•tlll~l'll"•tlol ftoiiiUII.IIolloii•II<I•IUIMI•!I!!f!!Oo..lltlol'l llt+!lbiiiOI'IUUttiMI'!•U.otMIIWIII .. It•tt ... ol••l'*lll•l.mutlo.IAIItllllt+I .. Wtilllt ltt!IIIIIM•II•MimtWIIIIOUiilil

1 !S 1) I (t " ......... ___ . ____ ·-···----- ... ·--·-.. ·-···--.. -...... .. ... ·--~-............................... -~-· ................. •· ...... ., ·-· ,_, .. __ ..... . ,,.r• , .. 0 ...... _, .. , ... M .. ~ .. M•o<-.... 0 _,, · ·- 00<- 400< 0 ·- ....... 00 ... ...... ,,.......... .. .......... ,_,, .......... _,_,_.,,., "" ;aw•·•l" ...... ...

,, .. ......... ···

(J 1'1 I (f

, ..... ...

, A••'",. .. ...... ········'

········ ... • : •••• ~ !"''''----'" ...

.•.. , .. '. ·······

•' l"' till::..:~~.:.:.::· ......... - .................... .......... - ·•· ............ - ... -... -, .•.. ~

,..,.... ... r•., .. ' ·' .. ........... , ..... .......... ..,.

. .... J~..?.._~. O,..,_ ___ +--------!--:::r...,...•·"'···_, ........... . , .................... .

1) ... ____ .,,.,.,.._.,w .,c:::;,:~·;:~·:::::::::::~~ -~···~ .... , ............ ,_, ____ ,, .... ___ ,,,,,,,

0.24 ............ -.......... ............ .... . ·- .... -·· ........ , ............... . ....................................................................................................... ·-·-· ............ . .... ····· .. . 1) 1 (1 I ,I 1 :1 I I 1 ~:· (I 1 :;!; I ,I 1 l.~ I) 1 e; I ,I 1 .:. ,·, I ;:_

··' , .................. .

,,.;·"' , .. , ...... ···

1"'1 I ':~1 ;l , II •tlolltll+t+j>jtl .. 111•tolllltlllll. l llllllltlllllal lolt.lllllti,.IMI• IJOIIIII!IIItltiiOIIoiiiiii ..... Mitlllllll•oj•IIIIMiUUIIIII"I~IfiMitlllltiMIIolrtWIIIIOIII-'"1111tlltlfiiiiiii*IOII•IIliiii iMiti~"IMI.tt.lloiJIIIIIItiMI 01Ul1111 ___ ..,._,_........,. __ 111141 ___ ....,.__MII--WWIIIIIOWIOifltlm .. Otllllol.llltlltlto!O+jloii•!IIIOIIoll~lllf&lltll'<llhj.lllll-llm+oltllll•llll .. l1111llllllllllotutliti01PIIIIMioloiMIIIIoll•t .. ll!!t.IIOIIoii •I ... MIIollf"''MitiiMioiJIUIIIItl•"tloi

TIME (sec)

FIGURB C- 7. GRAPH OF LATERAL OCCUPANT DISPLACEMBNT, Ace. 13

<T. , , '·'l.TI , . ' ' .:' ,. " .

--'-= - - - - -

-~ • ,0:' - - - ~

-" -z 0 H

a " --- I- - --~ -

'"' a- .. 0 u ..

Q

~ .. .. j

I. ~ 'i

r~ --1--;- 1-- .

~~1h I , (I

[ylIT 1M v\t

"' ~b~fiJ V11 I~ .N r,,· ,-, , (. I'i I ~ .

- i . I) -- - - - - - - - -I- _. I.,:

In ? A

u "~oj " " !

--;) -;, . " I" ,;- .~- ,)- . , "

. " ,r::,: ':' .. , TIME (se c)

FIGURE C- 8. GRAPH OF LATBRAL DBCBLERATION, Ace . • ,

m 0. ....

i: ... g ,., ~

'" .. ~ u .. ..

'" ... ~ .. " u g

(f :; I r:' J!

r----~------r_

2 '-' , ' :' 1---+---+---1,---- - -

1 E· , " r----- --f--- ------ - --

1 " . ( , 9 1'1

, , , . ," +-- -f---:"":/7"'-' --+ ----

/' ,

" • (0 ~/~+-----+---t---,- ---t-'- -

--II • (I ,_, • l

" . " " . 'i

.' .~ ... , ~ "., .... ~~.--'.-

f-::---~, . = ,', , .:

i..IJV)* :(AV) (VSIVl9 )Tm 0 Q,71 73,55,"15' TIME ( s ec )

,,_ .,., _ __ '-(~:...6_""~6!..0~"'luol ( 75> 71 S'n IS'

I (/N)1c= ,/, tf3 fp s I FIGURB C-9. GRAPH OF LATERAL OCCUPANT IMPACT VELOCITY , Ace . '4

0', , . '

. .....

"

....... ' ".-

-

-- -

f-" • -;0

..... _ ,_, ___ II IMIIIMitiU .. IIIMIII-IMM ____ ___ ,_......, ..... _ , .. _ .... IIIMIOIIIIIIIIIIII ..... It,IIIIMIUMIMIM .. INIMifiM-IIIIJ!IIIMIMII .. MIIIMI'IIt llt l•llllllltlloiiii iiM .. MUII!III-!IIIIIIIIIIIMHMitiiii i iMIOIIfll'll"'ltiUII .. IJIIflltltllt iMitiMMIIIItlll tllti i Utllfl l l l<!lll •tOIIIIIfiiii!IMMIIollfiOitl lill •t +OIIIIIfll ' l fl 'lliltiUI'IIfiUI+I'IItii i.IJIIIMIUIMIIIIII"Itn.tiiM-I!OIMIMI-I'II-II I"UII-IIItl ... lfiM

R e: ~.,. Ft T :J. •. • F.:: :r N r E r~ I o:.• I"~ o ··: •': 1 r I"' t', 1 11 l I .[ ~=: F' L. 1"'1 (, E I 'I f." I .I I

---· ·--·-,------.. ....... ................................. ,, __ ,., ................................. -... ~ .. ...... .,_,, ............ -.... --.... -................ -.............. .

:L E: ( 1 , ( t ~ ·--- ··- ·-····--+-------- 1 .. ··-.. ·-·-· --... "1 .. -· .. ··-- ·-·-··-....... - ................... ·-·· .. - .................... ... ......... .......... .. ...... • · · ·-· ............. ..

,ll)('t,(l- ... __ .................. _ -................ ······--·-· ........... ,_ ......................................................... . ................ -,,._,, ... _ ........ " .... " ...... _ ...................... . .. ..

,, .. , .. , .... . ( 1 -· . . .................. ,_ ,_ ····- ~ ............... , - ... - ............ ,_ ................................... _,_, ..... ' .......................... - ................... _, __ , ___ ,__, .... , .......... ~ ... ......... 1~::::::.: __ ............ ·-·- -~.. ..... . .............. ~-.. .. -~ - --.... .....

n , • . .1

I 'l /"1 . , ... .. It-''"', Co.ce•·= V----t-------+--="~·'·•·

, .. ~· · .. ,··"'·'·''"''"'

,. . ..; ,.,., .... .... ........ ,~I I I t"'

, .. _. .. r..,..

-·•-• -1'1141MIIIIIIf1Ut tr.:::::::-:!:::~~::::::-..::::~~.,~· -••-•••oo•~ • ,,.,,,,.,,,,,._,., .. _ ',,._,,.,,.,,.,.,,.,,,.,, ,. .. ,.,,,.,,.,,., .. ,., ,,_, ''"'"'

I•· - ......... .. .. 0.24 .... --.................. - .......... ·---I t • (I ( 1 1 ~::.

··•·······• _.,,, •• ..A

(! r S t) 1 1: 1) I ,:• I I 1 .·, () ·~ ll' tMt•lftt!tottot"l llt iOIMIIIIIIII•ttti iiM!JIIIIII ljtt•l.,,.tl, , ..... ,ll l'll fl,.tlltlltiOIItii•I .. IWifiM"II-IIOIOIMIMI l llfOII!Ittt t .. l t iMif•ott41 .. 111Ut!lltltllfi•IUIM.,,I Itll'llollllllll tl •lllltl"''"lllll.llllltl•l lllll!t101l lltiMIIIIIil ... llltlt l--lt-MI_..., __ ..,.... ... , •• ___ W, -··-llllltllthltllill!llilllllllllllll!l"liillhlolol"llllllflt'llllllllllltll•lllllol!lllllll•ll"•llll!lliHIIUIIIUIII.!III'!IIIIthllltiiiiiiiii.UIIMiollliiMtiiHIWIIIIJIUIIII_.il.ii·IMI(!Iil.llltlol

TIME (sec)

FIGURE C-10. GRAPH OF LATERAL OCCUPANT DISPLACEMENT, Ace . t4

" L-

Personnel involved with UNL Pooled Fund Testing. For all tests notify: 1) Nebraska representatives, 2) Appropriate state's representatives 3) FHWA Region 7

NEBRASKA

Mr. Oalyce Ronnau . Research and Tests Engineer Nebraska DOR P . O . Box 94759 Lincoln, NE 68509

Telephone (402) 479-4756 FAX (402) 479-3975

~r. Milo Cress Bridge Engineer FHWA - Nebraska Division 100 Centennial Mall - Room 220 Lincoln NE 68508-3851

Telephone (402) 437-5521 FAX (402) 437-4146

MISSOURI

Mr. Dan Davidson Design Division Missouri HTD P. O. Box 270 Jefferson City MO 65102

Telephone (314) 751-4659 FAX (314) 751-6555

Mr. Larry Biedel, Bridge Engr Mr. Don James, Safety Engineer FHWA - Missouri Division POBox 17B7 Jefferson City MO 65102

Telephone (314) 636-7104 FAX (314) 636-9283

FHWA - REGION

c Mr _ Bill Wendling FHWA - Region 7 6301 Rockhill Road POBox 419715 Kansas City MO 64141

Telephone (816) 926-7421 FAX (816) 926-7879

KANSaS

Mr. Ron Set tz DesiQn Divison Kansas DOT DockinQ State Office Building Topeka, KS 66612

Telephone, (913) 296-3890 FAX, (913) 296 - 6946 , Mr. Jeff Smith, Bridge Engineer Mr. Bob Alva, Safety Engineer FHWA - Kansas Division 444 SE Quincey Topeka KS 66683

Telephone (913) 295-2550 FAX (913) 752-2556

lQ!l/i

Mr. Dave Little Roadway Design IOWA DOT 826 Lincolnway Ames IA 50010

Telephone (515) 239-1402 FAX (515) 232-0843

/Mr. Bruce Brakke, Bridge Enqr Mr. Jack Latterell, Safety Engr FHWA - Iowa Division POBox 627 Ames IA 50010

Telephone (515) 233-1664 FAX (515) 233- 5727

l!Iall

Ms. Becky Curtis Procurement Services Utah DOT 4501 S 2700 West Salt Lake City UT 84119

Telephone (801) 965-4067 FAX (B16) 965-4338

DATE J . .. l ' 1 1 . , COMPANY/CENTER

CREDIT _. .. DEBIT I '/, 1 1" J J. - -'I ~- ' dj

UNIVERSITY OF NEBRASKA-LINCOLN

INTRAMURAL CHARGE TICKET ACCOUNT

"

REFERENCE

NO . . . DEPARTMENT

S:; .. J _' ( "Yj ] ,']"!({;-]

. ,

OESCRIPTON PRICE AMOUNT , co~'i('s

. 7J ff~ , t~,l' 0, 1'" 't'5 ,

:C'l~I;~iti f ,1 . " ..

" r ]l \, DeLIVER

TO RECEIVED

SOURCE BY

3211460 (5/91)

Cl \\::r! • ~: i r; • I .,

C(,'- j(~

~. r:r-:- ']1:-

~'.(", ,"

t ~.l.,_

, - , , ,

DEPARTMENTAL DELIVERY COpy

, .~. ,:

.'.

, '

," ." .' ..

, 1 J'l"' .

"

"

) : \ • :_1

-" -. ,

w .n"-· ,

', .

" "

I'

~,' . ", •

.,' , .'

,. '\"v ,